|
|
Post by Daddio on Jan 24, 2011 16:30:42 GMT
There has been one or two rumours surrounding changes to league structure for next year. (mainly from Scott Neil and Paul Ragen) Anyone have any ideas?
I can see a 2 conference system big clubs (us,steelers, cov, giants and cardiff) in 1 conference and smaller teams Caps, vipers, dundee, clan, hull in another with maybe less wage cap and imports.
Then have crossover games as had with BNL a few years ago. Play offs at end top 2 each conference maybe.
Im some bright spark can add some other ideas
|
|
|
|
Post by rangers on Jan 24, 2011 16:45:29 GMT
Not sure that would work, knowing how much that the 'smaller' teams rely on the bigger attendances that playing the bigger teams bring.
Also interesting you class the Clan as a smaller team. I think they have already proven they can mix it with the big boys.
It'll be interesting to see if both Edinburgh and Newcastle are around next year, and if they are what level they will play at.
Its gonna be an interesting summer.
sorry for making the post not very interesting with the over use of the word interesting
|
|
Dan
Forum Admin 
Boss
Posts: 5,891
|
Post by Dan on Jan 24, 2011 16:49:14 GMT
Sorry, but that would never work. The smaller teams are struggling as it is without the big club's help.
|
|
|
|
Post by panthersftw on Jan 24, 2011 17:05:08 GMT
Playing teams in europe as well?
|
|
|
|
Post by spik on Jan 24, 2011 17:42:21 GMT
On another point.Why should a team that may finish 6th or 7th be granted a semi final after playing weaker teams? Third place in the 'big club' league would be not liking that.
I vote for us going into the 'smaller club' league being as we can play like that at times.
|
|
|
|
Post by findevious on Jan 24, 2011 18:39:57 GMT
Bring back the autumn cup.
Lower the import limit.
Two division league with promotion and relegation.
May bank holiday for the play offs
|
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Jan 24, 2011 19:42:23 GMT
Scrap the import limit.
no wage cap.
10 points for a bench clearence?
|
|
|
|
Post by samjohnson345 on Jan 24, 2011 20:46:17 GMT
loving that last comment pantherdman, very drole  it could be interesting to see what develops over time, could be crunch times for the development of british hockey. i agree that clan are not a small team, they have an excellent coach who is doing well in their first ever season!! |
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Jan 24, 2011 20:47:34 GMT
Changes I think we can expect for definite next season;
Strict wage cap
Import limit back down to ten
Possible changes/ developments;
League sponsor
Closer ties with Sky
Return of the Ahearne trophy or similar cup
Further expansion
Two man ref system
Longer Play off series
I think out of the possibles we could potentially see more teams join in the next couple of seasons but my guess for next season would be a longer PO series (league attempted to organise one for this season) and a new league sponsor.
I'm certainly looking forward to further announcements from the league, I can't remember there ever being so much talk about positive developments etc.
|
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator 
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Jan 24, 2011 22:16:56 GMT
Not arguing with you in particular, Nick... but I have serious doubts about some of those ideas you've listed. The biggest doubt being one of those you tout as being "definite"
Strict wage cap
I'll believe it when I see it. A few years ago, the EIHL announced that the wage cap would be enforced, and that clubs breaking it would be punished.
Nothing happened - absolutely nothing.
Anyone here believe that no team broke the wage cap that season? Nope, didn't think so.
And in the EIHL fans' forum earlier this season, Andy French openly said that the wage cap had never been enforced and that it had only ever been a "gentlemen's agreement".
So... somebody has been lying to us...
British ice hockey - at all levels - is riddled with politics, distrust, greed, incompetence and suspicion. How the hell is anyone supposed to enforce a wage cap in that kind of regime? And even if some kind of structure could be worked out and actually enforced... there's always The Brown Envelope Of Doom. Rich leagues like the NHL may be able to enforce salary caps because they have a lot of inbuilt scrutiny, and because player salaries are so high that any significant illegal payment may well be easy to detect. In a tinpot league like ours, salaries are low enough so that a few tenners stuffed into an envelope could be enough to make a difference.
