oldman
Simon Hunt
The World is full of experts
Posts: 1,111
|
Post by oldman on Jun 1, 2007 7:10:34 GMT
weird combo for shuff they have got a NM with a girls name and a guy who is randy, explosive combination i reckon.
|
|
|
Post by rickstrang on Jun 1, 2007 7:22:39 GMT
That's one of the most accomplished acts of word twisting I've had the displeasure to come across for some considerable time.
My statement was that this league has been one of the most stable. The previous posters were intimating that without a rigidly enforced wage cap leagues lack stability and teams fold. For me that allusion seems misplaced when applied to the EIHL when the cap has been flexible to an extent and still only one team has folded, and as I said that was not cap related.
Your judicious use of the word "just" implies that I was suggesting that this is the only criteria for measuring the success of the league which is patently untrue and does my original post quite a disservice.
The wage cap is like a speed limit with cameras. The cameras usually give you a few miles an hour leeway and the cap appears to work in the same way.
I am disappointed by the lack of insight into the game shown in this thread. Closing the so called loopholes will simply create others. There are far too many ways of by-passing a cap to get the players that you want. Wasting time and energy nit-picking the rules is fruitless. The thing is best viewed like a great painting - you step back and squint. When you step in too close you just don't see the whole picture and you miss the point.
I know that most of this is just the usual Notts/Sheffield silliness. Again, if it was a real issue then teams would have lodged a formal complaint to the EIHL. The mechanism is there. If teams genuinely felt cheated that's all they have to do and with the animosity between your two organisations you can guarantee it'd be on the table in a flash. The very fact that it isn't tells me two things. Firstly, it's not perceived as a problem or secondly everyone is doing it so no-one's going to accuse someone else of doing it when they're at it too. Of course it may be a combination of both of these things.
Overall this league has been stable and the current rules, such as they are, seem to have worked. I'm always surprised by the long queue of people who seemingly spend their days waiting for the whole thing to fall over so they can say "Told you so ...". I think you need to relax a bit and learn to enjoy life.
|
|
Doom
Greg Hadden
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_orange.png)
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by Doom on Jun 1, 2007 7:58:07 GMT
The problem is Rick, you give a bit of leeway and people start to take advantage. It's like a parent with a child. The parent may turn a blind eye to a little misdemeanour by the child, but then the child will push the boundaries further and further until something has to be done. I personally think the reason the league has been stable to date is because the clubs have generally taken a sensible approach to the wage-cap. Admittedly clubs have used loopholes, but not to an excessive degree, which is why we've seen the likes of Sheffield and Nottingham lose on home ice to Hull and Edinburgh. If the wealthier clubs start pushing the boundaries further and further, I believe that's when we'll start to see more financial troubles. To my mind if there is to be a wage-cap and all the owners support it, then each owner has a responsibility to police his/her own spending within that wage-cap for the benefit of the league as a whole. I believe this season could be a defining one for the EIHL, I just hope by this time next season we're still talking about a 10 team (minimum ![:))](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/cheesy.png) league. Regards Doom
|
|
|
Post by rickstrang on Jun 1, 2007 8:42:24 GMT
I would agree fully. Where I'm a little confused (easily happens at my age) is what you or others think has suddenly changed to affect this equilibrium? From what I can see and what I know we're ball-parking wage wise at the same levels as previous years. There've been no outrageous signings to date and the silliness around jobs for players wives and additional jobs for players is just that - silliness between two rival sets of fans looking for an opening to bait each other. The reality of the situation is no different to previous years.
|
|
matt44
David Clarke
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_silver.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_silver.png)
Posts: 3,085
|
Post by matt44 on Jun 1, 2007 8:56:50 GMT
I would agree fully. Where I'm a little confused (easily happens at my age) is what you or others think has suddenly changed to affect this equilibrium? From what I can see and what I know we're ball-parking wage wise at the same levels as previous years. There've been no outrageous signings to date and the silliness around jobs for players wives and additional jobs for players is just that - silliness between two rival sets of fans looking for an opening to bait each other. The reality of the situation is no different to previous years. Exactly. Well said Rick Now can we all stop this wage cap bickering? Its the same every season and gets really boring. Lets leave it alone until someone blatantly goes over the top. ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png)
|
|
Doom
Greg Hadden
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_orange.png)
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by Doom on Jun 1, 2007 9:07:36 GMT
I would agree fully. Where I'm a little confused (easily happens at my age) is what you or others think has suddenly changed to affect this equilibrium? From what I can see and what I know we're ball-parking wage wise at the same levels as previous years. There've been no outrageous signings to date and the silliness around jobs for players wives and additional jobs for players is just that - silliness between two rival sets of fans looking for an opening to bait each other. The reality of the situation is no different to previous years. I agree there are no outrageous signings, but looking at Sheffield for example: We've kept all our top Brits. We've managed to replace Tait with Hill....undoubtedly more costly. The quality of our imports generally looks higher and I get the distinct impression there won't be the 'cheap' import signed this season to balance the books. Now assuming we were at the wage-cap limit last season, how've we managed it? University places? Jobs for wives? Secondary jobs for players? Admittedly it's all guesswork, but that's how it looks to me. Don't get me wrong, I'm not complaining at having a better squad to watch next season, I'm more concerned about the views of the likes of Edinburgh/Hull/Manchester. If they're all happy with what's going on....Then I'm happy ![:D](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/grin.png) Regards Doom
|
|
Warren
Greg Hadden
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_orange.png)
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by Warren on Jun 1, 2007 9:25:46 GMT
Just to throw another thought into the ring...
