I have no issue with any team tanking, thanks for the cash... If you pay into the league you should be able to run it the way you want to, if you want to suck, then hell let the team suck.

Now, if you are the one tanking, then man up to it... If a team is putting a solid player on the fourth line, or sitting your #1 tender for a considerable period lets call a spade a spade, the team is tanking. And I am cool with that, cause I would do the same in order to get the best pick possible...

If a team was seriously trying to save a player from not getting injuried as they were about to trade them (like at the trade deadline) then the player would be scratched as they are in the NHL, not sitting on the fourth line...

So in short tank away, I wish more teams were doing it, as it bode better for the teams like me that are trying to make the playoffs every year.

My two cents and that is all about all they are worth...

...Derek
GM Wild

BryceBruins wrote:

---

Here's my personal opinion.

If you suck, you're stupid not to tank. If you're like LA who has good young assets in place, you're stupid to trade them to tank (which he hasn't).

---

Luke, if you read a little more, you would find out what Bryce thinks.

Honestly, the decision has been made and there is NO wrong-doing done by Ottawa according to the league rules. The discussion should be over and really you're just grasping at straws right now. Let's move on and continue the season.

Sens wrote:

---

Of course all of this has NOTHING to do with the fact you just got Pittsburghs first round pick!

---

Of course that's why I noticed tanking. With my family, business ect.. I don't stay as up to date on issues in the league as I did before, so of course I'm human, if something effects me then I'm more likely to care about it.

 

However, just because i brought it up because it effects me doesn't mean that I'm not valid in bringing it up. Fact of the matter is that more clarity always helps the league in general and I'm trying to foster the growth and understanding of the rules of the league which in essence makes it more fair.

 

If i was in your shoes prior to Bryce's ruling I would have been hesistant to make lines like you were making for fear of doign something wrong, but now that it's been set as okay, then GO FOR IT. I would be disappointed in the spirit of competition of you DIDN"T tank your lines. I sure as heck would. The point of the post wasn't about getting you not do tank it was to find out if it was legal and you were the example. Don't take things so personally. Chillax.

Oddly, and no offense to any bottom feeder, I agree with Luke.

Putting out a line up that is trying to lose affects the spirit of competition with which all leagues are built on. Emulating a league that is as close to the NHL as possible means that there would be repercussions for any team that would do so.

If the GMs here had newspaper scribes ripping them for the ****ty play of their team. (Lowe's legacy has been permanently harmed in Edmonton, Tambellini is considered half ass, and tickets are cheap in E town right now) There might be some thoughts as to running the team to attempt to win.

I could see healthy scratching some key tradeable assets, but playing your poorest players on the first line and best on the fourth line wouldn't go well in any fanbase.

It doesn't only affect the team trying to tank. It affects every team trying to make the playoffs, win a division, first round match ups, money payed for where you end up etc.

It has no relevance to Chicago, but I would prefer the league make some ruling as to the ongoing process of "trying to lose". If you want to rebuild and sell off all your assets, that is cool, but icing a line up that is affecting competition is poor form.

Hawks_G wrote:

---

Oddly, and no offense to any bottom feeder, I agree with Luke.

Putting out a line up that is trying to lose affects the spirit of competition with which all leagues are built on. Emulating a league that is as close to the NHL as possible means that there would be repercussions for any team that would do so.

If the GMs here had newspaper scribes ripping them for the ****ty play of their team. (Lowe's legacy has been permanently harmed in Edmonton, Tambellini is considered half ass, and tickets are cheap in E town right now) There might be some thoughts as to running the team to attempt to win.

I could see healthy scratching some key tradeable assets, but playing your poorest players on the first line and best on the fourth line wouldn't go well in any fanbase.

It doesn't only affect the team trying to tank. It affects every team trying to make the playoffs, win a division, first round match ups, money payed for where you end up etc.

It has no relevance to Chicago, but I would prefer the league make some ruling as to the ongoing process of "trying to lose". If you want to rebuild and sell off all your assets, that is cool, but icing a line up that is affecting competition is poor form.

---

Could not disagree more ! Only reason it does not happen more frequently in the NHL is because of either ownership not allowing it or fans who would have their heads for repeatedly doing the same thing. Since we need to worry about either, it is the smart way to go.

Like i said before in a fun league maybe the good form is in play , but in a cash league as in any other thing involving your cash, you will do whatever it takes to make the buck.

This is a good topic.  Their is no real right or wrong here, just difference of opinions but I think the reason we do it overules the reason it generally is not done.

Hey the point in this league is to be as competaative as possible and to keep your team there in the money as long as possible. Sometimes things do not go right. I say if a GM recognizes this and knows there is no immediate turn around with what he has then tanking it is just another way of trying to improve your squad which in the long run makes for a more competative team.

 

Pittsburgh GM wrote:

---

 

Hawks_G wrote:

---

Oddly, and no offense to any bottom feeder, I agree with Luke.

Putting out a line up that is trying to lose affects the spirit of competition with which all leagues are built on. Emulating a league that is as close to the NHL as possible means that there would be repercussions for any team that would do so.

If the GMs here had newspaper scribes ripping them for the ****ty play of their team. (Lowe's legacy has been permanently harmed in Edmonton, Tambellini is considered half ass, and tickets are cheap in E town right now) There might be some thoughts as to running the team to attempt to win.

I could see healthy scratching some key tradeable assets, but playing your poorest players on the first line and best on the fourth line wouldn't go well in any fanbase.

It doesn't only affect the team trying to tank. It affects every team trying to make the playoffs, win a division, first round match ups, money payed for where you end up etc.

It has no relevance to Chicago, but I would prefer the league make some ruling as to the ongoing process of "trying to lose". If you want to rebuild and sell off all your assets, that is cool, but icing a line up that is affecting competition is poor form.

---

Could not disagree more ! Only reason it does not happen more frequently in the NHL is because of either ownership not allowing it or fans who would have their heads for repeatedly doing the same thing. Since we need to worry about either, it is the smart way to go.

Like i said before in a fun league maybe the good form is in play , but in a cash league as in any other thing involving your cash, you will do whatever it takes to make the buck.

This is a good topic.  Their is no real right or wrong here, just difference of opinions but I think the reason we do it overules the reason it generally is not done.

Hey the point in this league is to be as competaative as possible and to keep your team there in the money as long as possible. Sometimes things do not go right. I say if a GM recognizes this and knows there is no immediate turn around with what he has then tanking it is just another way of trying to improve your squad which in the long run makes for a more competative team.

 

 

---

If this is the reason that the league allows the tank...then I would like to review this rule.

Lines (Section 2)

2) A general manager may double shift any ONE forward on the fourth line; double shifting a forward on any combination of lines one, two, and three will default that teams lines to AUTO for that days games. Furthermore, a team cannot double shift any more than one forward; this prevents teams with top heavy talent laden lines from abusing the spirit of league parity and fairness.

If there is not disincentive to tank, then there should be no disincentive to play a player for over 30 minutes a game.

If there is a rule discussing spirit of league parity and fairness, then tanking is the antithesis of this rule.

My real point meaning that do we intend for a team to attempt to be as realistic as possible with "fans" "lines" "finances" or do we throw away the realism in relation to the NHL to achieve the "it's a pay league and do what you can to make a buck."

 

Eric_Isles wrote:

---

Sens wrote:

---

Of course all of this has NOTHING to do with the fact you just got Pittsburghs first round pick!

---

Book 'em Botham.

This is probably the main reason I didn't put much validity into this thread. That, and I truly thought Aaron made the post.

---

What about the rest of us, such as myself and George, who are also of the opinion that tanking should not be allowed?