|
Post by sparkymark75 on Aug 21, 2011 10:17:03 GMT
The problem in Sheffield is that they've gotten themselves into a vicious cycle. They spent big when they first started, won trophies, had to spend more, to win more trophies, and now their in a position where they can't afford to "keep up with the Joneses".
But their fans demand trophies or they stop attending, so they then spend more than they can afford to get said trophies and end up bankrupt. However, there's never any punishment so they are free to phoenix themselves time and time again.
This is why I kinda feel sorry for clubs such as Edinburgh, who try and live within their means (yeah I know they have other issues such as marketing, etc), and end up being the whipping boys for a season.
So at the top end of the table we have a team that wins the league by spending money they don't have and at the other end, we have a team who don't spend money they don't have and end up the laughing stock of the league.
|
|
|
Post by Heanor Lair on Aug 21, 2011 17:34:54 GMT
The problem in Sheffield is that they've gotten themselves into a vicious cycle. They spent big when they first started, won trophies, had to spend more, to win more trophies, and now their in a position where they can't afford to "keep up with the Joneses". But their fans demand trophies or they stop attending, so they then spend more than they can afford to get said trophies and end up bankrupt. However, there's never any punishment so they are free to phoenix themselves time and time again. This is why I kinda feel sorry for clubs such as Edinburgh, who try and live within their means (yeah I know they have other issues such as marketing, etc), and end up being the whipping boys for a season. So at the top end of the table we have a team that wins the league by spending money they don't have and at the other end, we have a team who don't spend money they don't have and end up the laughing stock of the league. Actually I think Shuff are a much bigger laughing stock than the likes of Edinburgh, Hull, Dundee, because the majority of the trophies have been won with them breaking the rules. For all their boasts about success, its pretty holow in reality. HL
|
|
|
Post by robbo2306 on Aug 21, 2011 21:47:59 GMT
The problem in Sheffield is that they've gotten themselves into a vicious cycle. They spent big when they first started, won trophies, had to spend more, to win more trophies, and now their in a position where they can't afford to "keep up with the Joneses". But their fans demand trophies or they stop attending, so they then spend more than they can afford to get said trophies and end up bankrupt. However, there's never any punishment so they are free to phoenix themselves time and time again. This is why I kinda feel sorry for clubs such as Edinburgh, who try and live within their means (yeah I know they have other issues such as marketing, etc), and end up being the whipping boys for a season. So at the top end of the table we have a team that wins the league by spending money they don't have and at the other end, we have a team who don't spend money they don't have and end up the laughing stock of the league. Actually I think Shuff are a much bigger laughing stock than the likes of Edinburgh, Hull, Dundee, because the majority of the trophies have been won with them breaking the rules. For all their boasts about success, its pretty holow in reality. HL Almost as big a laughing stock as the supposed biggest and richest team in the league being unable to win the biggest prize of them all.......
|
|
Pies
Forum Moderator
Reluctant Chief of ITK
Posts: 4,879
|
Post by Pies on Aug 22, 2011 5:35:10 GMT
Actually I think Shuff are a much bigger laughing stock than the likes of Edinburgh, Hull, Dundee, because the majority of the trophies have been won with them breaking the rules. For all their boasts about success, its pretty holow in reality. HL Almost as big a laughing stock as the supposed biggest and richest team in the league being unable to win the biggest prize of them all....... Wow do we play the when you don't like the truth, resort to 1956? I'd rather be a laughing stock for not winning the league than a laughing stock for having a multi time failed team with the most fickle fans in any sport and represented by a man with an IQ of a deranged monkey. Fact is, in 1 season we can get that monkey off our back. Can you guys ever be fully sure your team will survive from one summer to the next?
|
|
|
Post by christoff on Aug 22, 2011 6:50:15 GMT
Actually I think Shuff are a much bigger laughing stock than the likes of Edinburgh, Hull, Dundee, because the majority of the trophies have been won with them breaking the rules. For all their boasts about success, its pretty holow in reality. HL Almost as big a laughing stock as the supposed biggest and richest team in the league being unable to win the biggest prize of them all....... A big Part of me thinks that the League is the big one because the supposed biggest and richest team in the league hasent won it yet. To the rest of the world and the players that come over to play, traditionly the big one is the playoffs. If we won the league this year, then yes i would celebrate like a mad buffoon, but then the next year i think i would be more bothered about the playoffs... Lets face it, if the Panthers couldnt win the Challenge cup then that would be the big one.
