Section 6AA 2007-8

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:36 am

Who will win Section 6AA 2007-8?

Benilde-St. Margarets
Buffalo
Hopkins
Maple Grove
North Metro Stars
Rob. Armstrong
Rob. Cooper
Rogers
Wayzata

hockey21 · Post by **hockey21** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:13 pm

I know BSM lost Trunzo and Reilly and they still have Bacon. Do they have any hot new prospects coming in?

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:03 pm

hockey21 wrote:I know BSM lost Trunzo and Reilly and they still have Bacon. Do they have any hot new prospects coming in?

My opinion is that until incoming students are accepted and have committed publicly that they are starting school in the fall, it's not fair to them to mention any names.

gopher9 · Post by **gopher9** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 6:19 am

MNHockeyFan wrote:
hockey21 wrote:I know BSM lost Trunzo and Reilly and they still have Bacon. Do they have any hot new prospects coming in?
My opinion is that until incoming students are accepted and have committed publicly that they are starting school in the fall, it's not fair to them to mention any names.

Oh believe me They will have at LEAST 2or 3! So will Cretin,Holy Angels,Hill Murray and all the rest of the private schools. I think it is an absolute JOKE That they are all NOT in the same section!

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:34 am

gopher9 wrote:Oh believe me They will have at LEAST 2or 3! So will Cretin,Holy Angels,Hill Murray and all the rest of the private schools.!

I'm sure there will be some very good young players coming up that will go to their private school of choice, and many more that will want to go public - that's their decision to make.

gopher9 wrote:I think it is an absolute JOKE That they are all NOT in the same section!

In Class AA the private schools have not exactly been overpowering. This year only one private team made it to the state tourney. How many have actually won the 2A tourney in the past?

gopher9 · Post by **gopher9** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 7:24 pm

I'm sure there will be some very good young players coming up that will go to their private school of choice, and many more that will want to go public - that's their decision to make. [/quote]

Absolutely, that's their decision to make! But what if a family cannot afford to go to a private school at 9th grade? 4 years at $40,000? (mininmum) What if they can only afford to go their 11th & 12th grade year? Is it fair that they would have to sit out 1 year? That is why I think they should have O/E. JMHO!

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 8:46 pm

gopher9 wrote:Absolutely, that's their decision to make! But what if a family cannot afford to go to a private school at 9th grade? 4 years at $40,000? (mininmum) What if they can only afford to go their 11th & 12th grade year? Is it fair that they would have to sit out 1 year? That is why I think they should have O/E. JMHO!

I think if the new transfer rules, if passed, are fair in that they treat OE's the same, whether public or private. Whether or not they should be passed is a different question. Whatever they do, they should apply equally to both public and private schools, since they are both sanctioned by the MSHSL and abide by their rules.

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Wed Mar 07, 2007 10:10 pm

What will probably happen is that someone will fight the new rule and then we'll have no rule...

gopher9 · Post by **gopher9** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:06 am

ghshockeyfan wrote:What will probably happen is that someone will fight the new rule and then we'll have no rule...

You are correct!!! My guess is that several people will fight it?

gopher9 · Post by **gopher9** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:46 am

Does anybody know what percent of students actualy O/E? Maybe 1%? If thats the case, why a rule change???????

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 9:15 am

gopher9 wrote:Does anybody know what percent of students actualy O/E? Maybe 1%? If thats the case, why a rule change???????

Because, like kids that go private, the % of that 1% that are outstanding athletes isn't in line with what we'd expect in looking at a general sample of HS kids.

hockeyfan#4 · Post by **hockeyfan#4** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:12 pm

gopher9 wrote:
MNHockeyFan wrote:
hockey21 wrote:I know BSM lost Trunzo and Reilly and they still have Bacon. Do they have any hot new prospects coming in?
My opinion is that until incoming students are accepted and have committed publicly that they are starting school in the fall, it's not fair to them to mention any names.

Oh believe me They will have at LEAST 2or 3! So will Cretin,Holy Angels,Hill Murray and all the rest of the private schools. I think it is an absolute JOKE That they are all NOT in the same section!

Leave it alone if the private schools are that good at recruiting and finding all the kids that are great at hockey then they should be kicking everyones you know what every game. WELL! guess what they are not doing that. Yes, those schools are competitive on occasion and so are the public schools. Could you imagine what this forum would be saying if SSP was a private school!!! Oh wait what does it already say about Eden Praire and OE!!!

I think all of the people that are disatisfied with high school sports "specifically hockey" are not happy with WHAT??? The fact that parents are trying to control A certain situation to make the team that their daughter or son plays on is better than the team that just beat them!!!! The people that are having trouble with this??? Are you living vicariously through your children and really have no opinion on this or any forum untill you grow up???

