What is the definition of a "pro"

[Billyraye]

I've been playing inline hockey for 15 years, seen a lot of good players. I'm from Chicago, played against guys like Lee Sweatt, Pat Lee, Dan Costanza, etc. Those guys are really awesome, guys who if they needed to could completely dominate a game in any house league. They were guys we all called pros. Now it seems like any guy who can skate good and has no real job is a pro roller hockey player. In MLRH in particular, I know a few of the players, one friend of mine was trying to sell me on how good it was. Only problem, my buddy is good, but he's not even one of the best 15 players in the area.

Sorry, just had this on my mind and thought id see if anyone else agrees. I appreciate the desire for competition and all that, but we have to stop watering down the sport by calling so many players pros.

[whalercane]

There are probably about 4,700 other threads on this site about this specific topic, but...

By strict definition, a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially.

Even though there's probably not a roller hockey player alive who can make the claim that they survive and support a family strictly on money they've made playing roller hockey, the term "pro" has been bantered around and attached to certain players or even entire leagues for years now with little regard to the actual definition of the term.

So, if you define "pro" in financial terms which seems to be the most logical interpretation of the word, then no; you can't use the word in the same sentence as "roller hockey" without being flat-out wrong.

However, there are a lot of roller hockey people who insist that the term pro, though improperly used at times, pertains mainly to a level of play or "caliber" of league and is therefore not meant to be interpreted by strict definition.

Moral of the story: To each there own...

-Ryan

[SlammHockey]

"In sports, a professional is someone who participates for money. The opposite is amateur, meaning a person who does not play for money, but in an academic (e.g. college football) or other private setting. The term "professional" is commonly used incorrectly when referring to sports, as the distinction simply refers to how the athlete is funded, and not necessarily to what competitions he engages in or what results he achieves."

One of our first articles was based on what roller hockey has as far as professional inline hockey. Click here (http://www.slammhockey.com/2008/11/slamm-hockey-debuts.html) for the link.

SlammHockey (http://www.slammhockey.com)

[whalercane]

"In sports, a professional is someone who participates for money. The opposite is amateur, meaning a person who does not play for money, but in an academic (e.g. college football) or other private setting. The term "professional" is commonly used incorrectly when referring to sports, as the distinction simply refers to how the athlete is funded, and not necessarily to what competitions he engages in or what results he achieves."

One of our first articles was based on what roller hockey has as far as professional inline hockey. Click here (http://www.slammhockey.com/2008/11/slamm-hockey-debuts.html) for the link.

SlammHockey (http://www.slammhockey.com)


So if I'm reading your post correctly, then you're essentially echoing what I said in so far as that -by definition- there's no "true" pro roller hockey to speak of?

[AJ Barnett]

So if I'm reading your post correctly, then you're essentially echoing what I said in so far as that -by definition- there's no "true" pro roller hockey to speak of?

I disagree with the paid/unpaid thing, which I think is what you were getting to as well. I think that according to this definition:


a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially.

There is only one "pro" ice hockey league (aka: The NHL). Is this true by definition of some other "pro" ice hockey leagues, absolutely no. The weekly salary cap in the ECHL is $375 I believe. In the CHL I believe it is $360. Those figures may be a bit off, but they're close. I have worked in the CHL before, and I will tell you, there is not a single player in that league who doesn't work another job to support themselves and others. Tell me you can live off $375 a week. Hell, rent for a decent apartment will be $600/month (which is a lucky steal, assuming you need one bedroom). That's a salary of about $15,000 a year. Someone making minimum wadge makes about that much if not more. But even so, that plus a part time job (travel with the team takes out the full time possibility) still just gets you just over 25K a year. I don't think it would be a bad idea to finally start paying our "pro" players. The ultimate system will be to have a inline NHL equivalent and an inline AHL equivalent. The top league pays its players on 15 teams (not 42) and the bottom league is considered amateur, to give its players a chance to continue to grow without money causing problems. But I'll just have to keep dreaming.