Perhaps there is a lot of tout around the EIHL being a genuine Stepping stone League. Last Season Panthers got Gallant, an established DEL player. Tess has packed his bags and Currently "Wursting" it up over there too. (If rumors are true Macaslan has turned down a DEL contract)
So, Purely a Guess, Perhaps there is a gentleman's agreement across all the clubs to get scouts from the bigger leagues over here to see players.
If I was a up and coming star not being offered a DEL contract and some bloke guarantees that I will play in a good league which will have DEL scouts there, and If I want I can go there end of the season. I'd be tempted. - even If I wasn't on huge wage.
But anyway back on topic... Seems a good player on paper, but lets see how he skates and see if he can mop up for Jody...
"Randy Degenais mops up Jody's rebound" Innuendo city.
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Jun 1, 2007 9:39:51 GMT
is what you or others think has suddenly changed to affect this equilibrium? I don't think there has been a sudden change - which is the point Doom is making. Spending seems to be ratcheting up bit by bit. The envelope is slowly being pushed wider. At any one time the spending increases don't seem unreasonable and hopefully everyone can live with them - long term as well as here and now. The worry is that there will come a time when the spending differential between the clubs in the League will become a real problem if things carry on like this. The current wage cap system has been fairly effective so far but the honeymoon period since the genisis of the EIHL may be over. Some owners have decided to exploit more fully the flexibility of the curent wage cap system. No one wants a return to a five team league so surely some caution needs to be exercised. Doom is being far-sighted on the issue, there may not be any real problem at the moment but there so easily could be a year or so down the line if there isn't some form of control in place.
|
|
Doughnut
Forum Admin
mmmmmm ... Doughnuts
Posts: 5,072
|
Post by Doughnut on Jun 1, 2007 9:45:20 GMT
The previous posters were intimating that without a rigidly enforced wage cap leagues lack stability and teams fold. Just for the record, that's not what I was intimating at all. For me that allusion seems misplaced when applied to the EIHL when the cap has been flexible to an extent and still only one team has folded, and as I said that was not cap related. I agree, it seems to have worked OK so far, but as Doom points out, the spending levels appear to be going up. The whole point of a cap is to control spending. Flexibility is one thing, but if there's too much flexibility there's not enough control. The wage cap is like a speed limit with cameras. The cameras usually give you a few miles an hour leeway and the cap appears to work in the same way. That does appear to be the case. I don't think it should be though. Fair sporting competition needs clear rules that should be enforced. I am disappointed by the lack of insight into the game shown in this thread. Closing the so called loopholes will simply create others. There are far too many ways of by-passing a cap to get the players that you want. Wasting time and energy nit-picking the rules is fruitless. How would closing loopholes create others? That just doesn't make sense. It might lead to other loopholes being used, but not created - they're already there too. The more that get closed, the less there are that can be exploited. If you were running a web server you wouldn't decide to not close security loopholes just because hackers might find other ones instead would you? The thing is best viewed like a great painting - you step back and squint. When you step in too close you just don't see the whole picture and you miss the point. I'm stepping back. I'm squinting. I'm seeing the league being won/dominated by whichever team(s) can find the most loopholes to avoid the rules. That's not fair sporting competition IMO. I know that most of this is just the usual Notts/Sheffield silliness. Not really. Doom and I seem to be in agreement (all be it with a different motive). We're both pointing the finger at our own clubs as well as others and there are more than just our 2 clubs involved here. if it was a real issue then teams would have lodged a formal complaint to the EIHL. Do you really believe that?! everyone is doing it so no-one's going to accuse someone else of doing it when they're at it too. Sound familiar? I'm sure we've been there before. It allegedly lead to a team getting away with winning the grand slam by breaking the rules by a lot more than everyone else was breaking the rules by. Is that really the kind of thing you want to see happening? Overall this league has been stable and the current rules, such as they are, seem to have worked. Overall this league and its rules are a joke and burying your head in the sand isn't going to fix anything. Granted, me expressing my views on this noticeboard isn't likely to fix much either, but if that was what I was here for I'd have given up years ago.
