I would like to propose a rule change to be effective immediately. The rule change would not effect any draft picks traded up until the time the rule is adopted.
I am open to discussion and debate on changes to the proposed rule.
Proposed rule:
1.1 "No BRHL2 team may trade its right to a draft pick unless the team has satisfied the following criteria relating to the specific draft pick:
- for a right to a draft pick relating to a draft to be held in the immediate off-season, a non-refundable deposit of 25% of the team's fees for the immediate season must have been paid; - for a right to a draft pick relating to a draft to be held in the off-season following one full regular season (not including the current season in play), a non-refundable deposit of 50% of the team's fees for that season must have been paid; and - for a right to a draft pick relating to a draft to be held in the off-season following two full regular seasons (not including the current season in play), a non-refundable deposit of 100% of the team's fees for that eason must have been paid.
1.2 No BRHL2 team may trade a right to a draft pick relating to a draft to be hald in the off-season following three full regular seasons (not including the current season in play).
1.3 The BRHL2 will maintain a record of the fees paid by each team for all future seasons and publish this information on the BRHL2 website.
1.4 Where a team has paid a non-refundable deposit for season, and subsequently leaves the league prior to that season, the deposit will applied as a credit in equal proportions to the fees of all 30 BRHL2 teams.
How does this work in practice?
If this rule were adopted immediately, it would work as follows:
- To trade a 2008 pick, a team must pay 25% of its fees for 2008-09. - To trade a 2009 pick, a team must pay 50% of its fees for 2009-10. - To trade a 2010 pick, a team must pay 100% of its fees for 2010-11. - No 2011 picks can be traded.
The public record would show who has paid for 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, etc...
If a team has paid $25 for 2009-10 and subsequently leaves the league, each team would be credited $0.83 towards their fees for that season, or a subsequent season (if they have already paid for that season).
Why is the rule needed?
- It is essential to maintain the integrity and competitiveness of the BRHL2. - It is essential to prevent a team from stockpiling draft picks of other teams who might leave the league prior to the draft to which the pick relates without some financial compensation to the rest of the league.
Other suggestions:
- I think we should have a league treasurer manage the league's finances and report to the league on the status of each team's fee situation for subsequent years. The treasurer would also head a sub-committee of BRHL2 that would decide financial matters. I would be prepared to volunteer for this position.
__________________
2007-08 - missed playoffs (29th overall) 2008-09 - missed playoffs (26th overall) 2009-10 - 7th place in Western Conference (99 pts), Conference Semi-Finals 2010-11 - missed playoffs (19th overall) 2011-12
I would like to propose a rule change to be effective immediately. The rule change would not effect any draft picks traded up until the time the rule is adopted.
I am open to discussion and debate on changes to the proposed rule.
Proposed rule:
1.1 "No BRHL2 team may trade its right to a draft pick unless the team has satisfied the following criteria relating to the specific draft pick:
- for a right to a draft pick relating to a draft to be held in the immediate off-season, a non-refundable deposit of 25% of the team's fees for the immediate season must have been paid; - for a right to a draft pick relating to a draft to be held in the off-season following one full regular season (not including the current season in play), a non-refundable deposit of 50% of the team's fees for that season must have been paid; and - for a right to a draft pick relating to a draft to be held in the off-season following two full regular seasons (not including the current season in play), a non-refundable deposit of 100% of the team's fees for that eason must have been paid.
1.2 No BRHL2 team may trade a right to a draft pick relating to a draft to be hald in the off-season following three full regular seasons (not including the current season in play).
1.3 The BRHL2 will maintain a record of the fees paid by each team for all future seasons and publish this information on the BRHL2 website.
1.4 Where a team has paid a non-refundable deposit for season, and subsequently leaves the league prior to that season, the deposit will applied as a credit in equal proportions to the fees of all 30 BRHL2 teams.
How does this work in practice?
If this rule were adopted immediately, it would work as follows:
- To trade a 2008 pick, a team must pay 25% of its fees for 2008-09. - To trade a 2009 pick, a team must pay 50% of its fees for 2009-10. - To trade a 2010 pick, a team must pay 100% of its fees for 2010-11. - No 2011 picks can be traded.
The public record would show who has paid for 2008-09, 2009-10, 2010-11, etc...
If a team has paid $25 for 2009-10 and subsequently leaves the league, each team would be credited $0.83 towards their fees for that season, or a subsequent season (if they have already paid for that season).