[ACCCT2]

I disagree with the paid/unpaid thing, which I think is what you were getting to as well. I think that according to this definition:



There is only one "pro" ice hockey league (aka: The NHL). Is this true by definition of some other "pro" ice hockey leagues, absolutely no. The weekly salary cap in the ECHL is $375 I believe. In the CHL I believe it is $360. Those figures may be a bit off, but they're close. I have worked in the CHL before, and I will tell you, there is not a single player in that league who doesn't work another job to support themselves and others. Tell me you can live off $375 a week. Hell, rent for a decent apartment will be $600/month (which is a lucky steal, assuming you need one bedroom). That's a salary of about $15,000 a year. Someone making minimum wadge makes about that much if not more. But even so, that plus a part time job (travel with the team takes out the full time possibility) still just gets you just over 25K a year. I don't think it would be a bad idea to finally start paying our "pro" players. The ultimate system will be to have a inline NHL equivalent and an inline AHL equivalent. The top league pays its players on 15 teams (not 42) and the bottom league is considered amateur, to give its players a chance to continue to grow without money causing problems. But I'll just have to keep dreaming.

Sorry, AJ -- I'm agreeing with "SlammHockey" on this one: "pro" means "paid to play", whether it's $375 a week or game or $3,000,000 a season. And there are plenty of "pro" ice hockey leagues out there paying a lot more than just $375 a week. In some North American "pro" leagues and especially in Europe, besides a player's salary (some of which surpass the AHL and even some NHL salaries), they usually provide housing and a car (substantial cost-savings in terms of "living expenses" by any standard). This usually done on a player by player and "need" basis, of course.

As for what "pro" means in inline hockey, well, there's absolutely NO "pro" leagues here in the USA. The ONLY paid-to-play "pro" leagues are in Europe.:eek:

[PGHhockey]

It's semantics, it's marketing, it's whatever you want to call it.

Of course PIHA markets itself as a "pro" league, wanting to create an image that it has the best teams, best players, best refs, best league, etc. Small, growing companies market themselves as "Nationwide" as soon as they get their very first out-of-state customer, and "Worldwide" as soon as someone from Canada buys. It works, always has, always will.

Every company does this, they'll use language that may or may not be intentionally misleading in order to try and separate themselves from competition.

Bottom line: who cares what it's called?

[ACCCT2]

A North American "pro" inline hockey player or league is basically just incredibly wishful thinking at best (right now anyway;)).

[PGHhockey]

Yikes...sorry everyone!

The funny part is - I'm usually the first guy at any rink (or even any social outing) to say: "Come on guys, watch your mouth, we have kids around."

And then I totally forget there are kids/parents that read the board.

I feel like IHC's Sean Avery right now :(

[RichardGraham]

Hey Bill,

No worries. These things happen. I'm not prudish about these kinds of things myself (I play hockey, after all), but I'd rather keep things clean than have to defend the language to parents...

[hcarl]

I disagree with the paid/unpaid thing, which I think is what you were getting to as well. I think that according to this definition:



There is only one "pro" ice hockey league (aka: The NHL). Is this true by definition of some other "pro" ice hockey leagues, absolutely no. The weekly salary cap in the ECHL is $375 I believe. In the CHL I believe it is $360. Those figures may be a bit off, but they're close. I have worked in the CHL before, and I will tell you, there is not a single player in that league who doesn't work another job to support themselves and others. Tell me you can live off $375 a week. Hell, rent for a decent apartment will be $600/month (which is a lucky steal, assuming you need one bedroom). That's a salary of about $15,000 a year. Someone making minimum wadge makes about that much if not more. But even so, that plus a part time job (travel with the team takes out the full time possibility) still just gets you just over 25K a year. I don't think it would be a bad idea to finally start paying our "pro" players. The ultimate system will be to have a inline NHL equivalent and an inline AHL equivalent. The top league pays its players on 15 teams (not 42) and the bottom league is considered amateur, to give its players a chance to continue to grow without money causing problems. But I'll just have to keep dreaming.