|
|
Doom
Greg Hadden
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_orange.png)
Posts: 1,591
|
Post by Doom on Jun 1, 2007 10:00:58 GMT
is what you or others think has suddenly changed to affect this equilibrium? I don't think there has been a sudden change - which is the point Doom is making. Spending seems to be ratcheting up bit by bit. The envelope is slowly being pushed wider. At any one time the spending increases don't seem unreasonable and hopefully everyone can live with them - long term as well as here and now. The worry is that there will come a time when the spending differential between the clubs in the League will become a real problem if things carry on like this. The current wage cap system has been fairly effective so far but the honeymoon period since the genisis of the EIHL may be over. Some owners have decided to exploit more fully the flexibility of the curent wage cap system. No one wants a return to a five team league so surely some caution needs to be exercised. Doom is being far-sighted on the issue, there may not be any real problem at the moment but there so easily could be a year or so down the line if there isn't some form of control in place. You put it so much more eloquently than me, but that is exactly the point I'm trying to make. ;D There may not be a problem, but this is British ice hockey and most longer term supporters will be aware of the problems that excessive spending can cause, I don't want to go there again, hence my caution/concern. Regards Doom
|
|
|
Post by rickstrang on Jun 1, 2007 10:47:31 GMT
You've all expressed your opinions and your fears really well and I don't deny I share some of them. However the wage cap is a false measure of equality between teams and so enforcing it heavily has little or no effect. The question therefore has to be why have one at all? Well, it does at least give a framework within which to deliver your product and can add a baseline against which sensible decision making can happen. Imagine Worcester Wookies (newly promoted to the EIHL ![;)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/wink.png) ) coming to the league and saying "Guys, our gates have been pretty low this year. We think we can turn it around but we need £50k to tide us over." If the EIHL turnaround and say "OK - but are you within the cap?" "Yep" Then you've got the basis for assisting. If the Wookies have bust the cap then the EIHL can say "Sorry guys - go back and reduce your outgoings and then come back to us with what you need because you may find that with a sensible signing policy you only need £10k". It's great to harp on about the cap when you've got a huge fan base and fantastic facillities. In fact the cap works far more in your favour than it does for the small teams that you're purporting to be sticking up for. Oh ... and don't even get me started on loopholes. I like your thinking and I actually agree with it but I'm afraid it just doesn't relate to the real world. And whilst the "rules is rules" approach is clear cut we are are all painfully aware that the officious and "jobsworth" like application of rules often causes far more damage than being able to interpret them.
|
|
|
Post by rickstrang on Jun 1, 2007 10:56:00 GMT
Far from buried in the sand you may find I see things a lot clearer than most. Hopefully though these types of discussions I can help you see more too. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) The league's far from being a joke but it appears to be great fun and rather trendy to say that it is. Rather like Tesco's was a joke when I was a kid or Quality Seconds. It's just stereotyping an organisation to make it easier to score points or be entertaining. The EIHL has difficulties but they're not unique to the EIHL and certainly not unique to hockey. Solving them is complex and takes time. It may even take the eventual demise of the EIHL that takes hockey on to the next stage. Who knows? Its an evolutionary process but if you take the time to look carefully there is evidence of some significant improvements in the sport at this level.
|
|
Doughnut
Forum Admin
mmmmmm ... Doughnuts
Posts: 5,072
|
Post by Doughnut on Jun 1, 2007 10:57:04 GMT
Far from buried in the sand you may find I see things a lot clearer than most. Hopefully though these types of discussions I can help you see more too. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) Hopefully.
|
|
Warren
Greg Hadden
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_orange.png)
Posts: 1,467
|
Post by Warren on Jun 1, 2007 11:22:40 GMT
Far from buried in the sand you may find I see things a lot clearer than most. Hopefully though these types of discussions I can help you see more too. ![:)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/smiley.png) The league's far from being a joke but it appears to be great fun and rather trendy to say that it is. Rather like Tesco's was a joke when I was a kid or Quality Seconds. It's just stereotyping an organisation to make it easier to score points or be entertaining. The EIHL has difficulties but they're not unique to the EIHL and certainly not unique to hockey. Solving them is complex and takes time. It may even take the eventual demise of the EIHL that takes hockey on to the next stage. Who knows? Its an evolutionary process but if you take the time to look carefully there is evidence of some significant improvements in the sport at this level. I do, hand on heart think the EIHL have made some valid improvements. And yes to an extent to claim the league is Joke has become "Trendy" BUT there are still some area's of improvement that need to be acted upon properly. If I take everyone's mind back to the debacle with missing points from a London Game (We all have long memory's Rick) The rule book that nobody has seen except without swearing on a bible to say you haven't, The Farce with Andy French saying one thing regarding rules and the League saying different.