|
|
|
Post by jd on Aug 22, 2011 10:51:34 GMT
Almost as big a laughing stock as the supposed biggest and richest team in the league being unable to win the biggest prize of them all....... Wow do we play the when you don't like the truth, resort to 1956? I'd rather be a laughing stock for not winning the league than a laughing stock for having a multi time failed team with the most fickle fans in any sport and represented by a man with an IQ of a deranged monkey. Fact is, in 1 season we can get that monkey off our back. Can you guys ever be fully sure your team will survive from one summer to the next? What he said Any team that has Simms associated with them is a laughing stock. He hates Regan, funny how he is asking people to following him on Twitter and now they are friends on Facebook. The man is a joke
|
|
|
Post by Rob Scott on Aug 22, 2011 11:26:45 GMT
The club is a joke and their fan knows it.
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Aug 22, 2011 12:26:23 GMT
OK guys (on both sides)... can we keep at least some semblance of actual debate on this subject, please - not just jibes and insults, however tempting that may be?
|
|
|
Post by thfnick on Aug 22, 2011 14:51:58 GMT
Not sure how anyone can accuse Sheffield of breaking any EIHL rules when the league themselves don't even seem to know what the rules are or if they even exist at all!
|
|
|
Post by Rob Scott on Aug 22, 2011 14:58:39 GMT
Not sure how anyone can accuse Sheffield of breaking any EIHL rules when the league themselves don't even seem to know what the rules are or if they even exist at all! I think people are more bothered about them spending money they don't have.
|
|
|
Post by thfnick on Aug 22, 2011 15:03:14 GMT
Not sure how anyone can accuse Sheffield of breaking any EIHL rules when the league themselves don't even seem to know what the rules are or if they even exist at all! I think people are more bothered about them spending money they don't have. Highly stupid I agree but certainly (and incorrectly in my view) not a rule.
|
|
LUFC
Ashley Tait
Game On!
Posts: 1,819
|
Post by LUFC on Aug 22, 2011 18:15:10 GMT
I think people are more bothered about them spending money they don't have. Highly stupid I agree but certainly (and incorrectly in my view) not a rule. The rule breaking is a reference to the grand sham year of the ISL.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 22, 2011 21:30:32 GMT
I think people are more bothered about them spending money they don't have. Highly stupid I agree but certainly (and incorrectly in my view) not a rule. I'm fairly sure they have broken the rules of the many credit agreements Sheffield have more than likely defaulted on over the years. Sheffield fans would get so much more sympathy from even Panthers fans if they showed a sign of humility for the fact those muppets in charge of their club have acted unethically and put plenty of their creditors out of pocket but the majority(and it is a majority) would rather throw their tarnished trophy success in our faces year in year out.
|
|
Doom
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by Doom on Sept 16, 2011 6:52:04 GMT
Not in this thread - not in so many words, no... but the implication is plain. And it's been said ad nauseam elsewhere, like THF... as you well know, Doom. I'm well aware of the attitudes on THF, I think some on there still haven't got over the formation of the EIHL and are still waiting/hoping for it to go pearshaped.....Then they'll be able to tell all of us who supported it that they told us so. No, they're not two different types of business at all... they simply, in some cases, have different parameters. Higher incomes? - but also higher fixed costs (arena rental etc). Better facilities, in general, but bigger scheduling problems. But like I say... all this arena-vs-rink stuff is simply a deflection, an avoidance tactic... to distract people from the real issue. Which is - if a club of whatever size is run properly, it is most likely going to be financially stable. In just about every example of teams going bust or leaving this league, there have been widespread complaints from those within the club's fanbase (who'd be more likely to know the facts than thee or me) that serious mismanagement was a major factor. This cannot be a coincidence... Maybe different business was the wrong term, but substantially different business models. The fact is that with the exception of Coventry no other rink team can get close to the spending on wages of the arena teams. The likes of Edinburgh, Hull and Newcastle all had to spend beyond their means even to hang on to the coat tails. Do they reduce their spending to match income and fall even further behind the arena clubs?....We saw the result last season when both Edinburgh and Newcastle cut back......Farcical!! The one rink club that has gone against the trend are Coventry. I think why they are so successful is that they came into the EIHL on the back of a very good BNL campaign and as a result brought the fanbase with them. With a mixture of their relatively big crowds (probably the highest attendance to capacity), low rental, a top coach and success they've managed to stay with the big boys. I would be interested to see what happens down there if they had 2 or 3 poor seasons on the bounce, because I would imagine the crowds would start to drop and the knock on effects would probably see them struggle to recover (not that I want to see that happen). I guess time will tell, but I wouldn't be surprised if we lose some teams mid-season like we did when the ISL folded, the saving grace being the addition of Fife means there are enough teams for the league to survive. Am I being overly negative about the prospects of the sport? - Maybe I am, but I see a lot of similarities at the moment between football and ice hockey, be it on a different scale. Regards Doom What with the concerns on the other thread regarding Coventry, I thought it might be worth bringing this back up. I keep saying it....Wagecap or else..... Regards Doom
|
|
|
Post by Lord of the Rinks on Sept 16, 2011 7:53:25 GMT
You can't have a wage cap when it suits your team.
