I think folks are mistaking the AHL-ECHL affiliate model for baseball's. It doesn't work that way. The so-called parent clubs only have an interest in the half-dozen (or fewer) palyers that actually belong to that organization.
Blake, to address your points:
1) "Norfolk already has an ECHL affiliate, so why isn't it using them?" - First, see above. Second, do you mean to imply that you're okay with teams getting shafted by AHL clubs so long as it 's not the Komets?
2) "Why can't an ECHL team that calls up a non-affiliated player be obligated to send one back?" AHL teams call up players because they're shorthanded. The story in the morning paper said that Norfolk was down to 9 (of the customary 12) forwards, so who would they send? Plus, I doubt that contractually, they can just send any old player. If it's like the relationship between the AHL and the NHL, a player not under a two-way contract would have to clear waivers unless it's a conditioning assignment.
3) "Why shouldn't the ECHL fans be the priority of this league?" Blake, you've been a sports reporter for a long time. When has this ever been the case in any sport in any league?
4) "Eventually, that's going to really hurt the ECHL when it can't find new owners" All the recently minted owners (e.g. Indy) knew ( or should have known) what they were getting into, since the ECHL has been operating under this model for years. The landscape of minor league hockey is littered with the (figurative) corpses of former owners with more money than sense.
5)"$17,000, etc." Presuming they feed both teams, this works out to slightly over $10.00 per person per game (assumes 18 players and 5 staff per team). That doesn't sound all that outrageous. Besides, I firmly believe that if the lease terms ever became an existential threat to the team, I think negotiations would open pretty quickly given that the K's are the principal tenant and Randy Brown wouldn't be all that excited about 36 more open dates on his docket.
Sorry for the Alan-esque length.
Blake Sebring
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 1:57pm
1. Not at all. In fact, I've been careful to almost always refer to these things happening to every possible ECHL team. What fun is it to watch and ECHL powerhouse vs. a team full of lower-level players?
Right now, no ECHL team or their fans have any protections from AHL teams who are not their affiliates, even though those AHLteams might have their own ECHL affiliates. I'm not saying players should not be able to move up, but shouldn't there be a cost because you didn't do your own homework over the summer in recruiting players? ECHL teams get punished for scouting and finding good players and helping them develop. Why shouldn't they be rewarded for that instead of punished? And hence, their fans? All ECHL teams are not created equal, unless you do a good job and then you get hammered for doing that good job. Right now, an AHL team could call and say I'm taking your 10 best players, here's $5,000, and the ECHL team would basically have to take it, hopefully with enough time to find players before the next game. That $5,000 does nothing for you.
2. As Alan points out, they obviously are not short-handed, especially if they are having guys sit in the stands each night. AHL teams have, by rule, an unlimited roster size.
3. IHL 2, UHL, Central HL. They also sent teams up and down, but they had continuity. Even the original IHL had it much better than this. If your own customers are not your priority... what other business operates this way?
4. We've all been around this business long enough to notice there is constant turnover in ownership, right? The Frankes are the only owners in all of minor league hockey with more than 15 years, and there are only four or five others with at least 10 years. If finding owners were so easy, the CHL would still be in business. Pretty soon that constant turnover IS going to hurt them unless they make the business itself more appealing to potential owners. You can see it if you look at the long-term picture of minor league hockey. Most owners are... how do I say it... ignorant. They get in thinking they can run this like any other business or a hobby, and then six months later they start to realize it's completely different and they have to readjust. Well, you just guaranteed you lose money your first season, and many are not that wealthy. Or they are too stubborn to change, and they are dead because few can afford two bad years in a row. Here's something you can definitely have noticed: Not as many teams are sold any more. They just fold, and then another owner brings in a few expansion team to another market until 5-10 years later and then they try that market again. Indy, Utica, Adirondack, St. Charles, maybe Las Vegas, San Diego... That tells you there aren't that many great markets out there.