|
|
|
Post by bobness on Jun 1, 2007 11:31:59 GMT
Thanks God for some sense on here, I too am sick of the "Breaking the wage cap" drivel written by people who don't know what one player is earning more than they've read "A Brief History of Time" and understood it.
Q1. Has the wage cap gonne up with inflation this year?
Point 1. I'm not sure the quality is so much better so far. There has always been room in EIHL squads for career AHLers, or imports of that quality. Mcaslan, Clouthier, Craighead, Andrews and many others. The French, Italian, Danish, ECHL, UHL and 2.DEL leagues are (very) roughly on a par, salary wise with the EIHL, that's why there's so much transfer of players between them. If teams started signing fringe NHLers, Swiss league players or DEL centres for the season, then I'd be more concerned with how the wage cap is being policed. At the moment, there hasn't been a "blockbuster" signing, and I'd be surprised if there was a truly head turning signing this year. Don't believe the hype. Coaches hardly ever sign players and say "Well, he's OK, but not much of a player. We mainly got him 'cos he was cheap"
Point 2. I agree with rick. Loopholes will always be there, and covering some will open others, that aren't worth doing now, much like a currently redundant oilfield will be re-commissioned if the price of oil goes high enough. Leave it.
Point 3. And this is one where we'll all be on familiar ground. The game isn't played on paper. All this moaning and carping is pointless as these supposed awesome signings may turn out to be guys with good stats who just don't hack it or settle. I think Dagenais and Legue will be good players in the EIHL. Munn has a history of injury, and therefore his stock is lower than if he hadn't. Time will tell how far wide of the mark I am.
Point 4. The wage cap in the EIHL has been a great success, for me. No "easy" games, and virtually every team is capable of getting a result against any other team. All teams are competitive. We couldn't even score against Hull (9th in the league) for 2 whole games, and Sheffield were 1 game away from being whitewashed by the Caps (bottom). That alone tells me it's working.
|
|
|
Post by corey77 on Jun 1, 2007 11:43:46 GMT
imo if you get rid of the wage cap then you will end up with a poorer situation of the premiership nowadays. you will have nottingham, belfast, steelers and any other team with rich owners fighting it out as to who has the most money. you will then end up with a huge divide in the league with teams like edinburgh, manchester, hull etc almost playing in a second league and the sport will become too bias towards money exactly like football is now where the top four teams earn more, pay more than the other 16 teams !
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Jun 1, 2007 12:01:17 GMT
Point 4. The wage cap in the EIHL has been a great success, for me. No "easy" games, and virtually every team is capable of getting a result against any other team. All teams are competitive. We couldn't even score against Hull (9th in the league) for 2 whole games, and Sheffield were 1 game away from being whitewashed by the Caps (bottom). That alone tells me it's working. It has worked so far but will it continue to? Very few things in nature are stable for any length of time without regulation or intervention. It's easy to turn a blind eye if things seem to be going OK on the surface - look what happened in Germany in the Thirties (an extreme example I know). The League has been quite competitive so far - Doom and I want to make sure it stays that way. It's easier to stop a runaway truck by putting on the hand brake when you park it than trying to halt it when it's already rolling down the hill! ;D
|
|
|
Post by bobness on Jun 1, 2007 12:54:28 GMT
But what's changed? There's no evidence of any wrongdoing or underhand deals, and despite what everyone says, there are no obvious examples of players "too good" (read - "expensive") being signed.
Anyway, we certainly all 3 of us agree about keeping it competitive. That must be the number 1 goal (pardon the pun).
