HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Early going has to be something like this.

1 East Grand Forks or Thief River Falls

3 Warroad
4 Lake of the Woods

5 Crookston

6 Park Rapids or Red Lake Falls

8 Hallock
9 Bagley

The top 3 with a shot at state...
LOW will need something.... A Fort Frances or Kenora recruit????

TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE THIS:
1. CROOKSTON
2. EGF
3. WARROAD
4. LOW
5. PARK RAPIDS
6. KITTSON CENTRAL
7. TRF
8. RLF
9. ??
10 ??

riverman wrote:TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE THIS:
1. CROOKSTON
2. EGF
3. WARROAD
4. LOW
5. PARK RAPIDS
6. KITTSON CENTRAL
7. TRF
8. RLF
9. ??
10 ??

Don't get your panties in a bunch just yet...

riverman wrote:TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE THIS:
1. CROOKSTON
2. EGF
3. WARROAD
4. LOW
5. PARK RAPIDS
6. KITTSON CENTRAL
7. TRF
8. RLF
9. ??
10 ??

I was thinking more like:

1. CROOKSTON
2. CROOKSTON
3. CROOKSTON
4. CROOKSTON
5. CROOKSTON
6. CROOKSTON
7. CROOKSTON
8. CROOKSTON
9. CROOKSTON
10 CROOKSTON

Well, a lot of hockey is yet to be played but lookie here, Crookston stands on top of Section 8A. It's Been A While....(Staind)

1. Crookston 3-0
2. East Grand Forks 3-1
3. Warroad 2-1
4. Lake of the Woods 1-2
5. Thief River Falls 0-1
6. Red Lake Falls 2-0
7. Kittson Central 2-2
8. Park Rapids 0-3
9. Bagley 0-3

Kudos to Crookston. Nice start to the season.

Congrats to Bitts and the Pirate boys.
8A is very interesting this year.

crookston will never win a section 8a title. keep dreaming.

After seeing a few of these teams play I and comparing some scores to me the section looks to be wide open. I'd put it like this for now
1-4. Crookston, East Grand Forks, Thief River Falls, and Warroad.
5-7. Lake of the Woods, Park Rapids, and Red Lake Falls


8-9. Bagley and Kittson Central.

I don't think there is a real big gap between 1-4 and 5-7, but really don't see Bagley or Kittson Central making many anything happen especially inside the section. This year may be the first time in a while the section has been this wide open and we could see more than a few upsets come playoff time.

gordon wrote:crookston will never win a section 8a title. keep dreaming.

Butt hurt much? You can't expect Crookston to not be excited when everyone tells them they're in a different league than the big 3 and they knock off EGF.

Goal wrote:After seeing a few of these teams play I and comparing some scores to me the section looks to be wide open. I'd put it like this for now
1-4. Crookston, East Grand Forks, Thief River Falls, and Warroad.
5-7. Lake of the Woods, Park Rapids, and Red Lake Falls


8-9. Bagley and Kittson Central.

I don't think there is a real big gap between 1-4 and 5-7, but really don't see Bagley or Kittson Central making many anything happen especially inside the section. This year may be the first time in a while the section has been this wide open and we could see more than a few upsets come playoff time.

I don't think there is a big gap between 1-5 would be a better statement. Park Rapids has been beaten 11-2 (EGF), 7-2 (Crooks) and 5-1 (LOW). RLF is a non-factor every season.

It is very difficult to judge Crookston as of now with who they've played in the section. Sure, they're 3-0 in the section, which is great, but they haven't played Warroad, LOW, or TRF yet. It would be great to see them do well though. If they could compete with Hermantown, or at least go 2-1 this holiday tourney, that'd be cool.

EGF and Crookston always play it close, no matter how lopsided the competition. They've only played Park Rapids and Kittson (not exactly stiff competition). Wouldnt look too much into the win over EGF. (Crookston did the same thing to TRF last year, and how much did of an impact did they make in playoffs? ehhh....)