5. Has nothing to do with players. Has to do with off-ice staff, media, etc. You might think that, but it doesn't work that way in reality. I've been trying for years to get the list of things the Komets have to pay for at the Coliseum, ie Zamboni, scoreboard, ribbon board, broadcast origination fees, etc., with no luck. Yes, they pay no rent, but they pay for everything else. Not criticizing that, but it's a cost of doing business that few take into account. I've heard it said many times the Komets wouldn't mind paying rent if it allowed them to have access to other revenue streams. Right now they have tickets, advertising and souvenir sales. And that's all. What they make off ECHL TV doesn't even pay for the dues for one game to the league.
My whole point is, why can't the leagues work together so the systems are more equitable for everyone? Maybe such a system is impossible, but shouldn't they try to find one? If one franchise goes out, all of hockey loses at this point because the NHL loses potential future fans. There aren't that many minor league franchises out there any more because this is such a hard business.
kometfan29
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 2:54pm
Could be they have 12 forwards on roster...but are all of them healthy? Maybe some are injured...well find out tonight.
Anne Argast
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 3:01pm
Aren't the owners also the governors of the league, with the power to shape the rules in a way that promotes their own product? What stops them, say, from limiting call-ups only to affiliated teams?
chuckitt
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 3:12pm
if you didnt allow a non affiliated player to be called up you wouldnt get anybody to sign. the object is to get noticed and given a chance higher up. this is minor league hockey and you are always at the whim of the league above you. i think a new agreement needs to be made with the ahl and they need to pay more than 500 bucks if they call up non affiliated players. but of course the ahl doesnt care.. one way around that is to expand the echl rosters and expand the vetern limit.; doing this will give you a bigger player pool of guys used to your system and haveing more vets will make the ahl shy away from calling the vets up cause they wont do anything for the future of those ahl teams, something to think about boardof govenors.
Anne Argast
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 3:21pm
Every player would be eligible for call-up, but only to an affiliated team. It might sound harsh, but what choice would the players have if they wanted to play in North America?
RG2
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 3:26pm
Chuckitt , Your absolutly right. Expand rosters and expand number of veterans. I would bet the Frankes have already submitted these proposals at last meeting. And probably will again.
Alan
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 3:41pm
I don't have the answer. But it wouldn't hurt for the governors to put it on the league agenda.
The most ridiculous thing is that the komets and Utah are competitors. Yet the Komets "loan" two players to Norfolk while Utah's roster isn't touched. So Fort Wayne becomes weaker while Utah stays at the status-quo. Some could argue that we are "helping" Utah by providing players for Norfolk.
On another topic. Some demolition will have to take place if the Coliseum is going to re-do the locker rooms, so why don't they wait until Kalamazoo arrives. After all, it was Kalamazoo they suspected of damaging the visitors room a few years ago. They must've done a pretty good job.
Those two posts above were pretty long, so let's watch it. OK?
Muel
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 4:31pm
This thread shows exactly what is wrong with hockey in the ECHL? What is everyone talking about? The play of our team or the snatching of our players and everything that is wrong with the League? The state of minor league hockey is really sad IMO. The Komets and every team in the league know what the AHL can and will do to their roster especially when they are winning...they will pick it apart and the fact that the AHL has unlimited rosters does not mean a thing. They can do whatever they want to and we just have to take it. I said before and still believe there was a conspiracy earlier on when Nagle was "setting" with Grand Rapids instead of being here beating the socks off our opponents. Conway was available in Toledo! The ECHL bosses are not going to buck the AHL/NHL. So nothing is going to change. I personally am sick of it and hate watching this stuff. The only thing we can hope for from night to night is that our opponent's roster might be a bit thinner than ours and that just plain stinks. We all know that the Franke's are not going to keep this team forever and it will be very interesting to see if anyone local steps in and buys them or if they might be sold to the AHL/NHL. Watch out then!
OLDGUY45
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 4:42pm
I agree with Muel 100 per cent. The ECHL could care less about the fans. Maybe staying away would get someones attention.
A-Train
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 5:58pm
Blake, can you please describe what the Recall/Assignment Deadline is that comes up next week in the ECHL?
who/suz
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 6:24pm
So, who IS playing..Clarke and Harrison?
kometfan29
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 10:28pm
This is what irritates me...Norfolk calls up our top two scorers...meanwhile if they were so depleted and needed all they can get how is it that Anaheim then goes in today and sends one of norfolks forwards to Utah. Now I'd be p***** if I were the owners.