|
|
|
Post by james1977 on Sept 16, 2011 11:32:20 GMT
You can't have a wage cap when it suits your team. Indeed. The likes of Steelers, Coventry etc spunked money up the wall on players for years, lifting trophies on the back of such rash spending and all the time making '1956' jibes at low-spending Panthers. Only now that Panthers are starting to reap the rewards of financial prudence in the early years of the EIHL and other teams struggle does the call finally go out for wage caps. Pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Sept 16, 2011 11:48:30 GMT
You cant expect the club owners to regulate themselves fairly. It's like asking a glue manufacturer to look after your horses.
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Sept 16, 2011 12:30:49 GMT
In partial defence of Doom, he has consistently for years called for a proper wage cap to be put in place (even though you have also blotted your copybook at times with the odd jibe or two, you naughty Steeler you... ) However:- You cant expect the club owners to regulate themselves fairly. It's like asking a glue manufacturer to look after your horses. Exactly. Never mind the inevitable comparisons to other sports (rugby's Superleague, usually) - without rebuilding the entire sport virtually from the ground up, a wage cap simply will not work in British ice hockey. The EIHL in specific, as pantherdman correctly points out, is a total lost cause for a wage cap... when you have a bunch of owners running the league who won't even properly publish rules etc, never mind accept any oversight from outside, how the hell is a wage cap to be enforced? And how can you enforce a wage cap when wage levels are such that the infamous brown envelope with a few tenners stuffed into it can make the difference? Plus there's all the 'extras' (cars, housing, education, jobs-for-the-wives, etc) which are also hard to police. Actually, now I come to think of it... has a wage cap EVER worked in British ice hockey? I mean... just looking at the leagues that been in existence since I started watching (99-00 season):- ISL - started off with no wage cap, then brought one in that was almost unversally ignored, most famously in the case of the Grand Sham. BNL - had a 'luxury tax' on overspending teams, which (according to all the fuss at the time) was almost completely ignored by all concerned. EIHL - has a 'gentlemens agreement' which has also been ignored. EPL - doesn't even bother with a wage cap... which has the same effect, just perhaps shows a little less dishonesty. Wage caps make for a good soundbite... and little else.
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Sept 16, 2011 12:39:14 GMT
Wage cap = a good excuse not to spend more money on better quality players. nothing more.
attendances are up, shirt sales are up, season ticket prices are up, over heads are down. why aren't we spending the money on a better quality product? = Wage cap, easy excuse for the cash to go out of the sport.
Bravo, if i was an owner i would do exactly the same.
|
|
Doom
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by Doom on Sept 16, 2011 15:55:56 GMT
You can't have a wage cap when it suits your team. I think it probably suits the rink teams more than my team. The concern I have is that eventually the rink teams will get fed up of trying to compete (and in many cases failing badly like Edinburgh) and call it a day in the EIHL (Basingstoke, Newcastle and Manchester already have). A 3 team league with Sheffield, Nottingham and Belfast is not exactly my idea of fun. Coventry have often been held up as the example that rink teams can compete if managed well. My argument was that they came into the EIHL with a strong fanbase built on the back of success, but what would happen after a year or two of failure. Maybe last seasons failures are now starting to hurt them. To succeed we need a strong comptitive league, not just 2 or 3 teams head and shoulders above the rest, because the rest will eventually go elsewhere or just fold. The only way I can see the playing field being levelled is by some control over spending. Regards Doom
|
|
Doom
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by Doom on Sept 16, 2011 16:02:10 GMT
Actually, now I come to think of it... has a wage cap EVER worked in British ice hockey? I mean... just looking at the leagues that been in existence since I started watching (99-00 season):- ISL - started off with no wage cap, then brought one in that was almost unversally ignored, most famously in the case of the Grand Sham. BNL - had a 'luxury tax' on overspending teams, which (according to all the fuss at the time) was almost completely ignored by all concerned. EIHL - has a 'gentlemens agreement' which has also been ignored. Has there ever actually been a wagecap? It's only relevant if: 1. It's made clear at the start what it is and what is/isn't included. As far as I'm concerned all incentives should be included (eg. University courses, housing, free food, free gym membership etc). 2. It is properly audited, with confirmation that teams have been cleared and are within the wagecap. 3. A proper punishment tariff is in place for breach. I think they have a system in place in Rugby League and teams have been punished. There would be a cost in implementing such a system, but if it helps the league survive and flourish I'd be all for it. Regards Doom
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Sept 16, 2011 17:45:03 GMT
Wage cap = a good excuse not to spend more money on better quality players. nothing more. Completely disagree with that. Just about every year in just about every league we have instances of clubs in financial trouble... and a lot of that is down to financial irresponsibility - like paying out too much on players. Now whilst I think that the form of spending restriction under discussion - a wage cap - is not currently workable, there is certainly some form of spending restriction needed. And yet again - the Panthers are the perfect example. Neil Black takes over a financially-shaky club, institutes harsh spending restrictions (which at the time enraged just about everyone!)... and turns it into a financially-solid club. Only after that happens does he start to loosen the purse strings a bit. Overheads down? Are you sure? The cost of just about everything is going up and up... what makes you think this isn't the case for the Panthers?
