sandbagging

[kicksave60]

I love the fact that there are PLENTY of teams who sandbag. The fact that you can play BOTH minor and PRO in one night is an absolute JOKE. There are some players who have played all games for pros and minors. If you really want to be a creditable league, then have PROS......and minors. Just because half of your team doesn't like to travel, it's ok just to fill in as you need right? Then why not just bring a full "travel" team that can play both divisions. That's what teams seem to do anyways. Or is it just a fact "management" can't get enough players to come out and pay 400 bucks for hockey? or you just fill your team with any ole' guys to collect the cash and play your best players anyway. Either way, these are my opinions. And I think it shows that some teams don't really care about the franchise tag that is supposed to be implemented at the beginning of the season. I personally believe that the league doesn't uphold that tag or even monitor the fact that teams sandbag. The governing body of the PIHA must be the enforcer in this matter and it seems that teams do what they will with no penalties. Like I said all my opinions on this snowy a$$ day!:cool:

[Mlrhnorthfan]

I have to say that the league is doing a great job this season, at least in the North East with this.

Last season, the league was on point with making sure franchise players play only pros.

The league was so on top of this that last year, EVERY team in the North East had their franchise players re-evaluated mid season. Trust me when I say that this did affect several teams and their playoff rosters for pro and minor.

last year as many guys that werent franchised could play both and MANY teams did so.

This year only two guys can play both on a given game day.

I think it is a great rule. For instance if there is a team with a goalie shortage, you may have to have one guy play both, at least to back up, and theres one spot.

We use our other spot for some leadership. When the minors have 4 to 8 players under 18 playing against full grown men on other teams, a little veteran presence is needed for leadership.

In addition both the pro and minor teams are part of the same franchise as a whole. If you ahve two completely separate teams, cliques form and the 17 year olds feel outcast from the 30 year olds playing on the pros.

How does that build a team?

a guy or two playing both helps to bring the teams together.

besides every nhl team has a couple guys that shuttle back and forth from the minors during the year.

i think if you see an issue you need to bring it to your division coordinator asap. Trust me they will listen and act.

[DannyG]

I have to say that the league is doing a great job this season, at least in the North East with this...This year only two guys can play both on a given game day...I think if you see an issue you need to bring it to your division coordinator asap. Trust me they will listen and act.

As an observing fan on the Southwest Division, the two-man double rule appears to be correctly observed. I agree with Mir that this is an excellent rule for player and team development.

One note, as a fan...the PIHA game format of the "double-double headers" seems to detract from the "sanctity" of the game. While I am sure this has been debated before on IHC, I would rather see one minor game, and one pro game, each two, 20-minute or three, 15-minute, stop-time periods of play, than the present format. Each game isn't special if you play 40 kabillion of 'em in one night.

[RollerHockeyPro]

I agree with the fact that you should really only play one or the other. if someone is deserving of being in a game one night then fine but in general players should be asked to choose one or the other.

how does the leauge prevent from stacking up the minor team during playoffs?

[Mlrhnorthfan]

you have to play 20 games at a level to be eligible for playoffs and you can only be eligible for one or the other.

the league has this figured out and they are on top of it.

teams that load up on pros in the minors will be hurt come playoff time as guys will have to play one or the other.

And you have to play 20 games at a level specifically to qualify.

15 pro and 5 minor doesnt qualify you for anything. it has to be concrete 20 games at a level.

[Superstar9]

teams can't stack up their minor team in the playoffs because once playoffs start you're either a minor or pro player and NO ONE can play both. Hopefully everyone is playing by the roster rules. I get tons of complaints week to week because I have been watching every players games played on my club in an effort to get every player on my club 20 gp in either pro or minor. This definitely hurts our teams talent level from week to week depending on who we dress, especially in the minors. We have enough minors that we haven't really dressed any of our pro players down in the minors. Once you hit 12 games played or so, teams really have to start paying attention because they only have 20 games left and youre pretty much screwing yourself if you let players play that mathmatically can't reach 20. As for the franchise tag monitoring and the 2 man rules, keep an eye on the opposing team and say speak up if you feel it's being cheated. So far in the Southeast I can definitely say that ourselves, Pirates, Typhoon, and Robins are definitely following the rules.

