Have Nottingham and Belfast outgrown the league?
- Thread starter Ocko
- Start date
Just to respond
1 Your first point makes you no better than those you are trying to deride. But hey if your happy to throw away nearly 20K of fans thats upto you.
2. Maybe not to Cardiff but the Giants take a fair few to all the scottish rinks, Panthers and Shuff also take lots to Blaze Hull and the scottish rinks, Think you geography is a bit ou as the M4 goes to London :lol:
3. You obviously didnt read my first bit Panthers played in a dump for years but still packed it out, and they have got where they are by spending wisley and not chucking money away when they couldnt afford it. Murryfield is pretty much city center.
4. Would it the "richer" teams would still pick up the better players.
5. The main gripes this season seem to be coming from the Devils and Blaze fans who in the past have been succesful but are now not doing so well.
6. A predicted 6th place team is top of the league at the moment, the most expensive or silky lookig rosters dont always churn out the goods.
7. FWIW if you hadnt signed that clown Conboy at the start of the season I dont think you would be in a bad a position as you are now.
Thread starter
#23
There is a new European competition called the Champions Hockey League starting next season, don't be surprised to see that expanded if it proves to be a hit.
That in fact makes them even better off. No ice time costs, a few thousand through the door and all the money back in the pot. Admittadly it's not always as simple as that but you get my drift.
The import limit isn't the biggest problem IMO, although it is a hinderance to British development and GB, it's the level that is recruited by the top teams compared to the bottom. The gulf between your team, the Giants and teams like Edinburgh is huge - way to big. It's great for your team, easy points -fans go home happy with the win, Edinburgh are resigned to the bottom every year and gain no fans.
Foolish. The Giants have had and always will have a quality team that will challenge. Noone would write them off as anything other than top 3 if they know anything about hockey.
Not at all. We would have a 3000 seater, one of the biggest maybe but not by a great deal at all (a few hundred would separate the top and bottom teams)
This is near impossible. It fell on Nottingham's lap and to a degree the Giants too. Neither had to fight for their rink in the same way the Devils had. Nottingham's previous rink was a bit of a dump but still better than a few EIHL venues, better than the tent for sure. If they were to follow Nottingham's example there would be a haf a dozen £30m lottery grant applications in the post. It just isnt going to happen, building rinks to match the big 3 will not happen in this country for the foreseeable future. SORAC fought for years for our facility, and it still isnt here (albeit very close) and still wont draw in the levels of income the big three get. Other teams have no chance of getting anything in the next decade.
I understand that you will stick up for your team's position but whilst there is this disparity between the top and bottom the teams outside of the top three will never be close to breaking even and the EIHL will never expand and develop British talent properly (who have come through from Belfast in recent years?). Every year there is always unrest within the EIHL community of problems with the financial stability of clubs and it's because of the vicious circle of trying to compete to get people through the gates.
If Coventry and Cardiff were to break away, how many other would follow? I'd say we are the two most influential; not in terms of financial clout, playing position or obviously facility but I would bank on every Scottish team and Hull following our lead if it were to be the case, the EIHL would then be completely unsustainable. The 2 mid table teams are potentially a bit more powerful then the top teams think.
That in fact makes them even better off. No ice time costs, a few thousand through the door and all the money back in the pot. Admittadly it's not always as simple as that but you get my drift.
The import limit isn't the biggest problem IMO, although it is a hinderance to British development and GB, it's the level that is recruited by the top teams compared to the bottom. The gulf between your team, the Giants and teams like Edinburgh is huge - way to big. It's great for your team, easy points -fans go home happy with the win, Edinburgh are resigned to the bottom every year and gain no fans.
Foolish. The Giants have had and always will have a quality team that will challenge. Noone would write them off as anything other than top 3 if they know anything about hockey.
Not at all. We would have a 3000 seater, one of the biggest maybe but not by a great deal at all (a few hundred would separate the top and bottom teams)
This is near impossible. It fell on Nottingham's lap and to a degree the Giants too. Neither had to fight for their rink in the same way the Devils had. Nottingham's previous rink was a bit of a dump but still better than a few EIHL venues, better than the tent for sure. If they were to follow Nottingham's example there would be a haf a dozen £30m lottery grant applications in the post. It just isnt going to happen, building rinks to match the big 3 will not happen in this country for the foreseeable future. SORAC fought for years for our facility, and it still isnt here (albeit very close) and still wont draw in the levels of income the big three get. Other teams have no chance of getting anything in the next decade.
I understand that you will stick up for your team's position but whilst there is this disparity between the top and bottom the teams outside of the top three will never be close to breaking even and the EIHL will never expand and develop British talent properly (who have come through from Belfast in recent years?). Every year there is always unrest within the EIHL community of problems with the financial stability of clubs and it's because of the vicious circle of trying to compete to get people through the gates.