Why is the rule needed?
- It is essential to maintain the integrity and competitiveness of the BRHL2. - It is essential to prevent a team from stockpiling draft picks of other teams who might leave the league prior to the draft to which the pick relates without some financial compensation to the rest of the league.
Other suggestions:
- I think we should have a league treasurer manage the league's finances and report to the league on the status of each team's fee situation for subsequent years. The treasurer would also head a sub-committee of BRHL2 that would decide financial matters. I would be prepared to volunteer for this position.
A rule like this is already in place but off by one year because when you paid last off-season itgave you the right to the upcoming entry draft. You already have to pay your 08-09 fees to trade 2009 draft picks, 09-10 fees to trade 2010 draft picks.
My understanding is that the current rule only applies to 2010 picks. I haven't paid 2008-09 fees and I have traded Ana 3, 2009.
I think the proposed rule goes a lot further at protecting the integrity of the league. A team shouldn't be able to trade its future assets to load up for a cup run if they are not willing to commit financially to sticking around for those years.
If we want to make the proposed rule apply only to picks in the first three rounds, I would be fine with it, however, I really think we need to adopt a system to protect the league. If we don't and teams leave after trading away all their future rights, we will be unable to find GMs that will be willing to pay an entry fee for a team that will take 5 or 6 seasons to rebuild. I certainly wouldn't have been so willing to take Anaheim if I had no picks in 2008 or 2009.
I hope that GMs can see the strong rationale in this proposal and get behind the rule!
__________________
2007-08 - missed playoffs (29th overall) 2008-09 - missed playoffs (26th overall) 2009-10 - 7th place in Western Conference (99 pts), Conference Semi-Finals 2010-11 - missed playoffs (19th overall) 2011-12
Problem I see with this, is that you really hinder a GM's ability to make trades for now and the future. This goes against everything this league is about. Being as close to real NHL as possible. Don't see a GM paying yearly dues to have the right to make moves in the NHL, and in most cases GMs ( NHL and FHL ) cannot see that far into the future anyhow to know what there plans are.
Perfect way to look after this is to monitor all player movements much better than we currently are, which I brought up just recently to be discussed I hope. We must be able to let deals be somewhat one sided if the league is to thrive. We must be able to veto deals that are what is considered beyond one sidedness. Tough to explain but there is no need to charge anyone any more money to move future prospects or picks, just better monitoring.
-- Edited by Pittsburgh GM at 14:12, 2007-12-07
__________________
Rod Edwards Pittsburgh Penguins / Wilkes Barre Penguins General Manager BRHL2
My understanding is that the current rule only applies to 2010 picks. I haven't paid 2008-09 fees and I have traded Ana 3, 2009.
I think the proposed rule goes a lot further at protecting the integrity of the league. A team shouldn't be able to trade its future assets to load up for a cup run if they are not willing to commit financially to sticking around for those years.
If we want to make the proposed rule apply only to picks in the first three rounds, I would be fine with it, however, I really think we need to adopt a system to protect the league. If we don't and teams leave after trading away all their future rights, we will be unable to find GMs that will be willing to pay an entry fee for a team that will take 5 or 6 seasons to rebuild. I certainly wouldn't have been so willing to take Anaheim if I had no picks in 2008 or 2009.
I hope that GMs can see the strong rationale in this proposal and get behind the rule!
It doesn't apply only to 2010 picks. You shouldn't have been able to trade Anaheim 3rd. My guess is that pick you traded should have been Philly's 3rd as he has already paid his next season's fees so you're allowed to trade that one.
This is directly from the rulebook: " i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
I hope that GMs can see the strong rationale in this proposal and get behind the rule!
As someone that has just stepped in, I see the need for something like this. I was given a very solid team that could potentially win some money. What's stopping me from raping the teams future completely so I can win some money this year and then bail? :)
The only problem is commitment. Not everyone is wanting to put money up front for FHL.
"Problem I see with this, is that you really hinder a GM's ability to make trades for now and the future. This goes against everything this league is about. Being as close to real NHL as possible. Don't see a GM paying yearly dues to have the right to make moves in the NHL, and in most cases GMs ( NHL and FHL ) cannot see that far into the future anyhow to know what there plans are."
- NHL GMs dont put up a 50 dollar fee.. instead they attempt to live up to their contract and support their families through their moves. If they don't.. they're fired. There are some elements of FHL that can never be emulated. Steps must be taken to protect the league from having 6-8 teams being a complete mess. If Eric hadn't taken over the NYI, I don't think we would have found anyone willing to put up $50. The team has very few assets and little chance of making money (through top 50 prospects, winning, individual player awards, etc).
