|
Post by Rob Scott on Mar 16, 2011 12:06:39 GMT
Haha brilliant, I take it you don't run a business? Let's not forget that boring hockey doesn't guarantee the league. If that was the case Hull would of won it again and again under Strachan. I do run a business as it goes but it's not the Nottingham Panthers.... I really could not care if we win the league with great or boring Hockey as long as we win. Who said that boring Hockey would guarantee winning the league? Oh, that's right... NOBODY.
|
|
Pies
Forum Moderator
Reluctant Chief of ITK
Posts: 4,879
|
Post by Pies on Mar 16, 2011 12:24:51 GMT
TBH if we can get 4000 on a friday night to a Caps game where, lets be honest, beating them 15-0 is gonna be boring then playing a particular brand of hockey, which may not appeal to everyone, that gets the League at the end of the year, then the answer to me is obvious.
Get the title - how much easier is it to market a league winning team? I don't think a great number of fans would leave if the brand of hockey changed because simply casual fans may not know the difference.
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Mar 16, 2011 12:58:37 GMT
Haha brilliant, I take it you don't run a business? Let's not forget that boring hockey doesn't guarantee the league. If that was the case Hull would of won it again and again under Strachan. I do run a business as it goes but it's not the Nottingham Panthers.... I really could not care if we win the league with great or boring Hockey as long as we win. Who said that boring Hockey would guarantee winning the league? Oh, that's right... NOBODY. Wait a minute. Look at your last post and ask yourself if I was replying to you. Thereis suggestions on the previous page that people would be willing to put up with boring hockey in exchange for the league. What I was trying to point out is that you can play boring hockey all season long and still not win the league, so who wins there? If we're looking for a model which might bring us the league then I'd say look no further than the Coventry Blaze sides that have been crowned several times. They were all well balanced teams, defence, key forwards, leaders and toughness. It seems that everybody is associating any hockey less attacking than we currently play as boring, when I talk of a boring team I'm referring to the Steelers a few years back. Would I pay to watch that team week in week out? No.
|
|
|
Post by gcmandrake on Mar 16, 2011 14:30:51 GMT
The Panthers have built a following that is based on entertainment, not results. We win very little of note; a challenge cup occasionally, a play off rarely, and the league never. Despite this lack of success, we have the highest attendances in the league. Compare to the Steelers, who by any measure are one of the most successful teams in the league, yet after one bad season lost a huge part of their attendance. A resurgence in performance this season has gone some way to restore that, but it's still telling.
Gary Moran and Neil Black are smart people - they know the Panthers are a business first and a team second, whether we like it or not. The league is so fragile, that if success is placed ahead of getting people through the doors, and that gamble fails, its quite likely the team as a whole will cease to exist.
Entertainment and success need not be mutually exclusive; I'm sure both increase ticket sales. But entertainment is easier to guarantee than success.
The Panthers will always strive to be entertaining. Maybe we'll get lucky and win the league too. But you know what? I'd rather leave the NIC after a great game of hockey where we lost, than a boring 2-1 victory where all the goals were scored in the first period, and we just shut up shop defensively and stopped the game being played for two periods. And like it or loathe it, Neilson's era has given me more entertainment than most of our previous coaches. And we've always struggled to win things, so it's not as if we've sacrificed results either.
Strachan and Neilson are two polar opposites in coaching style. I'm quite liking having both in charge. But if I had to choose just one to be in charge? 77 every time.