If Coventry and Cardiff were to break away, how many other would follow? I'd say we are the two most influential; not in terms of financial clout, playing position or obviously facility but I would bank on every Scottish team and Hull following our lead if it were to be the case, the EIHL would then be completely unsustainable. The 2 mid table teams are potentially a bit more powerful then the top teams think.
The point is that the "big three" could agree steps to make the league more competitive but won't. To simply turn around and say we should all try and be like the Panthers or Giants is churlish and does not take into account the unavoidable constraints that many clubs have to operate under.
I would love to know the numbers that actually do travel to the other teams from the big 3 as the impression I get from most Panthers fans is that the only away game they go is Sheffield. How many do you go to as a Giants fan? I can only speak from what I see at the tent. Also, I know where the bloody M4 goes! I was including Telford and possibly Manchester along with teams along the M4 corridor.
Panthers can afford to spend way more than any other team and still be profitable. Great for them but not for the rest of us. Murrayfield is a freezing cold dump.
I've never seen the Devils win a trophy, so its not about success for me. Its about being able to compete week in week out and watch enjoyable hockey. Not turn up to games hoping we don't lose by too much.
Whoever predicted Giants would finish 6th is nuts. It is always going to be between Giants, Panthers and Steelers with one other team that gets lucky and picks up a few cheap Gems maybe crashing the party.
Conboy would have been great for the Devils and great for the league if he had been allowed to settle down. Yes he did some stupid things and was rightly banned but I think the league took the approach of "we don't want his sort playing over here - lets send a message". Unfortunately many fans enjoy watching this sort of player and the fact he brings an unknown element to the game.
I would love to know the numbers that actually do travel to the other teams from the big 3 as the impression I get from most Panthers fans is that the only away game they go is Sheffield. How many do you go to as a Giants fan? I can only speak from what I see at the tent. Also, I know where the bloody M4 goes! I was including Telford and possibly Manchester along with teams along the M4 corridor.
Panthers can afford to spend way more than any other team and still be profitable. Great for them but not for the rest of us. Murrayfield is a freezing cold dump.
I've never seen the Devils win a trophy, so its not about success for me. Its about being able to compete week in week out and watch enjoyable hockey. Not turn up to games hoping we don't lose by too much.
Whoever predicted Giants would finish 6th is nuts. It is always going to be between Giants, Panthers and Steelers with one other team that gets lucky and picks up a few cheap Gems maybe crashing the party.
Conboy would have been great for the Devils and great for the league if he had been allowed to settle down. Yes he did some stupid things and was rightly banned but I think the league took the approach of "we don't want his sort playing over here - lets send a message". Unfortunately many fans enjoy watching this sort of player and the fact he brings an unknown element to the game.
Again just to set a record straight here. Panthers played in a dump. A very similar dump to the WNIR. The panthers had their rink torn down and on the same site a brilliant facility built using lottery funding which the panthers were welcomed to use. Up until that day Panthers were going backwards and fast Neil Black was not prepared to spend to put his team top of the tree as he couldn't compete out of that building and they languished in mid to lower table. He wasn't doing anything brilliantly different to the owners GMs of the smaller teams now. Like I say. He is no messiah.
The Devils took their dump and had it torn down and replaced with a tent in a derelict muddy puddle. To spout panthers as a model we should all follow is like telling us to all live life like a lottery winner. Devils got shafted. Panthers got a jackpot. Neil Black has run a good business and club but many many business men given that opportunity would have done the same. He is as with Gary Moran simply as good and as bad as the rest. He has the same business principles be under no illusions. This is where he lets himself down in my eyes. He has forgotten himself. He drives for a model he would have despised himself in his early years. The reality is the arena teams are mavericks. They are out on their own. One day the greed will get to much as with the ISL and it will falter. It's sadly inevitable.
The Devils took their dump and had it torn down and replaced with a tent in a derelict muddy puddle. To spout panthers as a model we should all follow is like telling us to all live life like a lottery winner. Devils got shafted. Panthers got a jackpot. Neil Black has run a good business and club but many many business men given that opportunity would have done the same. He is as with Gary Moran simply as good and as bad as the rest. He has the same business principles be under no illusions. This is where he lets himself down in my eyes. He has forgotten himself. He drives for a model he would have despised himself in his early years. The reality is the arena teams are mavericks. They are out on their own. One day the greed will get to much as with the ISL and it will falter. It's sadly inevitable.
This could go on for a while. lol
1.I didnt say be like the Giants and Panthers I said be like the Panthers, The Giants situation is a bit unique as the O was built when the troubles were ending and was developed in line with promoting a facility for all.
2. As a Giants fan I dont go to any TBH and I dont really get to that many home games, I would watch the NLA more as i spend a good amount of the year in Switzerland.
