bogeyboge50 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 theres still track dont count them out yet I am a central athlete and this year wasnt our year just for the simple fact we do not have any ANY senior leadership. Next year will be interesting to see how all the sports are gunna do. football will be better, hockey will be better then this year, and other sports well might just stay the same!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNDhockey22 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 with all do respect i dont think he wouldve been a first line just for the simple fact that Red River has talent better than him and second liner and maybe a third liner but not a first liner Alex Simonson, a third liner? I think not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proudsioux Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share Posted February 21, 2007 The girls hockey is amde up from most of RR kids. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxfan123 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 How are the people that are building $300,000 homes (pick any on the south end) managing to raise kids, have those kids in sports, drive a couple of nice cars, have the kids drive nice cars, and still buy a place at the lake? I know that they are probably both working full time jobs, but just how much do you have to make to pay for all of this? Of course, I did have a banker friend tell me once that the average credit card debt is $25,000, and rising. Trust me; there are several people in this world who can not afford all of these things they have. Debt in the US is on the rise and even a little shift in a family's income can cause it all come down like a house of cards because people are living on the edge with very little savings. Perception of status and great marketing is what drives these purchases, not necessarily out of need or even true want. But lenders will keep on lending until a major economic shift causes the whole system to fall like a house of cards on its own. Will it happen? I don't know, but it will be interesting. Secondly, I have also heard that the economic status of students not only affect high school sports. I have heard from more then once source that the students at RR can be less then pleasant in areas such as entitlement (I deserve an A) and overall attitudes (the movie Mean Girls, based on the book Queen Bees and Wannabes by Rosalind Wiseman). On the flip side I have heard Central is a more pleasant teaching experience (granted I don't know for sure, but it is what I hear) and I think much of it steams from social class. Middle and Upper-Middle classes are generally the worst as far as attitudes are concerned. I have had the pleasure of knowing people from all income levels very low to mega rich and have found the least and most advantaged to be some of the nicest and most sincere people I know. Of course there are several factors to include (such as family economic history) and there are also tons of great middle-class people (I know several). Finally take all my ideas with a grain of salt, but this is what I see and hear. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray77 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Trust me; there are several people in this world who can not afford all of these things they have. Debt in the US is on the rise and even a little shift in a family's income can cause it all come down like a house of cards because people are living on the edge with very little savings. Perception of status and great marketing is what drives these purchases, not necessarily out of need or even true want. But lenders will keep on lending until a major economic shift causes the whole system to fall like a house of cards on its own. Will it happen? I don't know, but it will be interesting. Secondly, I have also heard that the economic status of students not only affect high school sports. I have heard from more then once source that the students at RR can be less then pleasant in areas such as entitlement (I deserve an A) and overall attitudes (the movie Mean Girls, based on the book Queen Bees and Wannabes by Rosalind Wiseman). On the flip side I have heard Central is a more pleasant teaching experience (granted I don't know for sure, but it is what I hear) and I think much of it steams from social class. Middle and Upper-Middle classes are generally the worst as far as attitudes are concerned. I have had the pleasure of knowing people from all income levels very low to mega rich and have found the least and most advantaged to be some of the nicest and most sincere people I know. Of course there are several factors to include (such as family economic history) and there are also tons of great middle-class people (I know several). Finally take all my ideas with a grain of salt, but this is what I see and hear. I agree with your 2nd point...which is why Alex Simonson will fit in great at RR. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BringDeanBack Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Alex Simonson, a third liner? I think not. Better not put him on the third line, he might quit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knowsall Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I agree with your 2nd point...which is why Alex Simonson will fit in great at RR. I will most definitely take you ideas with a grain of salt. After recently spending four years at Red River, the best four years of my life might I add, I think most of your statements are very untrue. As in any high school, you are going to have your kids that have attitudes, but you are sadly mistaken to say that the kids with the attitude problems and ego problems are those of a higher income level. from my experiences, the kids that frequently pick on others, and walk around as though they own the school are those from a lower incomes class. Throughout my whole high school career there were maybe 5 fights that happened during school hours, none of them including anybody from what would be concidered an upperclass family. As far as you hearing from teachers that RR is a "less than pleasant environment," I would like to know which teachers you are talking about. From my experiences, with the exception of a few "bad apples," students treated teachers and their fellow students with respect. The halls of Red River were not a scary place to be, and I think almost everybody