Blake Sebring
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 10:49pm
Sorry A-train, I am not 100 percent positive, but I think that has to do with AHL players coming down for the first time who ECHL teams want on their playoff rosters. Let's say, for an example and I am NOT predicting this but trying to give you an example everyone would recognize... let's say Lake Erie decided they wanted Daniel Maggio to be on FW's playoff roster. Since he has not played here during this season, he would need to be placed on FW's roster by the deadline. At least that's what I think it means. I could not find any references online other than the mention of the deadline. I'm basically looking at this as the same rule the NHL has about players on AHL playoff rosters.
Blake Sebring
Wed, 03/04/2015 - 10:39pm
Yes, there's no one else left. Everyone who is healthy and on the roster, at this point and time, will play. That's what the story said.
chuckitt
Thu, 03/05/2015 - 11:08am
think i said originally to all the people who hated the ihl2 and the chl, be carefull you might get what you wish for.......the echl was everybodys dream and now you got it. this is what it is and we should be damn proud of our gm, coach and players for being in the first place position that we are. just goes to show that its not easy to be on top in this league. now all we got to do is try and stay there! the league is here for one reason and thats to supply the ahl with players, plain and simple. we are lucky to draw what we do. havent you ever wondered why in past years the attendance in the ahl was around 3000 and teams were in small cities? it is because the league is there for and by the nhl. didnt need to draw 5000+ casue they didnt care if they made money, only cared that their players got developed. so you wanted to be here so instead of complaing you need to come up with ideas on how to make it better. my idea is expand our roster and add more vets and raise the cost of non affiliated call ups, its a start but got to remember at this level we are bucking the nhl not like the days in ihl2 where we called the shots.
Blake Sebring
Thu, 03/05/2015 - 1:24pm
Unfortunately, neither of those ideas has even a slim chance of happening because it would mean more expenses for the owners.
Alan
Thu, 03/05/2015 - 1:56pm
Everybody has posted legitimate concerns. I have to agree with chuckitt that we have joined a league where the ONLY thing that has importance is the NHL. The AHL does serve at the behest of the NHL, no argument here, and the ECHL is way, way down on the totem pole.
While the NHL owns many ( and probably will own more) AHL and ECHL teams, it will be hard to change the current philosophies. It will take the ECHL, hierarchy and governors and owners, to stand united and "put their foot down".
I would like to see the AHL have some sort of a roster limitation (just like the NHL and ECHL does). I would like to see the ECHL have little more "backbone" when it comes to arbitrary decisions. I would submit that the NHL and AHL need the ECHL more than a lot of people or organizations think.
As a STH the only thing I can be hopeful for is the fact that our Owners are vocal at each and every league meeting. Even to the point of being a nuisance. The Franke's have way more experience running a hockey franchise than most (and that includes many AHL and some NHL regimes). Many of the very same ideas, problems, and frustrations expressed on this blog are being felt by other ECHL teams. Some certainly more in some years than other years, but all franchises are at the mercy of this unlevel playing field sometime.
There isn't any problem that can't be worked out with some discussion and negotiation.
Chuckitt is correct in his thoughts about the IHL2 and the CHL. But both leagues went by the wayside.
And I always have to remind myself that "this is the league we have joined". Good or bad, right or wrong.
That doesn't mean it can't be improved, though.
Blake Sebring
Thu, 03/05/2015 - 5:39pm
Kometsfan29, who were you referring to please?
"This is what irritates me...Norfolk calls up our top two scorers...meanwhile if they were so depleted and needed all they can get how is it that Anaheim then goes in today and sends one of norfolks forwards to Utah. Now I'd be p***** if I were the owners."
orangemoon
Thu, 03/05/2015 - 8:05pm
this league, the talent and games must really suck reading these comments......
but it will all be better when they expand to Europe............................................
JK
Fri, 03/06/2015 - 1:50am
Not saying this is viable but the only way to fix the system is for the NHL teams to be allowed more contracts. They sign more of their prospects and more AHL depth and then it trickles down where you would see the same players on the ECHL team year by year and game by game. Would be closer to baseball's minor league system.