I watched the Red Lake Falls at Lake of the Woods game and really was not impressed by LOW at all. Red Lake Falls scored early and then really played a solid game of dumping the puck in deep and getting a good forecheck, the big thing that hurt them was they had two 5-on-3 powerplays both of which were over a 1:20 of 5-on-3 and couldn't get anything past Lyon. Lyon was solid and made some really big saves when he had to, LOW scored their first goal right after killing of a 5-on-3 and took advantage of an RLF mistake. LOW scored the winner with about 3mins left on a play where RLF didn't get the puck deep and turned it over and LOW went down and scored, they also added a empty netter with 0.4 seconds left. Lyon came up huge on a one timer off the face off with about 2mins left as the puck hit his shoulder and pipe and went out of play. I just didn't see the offensive skill from LOW to make them a real contender in this section, sure they have Lyon but he can only steal so many games for you.

riverman wrote:TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE THIS:
1. CROOKSTON
2. EGF
3. WARROAD
4. LOW
5. PARK RAPIDS
6. KITTSON CENTRAL
7. TRF
8. RLF
9. ??
10 ??

Haha pretty sure TRF just beat Kittson 17-1 last night so you might want to rethink how you rank teams. Not to mention like others have said, Crookston has only beat EGF, not Warroad, LOW, or TRF so it is tough to say they are better than Warroad who is always pretty good.

1. East Grand Forks
2. Warroad
3. Thief River Falls

very close

4. Crookston
darkhorse

5. LOW
two upsets in the semis and finals - NOPE - at best a spoiler


Will not make the semis
6. Park Rapids, Red Lake Falls

8. Hallock

9. Bagley

elliott70 wrote:1. East Grand Forks
2. Warroad
3. Thief River Falls

very close

4. Crookston
darkhorse

5. LOW
two upsets in the semis and finals - NOPE - at best a spoiler


Will not make the semis
6. Park Rapids, Red Lake Falls

8. Hallock

9. Bagley

I think this is a pretty good take, I agree with this Elliot

What's the difference between a 17-1 (TRF) and a 9-0 (CRX) victory over Kittson?

Nothing. Aside from some apparent sportsmanship issues.

There's no Crookston bandwagon but they are in the 8A mix.

Imfrummars wrote:What's the difference between a 17-1 (TRF) and a 9-0 (CRX) victory over Kittson?

Nothing. Aside from some apparent sportsmanship issues.

There's no Crookston bandwagon but they are in the 8A mix.

My point wasn't that TRF should be necessarily ranked higher then Crox. My point was that TRF shouldn't have been ranked lower then Kittson and that there is an argument against who is number 1 right now.

As of right now I believe there is no front runner in the section until one team shows some dominance.

bump

I agree that Park Rapids is probably going to win the section this year. Good for them! Hope everyone is having a wonderful winter, stay warm and catch the eyes!

SiouxRecruit wrote:I agree that Park Rapids is probably going to win the section this year. Good for them! Hope everyone is having a wonderful winter, stay warm and catch the eyes!

Are you actually serious?

MNHockey_6 wrote:

SiouxRecruit wrote:I agree that Park Rapids is probably going to win the section this year. Good for them! Hope everyone is having a wonderful winter, stay warm and catch the eyes!

Are you actually serious?

Yes, he is.
But then, I think he is from Nevis.
And that would explain it.

elliott70 wrote:

MNHockey_6 wrote:

SiouxRecruit wrote:I agree that Park Rapids is probably going to win the section this year. Good for them! Hope everyone is having a wonderful winter, stay warm and catch the eyes!

Are you actually serious?

Yes, he is.
But then, I think he is from Nevis.
And that would explain it.

He must be dreaming of course, as the Panthers are a mere 7-6, hardly a standout record thus far into the season. Not to mention they could finish the season going undefeated the rest of the way out and most likely still wouldnt garner a seed higher than 5th or 6th. A couple of losses that really stand as well won't fly come seeding time either:

PR 1 TRF 10
PR 2 EGF 11
PR 1 LOW 5
PR 2 Crookston 7