[kicksave60]

I realize teams are just using 2 players to move back and forth, but I believe my main issue is that those two players play mainly play all the games of both. If they are that good to play every game in the pros, then they should be pros. I believe that bringing up a minor should only be used when you have pro scratches or they just can't make a road trip. I feel it takes away from a younger skilled player who could use the minor league to gain skill. Then again, if you can gain an advantage by having two skilled guys that can move in between, that could be a good thing.....geeeez I must be bored I am now debating my own topic

[dan sangiorgio]

i know for marple none of our pro players have played any minor league games but at the same time i have seen atleast 3 games were our opponent had atleast one player who was of atleast meduim talent on there pro roster playing minor and in one game i can say it diffently made a difference and costed our team the game in all likely.

[Superstar9]

yeah I hear ya. We only pull players UP to help fill voids on the pro team. We never send players down to help the minors. I have too many minors to begin with let alone sendin players down to take even more playing time away from the true minors. Isn't the purpose of the minors to develope players to help your pro team eventually anyway? I feel that's the goal in the minors, even above winning really. EXPERIENCE for the younger guys and build a future for your pro team!

[alex]

As an observing fan on the Southwest Division, the two-man double rule appears to be correctly observed. I agree with Mir that this is an excellent rule for player and team development.

One note, as a fan...the PIHA game format of the "double-double headers" seems to detract from the "sanctity" of the game. While I am sure this has been debated before on IHC, I would rather see one minor game, and one pro game, each two, 20-minute or three, 15-minute, stop-time periods of play, than the present format. Each game isn't special if you play 40 kabillion of 'em in one night.

Yeah, but do your El Paso guys really want to drive 6 hours to Phoenix to play us in a 40-45 minute game then turn around and drive 6 hours back home? Then, repeat that 10 times throughout the season..

[RichardGraham]

Alex,

Danny would wooden-wheelchair from El Paso to Phoenix to play any form of hockey, including underwater field hockey, even if it took three days. ;)

[DannyG]

Yeah, but do your El Paso guys really want to drive 6 hours to Phoenix to play us in a 40-45 minute game then turn around and drive 6 hours back home? Then, repeat that 10 times throughout the season..

Just in jest (but only barely)...as Alex knows, we here in the southwestern states routinely drive 8-12 hours one way for a tournament/event...for years (decades) we have scoffed at internet message board discussions where you northeastern and midwest guys whine about two hour road trips.

More directly to Alex's question: You make a good point -but- my observation was about the product that you sell to the fans. The length of the trip is co-incidental to what you are selling as a pro team. You may note that my observation was indeed only my opinion as a fan.

A single, three-period, 15/20 minute stop-time game with intermissions would play out to over two hours clock time. A minor game as the prelim game, with shorter intermissions, would add maybe an hour and one half to the event.

In my case, I have personally coached 18 of the 24 guys on the El Paso roster at one time or another, so I consider them "my guys," as a fan. I was looking out for the fan who has no such ties, and I assert that the more "pro-like," single games format would heighten the fan-identification with the product, and give it greater value.

[GROWL]

Danny,

Trust me I was as against this format as anyone could be when it was first introduced. However i came around pretty quickly and now I would be willing to lead the charge to keep it in tack. Allow me to point out the benefits.

1. Now instead of a 16 game schedule, we are playing 32 games. This makes the standings much more fun to watch and more competetive.

2. It breeds competetion and rivalry. A team can lose a last second game and then have the ability to come back 15 minutes later and redeem themselves. A good hard fought game is going to instantly lead to a second great game.

