New Rule?

[rangehockey14]

I just recently heard there might be a new rule put into place that each team has to play every team in their respective section at least once during the season. What do you think good idea or no?

[Jacketfan06]

i think that this would be a very good idea. then the sections would be much easier to seed teams if they have all played each other and truly found out who is better at the time and i believe that is how the sections should be ran. even if a real good team loses to a not so good team . if they are so good they could still get through the section if there a 1 seed or the 4 seed. so i think it would be a good idea. every team in each section should play each other at least one time.....

[SiouxRecruit]

Great idea....

[hockeydad]

Why yes, I think that would be a lovely idea.

That way, we could see Roseau and Moorhead really strengthen up their schedule. They would be forced to play such powerhouses as Becker/Big Lake, Monticello/AML, and Northern Lakes, teams that they've been ducking for years.

I'm sure they could rise to the challenge.

[Jacketfan06]

good point dad

[Indians forever]

I believe it means in your section not Conference.

[wishock]

Why yes, I think that would be a lovely idea.

That way, we could see Roseau and Moorhead really strengthen up their schedule. They would be forced to play such powerhouses as Becker/Big Lake, Monticello/AML, and Northern Lakes, teams that they've been ducking for years.

I'm sure they could rise to the challenge.

Great idea. It would force Roseau to use their travel budget to play these teams instead of playing Moorhead twice and getting over to Grand Rapids for a game.

[gatzke]

it would be a great idea in almost every case except Roseau's, they would finally get their trip to the cities back, except instead of playing Anoka, Blaine or CDH like they were accustomed to, they would get Becker, Monticello and Buffalo. Then people could bitch about their weak schedule even more

[Flin Flon]

Very dumb idea. Why would Warroad want to go and play Park on their schedule when they can play teams that will give them competition or why would EGF want to have to give up their games against cross town rivals Red River and Central.

[pioneers]

Bad idea. If they did that, it would severely limit the non-conference opponents that a school would be able to schedule. In many cases it would reduce the strength of some schools schedules. The only way I could see this rule implemented would be to expand the number of games they are allowed to play.

[GR3343]

With a 25 to 30 game schedule, and only 8-10 section opponents, section being defined by class & region, what's the big deal? EGF can still play their cross town rivals, GR can still play Greenway, Roseau can still play Farmington , and ALL would still improve their schedule. It would make for a more compelling finish come section playoffs.

[GetaDayJob]

RangeHockey, this rule would never be considered, thanks for getting the board all excited. This would eliminate conference hockey and turn it into section hockey. Example is section 7, Anoka, Andover, and Elk River would not have enough games outside of their conference and you would eliminate alot of the holiday tournaments.

[stxnpux]

I believe it means in your section not Conference.

These teams are in section 8AA not the Mariucci conference.

And yes. It would be absolutely backwards if you required Moorhead to drop teams from their schedule like Eden Prairie and Jefferson so that they would have to play the teams in the bottom of the conference.

The top tier teams in their respective conferences already play each other at least once during the regular season anyway.

How would this rule make it easier to seed?

[tomASS]

RangeHockey, this rule would never be considered, thanks for getting the board all excited. This would eliminate conference hockey and turn it into section hockey. Example is section 7, Anoka, Andover, and Elk River would not have enough games outside of their conference and you would eliminate alot of the holiday tournaments.

very solid points, but I'm always amazed at the whining that goes on with the seeding process when a team doesn't get the slot they had hoped for but there isn't a lot of head to head to make a comparison.

[GR3343]

RangeHockey, this rule would never be considered, thanks for getting the board all excited. This would eliminate conference hockey and turn it into section hockey. Example is section 7, Anoka, Andover, and Elk River would not have enough games outside of their conference and you would eliminate alot of the holiday tournaments.

How good is section hockey now anyways? The IRC is all but dead with 5 members, 4 of which are Class A. There may be a few sections that are still going strong, but the one's I've seen are mostly one or two teams vs several overmatched squads with little or no chance. Section hockey would bring back some of the dramatics missing from the regular season on a regular basis. I personally would love to see a regular season GR vs Andover, rather than GR vs Eveleth. A team would have to truly earn their seed come sections, rather than having it decided at a meeting.

[DmnHawk5]

If this is what people want then some people would have to not piss n moan about strength of schedule for teams when they are arguing. I think both sides of the spectrum would rather not have to have this happen. The teams that are going elsewhere for better competition obviously have a reason and should be punished for trying to play better teams and the teams at the bottom of the section probably don't want to get put into running time in the second period. You play better teams during the season to prepare your team to beat the teams in your section during playoffs, after all it is sports and the goal is kind of to win in the playoffs.

[RLStars]

RangeHockey, this rule would never be considered, thanks for getting the board all excited. This would eliminate conference hockey and turn it into section hockey. Example is section 7, Anoka, Andover, and Elk River would not have enough games outside of their conference and you would eliminate alot of the holiday tournaments.

How good is section hockey now anyways? The IRC is all but dead with 5 members, 4 of which are Class A. There may be a few sections that are still going strong, but the one's I've seen are mostly one or two teams vs several overmatched squads with little or no chance. Section hockey would bring back some of the dramatics missing from the regular season on a regular basis. I personally would love to see a regular season GR vs Andover, rather than GR vs Eveleth. A team would have to truly earn their seed come sections, rather than having it decided at a meeting.