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Sept 16, 2011 17:50:50 GMT
Has there ever actually been a wagecap? Allegedly, yes... the EIHL announced at the beginning of the season a few years ago that there was a wage cap in place, teams breaking it would be punished, etc etc... nothing happened. Then last season it is revealed at the Fan Forum in Nottingham that it's only ever been an 'optional' thing... in other words, hot air and nothing more. Told you someone would mention rugby... Rugby is a different sport, run differently... and probably a hell of a lot better. You can list the criteria for a wage cap all you like, but until or unless things radically change in our sport... it simply won't work. If I thought there was even a reasonable chance that it would work, so would I. But when you've got a bunch of owners (who often seem to be pulling in different directions) making up the rules which they a) don't publish, b) don't obey, and c) don't let anyone else enforce... you're not going to get anywhere.
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Sept 16, 2011 17:57:18 GMT
The concern I have is that eventually the rink teams will get fed up of trying to compete (and in many cases failing badly like Edinburgh) and call it a day in the EIHL (Basingstoke, Newcastle and Manchester already have). It's a valid concern... although I have to wonder how likely that would be for some teams. After all... the EPL isn't run much better (if at all), and the Scottish teams, for example, would have to create a whole new league for themselves. Well, that's been talked about for years and never happened... and even if it did, is anyone naive enough to think that it would be any better run? Couldn't agree more. Then a bit of financial prudence a la Neil Black is the most likely solution... See above. Self control... as unlikely as it seems in many/most cases... that's the only kind of control that's likely to have a chance. Because none of them are inclined to follow the existing rules - so why would they follow any new ones? Of course, the only real way of improving things long-term is not to restrict expenditure... but to increase income and/or reduce costs. And that latter one would take me back onto the cutting-costs-by-improving-British-player-development subject (see other threads for details)...
|
|
|
Post by james1977 on Sept 16, 2011 19:00:24 GMT
The concern I have is that eventually the rink teams will get fed up of trying to compete (and in many cases failing badly like Edinburgh) and call it a day in the EIHL (Basingstoke, Newcastle and Manchester already have)......... ..........To succeed we need a strong comptitive league, not just 2 or 3 teams head and shoulders above the rest, because the rest will eventually go elsewhere or just fold. When the likes of your very own Sheffield as well as Manchester, Cardiff and a few other were throwing money about like it was water and buying trophies where were the calls for wage caps to help poor little Nottingham? Did Neil Black take his team and sulk off to another league because the others wouldn't play nice or did he stick around, see his/our team take a tonking every other week and stay with a financial plan that considered the long game? How about then, and this may he a crazy idea, a bit of self-control over spending? Rather than attempt to climb to the moral high ground, plead actions for 'the greater good' and generally throw toys about because the devil that is Mr Black seems to have had the right idea all along, why don't team owners show a bit of restraint and team fans accept that perhaps, whilst their team is being reborn on a more financially stable foundation, that other teams (teams that you previously looked down on) may shine? How about, rather than introduce a wage cap that is very likely to reduce the overall quality of the game which would hit every team hard, teams develop as businesses first before trying to chase trophies? How about some teams and fans having a bit of honesty and admitting that the hole they are in is no ones fault than their own, driven by their lust for silver at all costs?
|
|