Sorry to be a gloomy gus, but on this one... I think we're screwed.
|
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Jan 24, 2011 22:27:05 GMT
Not arguing with you in particular, Nick... but I have serious doubts about some of those ideas you've listed. The biggest doubt being one of those you tout as being "definite" Strict wage capI'll believe it when I see it. A few years ago, the EIHL announced that the wage cap would be enforced, and that clubs breaking it would be punished. Nothing happened - absolutely nothing. Anyone here believe that no team broke the wage cap that season? Nope, didn't think so. And in the EIHL fans' forum earlier this season, Andy French openly said that the wage cap had never been enforced and that it had only ever been a "gentlemen's agreement". So... somebody has been lying to us... British ice hockey - at all levels - is riddled with politics, distrust, greed, incompetence and suspicion. How the hell is anyone supposed to enforce a wage cap in that kind of regime? And even if some kind of structure could be worked out and actually enforced... there's always The Brown Envelope Of Doom. Rich leagues like the NHL may be able to enforce salary caps because they have a lot of inbuilt scrutiny, and because player salaries are so high that any significant illegal payment may well be easy to detect. In a tinpot league like ours, salaries are low enough so that a few tenners stuffed into an envelope could be enough to make a difference. Sorry to be a gloomy gus, but on this one... I think we're screwed. I see what your saying and pretty much agree entirely. I probably should have put "an attempt at a strict wage cap". Like you say the biggest problem we have is the mighty brown envelope. We could even go as far as having an independent auditor to keep tabs on wages but a few loose notes here and there would get around that quite easily. I still think a luxury tax is the only way to go but hey ho. I think it's going to be an interesting summer now we have another influential businessmen around the owners table. |
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Jan 25, 2011 10:03:57 GMT
Strict wage cap - Would cost money to enforce properly so IMO is a non started. Gentlemans agreement maybe but as we have seen not many are gentlemen so waste of time.
Lower import limit - would save owners money - Possible, but would be a backwards step imo.
2 man ref system - would cost = non started
New sponsor and Sky = hope so, hope they demand a few things are cleaned up too.
Alternate cup and play off set up would be great, as long as they get it right, I don't want one game counting for League, cup, and play offs.
Maybe the league will sign a load of players and we'll have a draft? lol!
Don't think we'll see anything too ground breaking TBH, history has told us change is not good in the Elite league.
|
|
|
|
Post by howeaboutthat on Jan 25, 2011 11:01:16 GMT
Lower import limit - would save owners money - Possible, but would be a backwards step imo. This is a complete red herring. Its simple 'supply and demand'. If the league further restricts the amount of imports the value of the better British players, relative to the league they're playing in (not the rest of the world obviously, were they would be seen as bobbins) goes up. So the wealthy clubs snatch up all the better Brits and teams such as Edinburgh and Newcastle are left fielding ENL/rec hockey players. So then how do the league stop all the best British players going to the richer clubs? Ah, wage cap eh? But then the fans of the richer teams, used to seeing a decent level of hockey are suddenly watching EPL under a different name hockey and decide to call it a day, after all how many EPL teams manage to get nigh on 5k average crowds? Bin the import limit, forget about a wage cap but impliment a 'luxury tax'. Teams that can afford to bring in the best they can may do so and in doing so they will help fund the league and the smaller teams. British players who are good enough to compete in such a league will play and not at inflated wages and young Brits will have to improve their game to get a slot rather than know that if they hang around the system long enough that, due to an imposed import limit, they will eventually fall into one. |
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Jan 25, 2011 12:36:48 GMT
Luxury tax is good in theory, but ask some of the richer clubs 'do you want to prop up the poorer clubs?', i'm sure they would say, 'no thanks'.
I can't see Regans first act (after just buying 2 big clubs) being to offer to subsidise a few more. He'll be looking to get his money back ASAP IMO
It's got to be a money generating development IMO
|
|
|
|
Post by texpef on Jan 25, 2011 12:49:23 GMT
its simpler than that, restrict teams to own developed players and a limited number from other teams...
or at a push have a payment structure for number of games played for "poached" players..
|
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Jan 25, 2011 13:38:31 GMT
I think you are missing the leagues aim = make as much money as possible.
