Section 3A #4 seed vs. #5 seed!!!!

[bluelinespecial1]

fix this section!!!!!!!!!!!!!! yikers!

on a lighter note...should be a barn burner haha

[CherryPicker99]

Its actually a 4 seed (Marshall) and 6 seed (Hutchinson).

[Doc Holliday]

I still think SW MN having their own section is a benefit to the growth of hockey, even if they get blasted the first game at the X.

However, would it be possible to have the Mankato schools a part of this section? Maybe this would add a little depth to the section & it's not like 1A couldn't lose a team or two from the dozen they have now.

[Ready2GoYet]

I had the same thought--I think moving Mankato to 3A would make a lot of sense. Section 1A has 12 teams, but 3A has 9, not to mention Mankato is closer to Luverne than it is to La Crescent.
Going outside of 3A, since were in this area, it would also be nice if Lourdes would go to 1AA, as they are (in my opinion) the best Rochester team, and that might start to answer some of the 1AA negativity.
The point of also promoting out-state hockey is a good one. One section will always be the worst, and if we just want to push stronger programs into that section, why instead don't we just use QRF or some other rating to say that just the top 32 or top 64 teams make the playoffs, and split up the playoffs into brackets once that is decided.
I'd like to believe that we are not just trying to benefit the larger, stronger programs, and those programs that recruit (private and public), we are also trying to grow and support the game at all levels.

[Grocery_Stick]

I still think SW MN having their own section is a benefit to the growth of hockey, even if they get blasted the first game at the X.

However, would it be possible to have the Mankato schools a part of this section? Maybe this would add a little depth to the section & it's not like 1A couldn't lose a team or two from the dozen they have now.

I couldn't agree more on adding Mankato to 3A. I am not sure on the set ups anymore, but I remember growing up they were in the same district as the other 3A teams. I feel like it would benefit the overall quality of hockey in the area to add them also.

[Deck Slide]

I had the same thought--I think moving Mankato to 3A would make a lot of sense. Section 1A has 12 teams, but 3A has 9, not to mention Mankato is closer to Luverne than it is to La Crescent.
Going outside of 3A, since were in this area, it would also be nice if Lourdes would go to 1AA, as they are (in my opinion) the best Rochester team, and that might start to answer some of the 1AA negativity.
The point of also promoting out-state hockey is a good one. One section will always be the worst, and if we just want to push stronger programs into that section, why instead don't we just use QRF or some other rating to say that just the top 32 or top 64 teams make the playoffs, and split up the playoffs into brackets once that is decided.
I'd like to believe that we are not just trying to benefit the larger, stronger programs, and those programs that recruit (private and public), we are also trying to grow and support the game at all levels.

The QRF is not an option. It would be a mess in my opinion and would exclude a lot of programs. Moving Mankato East and West to Section 3A does nothing because Mankato teams traditional are not any stronger than the teams in 3A currently.

[CherryPicker99]

In 2001 Here is Section 1A seedings.

1. Lourdes (Lost 2-1 to BSM in State Championship)
2. New Ulm
3. Northfield
4. Luverne
5. Mankato West
6. Albert Lea
7. Mankato East
8. Windom
9. Worthington
10. Fairmont
11. Waseca
12. Sleepy Eye
13. Lacrescent

Why not got back to this section alignment? Would this make a more competitive section? With Sleepy Eye and New Ulm now a Co-op it would be a 12 team section.

http://www.minnhock.com/boys2001.htm

[Section 3A HockeyScout]

In 2001 Here is Section 1A seedings.

1. Lourdes (Lost 2-1 to BSM in State Championship)
2. New Ulm
3. Northfield
4. Luverne
5. Mankato West
6. Albert Lea
7. Mankato East
8. Windom
9. Worthington
10. Fairmont
11. Waseca
12. Sleepy Eye
13. Lacrescent

Why not got back to this section alignment? Would this make a more competitive section? With Sleepy Eye and New Ulm now a Co-op it would be a 12 team section.

http://www.minnhock.com/boys2001.htm

Here is what I see it being for 3A next year:
New Ulm
Hutch
LDC
Luverne
Marshall
Windom
Worthington
Fairmont
Redwood Valley
Mankato West
Mankato East
St Peter

For next year it will make 3A Legit as Mankato West will be a top 10 team in state. However, down the road wont make it that much better overall.

3A is what use to be in the old days 6A.

6A use to be represented by LDC, Hutch and Mound Westonka before the whitehawks had a metro population move it. its good for SW Minnesota to get its own section. Gives kids in our area a chance to dream about st paul.

I dont see too many major changes but adding the Mankato's makes sense and they will dominate the section for a few years. Overall though leave 3A alone its good for the game to let hockey hockey grow. Its a State Tourney not a Metro Private Tourney

[Ready2GoYet]

I like 3AHS's listing, just one question though. I thought I remembered last time the sections were redone that the St. Peter coop was above the AA line but were given a one time push down to A. Anyone else remember this? And if so, the odds of them getting to stay there?
Otherwise, this thread falls partly in line with the realigment discussion, and I would echo those comments that keeping out-state sections is important to keeping interest in the game. While I agree the section format does not result in the "best" teams being in the state tournament, I for one, do not believe that is its only goal.