So you wouldnt consider the AHL, not to mention echl, chl, etc, pro hockey? As far as I know theres two classifications here: amateur and professional. If the AHL isnt professional, then its amateur?

Also $375 a week is the echl minimum. Their housing is provided by the team. Its professional hockey no matter how you look at it.

[PGHhockey]

I think this question should be asked to all of the guys that said "The U" after they (successfully) pronounced their own name for the taped segments that 'introduce' the starters on each team during the Super Bowl.

They were all pro long before they inked their first NFL deal.

And what about Canadian Jr. A stipends? I know how the NCAA sees them, but how does IHC see them? Are those Jr. A kids pros?

I probably would have paid Roux $5 to play for my team this weekend in the Madden tournament (or taken him to the Taco Bell near the rink, whichever he prefers). Since many of you disagree with calling PIHA or AIHL "pro", would that finally make him a pro? :confused:

(Side note: All quotations and other odd punctuation in this post were an understated "Thank You" to ACCCT2 for his kind words about my blog in his earlier post.)

:)

[quick_dry]

I consider it "pro league" when the majority of players are paid enough to live on - both directly as a result of pay received for playing, and possibly with some supplementation by minor jobs performed for the club/team/organisation.

e.g. in Australian Rugby League (NRL) of Aussie Rules (AFL) you will have players getting paid enough to live the high life of a 'pro sports superstar', but at the bottom end you'll have the fringe players who get paid to play in the same team, and won't make enough from game related pay to live on - so the club might set them up working shifts at the clubs bar, or in the front office and that way they can earn a decent wage/salary.

basically - you're pro when you get paid to play and it is enough to live on.

I don't think the NCAA rules (or what i know of them) have enough leeway in them. A bit of money per game sweetens the deal, but a tiny amount shouldn't make you a 'professional'.

Jr A stipends, and that whole world of "you played hockey for us, we've set you up with a billet called Miss McGill, here is a couple of bucks to tide you over till next game" is pretty shady area for me. is it pro, semi-pro, pro-am, or elite amateur. I guess it is the primary income for these guys.

[AJ Barnett]

So you wouldnt consider the AHL, not to mention echl, chl, etc, pro hockey? As far as I know theres two classifications here: amateur and professional. If the AHL isnt professional, then its amateur?

Also $375 a week is the echl minimum. Their housing is provided by the team. Its professional hockey no matter how you look at it.

No, I am only saying that to say that the definition that a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially doesn't work for sports. The fact that the ECHL, CHL, AHL, IHL, etc. would not be considered professional leagues by this definition as the players are not paid enough to support themselves and others. But yet the players and coached in these leagues are pros.

[ACCCT2]

No, I am only saying that to say that the definition that a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially doesn't work for sports. The fact that the ECHL, CHL, AHL, IHL, etc. would not be considered professional leagues by this definition as the players are not paid enough to support themselves and others. But yet the players and coached in these leagues are pros.

I think that the Professional Hockey Players' Association (PHPA) membership clearly might disagree with you on what constitutes "pro". If you know anything about the international "pro" game, the ridiculous "definition" that "a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially doesn't work for sports" is utter nonsense. One way or another (cash or 'in-kind' or no-show day-job), these "pro's" are indeed supporting themselves (and yes, in some cases, even others) playing their game. The degree to which each of them are, in each of their respective leagues and circumstances, obviously various from league to league, team to team, and player to player.

GEEZ, AJ -- know of what you speak before you speak it. I admire your youthful exuberance and enthusiasm, but a little research goes a long way in making sure you don't look narrowly uninformed in arguing easily refuted points or either experiential fact or (at the very least) common knowledge.;)



(Side note: All quotations and other odd punctuation in this post were an understated "Thank You" to ACCCT2 for his kind words about my blog in his earlier post.)

:)

Your welcome!:)

[AJ Barnett]

I think that the Professional Hockey Players' Association (PHPA) membership clearly might disagree with you on what constitutes "pro". If you know anything about the international "pro" game, the ridiculous "definition" that "a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially doesn't work for sports" is utter nonsense.