3. They can spend more because they are prudent with their money, fair enough they have a good facility but you still have to get the punters in
5. Personally I think thats down to poor signings, The Giants were lucky pickiing up Adey who has coached in Europe and recruited a good few players with european experience (bigger rinks). EIHL hockey seems to be trending towards a more euro style of play.
1.I didnt say be like the Giants and Panthers I said be like the Panthers, The Giants situation is a bit unique as the O was built when the troubles were ending and was developed in line with promoting a facility for all.
2. As a Giants fan I dont go to any TBH and I dont really get to that many home games, I would watch the NLA more as i spend a good amount of the year in Switzerland.
3. They can spend more because they are prudent with their money, fair enough they have a good facility but you still have to get the punters in
5. Personally I think thats down to poor signings, The Giants were lucky pickiing up Adey who has coached in Europe and recruited a good few players with european experience (bigger rinks). EIHL hockey seems to be trending towards a more euro style of play.
There's a very difficult balancing act here. Getting a viable product - each team being competitive, playing good quality hockey, whilst at least breaking even - is absolutely vital and almost impossible all at the same time. Looking at results you can see the league has evened out a little, but at what cost to teams that only get 1000 fans in?
One answer could be a properly-enforced salary cap (don't laugh), but Nottingham and others could justifiably say 'why should we be punished for being successful? We get 4-5000 crowds and can afford to pay more for players'. But ultimately I think it has to happen for the greater good, it's unrealistic for teams like Hull and Edinburgh (Cardiff?) to try and keep up. Otherwise you could see an ISL situation of a 5 team league which would soon see attendances drop at the arena teams.
In conjunction with a salary cap I'd remove the import limit. British players' wages are artificially high; if the smaller teams can get 10 cheap-but-decent east european players I think you'd get decent quality hockey. You'd probably see a better style of hockey too.
The other thing I'd try and do is get at least some rapport with the EPL - the ultimate goal should be to get successful clubs like Guildford etc playing other successful clubs.
One answer could be a properly-enforced salary cap (don't laugh), but Nottingham and others could justifiably say 'why should we be punished for being successful? We get 4-5000 crowds and can afford to pay more for players'. But ultimately I think it has to happen for the greater good, it's unrealistic for teams like Hull and Edinburgh (Cardiff?) to try and keep up. Otherwise you could see an ISL situation of a 5 team league which would soon see attendances drop at the arena teams.
In conjunction with a salary cap I'd remove the import limit. British players' wages are artificially high; if the smaller teams can get 10 cheap-but-decent east european players I think you'd get decent quality hockey. You'd probably see a better style of hockey too.
The other thing I'd try and do is get at least some rapport with the EPL - the ultimate goal should be to get successful clubs like Guildford etc playing other successful clubs.
Regardles, you don't answer the point as to why the "big 3" will not agree to measures to make the league more competitive. Simply saying "be more like the Panthers" is easier said than done for most teams.
A millionaire can go out and buy a brand new Porsche without issue. Would you say they are being prudent?
Yes, I think the Gaints have recruited well this season and picked up some gems late on but again having the ability to offer the right contracts is a big factor in recruitment.
A millionaire can go out and buy a brand new Porsche without issue. Would you say they are being prudent?
Yes, I think the Gaints have recruited well this season and picked up some gems late on but again having the ability to offer the right contracts is a big factor in recruitment.
In a nutshell Nottingham got pulled for a new arena. Cardiff got pulled for a city centre development and John Lewis. The teams couldn't have been dealt more different cards. Cardiff as a city had to fight the council to get the tent begrudgingly. All this happened around the same sort of time frames so you'd have to forgive that in general in Cardiff when Nottingham gets mentioned as some sort of beacon of excellence everyone cops a strop. The two organisations were neck and neck until that unfolded. Gaurantee if the tables had been reversed Devils and Panthers histories of the modern era would near enough mirror each other. Devils top. Panthers bottom. They would not exist on a competitive level in the tent. I think that's what I'm trying to point out. The league is not dominated by three clubs. It's dominated by three venues. To quote anything from those clubs as good practice or to be admired and followed is pointless. They have tools to do things others dream of. Until there is venue parity there is no way to judge if any owner, GM or personality has better practice or principles than the next.
1. What measures are you refering to? and can you be sure they would be sustainable.
3. yes its prudent because he can affor it, its called spending within your means.
5.The right contracts just dont involve money though, its how players are treated and what they hear from other players. TK is on record that he uses ex players to help recruit for the Giants.
Would this discussion even be taking place if the Devils were sat in one of the top 3 positions?
3. yes its prudent because he can affor it, its called spending within your means.
5.The right contracts just dont involve money though, its how players are treated and what they hear from other players. TK is on record that he uses ex players to help recruit for the Giants.
Would this discussion even be taking place if the Devils were sat in one of the top 3 positions?