Public School Parent That Loves playing the best competion in the State.

Bring It On!!!

findme · Post by **findme** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 3:38 pm

I totally agree with hockeyfan#4! Thank you for talking some sense. I encourage all of you to re-read your latest entries-you sound like a bunch of wining babies!

Thank God we live in a state that allows our children to have the opportunity to attend whatever school we as parents decide is best for our children!

As a parent who has one child at a public school and one child at a private school, whom both play hockey, I challenge all of you to contact a private school, indicate that your child is a hockey player and see what happens. If you think your tuiton will be reduced or they will offer you any incentive at all-you are WRONG! (or just plain crazy)

Clearly, you think it is acceptable to blame others when you either a) can not get YOUR way or b) you lose. Sounds like sour grapes to me!

By the way...my public school hockey player has never once complained about playing any school that has E/O players or any private school. In fact, the opposite is true-it is challenging and very satisfying.

Public and Private School Parent That Loves playing the best competion in the State. Ditto on the BRING IT ON!

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Sun Mar 11, 2007 11:34 pm

findme wrote: As a parent who has one child at a public school and one child at a private school, whom both play hockey, I challenge all of you to contact a private school, indicate that your child is a hockey player and see what happens. If you think your tuiton will be reduced or they will offer you any incentive at all-you are WRONG! (or just plain crazy)

When it comes to admissions and partial aid ("scholarships") I believe you will find that most private high schools operate much the same as the Ivy League does for college. If you are an athlete it is one aspect they will consider in admissions, but you will still need to qualify academically. Some schools are obviously tougher on academics than others. Financial aid MAY be available, but forms must be completed and the amount of money the school MAY contribute is totally dependent on need, not how good of an athlete you are.

If there ever would be any bending of rules when it comes to the above - and I've never heard of any specific situations where this would have been the case no matter what the sport - it would NOT be for girls' hockey.

keepitreal · Post by **keepitreal** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 3:17 pm

hockey21 wrote:I know BSM lost Trunzo and Reilly and they still have Bacon. Do they have any hot new prospects coming in?

There are a number of players on their JV team that would have starting jobs elsewhere. I doubt you will see few if any upperclassmen transfers given the pending status of the transfer rules, but there's good depth there regardless and a decent returning core who play a lot of summer hockey. I'd characterize BSM as the early favorite in this section. Wayzata will always be strong, Hopkins is a couple of years away, North Metro lost several key seniors and might fall back a bit, Armstrong and Maple Grove will give teams some trouble but trail the other four. That's how I see it.

Silent But Deadly · Post by **Silent But Deadly** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 4:29 pm

BSM and Wayzata will always be tough. I'm not so sure Hopkins is a few years away....if they don't lose anyone they should be a force starting next year. I think overall they had the best freshman/sophomore talent....they will be a year older and better. Buffalo, not up to Hopkins talent pool, but also young, doesn't lose anyone from their top two lines. Maple Grove, North Metro & Armstrong will give any of the above a good game.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 4:40 pm

keepitreal wrote:
hockey21 wrote:I know BSM lost Trunzo and Reilly and they still have Bacon. Do they have any hot new prospects coming in?
There are a number of players on their JV team that would have starting jobs elsewhere. I doubt you will see few if any upperclassmen transfers given the pending status of the transfer rules, but there's good depth there regardless and a decent returning core who play a lot of summer hockey. I'd characterize BSM as the early favorite in this section. Wayzata will always be strong, Hopkins is a couple of years away, North Metro lost several key seniors and might fall back a bit, Armstrong and Maple Grove will give teams some trouble but trail the other four. That's how I see it.

I see it pretty much the same way, except Hopkins will be stronger than you might think NEXT year. They will have a very strong senior class and their younger players will only get better and contribute more. They really lose nobody from this year's team, which went 1-1-1 vs. Wayzata and beat teams such as Eagan, White Bear Lake, North St. Paul, Sibley, Mayo, and CDH.

Wayzata will still be good but may fall off a bit from this year. They lose two very good players in Yungner and Lorenz plus several other solid contributers from this year's team. Right now I would say Hopkins could pass them up and compete strongly with Edina for the Classic Lake title.

Armstong will will not be as strong next year as three out of their four leading scorers this year were seniors, as were three of their defensemen and their main goalie. They do have their overall leading scorer (Chelsey Calder) returning plus her younger sister Kersten and Alex Morey, but other than these three they don't have much. This past season was their year to compete and possibly win their section, but from now on it will be a real struggle for them I believe.

