|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Aug 23, 2011 11:36:08 GMT -5
I completely understand both sides of the coin here. I try to make decisions based on what I feel is in the best interest in the league. In the past, when things became an issue we tended to wait too long to fix things and then even more problems arose.
The financial thing isn't as big of a deal that people are making it out to be. I originally had wanted to give each team 50,000,000 to start. It's a more realistic number of a professional sports franchise to have then 10 mill. There were 2-3 threads and numerous emails and pms to me about fixing financing because most teams were losing money so I acted. Some of you are saying well money doesn't mean anything now, well did it before? Nobody had any money and has Colorado has said, what was the alternative, remove all the bankrupt GMs?
The slider thing, I can see it being a bigger issue. I was initially against moving them mid-season, but as more and more GMs complained aboutt it, I decided to do it. Quite frankly, I've made it pretty clear in emails and in our rules, that teams should be checking the forums daily. So, if only half the GMs responsed and it was a pretty clear majority of that half, well I felt comfortable enough to do it. I'm sorry that anybody feels that this move could have negatively affected their team, that was never my intention.
I make all my decisions based on the best for the league. In the offseason, we will look at rule changes and such and even if there are rules that I like, but a strong majority don't, I'm willing to change those things.
|
|
|
Post by NJDevils on Aug 23, 2011 12:26:52 GMT -5
I'm absolutely OK with the slider changes, don't get me wrong. It is for the best of the league, I understand that. It's just bad timing.
And all we did by giving everyone $50 mil is delay the inevitable. Should we have started with more? Yes. But $50 mil is a lot and if the financial sliders are all the way up, we're just going to be back at this point in a few seasons. Teams can't spend to a $60 mil cap AND make money. Players salaries would have been a bit lower because of this as we hit this offseason. Now, teams will just hemorrhage money without fixing their finances.
Money should have been given out though. I would have argued for a bit less (enough to get through this year) or give some out at the end of the year before free agency turning a blind eye to bankruptcy, but that's just me.
This issue is going to continue to be spending if we can't increase financial sliders further. We just put a band-aid on that issue.
|
|
|
Post by yzerman on Aug 23, 2011 14:44:46 GMT -5
i think if teams are managed properly, they can make money even with a $60m cap. you need to figure out the best ticket price to try and get close to max attendance, while managing an appropriate salary for your team. i have the same amount of money i started with when i joined about 20 games ago(exclude the $50m). my projected balance has gone up over $3m
|
|
|
Post by sensgm on Aug 23, 2011 14:59:13 GMT -5
I agree with with Tampa completely I was trading for money and keeping my payroll low in order be a wealthy team! Adding 50mil was crazy!!! Maybe adding 10mil would have been alright until we got to the off season and then something could have been implemented!
But whats done is done, I guess!
|
|
|
Post by Avs on Aug 23, 2011 16:13:45 GMT -5
my projected balance has gone up over $3m Trading a $10 millon player will do that.
|
|
|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Aug 23, 2011 17:34:19 GMT -5
the 50 million was a bandaid until we work out a way to fix it in the offseason. It didn't really affect anything or anyone. It's not like it gave teams an advantage and such. Teams were going to go bankrupt and it wouldn't have made a difference.
|
|