|
|
Doughnut
Forum Admin
mmmmmm ... Doughnuts
Posts: 5,072
|
Post by Doughnut on Jun 1, 2007 13:08:21 GMT
But what's changed? There's no evidence of any wrongdoing or underhand deals, and despite what everyone says, there are no obvious examples of players "too good" (read - "expensive") being signed. Clubs are spending more than the cap though. They're not "breaking" the cap, but they are spending more than it. This was reportedly even stated on a public forum by Dave Simms - I'm sure he knows more than you or I about what the Steelers are spending on players. Just so we're clear, the only reason I'm singling Steelers out is because as far as I'm aware they're the only team to have commented publicly on the subject of finding ways to exploit loopholes in the wagecap rules. Also, no; I don't know what any player earns, or what any team is spending. I did understand A Brief History of Time though. ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png)
|
|
|
Post by ally85 on Jun 1, 2007 14:04:04 GMT
Firstly, I'd like to join with those who have welcomed this thread as actually being a rational debate on an important subject - makes a pleasant change from wage-cap name-calling and point scoring! Most of what I would like to say has already been said so I won't just parrot what other people have argued. One quick question for Rick though... I would suggest that the belief that the wage cap is in place as a means of ensuring a so-called "level playing field" is a false one. My understanding of the cap is that it provides an affordability framework in a business sense and is not intended to ensure that every season any team in the league could win the league. That's an interesting point Rick (and I'm sure you have more of an inside knowledge about such things than I do) but in that case why isn't a team's wage cap based around a percentage of their revenues? Surely that would make more sense for ensuring that a business stays stable over a long period of time than having a (in theory) fixed cap that remains the same whatever your revenues are? It seems to me that the wage cap is designed to make the playing field at least somewhat more level, and I share the concern of those who worry that in the medium term (probably not this season, but 2-3yrs down the line) it might make things unsustainable. To my mind, the only way that a wage cap could be properly enforceable is if it were raised and all perks (including the standard ones such as housing, cars etc) brought under it. Teams would then have to produce a list of all extra bits they had negotiated around this time of year (e.g. 8 x 2 bedroom flats, 4x3 bed houses, 15x smart cars, 4 x university courses etc) and the actual amount they were permitted to spend on wages would be re-calibrated accordingly. At the season's end they would then have to submit accounts to the League. To encourage growth the system could also be made in such a way that work undertaken by players to help local communities and promote the game would result in a slight rise in the amount they were allowed to spend, e.g. a player agreeing to spend 1 afternoon a week for 6 months coaching under-16s would raise the cap allowance by 1k, or going in to local schools a rise of £500 etc. That would give teams an incentive to increase their involvement in some of the good works that are actually already going on behind the scenes. But all that would be quite an administrative task to oversee (to say the least!) and I'm not sure the league has the resources to be able to undertake it. It's a tough chestnut this one... but an important one to crack I think.
|
|
MP
Paul Adey
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
Hail hurts and rain is cold. Summer in the mountains
Posts: 6,811
|
Post by MP on Jun 1, 2007 14:20:41 GMT
Superficially, nothing much seems to have changed. But take the analogy of blowing up a balloon - you keep putting a bit more air into it and it gets a bit bigger, but it looks much the same. However, there's a limit to how much you can inflate it before it bursts with catastrophic consequences. The same can happen to the EIHL if spending gets out of hand.
|
|
|
Post by bobness on Jun 1, 2007 14:51:24 GMT
I did understand A Brief History of Time though. ![:P](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/tongue.png) But I bet you can't put a rowntree's fruit pastille in your mouth without chewing it....
|
|
|
Post by rickstrang on Jun 1, 2007 16:10:24 GMT
I get a sense that the issue around the wage cap is actually a symptom of something else. It's not about the cap but more about ensuring that the league stays competitive from top to bottom. Is that a fair summation?
If it is then that's a concern we share. However it could go one of two ways. If more teams join the EIHL then we could reasonably move towards an EIHL 1 and EIHL 2 which I would quite like, especially as that would allow promotion/relegation between the two divisions. Of course it could go the other way and every season is just a procession behind the same couple of teams. One way around that would be to introduce some new rules. The NHL gives the best draft picks to the clubs that fair the worst during the season. We don't have draft picks as a commodity here but we do have imports. On that basis I would be all for having a 10 import league but the team that finishes bottom the previous season could carry 11 imports. Alternatively, the team that finishes bottom gets one player "for free" in as much as his salary does not contribute to the wage cap.
Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by thfnick on Jun 1, 2007 16:43:50 GMT
I get the impression that whilst there is some concern from some clubs about the sort of offers being thrown around this season a bigger issue is the number of ridiculous offers being made to very average players and how that is causing other average players to up there wage demands.
|
|
|
Post by ally85 on Jun 1, 2007 20:17:42 GMT
Interesting ideas Rick... if every team had the same rules and same capabilities though I don't think they'd be necessary. Teams in the NHL are relatively stable year on year and the draft system is one way of adding some instability to the mix by ensuring that the weaker teams get the better new players and so don't stay at the bottom of the pile forever. There's such a high player turnover in this country though that I don't think such measures would be necessary, if all the teams were in a financial position to compete at the same level. The problem is, they're not...
|
|