Silent But Deadly · Post by **Silent But Deadly** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 2:55 pm

Looks like BSM is the poll favorite. What makes them your pick for next year?

keepitreal · Post by **keepitreal** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 3:32 pm

MNHockeyFan wrote:I see it pretty much the same way, except Hopkins will be stronger than you might think NEXT year. They will have a very strong senior class and their younger players will only get better and contribute more. They really lose nobody from this year's team, which went 1-1-1 vs. Wayzata and beat teams such as Eagan, White Bear Lake, North St. Paul, Sibley, Mayo, and CDH.

Great point. They are already very competitive and should only get better. At least now Hopkins won't have to go through Edina. They traded EP and Edina for BSM and North Metro. I think they'll take it and will make some noise as early as next season.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:14 pm

keepitreal wrote:Great point. They are already very competitive and should only get better. At least now Hopkins won't have to go through Edina. They traded EP and Edina for BSM and North Metro. I think they'll take it and will make some noise as early as next season.

Hopkins already had BSM to contend with, but both teams do pick up North Metro in 6AA.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Thu Mar 15, 2007 6:30 pm

Silent But Deadly wrote:Looks like BSM is the poll favorite. What makes them your pick for next year?

They are losing Trunzo, Reilly and Perushek, which will be hard to replace, but they do have a strong core of returning players including Kate Bacon, Liz Burg, Ashley Duffy, Emma Shields Nordness, and their starting goalie Nagel. There are also several returning girls who played JV this year that could have played varsity at just about any other school, plus one incoming 9th grader that is supposed to be an excellent player.

#7hockey#7 · Post by **#7hockey#7** » Mon Jul 02, 2007 6:34 pm

MNHockeyFan wrote:
keepitreal wrote:
hockey21 wrote:I know BSM lost Trunzo and Reilly and they still have Bacon. Do they have any hot new prospects coming in?
There are a number of players on their JV team that would have starting jobs elsewhere. I doubt you will see few if any upperclassmen transfers given the pending status of the transfer rules, but there's good depth there regardless and a decent returning core who play a lot of summer hockey. I'd characterize BSM as the early favorite in this section. Wayzata will always be strong, Hopkins is a couple of years away, North Metro lost several key seniors and might fall back a bit, Armstrong and Maple Grove will give teams some trouble but trail the other four. That's how I see it.
I see it pretty much the same way, except Hopkins will be stronger than you might think NEXT year. They will have a very strong senior class and their younger players will only get better and contribute more. They really lose nobody from this year's team, which went 1-1-1 vs. Wayzata and beat teams such as Eagan, White Bear Lake, North St. Paul, Sibley, Mayo, and CDH.

Wayzata will still be good but may fall off a bit from this year. They lose two very good players in Yungner and Lorenz plus several other solid contributers from this year's team. Right now I would say Hopkins could pass them up and compete strongly with Edina for the Classic Lake title.

Armstong will will not be as strong next year as three out of their four leading scorers this year were seniors, as were three of their defensemen and their main goalie. They do have their overall leading scorer (Chelsey Calder) returning plus her younger sister Kersten and Alex Morey, but other than these three they don't have much. This past season was their year to compete and possibly win their section, but from now on it will be a real struggle for them I believe.

armstrong is gona...suck next year they have 3 good players chelsey calder kersten calder and alex morey like that porson said...well zinka well be okay [the starting goalie for next year] tessa house the JV goalie has quit becuz she knows she is not gona start next year and she tought whats the point she is gona be a senoir so the will not even have a JV goalie
its all the coaches fault...but as marcy once said every team has a problem. and its his fault that they didnt go to state last year becuz they had all the talent but they didnt come together as a team. urg.
yea i am gona stop

ghshockeyfan · Post by **ghshockeyfan** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:43 pm

Hopkins should be one to watch too...

Silent But Deadly · Post by **Silent But Deadly** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 12:42 pm

ghshockeyfan wrote:Hopkins should be one to watch too...

Anything new in 6AA?

I understand Hopkins lost one of their potential transfers....however, they probably didn't need her.

MNHockeyFan · Post by **MNHockeyFan** » Thu Oct 04, 2007 1:17 pm

Silent But Deadly wrote:
ghshockeyfan wrote:Hopkins should be one to watch too...
Anything new in 6AA?

I understand Hopkins lost one of their potential transfers....however, they probably didn't need her.

Lindsey Burman decided to play with the Thoroughbreds. Even though Hopkins will still be very strong without her, she would have made them even stronger.

Also Armstrong lost Alex Morey to the Thoroughbreds, and their season will become even more challenging without her.