Considering that there are always injuries at the NHL level plus they don't want to carry a bare bones roster then the same happens to the AHL and I don't think it's outrageous that they bring up an insurance guy or two. Lake Erie always has horrendous injury problems, they run pretty bare as it is.
I will agree it's pretty silly to have an affiliation and then the majority of those players can sign with any AHL team/org. Kind of makes it pointless that the affiliation only works one way.
Comments
I think folks are mistaking the AHL-ECHL affiliate model for baseball's. It doesn't work that way. The so-called parent clubs only have an interest in the half-dozen (or fewer) palyers that actually belong to that organization.
Blake, to address your points:
1) "Norfolk already has an ECHL affiliate, so why isn't it using them?" - First, see above. Second, do you mean to imply that you're okay with teams getting shafted by AHL clubs so long as it 's not the Komets?
2) "Why can't an ECHL team that calls up a non-affiliated player be obligated to send one back?" AHL teams call up players because they're shorthanded. The story in the morning paper said that Norfolk was down to 9 (of the customary 12) forwards, so who would they send? Plus, I doubt that contractually, they can just send any old player. If it's like the relationship between the AHL and the NHL, a player not under a two-way contract would have to clear waivers unless it's a conditioning assignment.
3) "Why shouldn't the ECHL fans be the priority of this league?" Blake, you've been a sports reporter for a long time. When has this ever been the case in any sport in any league?
4) "Eventually, that's going to really hurt the ECHL when it can't find new owners" All the recently minted owners (e.g. Indy) knew ( or should have known) what they were getting into, since the ECHL has been operating under this model for years. The landscape of minor league hockey is littered with the (figurative) corpses of former owners with more money than sense.
5)"$17,000, etc." Presuming they feed both teams, this works out to slightly over $10.00 per person per game (assumes 18 players and 5 staff per team). That doesn't sound all that outrageous. Besides, I firmly believe that if the lease terms ever became an existential threat to the team, I think negotiations would open pretty quickly given that the K's are the principal tenant and Randy Brown wouldn't be all that excited about 36 more open dates on his docket.
Sorry for the Alan-esque length.
1. Not at all. In fact, I've been careful to almost always refer to these things happening to every possible ECHL team. What fun is it to watch and ECHL powerhouse vs. a team full of lower-level players?
Right now, no ECHL team or their fans have any protections from AHL teams who are not their affiliates, even though those AHLteams might have their own ECHL affiliates. I'm not saying players should not be able to move up, but shouldn't there be a cost because you didn't do your own homework over the summer in recruiting players? ECHL teams get punished for scouting and finding good players and helping them develop. Why shouldn't they be rewarded for that instead of punished? And hence, their fans? All ECHL teams are not created equal, unless you do a good job and then you get hammered for doing that good job. Right now, an AHL team could call and say I'm taking your 10 best players, here's $5,000, and the ECHL team would basically have to take it, hopefully with enough time to find players before the next game. That $5,000 does nothing for you.
2. As Alan points out, they obviously are not short-handed, especially if they are having guys sit in the stands each night. AHL teams have, by rule, an unlimited roster size.
3. IHL 2, UHL, Central HL. They also sent teams up and down, but they had continuity. Even the original IHL had it much better than this. If your own customers are not your priority... what other business operates this way?
4. We've all been around this business long enough to notice there is constant turnover in ownership, right? The Frankes are the only owners in all of minor league hockey with more than 15 years, and there are only four or five others with at least 10 years. If finding owners were so easy, the CHL would still be in business. Pretty soon that constant turnover IS going to hurt them unless they make the business itself more appealing to potential owners. You can see it if you look at the long-term picture of minor league hockey. Most owners are... how do I say it... ignorant. They get in thinking they can run this like any other business or a hobby, and then six months later they start to realize it's completely different and they have to readjust. Well, you just guaranteed you lose money your first season, and many are not that wealthy. Or they are too stubborn to change, and they are dead because few can afford two bad years in a row. Here's something you can definitely have noticed: Not as many teams are sold any more. They just fold, and then another owner brings in a few expansion team to another market until 5-10 years later and then they try that market again. Indy, Utica, Adirondack, St. Charles, maybe Las Vegas, San Diego... That tells you there aren't that many great markets out there.