I hope that GMs can see the strong rationale in this proposal and get behind the rule!
As someone that has just stepped in, I see the need for something like this. I was given a very solid team that could potentially win some money. What's stopping me from raping the teams future completely so I can win some money this year and then bail? :)
The only problem is commitment. Not everyone is wanting to put money up front for FHL.
"Problem I see with this, is that you really hinder a GM's ability to make trades for now and the future. This goes against everything this league is about. Being as close to real NHL as possible. Don't see a GM paying yearly dues to have the right to make moves in the NHL, and in most cases GMs ( NHL and FHL ) cannot see that far into the future anyhow to know what there plans are."
- NHL GMs dont put up a 50 dollar fee.. instead they attempt to live up to their contract and support their families through their moves. If they don't.. they're fired. There are some elements of FHL that can never be emulated. Steps must be taken to protect the league from having 6-8 teams being a complete mess. If Eric hadn't taken over the NYI, I don't think we would have found anyone willing to put up $50. The team has very few assets and little chance of making money (through top 50 prospects, winning, individual player awards, etc).
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
Very mature... If you read what I wrote you would see major differences between the status quo and what I have proposed.
First, I am proposing that teams not even be allowed to trade picks for the upcoming draft without making some kind of financial commitment.
Second, I am asking that a record of fees paid be made available on the website.
Third, I am looking for a rule that says how non-refundable deposits should be treated (i.e., what happens currently if a team pays to trade 2010 draft picks and leaves the league? Does the money stay with the franchise, does it go to the commishes, is it split up amongst the remaining teams?)
Fourth, I am suggesting that we could use a treasurer to keep track of the league's money.
Don't you think that goes a little bit further than:
The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year.
Philippe27 wrote:
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
__________________
2007-08 - missed playoffs (29th overall) 2008-09 - missed playoffs (26th overall) 2009-10 - 7th place in Western Conference (99 pts), Conference Semi-Finals 2010-11 - missed playoffs (19th overall) 2011-12
Very mature... If you read what I wrote you would see major differences between the status quo and what I have proposed.
First, I am proposing that teams not even be allowed to trade picks for the upcoming draft without making some kind of financial commitment.
Second, I am asking that a record of fees paid be made available on the website.
Third, I am looking for a rule that says how non-refundable deposits should be treated (i.e., what happens currently if a team pays to trade 2010 draft picks and leaves the league? Does the money stay with the franchise, does it go to the commishes, is it split up amongst the remaining teams?)
Fourth, I am suggesting that we could use a treasurer to keep track of the league's money.
Don't you think that goes a little bit further than:
The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year.
Philippe27 wrote:
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
" i. The trading of future draft picks, past the upcoming draft isn't allowed. The rule will be waived when new franchise fees have been paid for the upcoming year. (updated 11-04-06)"
I posted that because no one read what I posted so thought like this it would get read and it did so I succeeded. Now as for your questions: Q: First, I am proposing that teams not even be allowed to trade picks for the upcoming draft without making some kind of financial commitment. A: When you pay 50 bucks you get a season and an entry draft. When you paid the first year you got the 2007 entry draft. When you paid for this year you get the 2008 entry draft. The commitment was made last summer.
Q: Second, I am asking that a record of fees paid be made available on the website. A: Not too sure about the use of this unless you're desperate for '09 draft picks. I can tell you Philly and Atlanta have paid, maybe one or two others. You can ask Eric or Bryce if you,re so eager to know.
Q: Third, I am looking for a rule that says how non-refundable deposits should be treated (i.e., what happens currently if a team pays to trade 2010 draft picks and leaves the league? Does the money stay with the franchise, does it go to the commishes, is it split up amongst the remaining teams?) A: Once again not too sure this is very useful because why would someone pay in advance and then decide to quit? If it happens during the season (like it has before with St.Louis), the money stays with the franchise and the season pays his fees for next season so basically gets a season and a half for the price of one (which is normal because he's getting a ****ty team halfway through).
Q: Fourth, I am suggesting that we could use a treasurer to keep track of the league's money. A: That treasurer is named Bryce Shuck.
For the record I like the idea of having some sort of financial transparency. It is everyone's right to know what the league's financial status is at all times. But that's just me.
