| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
chevyman |
The axe is swinging. |
Lead | |
|
|||
lonestarbug |
|||
|
And that ax is going to swing about an hour north of Denver.
Colorado Eagles will have six veterans when this October arrives. Danged shame. |
|||
rydercat |
|||
|
I wonder if the vet limits will be changed when the CBA comes down?
A bitter American, clinging to my guns & my religion, with antipathy for those who aren't like me...
|
|||
TigerBug1 |
|||
|
I had read an article the other day about talks to allow each team 5 vets; but the guy writing the article made the statement that he didn't think that
would happen. He felt the vet limit would stay the same. I have to agree with this myself. Although it would be nice. Well; shall I say it would be nice for
the Eagles, Bucks, Sundogs & the Rapid City Rush kind of teams in the CHL.
We all know why I say that. They have deep pockets & seem to know how to get around the salary cap because of those deep pockets. I think it's VERY wrong. I think every team in the league should have to be on some kind of even ground. A team shouldn't be able to use "CERTAIN PERKS" to draw in players. Because what anyone else thinks about this; I think it should be considered a violation of the salary cap. And the idiots running this circus should have figured this out already. There are definitely TWO teams already that are very close to having to close their doors on operations. One main reason is because of attendance numbers. And it's because they don't have the deep pockets that some of these other team owners have & it's hard to compete with it season after season. If the CHL doesn't want to see this league consist of about 4-6 teams in the next few seasons; they had better wake up & make some changes for the smaller markets in this league. Just some food for thought.
|
|||
Old Dogger |
|||
|
I, for one, seriously doubt that the old CHL vet rule of more than 280 games is left unchanged in the collective bargaining agreement.
To do so would create a two standards for the union to deal with and would negate the gain they made in forcing the 260 limit in the ECHL. I expect the PHPA to drive a very hard bargain and something very close to the existing ECHL CBA is the most probable outcome, in my estimation.
I make up my opinions from facts and reasoning, and not to suit any
body but myself. If people don't like my opinions, it makes little difference as I don't solicit their opinions or votes.
|
|||
applestreudel |
|||
|
There are several teams consistently breaking the salary cap season after season, some of them not as obvious as others.
|
|||
Old Dogger |
|||
|
Giving players everything allowed under the rules and things that aren't prohibited by the rules isn't "breaking the salary cap".
It might not seem "fair" (and most likely isn't) but most - like Donny Parsons getting paid $55,000 a year by ownership to teach kids how to skate in the off-season - are quite legal by the CHL "rule book". Can't say as I can blame teams for taking advantage of loopholes to take care of their players. Players & their famlies want to eat and live well too.
I make up my opinions from facts and reasoning, and not to suit any
body but myself. If people don't like my opinions, it makes little difference as I don't solicit their opinions or votes.
|
|||
applestreudel |
|||
|
OD, I wasn't talking about loopholes.
|
|||
Old Dogger |
|||
|
I figured as much but wanted to stop the usual whining about how things are "legal" - lots of stuff is.
Actually breaking the salary cap is a dangerous game (ask Tony Martino and the New Mexico Scorpions & their fans).
I make up my opinions from facts and reasoning, and not to suit any
body but myself. If people don't like my opinions, it makes little difference as I don't solicit their opinions or votes.
|
|||
jonlarz |
|||
|
Every team has the exact same opportunities to take advantage of the perks and every team does. The only difference is that not every "perk pile" is
the same.
My Indian name is "Runs With Beer". Mayan Name: "Runs with Tequila". 02-03 CMHL Champ 33-24-4 |
|||
OGR69 |
|||
|
not so sure if they change the number of games to be a vet-seems that would cut a few out of jobs. I would think they keep the number the same.
I can think of other changes that I feel need to be made or would like to see made: 1. Each team gets a "franchise" player. Must have been on the roster last year. Does not count against the salary cap or vet status. However-he must be named prior to camp and if he is hurt-quits-leaves-gets traded-you can not replace his franchise tag until the next year-basically 1 tag per year. 2. All-star game is for tweeners and rookies only-sorry vets, but it should be quite obvious by now that you are not moving up for whatever reason-let the young up and comers get noticed. 3. Tighten loopholes-I mean living on a golf course in Colorado vs living in an apt in Odessa-hmmmmm? 4. If a team folds and another starts up-why have an expansion draft? Those guys are looking for a place to play and the team is looking for players. Most of the time those in the draft are lower tier players anyway-or said they were leaving anyway for other leagues-overseas-whatever. 5. 2 refs in the play-offs. This can get tricky if you have 1 that let's things slide and 1 that calls tick-tack things-but it is needed. With the union getting in-I would predict that in a quick few years a merger with the ECHL will be more likely. Weed out the weaker teams/locations-have a more viable geography. I would be willing to bet that it happens.
"American by birth-SOUTHERN BY THE GRACE OF GOD"
![]() ![]() ![]() |
|||
sidebar © ezdesign