|
|
Yotes
Forum Admin
Posts: 16,412
|
Post by Yotes on Mar 16, 2011 18:11:26 GMT
This. A little more attention to D, sacrifice a little O, and we'd stand a much better chance of success and no one'd find it boring.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 16, 2011 22:01:45 GMT
The Panthers have built a following that is based on entertainment, not results. We win very little of note; a challenge cup occasionally, a play off rarely, and the league never. Despite this lack of success, we have the highest attendances in the league. Compare to the Steelers, who by any measure are one of the most successful teams in the league, yet after one bad season lost a huge part of their attendance. A resurgence in performance this season has gone some way to restore that, but it's still telling. Gary Moran and Neil Black are smart people - they know the Panthers are a business first and a team second, whether we like it or not. The league is so fragile, that if success is placed ahead of getting people through the doors, and that gamble fails, its quite likely the team as a whole will cease to exist. Entertainment and success need not be mutually exclusive; I'm sure both increase ticket sales. But entertainment is easier to guarantee than success. The Panthers will always strive to be entertaining. Maybe we'll get lucky and win the league too. But you know what? I'd rather leave the NIC after a great game of hockey where we lost, than a boring 2-1 victory where all the goals were scored in the first period, and we just shut up shop defensively and stopped the game being played for two periods. And like it or loathe it, Neilson's era has given me more entertainment than most of our previous coaches. And we've always struggled to win things, so it's not as if we've sacrificed results either. Strachan and Neilson are two polar opposites in coaching style. I'm quite liking having both in charge. But if I had to choose just one to be in charge? 77 every time. That's a great post.
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Mar 16, 2011 23:32:00 GMT
The Panthers have built a following that is based on entertainment, not results. We win very little of note; a challenge cup occasionally, a play off rarely, and the league never. Despite this lack of success, we have the highest attendances in the league. Compare to the Steelers, who by any measure are one of the most successful teams in the league, yet after one bad season lost a huge part of their attendance. A resurgence in performance this season has gone some way to restore that, but it's still telling. Gary Moran and Neil Black are smart people - they know the Panthers are a business first and a team second, whether we like it or not. The league is so fragile, that if success is placed ahead of getting people through the doors, and that gamble fails, its quite likely the team as a whole will cease to exist. Entertainment and success need not be mutually exclusive; I'm sure both increase ticket sales. But entertainment is easier to guarantee than success. The Panthers will always strive to be entertaining. Maybe we'll get lucky and win the league too. But you know what? I'd rather leave the NIC after a great game of hockey where we lost, than a boring 2-1 victory where all the goals were scored in the first period, and we just shut up shop defensively and stopped the game being played for two periods. And like it or loathe it, Neilson's era has given me more entertainment than most of our previous coaches. And we've always struggled to win things, so it's not as if we've sacrificed results either. Strachan and Neilson are two polar opposites in coaching style. I'm quite liking having both in charge. But if I had to choose just one to be in charge? 77 every time. That's a great post. And one I completely agree with.
|
|
oldman
Simon Hunt
The World is full of experts
Posts: 1,111
|
Post by oldman on Mar 17, 2011 0:06:34 GMT
well in that case lets not worry about winning the league then hey! So long as Black is making money, and we are entertaining people, why not go all the way and have a clowns outfit for next seasons strip!
You know when shuff won the league do you think the fans cared how they did it, we need to have one season get this monkey off our back and then get back to the entertainment business again!
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Mar 17, 2011 0:07:59 GMT
well in that case lets not worry about winning the league then hey! So long as Black is making money, and we are entertaining people, why not go all the way and have a clowns outfit for next seasons strip! You know when shuff won the league do you think the fans cared how they did it, we need to have one season get this monkey off our back and then get back to the entertainment business again! Bad example buddy. Obviously the Sheffield fans did care as barely any of them showed up the season after!
|
|
oldman
Simon Hunt
The World is full of experts
Posts: 1,111
|
Post by oldman on Mar 17, 2011 0:10:03 GMT
well in that case lets not worry about winning the league then hey! So long as Black is making money, and we are entertaining people, why not go all the way and have a clowns outfit for next seasons strip! You know when shuff won the league do you think the fans cared how they did it, we need to have one season get this monkey off our back and then get back to the entertainment business again! Bad example buddy. Obviously the Sheffield fans did care as barely any of them showed up the season after! I am not a yank or your buddy and they stopped going when they stopped winning, seems like a good example really, they only want winners not showmen!