that has attended school there recently can back me up on that. I am not in a position to say very much regarding Central, but I have heard of several more attitude problems and bullying that occur there. Please don't be so quick to attack the "upper class" Red River kids next time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxpux Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I agree with your 2nd point...which is why Alex Simonson will fit in great at RR. If you agree so much with his second point, why was Central's hockey team so undisciplined and unmotivated. Doesn't sound like they are pleasant to coach. RR's hockey team is a hard working, disciplined hockey team. I think the bottom line to all of this is that both Central and Red River have good and bad kids and it doesn't matter how much money the family has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray77 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 If you agree so much with his second point, why was Central's hockey team so undisciplined and unmotivated. Doesn't sound like they are pleasant to coach. RR's hockey team is a hard working, disciplined hockey team. I think the bottom line to all of this is that both Central and Red River have good and bad kids and it doesn't matter how much money the family has. Yes, you're right...there are good and bad kids on any team. But don't overlook the impact that "Simonsongate" had on the Central hockey team. If you think that the rest of the team could just ignore what happened or 'get over it', you're mistaken. I think what Simonson did really shook that team up. That being said...I'm not sure if they were a top 4 team in the East anyways, but I do think they were better than what their record showed. How they finished the year was disgraceful, and if I'm Tony Bina right now I hold a meeting with all of the returners and let them know that if they think any of that can carry on next year - they won't see any icetime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxpux Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Yes, you're right...there are good and bad kids on any team. But don't overlook the impact that "Simonsongate" had on the Central hockey team. If you think that the rest of the team could just ignore what happened or 'get over it', you're mistaken. I think what Simonson did really shook that team up. That being said...I'm not sure if they were a top 4 team in the East anyways, but I do think they were better than what their record showed. How they finished the year was disgraceful, and if I'm Tony Bina right now I hold a meeting with all of the returners and let them know that if they think any of that can carry on next year - they won't see any icetime. A lot of the undisciplined things that were happening were going on before Alex left the team. It was an undisciplined team from the get go. There were 2 or 3 guys I would've cut from the team midseason if I were coaching. I agree with you, Tony Bina needs to set the tone right away for any undisciplined, stupid acts/penaltys for next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proudsioux Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share Posted February 21, 2007 My friend currently student teaches at red river and he says that all of the hockey players he knows of that he teaches are very quiet and well mannerd and work hard in the classroom. He said most of the bad apples are the kids who skip class and stay in the commons and those kids are the kids that wear all black clothes and are mistreated by other classmates. he said though he can difenatly tell whose rich and whose not as rich by most of the rich kids have more friends (wonder why). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobIwabuchiFan Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 To all, How does the size of your parents house and the quantity of garages equate to success or failure in hockey? I don't believe there is any correlation whatsoever to substantiate this idiotic class jealousy arguement as it pertains to hockey success at a highschool level. BobIwabuchiFan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Csonked Out Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Trust me; there are several people in this world who can not afford all of these things they have. Debt in the US is on the rise and even a little shift in a family's income can cause it all come down like a house of cards because people are living on the edge with very little savings. Perception of status and great marketing is what drives these purchases, not necessarily out of need or even true want. But lenders will keep on lending until a major economic shift causes the whole system to fall like a house of cards on its own. Will it happen? I don't know, but it will be interesting. Secondly, I have also heard that the economic status of students not only affect high school sports. I have heard from more then once source that the students at RR can be less then pleasant in areas such as entitlement (I deserve an A) and overall attitudes (the movie Mean Girls, based on the book Queen Bees and Wannabes by Rosalind Wiseman). On the flip side I have heard Central is a more pleasant teaching experience (granted I don't know for sure, but it is what I hear) and I think much of it steams from social class. Middle and Upper-Middle classes are generally the worst as far as attitudes are concerned. I have had the pleasure of knowing people from all income levels very low to mega rich and have found the least and most advantaged to be some of the nicest and most sincere people I know. Of course there are several factors to include (such as family economic history) and there are also tons of great middle-class people (I know several). Finally take all my ideas with a grain of salt, but this is what I see and hear. Although it is true some people over buy, this is one of the most closed minded comments i've heard. You must remember that there is a lot of inheritance money in the red river valley from the rich farmland which a lot of familys had passed down to them. The university pays most professors quite well, and many of them are also entepreneurs in town. Engineering jobs for the city are payin close to 60k a year, and there are plenty of upper end management jobs where these workers are in their late 40's and early 50's which pay quite well, its the good paying entry level jobs that the city