HighSchoolHockeyForums.com

Sections 1, 3 and 5 are the weakest sections in Single A.

Section 5 in its current state (the last 3 years) is 0 and 6 being outscored 28 - 5 at the state tournament.

Section 3 in the last 5 years is 1 and 10 without a QF win and outscored 59 to 25.

Section 1 in the last 10 years is 14 and 16 with one QF win, a 3rd place and 3 CON champs.

Should there be some balance of these sections with other sections to have a more competitive QF at state?

I understand the "spirit" behind Single A Hockey and do believe it helps communities build their youth with some excitement of a state run or deep into sections. But.. I believe Single A hockey should be just that, Single A hockey teams playing Single A teams..Only

my solution would be simple and it could be done, if you are single A and believe that's what you are, then you only play Single A teams, not just at State, but the entire year. Very simple and makes the decision of those programs that don't "Really" want to play A until the end of the year very very easy for them. You are a single A program, you play single A then, All year and through State.

I believe you are looking for your answer with the wrong question of section this, section that. it's who's in those sections that disrupt the "Spirit" of the parity you are looking for.

HockeyTalk18 wrote:I understand the "spirit" behind Single A Hockey and do believe it helps communities build their youth with some excitement of a state run or deep into sections. But.. I believe Single A hockey should be just that, Single A hockey teams playing Single A teams..Only

my solution would be simple and it could be done, if you are single A and believe that's what you are, then you only play Single A teams, not just at State, but the entire year. Very simple and makes the decision of those programs that don't "Really" want to play A until the end of the year very very easy for them. You are a single A program, you play single A then, All year and through State.

I believe you are looking for your answer with the wrong question of section this, section that. it's who's in those sections that disrupt the "Spirit" of the parity you are looking for.

No, I believe I asked the question I was looking to ask.

This is not about Hermantown and Breck.
This is simply whether or not the MSHSL should strengthen a section.
Do you think it would have resulted in anything different if Hibbing had been section 7 rep and Hermantown would have played AA.
Mankato West vs Delano?
Princeton vs East Grand Forks?

Keep it to the topic please. We have enough Hermantown discussion.

Maybe there should be some competitive balance but refer back to the mission statement of the MSHSL. There is no subjectivity in section assignments. We would all love to see the best product but participation and positive experience are the goals.

HockeyTalk18 wrote:I understand the "spirit" behind Single A Hockey and do believe it helps communities build their youth with some excitement of a state run or deep into sections. But.. I believe Single A hockey should be just that, Single A hockey teams playing Single A teams..Only

my solution would be simple and it could be done, if you are single A and believe that's what you are, then you only play Single A teams, not just at State, but the entire year. Very simple and makes the decision of those programs that don't "Really" want to play A until the end of the year very very easy for them. You are a single A program, you play single A then, All year and through State.

I believe you are looking for your answer with the wrong question of section this, section that. it's who's in those sections that disrupt the "Spirit" of the parity you are looking for.

Not possible, some A teams are in conferences with AA teams

elliott70 wrote:Sections 1, 3 and 5 are the weakest sections in Single A.

Section 5 in its current state (the last 3 years) is 0 and 6 being outscored 28 - 5 at the state tournament.

Section 3 in the last 5 years is 1 and 10 without a QF win and outscored 59 to 25.

Section 1 in the last 10 years is 14 and 16 with one QF win, a 3rd place and 3 CON champs.

Should there be some balance of these sections with other sections to have a more competitive QF at state?

5A is going to become very strong with top 5 ranked A teams in Bantams and Peewees the last couple years. They finally have the geographical areas of the state right now in sections... So let the rivalries grow! Southern Minnesota is finally strengthening and now we should find a STA type (roadblock) to fill the role of killing moral and weakening many programs?

Nothing better than having underdogs/ new faces / Cinderella stories!

Nah.

5A will get better, as it's an exurban section in a growing area. 3A has gotten better recently--this year's QF was ugly, but Hermantown beat everyone they played in the post season ugly. And 1A's 14-16 record isn't bad at all; they're normally competitive, even if they rarely win the opening round game. Edit around the margins if need be, but there's no reason to blow it all up.

The sections are fine they way they are. The goal of section assignment is not to make them "balanced". Sections are and should be based on geography. One of the the good things about geographical sections is that it helps hockey grow in nontraditional sections of the state. Southwest Minnesota in particular has improved and now has some schools that have now developed their own hockey tradition. New Ulm and Luverne come to mind. Also, Section 1 is now more than just Rochester Lourdes. Section 5 will become more competitive if you look at youth hockey results where North Branch and Princeton have fielded competitive teams in District 12 which includes Duluth and the Iron Range. The fact that some sections have not competed well should not be the criteria used to assign a team to a different section. The is not and should not be for the best 8 teams in the state to compete. It's for every team throughout the state to have a chance to represent their area at the tourney. Sections 2, 7 and 8 have recently dominated the state tournament but having all eight teams from those three sections would not serve the slogan "State of Hockey" well.

I think that the fact the schools in SW Minnesota can legitimately compete for a spot in the state tourney has allowed for the growth of the sport in that part of the state. The move to 2 classes as also helped as those programs would NEVER sniff the state tourney in the 1 class days. Most of them would struggle to reach the qf round of the respective section tournaments. I'm old enough to remember that in southern MN when New Ulm was about as far west as you went and they always struggled to win a game or two in the section 1 tourney. In 1978 they made the quarter finals of Section 1 at Met Center by beating Rochester Mayo and for them it was like making the state tourney in the one class system.

Even section 6 a few years ago wasn't always very competitive now it's arguably the most competitive section come section playoffs and the past 3 years the teams that made it to state took 4th twice and won the consolation championship. Maybe soon one of those sections can do what section 6 did. All it takes is a good group of guys and for those guys to not leave their town and choose to play for some metro private school.

Section 1 has Lourdes, Mankato West, and Northfield. Those seem to be the teams to beat lately. A good Albert Lea team or something like that can come around every once in a while. Pretty competitive section.

Section 3: Luverne and New Ulm have been the two teams in that section but Hutchinson has had some good hockey players and of course Litchfield made a lot of noise this year and I hope they can stay as good as they were. That creates a 3-4 team race for section 3 every year and they could hang in with the big dogs as evidenced by litchfield's play against Hermantown. (Hermantown destroyed everyone so you can't use that argument on me)

Section 5: this is the section that needs some work. It may be an urban expansion area but that also leaves players to go transfer to private schools. Princeton should be a better team. Chicago lakes could improve but there isn't really much. Monticello has a decent squad but nobody could really compete come the state tournament.

Like I've said before it just takes a really good core group of guys and for everyone to stay loyal to their roots and you can have a competitive hockey program. That's what happened at Apollo for 4 years. We had our fun and now it's time to reload. That's kind of what Class A hockey is about, not really perrenial powers.