GEEZ, AJ -- know of what you speak before you speak it. I admire your youthful exuberance and enthusiasm, but a little research goes a long way in making sure you don't look narrowly uninformed in arguing easily refuted points or either experiential fact or (at the very least) common knowledge.;)

What I said was the definition, "a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially" doesn't work for pro sports. That statement is very true.

And to attack me (even as light as the attack was) by name is a bit selfish, considering you have not given me the same privilege. So before you tell me that I am being youthful, think about what you are doing on these Forums as well.

[ACCCT2]

What I said was the definition, "a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially" doesn't work for pro sports. That statement is very true.

And to attack me (even as light as the attack was) by name is a bit selfish, considering you have not given me the same privileged. So before you tell me that I am being youthful, think about what you are doing on these Forums as well.

AJ -- I think you're bein' a little bit too defensive. My comment was meant in GOOD cheer and definitely NOT intended as an "attack" of any kind. And with all due respect, your "definition" and "statement" is NOT "very true", especially with how it concerns real (paid-to-play) "pro" sports.;)

[AJ Barnett]

AJ -- I think you're bein' a little bit too defensive. My comment was meant in GOOD cheer and definitely NOT intended as an "attack" of any kind. And with all due respect, your "definition" and "statement" is NOT "very true".;)

I think I am within my rights to be defensive, and would just like to point out that the definition in question was not MY definition, but the one provided by SlammHockey.

[ACCCT2]

I think I am within my rights to be defensive, and would just like to point out that the definition in question was not MY definition, but the one provided by SlammHockey.

Well then, as much as I like a lot of what "SlammHockey" says and does, on this one I completely disagree with the "definition".:(

[hcarl]

No, I am only saying that to say that the definition that a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially doesn't work for sports. The fact that the ECHL, CHL, AHL, IHL, etc. would not be considered professional leagues by this definition as the players are not paid enough to support themselves and others. But yet the players and coached in these leagues are pros.

How much is enough to support yourself financially? Care to put a dollar figure on that?

(Heres a hint: the average AHL salary is $80k so you may want to go with 80,001 if you dont want your argument to fail)

[AJ Barnett]

How much is enough to support yourself financially? Care to put a dollar figure on that?

(Heres a hint: the average AHL salary is $80k so you may want to go with 80,001 if you dont want your argument to fail)

I originally didn't include the AHL in my statement, it got added in after it was used by another individual.

[hcarl]

I disagree with the paid/unpaid thing, which I think is what you were getting to as well. I think that according to this definition:



There is only one "pro" ice hockey league (aka: The NHL).

Im pretty sure thats where you said the AHL isn't a pro league

[Alvare71]

AMATEUR: One who engages in an activity as a pastime rather than as a professional; one who lacks expertise.

AMATEUR IN SPORTS: An athlete who has never participated in competition for money. An athlete who is not paid for his/her performance. An athlete at the beginning learning levels of his/her career.

PROFESSIONAL: Performed by persons receiving pay. An expert in a field of endeavor.

PROFESSIONAL IN SPORTS: An athlete who is paid for his/her performance. Paid for their excellence of experience, knowledge and ability of their given sport. An athlete who plays for pay.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you have fought as a PRO (see definition above) in "ANY Full Contact Fight Sport" than you are considered a PRO in "ALL Full Contact Fight Sports."

The term "Full Contact" in this explanation above indicates FULL power punches, kicks etc.
In Addition: Karate "POINT" fighters or Point Kickboxers who DO NOT use full power strikes (Punches pulled or with control) who are paid a winning purse are NOT considered PRO "Full Contact" Fighters. They are always considered AMATEUR fighters until they compete in a Full Contact Fight Sport as defined above.

Amateurs are NEVER paid a fight purse. Amateurs requesting, demanding and receiving a fight purse shall be considered a PRO fighter from the moment the first bell rings to start the bout in which they have agreed to be paid to fight in.