is missing. Also a lender will not lend to a person with to much debt very easily. There is a thing called a credit score that effects it. An example, it is good on your credit score if you only have 40% credit card debt. This means that if you have four credit cards with a total limit of $10,000 you want to keep the debt below 4,000. having more than this drops your rate, so if credit cards are maxed out, and a person owns a house they can't make payments on, they could still afford a navigator by making minimum payments. Also to an extent spending on credit is a good thing for our economy as it keeps money in the system, but yes it is unhealthy to overspend as is what is going on. Provide proof that this is what most people are doing in grand forks and I will believe you, but i have a strong suspicion that inheritance and entrepreneurship plays a big role in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Csonked Out Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 To all, How does the size of your parents house and the quantity of garages equate to success or failure in hockey? I don't believe there is any correlation whatsoever to substantiate this idiotic class jealousy arguement as it pertains to hockey success at a highschool level. BobIwabuchiFan Yeah the class argument and the pigeon holing that was insinuated in his post is a very dated viewpoint, and has no affect on the quality of hockey within grand forks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siouxpux Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 Yeah the class argument and the pigeon holing that was insinuated in his post is a very dated viewpoint, and has no affect on the quality of hockey within grand forks. It wasn't based on how good they play hockey. The conversation was about their attitudes, not on how good they are at hockey. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I'm the one who originally brought up the point regarding the disparity between Central and Red River in certain sports being due in large part to money. I stand by that assertion, to the extent people have qualms with it. The idea that a Central hockey team could not only fail to make it to the state tournament, but also only win four or five games, would have been unheard of 20-30 years ago. Now, I can't say that I'm surprised at all. When I was growing up, the primary feeder programs to Central were the park board teams from University, Riverside and Central parks. Central park doesn't even exist anymore. Much of the Riverside neighborhood was removed after the flood, and Wilder School has the smallest enrollment in Grand Forks. The Lake Agassiz/West/Winship neighborhoods are increasingly becoming rental houses. It certainly doesn't appear to me to be a coincidence that sports which were once staples of the Central athletic program--hockey, tennis and golf--are shadows of their former selves, while those sports continue to thrive at Red River. If this has nothing to do with money, I'd be interested to hear other theories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
proudsioux Posted February 21, 2007 Author Share Posted February 21, 2007 central also gets all the kids from manvel. I think i counted 6 kids from manvel on there team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted February 21, 2007 Share Posted February 21, 2007 I'm the one who originally brought up the point regarding the disparity between Central and Red River in certain sports being due in large part to money. I stand by that assertion, to the extent people have qualms with it. The idea that a Central hockey team could not only fail to make it to the state tournament, but also only win four or five games, would have been unheard of 20-30 years ago. Now, I can't say that I'm surprised at all. When I was growing up, the primary feeder programs to Central were the park board teams from University, Riverside and Central parks. Central park doesn't even exist anymore. Much of the Riverside neighborhood was removed after the flood, and Wilder School has the smallest enrollment in Grand Forks. The Lake Agassiz/West/Winship neighborhoods are increasingly becoming rental houses. It certainly doesn't appear to me to be a coincidence that sports which were once staples of the Central athletic program--hockey, tennis and golf--are shadows of their former selves, while those sports continue to thrive at Red River. If this has nothing to do with money, I'd be interested to hear other theories. I would agree with UND92,96. Look at Minnesota hockey. Formerly, the schools from the Range, as well as St. Paul city schools (like St. Paul Johnson), and blue-collar suburbs like South St Paul and Richfield were hockey powers. Now, the top ten rated hockey schools in Minnesota highly correlate with wealth. -->1. Holy Angel$ 2. Moorhead -->3. Roseville -->4. White Bear Lake -->5. Edina 6. Roseau -->7. Duluth Ea$t -->8. Cretin-Derham Hall -->9. Hill-Murray -->10. Minnetonka -->$$$'s Only two of the top 10 schools are from "average" areas. In Minnesota football and especially basketball, there is much less correlation. Against that list (and what surburban blue line clubs are able to raise), Roseau and Moorhead's accomplishments are truly remarkable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prairie_dweller Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 I would agree with UND92,96. Look at Minnesota hockey. Formerly, the schools from the Range, as well as St. Paul city schools (like St. Paul Johnson), and blue-collar suburbs like South St Paul and Richfield were hockey powers. Now, the top ten rated hockey schools in Minnesota highly correlate with wealth. -->1. Holy Angel$ 2. Moorhead -->3. Roseville -->4. White Bear Lake -->5. Edina 6. Roseau -->7. Duluth Ea$t -->8. Cretin-Derham Hall -->9. Hill-Murray -->10. Minnetonka -->$$$'s Only two of the top 10 schools are from "average" areas. In Minnesota football and especially basketball, there is much less correlation. Against that list (and what surburban blue line clubs are able to raise), Roseau and Moorhead's accomplishments are truly remarkable. so i guess in minnesota you have to pay to win games whoever has the most money is gonna win. Is that how it goes? the answer is no!!! everyone still plays the games every team still has to work to win you dont just win because you have alot of money Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stromer Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 