I'd say you're totally confused. The sections are alive and well, they have to be. How else do you get to the state tournament? I think you mean CONFERENCE in your first two sentences. The IRC is a cnference, not a section, and yes it is small. There are some that are large (number of schools participating in them) and require teams to play each conference team twice. Add in the Section opponents and that leaves few non-conference/non-section games.

Example St. Cloud Tech
Cental Lakes Conference with 10 teams and only 2 are also in section 8AA. Section 8AA has 9 teams and they play two in conference play.
9 confernce teams x 2 (unless agreed by both)...........18 games
8 section teams (2 played in conference).....................6 games
_____________________________________________________
Total.......................................................................24 games

Now how do they fit a holiday tournament into this schedule with only one game to spare?

[GR3343]

I think both sides of the spectrum would rather not have to have this happen. The teams that are going elsewhere for better competition obviously have a reason and should be punished for trying to play better teams and the teams at the bottom of the section probably don't want to get put into running time in the second period.

What???

[RLStars]

I think both sides of the spectrum would rather not have to have this happen. The teams that are going elsewhere for better competition obviously have a reason and should be punished for trying to play better teams and the teams at the bottom of the section probably don't want to get put into running time in the second period.

What???

He is saying that Roseau would not want to have to play Becker/Big Lake and Becker/Big Lake has no reason to play Roseau. What would either team have to gain by playing each other?

[Can't Never Tried]

I think both sides of the spectrum would rather not have to have this happen. The teams that are going elsewhere for better competition obviously have a reason and should be punished for trying to play better teams and the teams at the bottom of the section probably don't want to get put into running time in the second period.

What???

He is saying that Roseau would not want to have to play Becker/Big Lake and Becker/Big Lake has no reason to play Roseau. What would either team have to gain by playing each other?

I know someone would get lots of points....BTW, BBL did beat Monticello this year

[GR3343]

RangeHockey, this rule would never be considered, thanks for getting the board all excited. This would eliminate conference hockey and turn it into section hockey. Example is section 7, Anoka, Andover, and Elk River would not have enough games outside of their conference and you would eliminate alot of the holiday tournaments.

How good is section hockey now anyways? The IRC is all but dead with 5 members, 4 of which are Class A. There may be a few sections that are still going strong, but the one's I've seen are mostly one or two teams vs several overmatched squads with little or no chance. Section hockey would bring back some of the dramatics missing from the regular season on a regular basis. I personally would love to see a regular season GR vs Andover, rather than GR vs Eveleth. A team would have to truly earn their seed come sections, rather than having it decided at a meeting.

I'd say you're totally confused. The sections are alive and well, they have to be. How else do you get to the state tournament? I think you mean CONFERENCE in your first two sentences. The IRC is a cnference, not a section, and yes it is small. There are some that are large (number of schools participating in them) and require teams to play each conference team twice. Add in the Section opponents and that leaves few non-conference/non-section games.

Example St. Cloud Tech
Cental Lakes Conference with 10 teams and only 2 are also in section 8AA. Section 8AA has 9 teams and they play two in conference play.
9 confernce teams x 2 (unless agreed by both)...........18 games
8 section teams (2 played in conference).....................6 games
_____________________________________________________
Total.......................................................................24 games

Now how do they fit a holiday tournament into this schedule with only one game to spare?

I did mean conference in the first couple of sentences.

[GR3343]

I think both sides of the spectrum would rather not have to have this happen. The teams that are going elsewhere for better competition obviously have a reason and should be punished for trying to play better teams and the teams at the bottom of the section probably don't want to get put into running time in the second period.

What???

He is saying that Roseau would not want to have to play Becker/Big Lake and Becker/Big Lake has no reason to play Roseau. What would either team have to gain by playing each other?

My question is what do teams like GR gain by playing Eveleth rather than Andover, or Roseau by playing Farmington rather than whoever? Every team needs a feel good/get well type of game now and then, but not a schedule full of them.

[mohunk]

I believe it means in your section not Conference.

These teams are in section 8AA not the Mariucci conference.

The top tier teams in their respective conferences already play each other at least once during the regular season anyway.

I guess it's pretty clear conferences don't mean a hill of beans in section seeding, best to have head to head games. Sorry to resurrect Park Rapids, but they have NEVER NEVER played Warroad during the regular season, even when PR was rated way higher than them back 7-8 years ago. Coaches have an idea what kind of team they are going to have, and if the perceived lower rated team did not want to play the power house, some way could be figured out to not schedule them.

What purpose do conferences have anyway, especially when you play teams that are not in your section, and even have to play them TWICE?!?!

A lot of nashing of teeth, angst, and name calling could have been eliminated had the Panthers and Warriors played each other. I like the idea of every section team playing every other one at least once a year.

Still, PR not playing WAR has resulted in a lot of entertainment here!

[HShockeywatcher]

I say this is a good idea if they extend how many games you can play a season. As it is some teams in the lake conference only play a handful of non-conference games. If this happened, they wouldn't have time for all the section games and their schedule would be determined for them from the get go, with no wiggle room.

Then you compare them to teams with no conference, they'd only have 7 games determined. Also, some teams have more common opponents between their conference and section, which isn't "fair" to others.

On the flip side, this would give bottom teams a chance to play good teams yearly they would otherwise not be able to get scheduled.

[gatzke]

Every team should just play everyother team in the state once, then we wouldn't have to argue about Edina or Roseau being ranked number 1 just as rediculous as this discussion