Mixed Martial Arts Fighters who have fought as a Pro and were paid a fighters purse as a Pro are considered a PRO in Mixed Martial Arts, Kickboxing and Boxing regardless if they have or have not fought in boxing or kickboxing before as an amateur or pro.

PRO does NOT mean you do Full Contact Fighting as a living. VERY FEW fighter's make a living at Full Contact Fight.......

the Artical stops there and "I will add that very few Roller hockey players make a living at our sport."

[AJ Barnett]

Im pretty sure thats where you said the AHL isn't a pro league

I said that it wasn't according to that definition.

[ACCCT2]

I said that it wasn't according to that definition.

AJ, it was your "definition" alone --


I disagree with the paid/unpaid thing, which I think is what you were getting to as well. I think that according to this definition:

There is only one "pro" ice hockey league (aka: The NHL). Is this true by definition of some other "pro" ice hockey leagues, absolutely no. The weekly salary cap in the ECHL is $375 I believe. In the CHL I believe it is $360. Those figures may be a bit off, but they're close. I have worked in the CHL before, and I will tell you, there is not a single player in that league who doesn't work another job to support themselves and others.

The "definition" of a $360 or $375 "weekly salary" as being in any way 'definitive' of anything outside of the NHL is absurd. There are plenty of "pro" ice hockey players not playing in the NHL (or even the AHL) making a living (and yes, some even supporting their families) on non-NHL salaries. Just so you know, in Europe alone I can name at least a dozen leagues where a good majority of their players are being paid a comfortable "living" wage: the KHL in (mostly) Russia; the Eliteserien & Allsvenskan in Sweden; DEL & 2nd Bundesliga in Germany; National League A & B in Switzerland; SM-liiga in Finland; Czech Extraliga in the Czech Republic; Serie A in Italy; Ligue Magnus in France; Eredivisie in the Netherlands; EBEL in (mostly) Austria; Slovak Extraliga in Slovakia; EIHL in the UK; GET-ligaen in Norway; LEH in Spain -- all of these leagues feature pay-scales beyond your "definition" of what constitutes "pro" and why there is supposedly "only one 'pro' ice hockey league (aka: The NHL)." -- an assertion that is definitely and "definitively" NOT so.

And AJ, this post was "definitely" not intended as an "attack", simply an "FYI".;)

[AJ Barnett]

No, my post reads:


I disagree with the paid/unpaid thing, which I think is what you were getting to as well. I think that according to this definition:


a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially.

There is only one "pro" ice hockey league (aka: The NHL). Is this true by definition of some other "pro" ice hockey leagues, absolutely no. The weekly salary cap in the ECHL is $375 I believe. In the CHL I believe it is $360. Those figures may be a bit off, but they're close. I have worked in the CHL before, and I will tell you, there is not a single player in that league who doesn't work another job to support themselves and others. Tell me you can live off $375 a week. Hell, rent for a decent apartment will be $600/month (which is a lucky steal, assuming you need one bedroom). That's a salary of about $15,000 a year. Someone making minimum wadge makes about that much if not more. But even so, that plus a part time job (travel with the team takes out the full time possibility) still just gets you just over 25K a year. I don't think it would be a bad idea to finally start paying our "pro" players. The ultimate system will be to have a inline NHL equivalent and an inline AHL equivalent. The top league pays its players on 15 teams (not 42) and the bottom league is considered amateur, to give its players a chance to continue to grow without money causing problems. But I'll just have to keep dreaming.

And in response to this quote:


in Europe alone I can name at least a dozen leagues where a good majority of their players are being paid a comfortable "living" wage

I was talking about leagues in America, not Europe.

[ACCCT2]

There is only one "pro" ice hockey league (aka: The NHL).

Speaks for itself.

And about the ECHL and CHL --


I will tell you, there is not a single player in that league who doesn't work another job to support themselves and others.

Speaks for itself -- and you're definitely wrong about this clearly uninformed and inacurate assumption.


No, I am only saying that to say that the definition that a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially doesn't work for sports. The fact that the ECHL, CHL, AHL, IHL, etc. would not be considered professional leagues by this definition as the players are not paid enough to support themselves and others. But yet the players and coached in these leagues are pros.