5. Has nothing to do with players. Has to do with off-ice staff, media, etc. You might think that, but it doesn't work that way in reality. I've been trying for years to get the list of things the Komets have to pay for at the Coliseum, ie Zamboni, scoreboard, ribbon board, broadcast origination fees, etc., with no luck. Yes, they pay no rent, but they pay for everything else. Not criticizing that, but it's a cost of doing business that few take into account. I've heard it said many times the Komets wouldn't mind paying rent if it allowed them to have access to other revenue streams. Right now they have tickets, advertising and souvenir sales. And that's all. What they make off ECHL TV doesn't even pay for the dues for one game to the league.
My whole point is, why can't the leagues work together so the systems are more equitable for everyone? Maybe such a system is impossible, but shouldn't they try to find one? If one franchise goes out, all of hockey loses at this point because the NHL loses potential future fans. There aren't that many minor league franchises out there any more because this is such a hard business.
Could be they have 12 forwards on roster...but are all of them healthy? Maybe some are injured...well find out tonight.
Aren't the owners also the governors of the league, with the power to shape the rules in a way that promotes their own product? What stops them, say, from limiting call-ups only to affiliated teams?
if you didnt allow a non affiliated player to be called up you wouldnt get anybody to sign. the object is to get noticed and given a chance higher up. this is minor league hockey and you are always at the whim of the league above you. i think a new agreement needs to be made with the ahl and they need to pay more than 500 bucks if they call up non affiliated players. but of course the ahl doesnt care.. one way around that is to expand the echl rosters and expand the vetern limit.; doing this will give you a bigger player pool of guys used to your system and haveing more vets will make the ahl shy away from calling the vets up cause they wont do anything for the future of those ahl teams, something to think about boardof govenors.
Every player would be eligible for call-up, but only to an affiliated team. It might sound harsh, but what choice would the players have if they wanted to play in North America?
Chuckitt , Your absolutly right. Expand rosters and expand number of veterans. I would bet the Frankes have already submitted these proposals at last meeting. And probably will again.
I don't have the answer. But it wouldn't hurt for the governors to put it on the league agenda.
The most ridiculous thing is that the komets and Utah are competitors. Yet the Komets "loan" two players to Norfolk while Utah's roster isn't touched. So Fort Wayne becomes weaker while Utah stays at the status-quo. Some could argue that we are "helping" Utah by providing players for Norfolk.
On another topic. Some demolition will have to take place if the Coliseum is going to re-do the locker rooms, so why don't they wait until Kalamazoo arrives. After all, it was Kalamazoo they suspected of damaging the visitors room a few years ago. They must've done a pretty good job.
Those two posts above were pretty long, so let's watch it. OK?
This thread shows exactly what is wrong with hockey in the ECHL? What is everyone talking about? The play of our team or the snatching of our players and everything that is wrong with the League? The state of minor league hockey is really sad IMO. The Komets and every team in the league know what the AHL can and will do to their roster especially when they are winning...they will pick it apart and the fact that the AHL has unlimited rosters does not mean a thing. They can do whatever they want to and we just have to take it. I said before and still believe there was a conspiracy earlier on when Nagle was "setting" with Grand Rapids instead of being here beating the socks off our opponents. Conway was available in Toledo! The ECHL bosses are not going to buck the AHL/NHL. So nothing is going to change. I personally am sick of it and hate watching this stuff. The only thing we can hope for from night to night is that our opponent's roster might be a bit thinner than ours and that just plain stinks. We all know that the Franke's are not going to keep this team forever and it will be very interesting to see if anyone local steps in and buys them or if they might be sold to the AHL/NHL. Watch out then!
I agree with Muel 100 per cent. The ECHL could care less about the fans. Maybe staying away would get someones attention.
Blake, can you please describe what the Recall/Assignment Deadline is that comes up next week in the ECHL?
So, who IS playing..Clarke and Harrison?
