|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Sept 15, 2011 9:11:13 GMT -5
Just testing the waters here. We have a pretty active league and I just wanted to see where people stand on this issue.
|
|
|
Post by leafs on Sept 15, 2011 10:17:06 GMT -5
we don't have 30 committed GMs so why expand? I'd be more in favour of contraction than expansion I think
|
|
|
Post by Capitals on Sept 15, 2011 12:14:09 GMT -5
I agree with Toronto. Id have contraction over expansion. Maybe only contract 2-4 teams.
|
|
|
Post by oilersgm on Sept 15, 2011 13:10:08 GMT -5
yeah i think we should fold 2 teams
|
|
|
Post by ECFHL Commissioner on Sept 15, 2011 13:26:43 GMT -5
LOL you guys are the toughest GMs I've ever had. I get lines sent in from ALL 30 teams, but because a few don't respond to every trade request, we need to contract.
|
|
|
Post by leafs on Sept 15, 2011 14:04:05 GMT -5
LOL you guys are the toughest GMs I've ever had. I get lines sent in from ALL 30 teams, but because a few don't respond to every trade request, we need to contract. it's tough to know they are alive if we never see them haah we don't have access to see how much they send in lines there needs to be some sort of requirement to posting on the forum at minimum......like this is a big league issue and I can already bet that at least 10-12 GMs won't even log on and see this posting... I suggest a forum roll call......don't notify people through email just make a posting on the board and give them 24, 48, 72 hours whatever to post that they saw the message......I'm not suggesting you fire them on the spot if they miss one roll call, maybe a 2 or 3 strike system or something just my 2 cents
|
|
|
Post by BluesGM on Sept 15, 2011 15:35:03 GMT -5
i'm against expansion or contraction. i don't see what either accomplishes, honestly. even if you think you have a weak GM - you dont have to contract their team. just replace them. (not saying it has to be done)
|
|
|
Post by leafs on Sept 15, 2011 16:06:00 GMT -5
i'm against expansion or contraction. i don't see what either accomplishes, honestly. even if you think you have a weak GM - you dont have to contract their team. just replace them. (not saying it has to be done) aren't we already on our 4th or 5th Isles GM in less then a full season?
|
|
|
Post by bluejacketsgm on Sept 15, 2011 16:42:15 GMT -5
Expansion would be awful unless we did indeed have highly active gms managing all the current teams we have. I don't like the idea of contraction either. I'd rather just replace the gms of about 3-4 teams that haven't said a peep on the boards, were mysteriously non-active at deadline time, and generally haven't responded to emails or pms in a looooong time. I suggest the message board roll-call system awhile back (stop stealing my ideas you dirty maple leaf!) and still think it would be beneficial as part of the responsibility of an active gm is to monitor the site/boards for any rule changes. So in theory if gms are doing that they should have no problem firing off a quick reply to state they are present and accounted for.
|
|
|
Post by penguins on Sept 15, 2011 19:26:09 GMT -5
Have to agree with Blues and Blue Jackets ....NO Expansion. I'm ok if the NHL finally expands one day, then the ECFHL should too. Every league have a few GM's who aren't that active, as long as they are sending in lines and answering trade offers. It would be nice to hear from some of these inactive GM's in the Forum once in while. It's the responsibility of all GM's
|
|