3. It avoids blowouts and keeps games competetive. There have already been a lot of complaints about the blowouts this year, so lets take Savannah as an example. They have lost some games by 13 goals... Imagine what those games would have been like if we doubled the length. More importantly however, is I think the 5-2 and 6-3 type games. An average team can hang in a game against an elite team and not feel embarressed or overwhelmed after a game. Double a 6-3 score and all of a sudden 12-6 is a bit of an a$$ kicking.

4. Fighting is reduced. A longer game keeps tension high. Once you reset the clock at the half, the mentality of most players is to reset their tempers in preparation of a new game.

5. Splits! At first, I felt like it was like taking a shower with your clothes on. But then I realized that it only helped show the competetiveness of this league and it would make our next meeting with that team even better. Last season the Roller Rats and Mass Bombers played 3 times in the in regular season. Each of the three series ended in splits. How amazing must have that playoff series been for those players? Finally someone had to come out a winner? Don't think it helps, I believe the Roller Rats were the only team to end their season with a win last year.

[alex]

Just in jest (but only barely)...as Alex knows, we here in the southwestern states routinely drive 8-12 hours one way for a tournament/event...for years (decades) we have scoffed at internet message board discussions where you northeastern and midwest guys whine about two hour road trips.

More directly to Alex's question: You make a good point -but- my observation was about the product that you sell to the fans. The length of the trip is co-incidental to what you are selling as a pro team. You may note that my observation was indeed only my opinion as a fan.

A single, three-period, 15/20 minute stop-time game with intermissions would play out to over two hours clock time. A minor game as the prelim game, with shorter intermissions, would add maybe an hour and one half to the event.

In my case, I have personally coached 18 of the 24 guys on the El Paso roster at one time or another, so I consider them "my guys," as a fan. I was looking out for the fan who has no such ties, and I assert that the more "pro-like," single games format would heighten the fan-identification with the product, and give it greater value.

Yeah, I definitely understand where you're coming from on that.

[TheSnake22]

lol well i happen to remember pottstown ended their season with a win. that is unless you count them not showing up for the playoffs...

[nyrhatric]

I like the rule to keep the playing levels equal. Our team has caught a couple of teams playing more then the 2 allowed players. And I believe our coach was told that the rule is meant more for home games. That if teams are having travel issues they wouldn't be punished for using too many guys on both teams. I've also seen teams saying it's 2 players and a goalie or 2 players including the goalie.

I'm not going to call out any teams, but we've had two different weekends, where 1 player gets the hat trick or more in both the minor level games and the pro level games.

Our team recently started playing 2 minor guys in almost every pro game, as our pro roster was cut if half by guys leaving the teams for injury or personal reasons. But we are usually giving all of our 18 year old minors a chance to play pro and prove themselves for next season. We have only had 1 pro guy play down once, and that was due to a injury and suspension plagued week.

I do think there are teams out there who only have 1 and 1/2 teams in total numbers. So theres 3 or 4 guys playing on both teams all season long.

I think even when using the extra pro/minor skaters in minor or pro games, the games are always competitive. I've only noticed once or twice a player making a significant difference in the outcome of all the games.


Bobby Henry
Potomac Mavericks #2

[DannyG]

Danny,

Trust me I was as against this format as anyone could be when it was first introduced. However i came around pretty quickly and now I would be willing to lead the charge to keep it in tack. Allow me to point out the benefits...

Anthony, as usual, I must agree that every one of your points is valid. It looks like, when the league needs next to evaluate how to move itself up to another level of marketing, some trade-offs are going to occur.

The problem that I now perceive is that with your points and mine, neither refutes the other. Which is more important, the fans peception, or the players' quality of play? Both are obviously important, how do you upgrade both?

I would like to see this league playing in venues of 4,000-5,000, with fan-filled stands at every game. Which comes first, change to game format to bring in more fans, or wait for more fans to show up before accomodating them? The league might have to bite the proverbial bullet and allow themselves to be fan-driven in their marketing drive.