This is what irritates me...Norfolk calls up our top two scorers...meanwhile if they were so depleted and needed all they can get how is it that Anaheim then goes in today and sends one of norfolks forwards to Utah. Now I'd be p***** if I were the owners.
Sorry A-train, I am not 100 percent positive, but I think that has to do with AHL players coming down for the first time who ECHL teams want on their playoff rosters. Let's say, for an example and I am NOT predicting this but trying to give you an example everyone would recognize... let's say Lake Erie decided they wanted Daniel Maggio to be on FW's playoff roster. Since he has not played here during this season, he would need to be placed on FW's roster by the deadline. At least that's what I think it means. I could not find any references online other than the mention of the deadline. I'm basically looking at this as the same rule the NHL has about players on AHL playoff rosters.
Yes, there's no one else left. Everyone who is healthy and on the roster, at this point and time, will play. That's what the story said.
think i said originally to all the people who hated the ihl2 and the chl, be carefull you might get what you wish for.......the echl was everybodys dream and now you got it. this is what it is and we should be damn proud of our gm, coach and players for being in the first place position that we are. just goes to show that its not easy to be on top in this league. now all we got to do is try and stay there! the league is here for one reason and thats to supply the ahl with players, plain and simple. we are lucky to draw what we do. havent you ever wondered why in past years the attendance in the ahl was around 3000 and teams were in small cities? it is because the league is there for and by the nhl. didnt need to draw 5000+ casue they didnt care if they made money, only cared that their players got developed. so you wanted to be here so instead of complaing you need to come up with ideas on how to make it better. my idea is expand our roster and add more vets and raise the cost of non affiliated call ups, its a start but got to remember at this level we are bucking the nhl not like the days in ihl2 where we called the shots.
Unfortunately, neither of those ideas has even a slim chance of happening because it would mean more expenses for the owners.
Everybody has posted legitimate concerns. I have to agree with chuckitt that we have joined a league where the ONLY thing that has importance is the NHL. The AHL does serve at the behest of the NHL, no argument here, and the ECHL is way, way down on the totem pole.
While the NHL owns many ( and probably will own more) AHL and ECHL teams, it will be hard to change the current philosophies. It will take the ECHL, hierarchy and governors and owners, to stand united and "put their foot down".
I would like to see the AHL have some sort of a roster limitation (just like the NHL and ECHL does). I would like to see the ECHL have little more "backbone" when it comes to arbitrary decisions. I would submit that the NHL and AHL need the ECHL more than a lot of people or organizations think.
As a STH the only thing I can be hopeful for is the fact that our Owners are vocal at each and every league meeting. Even to the point of being a nuisance. The Franke's have way more experience running a hockey franchise than most (and that includes many AHL and some NHL regimes). Many of the very same ideas, problems, and frustrations expressed on this blog are being felt by other ECHL teams. Some certainly more in some years than other years, but all franchises are at the mercy of this unlevel playing field sometime.
There isn't any problem that can't be worked out with some discussion and negotiation.
Chuckitt is correct in his thoughts about the IHL2 and the CHL. But both leagues went by the wayside.
And I always have to remind myself that "this is the league we have joined". Good or bad, right or wrong.
That doesn't mean it can't be improved, though.
Kometsfan29, who were you referring to please?
"This is what irritates me...Norfolk calls up our top two scorers...meanwhile if they were so depleted and needed all they can get how is it that Anaheim then goes in today and sends one of norfolks forwards to Utah. Now I'd be p***** if I were the owners."
this league, the talent and games must really suck reading these comments......
but it will all be better when they expand to Europe............................................
Not saying this is viable but the only way to fix the system is for the NHL teams to be allowed more contracts. They sign more of their prospects and more AHL depth and then it trickles down where you would see the same players on the ECHL team year by year and game by game. Would be closer to baseball's minor league system.
Considering that there are always injuries at the NHL level plus they don't want to carry a bare bones roster then the same happens to the AHL and I don't think it's outrageous that they bring up an insurance guy or two. Lake Erie always has horrendous injury problems, they run pretty bare as it is.
I will agree it's pretty silly to have an affiliation and then the majority of those players can sign with any AHL team/org. Kind of makes it pointless that the affiliation only works one way.