so i guess in minnesota you have to pay to win games whoever has the most money is gonna win. Is that how it goes? the answer is no!!! everyone still plays the games every team still has to work to win you dont just win because you have alot of money The private schools on that list distort the actuality of the problem. Private schools can assure parents of good athletes that their kids will be on a team with 19 other good kids. That amount of talent will bring sucess more often than not. There seems to be a relationship between money and skills, however you just can't put a finger on it. It just seems like a lot of the richer kids are good at hockey. Why that is, I am not sure. So when those rich kids go to the rich kids school, RR, the team becomes a lot better than if those same kids were divided between both schools. The sports that were mentioned earlier, tennis, golf, and hockey are sports that money seems to be a factor, so I am not suprised that RR is dominating nowdays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
knownothing Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 You people are ridiculous if you think economics play that important of a role in athletics. It all boils down to the talent. Some years some schools have it , some years they don't. If your theory makes any sense then explain to me how GF Central won a state championship only 3 years ago. Did all the "rich" kids then live in the Central school district? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siouxmama Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 I will most definitely take you ideas with a grain of salt. After recently spending four years at Red River, the best four years of my life might I add, I think most of your statements are very untrue. As in any high school, you are going to have your kids that have attitudes, but you are sadly mistaken to say that the kids with the attitude problems and ego problems are those of a higher income level. from my experiences, the kids that frequently pick on others, and walk around as though they own the school are those from a lower incomes class. Throughout my whole high school career there were maybe 5 fights that happened during school hours, none of them including anybody from what would be concidered an upperclass family. As far as you hearing from teachers that RR is a "less than pleasant environment," I would like to know which teachers you are talking about. From my experiences, with the exception of a few "bad apples," students treated teachers and their fellow students with respect. The halls of Red River were not a scary place to be, and I think almost everybody that has attended school there recently can back me up on that. I am not in a position to say very much regarding Central, but I have heard of several more attitude problems and bullying that occur there. Please don't be so quick to attack the "upper class" Red River kids next time. Is any of this because you have Officer Torok and Co. there to patrol the grounds every day during school hours? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sioux-cia Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 As far as you hearing from teachers that RR is a "less than pleasant environment," I would like to know which teachers you are talking about. From my experiences, with the exception of a few "bad apples," students treated teachers and their fellow students with respect. What bushel are you living under? I know first hand that a RR hockey player who went on to play for the Goofs called a black hockey player from Jamestown the "N" word during a game. This same upstanding, respectful young man called the cheerleaders, among other things, the "C" word. He's the reason the cheerleaders refused to go to the state hockey tournament. Don't start throwing stones when you live under a glass bushel. No school is better than the other but I have never heard of anything more racist or sexist happening at Central. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UND92,96 Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 You people are ridiculous if you think economics play that important of a role in athletics. It all boils down to the talent. Some years some schools have it , some years they don't. If your theory makes any sense then explain to me how GF Central won a state championship only 3 years ago. Did all the "rich" kids then live in the Central school district? A very large reason Central won state a few years ago was open enrollment. The Lamoureux clan lives well inside the Red River district. I don't think they were the only ones on Central's team who did. And just to be clear here, nobody's saying you have to be rich to be a good hockey player. The point is more that if you come from a family where the household income is close to the national median--somewhere in the $45,000 range--you probably will be needing to make some pretty big sacrifices to be have your kid(s) play hockey. And some families do that, although probably not very many. It's not like I'm saying that Red River's or Fargo South's accomplishments are somehow tainted, or that they have an unfair advantage. That's not my point at all. The point is that things have changed rather dramatically from the days when Central was "it" in North Dakota high school hockey on a routine basis. Again, if it's not the changing demographics of the north end of Grand Forks, then what is it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star2city Posted February 22, 2007 Share Posted February 22, 2007 You people are ridiculous if you think economics play that important of a role in athletics. It all boils down to the talent. Some years some schools have it , some years they don't. If your theory makes any sense then explain to me how GF Central won a state championship only 3 years ago. Did all the "rich" kids then live in the Central school district? You really have to distinquish between players and programs. Great players can come from anywhere, and the hungriest ones are maybe even more likely to come from less wealthy families. In the 40's, 50's and 60's, when outdoor ice was the standard, the working class schools prevailed. Now, relative to most other sports, hockey at a program level does take money, especially as access to ice time during the off-season grows in importance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.