I suppose if I had the answers down-pat, I'd be running the league, not quality individulas like Charlier Yoder and Anthony Flynn, so take what I suggest with a grain of whatever. keep up the good work, fellahs, and good things will happen.

[MBurke]

I think we'd be ready to move to a single-game format if/when the parity is close enough to all but guarantee that we won't have 18-4 final scores.

I can't imagine that a fan base would be retained if their home team was either winning or losing by that margin; why go to the game if the outcome is all but decided before you even leave your house?

[pburghbandits]

good points by both anthony, danny, and burke..

my opinion.. i dont see this league being one that can fill 4000-5000 seats.


My Reasoning:
1) I have heard that the league plans on continuing to expand to upwards of 100 teams, and after that, possibly european markets.

That is way too many teams, and at this point it will dilute the already small pool of PRO talent in roller hockey. Like it or not, this is the truth.

2) Out of current 40+ teams we have, most of them are located in regions not far apart. For example..

The Atlantic division has 6 teams, and all 6 teams are most likely within 2 hours of each other.. You could almost call this the Philadelphia division

The Gateway division has 6 teams, of which 4 are a hop and skip away.

The Rocky Mountain division has 5 teams, all of them are very close and according to this Blizzard hockey guy they might add a 6th team next season.

The Pacific Division has 4 teams all very close to eachother also.

Ive heard the South teams have to travel a little to play, but I dont know how long those trips are so im not fully sure.

I know that we personally dont have to travel too far to play, playing teams in smaller cities such as Scottdale, Winchester, and Potomac.


Please keep in mind I am not bad mouthing any divisions or any teams in this post. I am simply comparing the regions and distances between teams.


And I would like to re-state my first comment. Many people in inline hockey, and in PIHA are not realistic. Someone said it in the other topic "there is a lack of talent in roller hockey". This is the truth, and while you can say, well i so and so and hes in the NHL now, he played Narch and Torhs back in 14 and under, etc... This is true, I could name 20 guys I grew up playing inline with that are now in the OHL, NCAA, and NHL/AHL.. lots of you can. But none of them stick with it. Fact is, if the top roller hockey pro players were good enough, they would play pro ice hockey first. Most of them would skip pro roller for a lousy minor league team.

Whether you agree or not, there are not enough talented players in this country to support a pro roller hockey league like RHI once had.

..btw. the RHI was almost 90% pro ice hockey (mostly minor league) players, who played during the off season to stay in shape or made some side money to get by.

[GROWL]

Our team has caught a couple of teams playing more then the 2 allowed players. And I believe our coach was told that the rule is meant more for home games. That if teams are having travel issues they wouldn't be punished for using too many guys on both teams. I've also seen teams saying it's 2 players and a goalie or 2 players including the goalie.

All of that is BS.

First of all it is two players, INCLUDING any called up goalies. Second any team not adhering to that rule should be reported to your division commisioner and to the league. The rule was put in this year because last season teams were dressing ridiculous amounts of players on both rosters, so that they could stack rosters for the playoffs, if both their pro and minor teams didn't make it.

[Bfoster]

The format of double headers has both pros and cons to it. Just as Growl stated, it's great that a team can come back and get a split decision. However, i think there should be 1 game played saturday and 1 sunday. As a player for El Paso, I noticed that after a win (the few that we get lol) we head to the locker room and wait 15 or so minutes before warming up for the next game. Now as our morale is high and we're ready for the next game by the time those 15 minutes pass, fatigue begins to set in and it seems as thouhg all our momentum starts to slip away. I dont think its just me, because ive talked to a lot of my teammates and they seem to feel the same way.

Next, as Alex said the drive really does suck. It's pretty rough sitting in those vans for 4-6 hours and get off the bus and play. That's where the benefit of playing double headers comes in. As alex said it would seem pointless to drive that long play one game and turn around and leave. Staying overnight for the weekend is always the best so come gametime on sunday, the players dont have bus legs.

Anyways, i think playing 1, 2 period maybe 15-16 min stop time game sat and 1 sun would be the best way to go.