It's not to see GB win the olympics.
|
|
|
|
Post by howeaboutthat on Jan 25, 2011 13:56:04 GMT
its simpler than that, restrict teams to own developed players and a limited number from other teams... or at a push have a payment structure for number of games played for "poached" players.. Those are 'simple' options? How many teams have a true developmental system? How many EIHL teams can afford to have a developmental system? How do you define where a player is 'poached from' in a league in which few, if any, teams have an in-house developmental system? Until/unless EIHL teams have official feeder teams from which to draw players defining 'ownership' of a player during their developmental years is fraught with issues. But in the hockey backwater like this, crammed full of egos and backbiting can you really see teams from lower leagues being happy about accepting a subservient position to one of those teams from the big, nasty, EIHL? It wasn't that long ago that the 'governing body' of ice hockey in the UK wouldn't even recognise the EIHL, a decision that almost caused the end of the Nottingham Panthers. Do you really think IHUK really has the interests of EIHL teams at heart and would push smaller teams to fall into line? |
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Jan 25, 2011 13:56:27 GMT
I think you are missing the leagues aim = make as much money as possible. It's not to see GB win the olympics. And I think you're missing the point completely... |
|
Shaggy
Forum Moderator
Am I a cynical idealist or an idealistic cynic?
Posts: 10,995
|
Post by Shaggy on Jan 25, 2011 13:58:41 GMT
its simpler than that, restrict teams to own developed players and a limited number from other teams... or at a push have a payment structure for number of games played for "poached" players.. Those are 'simple' options? How many teams have a true developmental system? How many EIHL teams can afford to have a developmental system? Simple in concept, yes... not in execution. Thing is - there IS no 'simple' option (in execution) that would actually do any good. Forget any 'quick-fix' solution (two lies for the price of one). Nothing good ever comes easy... the only way to change things for the better will be to put in a lot of resources and effort over a considerable period of time. Anything else is just fooling ourselves... |
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Jan 25, 2011 14:15:57 GMT
I think you are missing the leagues aim = make as much money as possible. It's not to see GB win the olympics. And I think you're missing the point completely... Educate me please. |
|
|
|
Post by howeaboutthat on Jan 25, 2011 14:25:46 GMT
Thing is - there IS no 'simple' option (in execution) that would actually do any good. Forget any 'quick-fix' solution (two lies for the price of one). Nothing good ever comes easy... the only way to change things for the better will be to put in a lot of resources and effort over a considerable period of time. Anything else is just fooling ourselves... So ignoring 'partnering' lower league teams with EIHL teams for development of players, as that is not likely to happen, ever, what is the answer? If teams have to develop their own players then there will be a significant cost factor. Teams such as Newcastle are paying through the nose for ice time for their first team, how much more would they have to spend to give their developing players ice time? Where is this extra money going to come from? The arguement seems to be that 'the arena teams' have an arms race going on which is pushing out the smaller teams, so fans of the smaller teams want the import cap to be lowered in order to reduce costs, though as I've already mentioned this is a red herring, better Brits will just become higher valued commodities. So you have less imports resulting in arguably lower quality hockey, top level Brits who can command higher wages and on top of this the league wants teams to develop players in-house (with the as mentioned associated costs). With the lower standard of hockey possibly driving fans away and higher wages of now even more in demand Brits where does the money come from to build this developmental system? I can think of few things that would kill this league quicker than a significantly lower import limit combined with a requirement to 'develop your own'. There just isn't the money. On top of all of this Brit hockey players, when considered outside of the UK bubble, are dross. The best this country has to offer would/have struggled to get a berth in even CHL teams. Whilst there is a little historical success on the international stage (mainly by using ex-pat Canadians) modern British hockey is too minor a sport and competing against too large a foe (soccer/football) to ever drag in significant funding in order to aid development. No amount of import culling or forced in-house development systems are going to change that. |
|
Shorty
Paul Adey
Still here for Private Messages
Posts: 6,636
|
Post by Shorty on Jan 25, 2011 17:50:07 GMT
its simpler than that, restrict teams to own developed players and a limited number from other teams... So we would lose Clarke, Myers, Meyers and Lee. What about players developed at lower league level who want to make the step up to Elite League? |
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Jan 25, 2011 18:51:38 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by pantherdman on Jan 25, 2011 19:06:15 GMT
Great news! no wage cap!!!... hang on a wage minimum cap! lol!! Genius, can't wait to see all these Millionares who like throwing money down the toilet turn up! |
|
|
|
Post by howeaboutthat on Jan 25, 2011 19:27:40 GMT
Ah, due-diligence checks eh? If such checks had been in place a few seasons ago would Mr Ragan be the owner of two teams at the moment or just the one? |
|
it could be interesting to see what develops over time, could be crunch times for the development of british hockey. i agree that clan are not a small team, they have an excellent coach who is doing well in their first ever season!!
