The Sellars to Danbury thread has been eliminated. There's no reason to get personal in the attacks -- from either side. It's over. Neither side proved their point, so there.
Weird how that one blew up, but I was expecting a lot more comments on veterans and salary cap. I must either be 100 percent right on or 100 percent dead wrong. Which is it? Do you even care that the league has a salary cap? Why should or shouldn't they?
Comments
if they are gonna have a salary cap, they should inforce it..you said teams don't have to open the books to the league, In my opinion they should have to...the salary cap is enforceable as long as the league office cares, which in my opinion it doesn't. The more teams who are successful, the better the league looks..and in todays world, Image is everything..
If there are teams cheating, catch them, penalize them, make an example of them. If we are going to go on the idea, "well, everyones doing it, and no one is going to enforce it," then why don't we have a better team with top-tier players? Don't we have more attendance than the rest of the league? Shouldn't we be able to bring in better players than Muskegon who is obviously cheating?
What is the deal on Luke Sellars? We bring him in for conditioning, and he bolts? What is that all about, other than money?
I agree with Hit, if the league has a rule for a salary cap then they should force teams in the league to open their books when a question arises to the cap. If the league is not going to do that why have a cap. I know the league wants to be some sort of "development league" for younger players and that is why we have a rookie minimum. I do not mind having a rookie minimum but I wish the league would allow more veterans to be on the rosters.
Money is all it was about. Even opening the books might not work because what if you pay them off the books? Nobody would be that stupid to put it on the books. That's the problem. How do you catch them unless someone confesses?
Blake do you think teams like Port Huron, Flint, Elmira, etc would fold if there would be no cap because they couldn't put together a competitive team? Is that the worry of the UHL removing the cap? Perhaps there is another way to make all teams competitve other than the way the UHL does it now.
Yes, I think some of them would fold. I don't know what they should do for a better system.
How many teams are assumed to be doing this? Are they all in first place? They winning cups?
If its that easy to cheat, why aren't we cheating? Or are we? Maybe bring it up at the next UHL meetings. I am sure Fort Wayne is good for the UHL. Maybe suggest Fort Wayne will go to a different league? I don't know. Sounds like there is a few things that could be done aside from nothing. Silence is a sign of acceptance.
dalary cap is good idea but it must be taken as a gentlemans agreement since theres no way to really police it. i think the rookie rule is ok but they need to remove the vet limit. hockey towns like ft wayne would support about anything but these smaller markets need something to root for, and if the players are constantly changing, theres not a lot to get behind in the pro end of sports. hte league needs to do a better job in accepting ownership groups. how good is an owner that fails in port huron then moves his frnchise to the east coast and is failing there also? how good is an owner who doesnt have a broadcaster or publicist or a trainer? that is bush league and this league deserves better. instead of putting a cap on player salaries, maybe they should set a minimum ammount that each franchise has to spend on broadcasts, promotions and support staff and if an owner isnt capable of meeting the mimimum requirements, then they lose their franchise. the league can reaach a happy medium and still stay out of the traps that the ihl fell into.
I thought it was a great article/thread. i do think there is some "funny stuff" going on other than ft wayne, one day the cat will get out of the bag.