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Mar 17, 2011 0:20:55 GMT
Bad example buddy. Obviously the Sheffield fans did care as barely any of them showed up the season after! I am not a yank or your buddy and they stopped going when they stopped winning, seems like a good example really, they only want winners not showmen! Fair enough, if that's how it is that's how it is. Oh and seems they were considerably down on season ticket holders the season after they won the league how do you explain they stopped going when they stopped winning? Seems ST's are bought before a game has even been played, buddy.
|
|
|
Post by heja on Mar 17, 2011 4:49:33 GMT
Bad example buddy. Obviously the Sheffield fans did care as barely any of them showed up the season after! I am not a yank or your buddy and they stopped going when they stopped winning, seems like a good example really, they only want winners not showmen! Erm they stopped going while they were walking the league too people thought it would pick up the closer it got to them winning the league but it did not really, then they thought they would get more the next season, because of the win the year before, but they did not, then they went bust. They went bust not because they were not winning but because they were not entertaining. you can still win and are probably more likely to win by playing entertaining hockey than boring hockey, because boring hockey tends to mean you are playing on dimensional hockey. Cardiff IMO are a perfect example of the balance between the two extremes and Coventry were for many years before them.
|
|
Warren
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by Warren on Mar 17, 2011 8:17:53 GMT
I can't argue with the idea of entertaining but defensively sound system. Trouble is, I don't think that would stop the inevitable mid season fall to bits we see year in year out. A more defensive style, could possibly ride it out and keep some momentum for the run in and a trophy being lifted.
I do however think, that once the league has been won and the monkey is off our back, we could win the title with a side built around entertainment.
But as gcmandrake says, I can't see it.
|
|
|
Post by heja on Mar 17, 2011 17:25:58 GMT
when does Weavers multi year deal finish at Coventry?
|
|
Warren
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by Warren on Mar 18, 2011 7:54:20 GMT
when does Weavers multi year deal finish at Coventry? I think it finished last year, with this season being a 1 year extension. could be wrong...
|
|
|
Post by jd on Mar 18, 2011 9:48:44 GMT
Hes on £1k a week - is he worth it?
|
|
|
Post by Rob Scott on Mar 18, 2011 10:12:20 GMT
Yep.
|
|
Pies
Forum Moderator
Reluctant Chief of ITK
Posts: 4,879
|
Post by Pies on Mar 18, 2011 11:08:28 GMT
Weaver would be great but I think it's take a big offer to get him away from the Blaze
|
|
Warren
Greg Hadden
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by Warren on Mar 18, 2011 12:01:49 GMT
Plus as great as he is, do we need another Offensive D-man?
Assuming we loose Corey, There is a theoretical slot for one. But if the wage cap is in place, I don't think we can have him, Myers, Meyers and Clarke. I would rather keep those 3 and replace Corey with Weller / Import Offensive D-man.
|
|
|
Post by ted logan on Mar 18, 2011 12:42:17 GMT
Plus as great as he is, do we need another Offensive D-man? Assuming we lose Corey, There is a theoretical slot for one. But if the wage cap is in place, I don't think we can have him, Myers, Meyers and Clarke. I would rather keep those 3 and replace Corey with Weller / Import Offensive D-man. If we do lose CN then we would IMHO need an offensive d-man but not sure if i'd go for Weaver. Maybe 2 or 3 years ago yes but Weaver is not much yopunger than CN (32 or 33 now?) and is starting to pick up a few injuries too. Sadly, with age these take longer to heal Don't get me wrong he's still a very good player but if we want the best offensive D-man for the next few seasons I just don't feel it's him any longer. Weller ideally, if not then Landry would fit the bill.
|
|
Shorty
Paul Adey
Still here for Private Messages
Posts: 6,636
|
Post by Shorty on Mar 18, 2011 12:46:23 GMT
If they do reduce the import number, then Weaver's salary is likely to increase as well.
|
|
|
Post by NickThePanther44 on Mar 18, 2011 23:53:08 GMT
If they reduce the import numbers then Weaver, Clarke, Shields etc will be laughing all the way to the bank. They are literally one of the only winners out of that situation.
|
|
|
Post by marshalfish on Mar 19, 2011 15:02:27 GMT
Rumours on Steel Talk seem to think that Simon will be on his toes at the season's end.
Wouldn't mind seeing him in as player coach with Curtis on the bench
|
|
|
Post by heja on Mar 19, 2011 22:20:54 GMT
Hes on £1k a week - is he worth it? Definitly, I would swap Clarke for weaver in an instant I would probably give them Clarke and Levers for weaver.
|
|
|
Post by rach09 on Mar 19, 2011 22:41:07 GMT
From the rumours going around the arena I don't think Corey leaving is a given.
|
|