Speaks for itself.


No, my post reads:

I was talking about leagues in America, not Europe.

You "definitely" did not state nor imply it in any way by what you actually wrote.

AJ, with all due respect (and "definitely" not "attacking" you), your original post says what it says and again, speaks for itself.

[AJ Barnett]

You're not quoting my entire post. It says:

No, my post reads:

"disagree with the paid/unpaid thing, which I think is what you were getting to as well. I think that according to this definition:

a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially. - SlammHockey

There is only one "pro" ice hockey league (aka: The NHL). Is this true by definition of some other "pro" ice hockey leagues, absolutely no. The weekly salary cap in the ECHL is $375 I believe. In the CHL I believe it is $360. Those figures may be a bit off, but they're close. I have worked in the CHL before, and I will tell you, there is not a single player in that league who doesn't work another job to support themselves and others. Tell me you can live off $375 a week. Hell, rent for a decent apartment will be $600/month (which is a lucky steal, assuming you need one bedroom). That's a salary of about $15,000 a year. Someone making minimum wadge makes about that much if not more. But even so, that plus a part time job (travel with the team takes out the full time possibility) still just gets you just over 25K a year. I don't think it would be a bad idea to finally start paying our "pro" players. The ultimate system will be to have a inline NHL equivalent and an inline AHL equivalent. The top league pays its players on 15 teams (not 42) and the bottom league is considered amateur, to give its players a chance to continue to grow without money causing problems. But I'll just have to keep dreaming."

And in response to this quote:

"in Europe alone I can name at least a dozen leagues where a good majority of their players are being paid a comfortable "living" wage - ACCCT2"

I was talking about leagues in America, not Europe.


-----------------------------------

What I mean is, I DISAGREE and used the examples to say that I DO NOT agree with that. Those players are professionals, regardless of what they would be considered by the given definition.

And regarding salary, I have worked in the CHL, I'm sure I know a little more about what goes on in the Front Office than you do, so I am not uninformed thank you very much.

[ACCCT2]

You're not quoting my entire post. It says:

No, my post reads:

"disagree with the paid/unpaid thing, which I think is what you were getting to as well. I think that according to this definition:

a profession is a line of work that one engages in which provides that person with a means to support themselves (and possibly others) financially. - SlammHockey

There is only one "pro" ice hockey league (aka: The NHL). Is this true by definition of some other "pro" ice hockey leagues, absolutely no. The weekly salary cap in the ECHL is $375 I believe. In the CHL I believe it is $360. Those figures may be a bit off, but they're close. I have worked in the CHL before, and I will tell you, there is not a single player in that league who doesn't work another job to support themselves and others. Tell me you can live off $375 a week. Hell, rent for a decent apartment will be $600/month (which is a lucky steal, assuming you need one bedroom). That's a salary of about $15,000 a year. Someone making minimum wadge makes about that much if not more. But even so, that plus a part time job (travel with the team takes out the full time possibility) still just gets you just over 25K a year. I don't think it would be a bad idea to finally start paying our "pro" players. The ultimate system will be to have a inline NHL equivalent and an inline AHL equivalent. The top league pays its players on 15 teams (not 42) and the bottom league is considered amateur, to give its players a chance to continue to grow without money causing problems. But I'll just have to keep dreaming."
.

Whatever -- that is definitely NOT how you originally posted it.:confused:


And in response to this quote:

"in Europe alone I can name at least a dozen leagues where a good majority of their players are being paid a comfortable "living" wage - ACCCT2"

I was talking about leagues in America, not Europe.

Again, NOT how you originally posted it.:confused:

-----------------------------------


What I mean is, I DISAGREE and used the examples to say that I DO NOT agree with that. Those players are professionals, regardless of what they would be considered by the given definition.

Yet again, NOT how you originally posted it.:confused:


And regarding salary, I have worked in the CHL, I'm sure I know a little more about what goes on in the Front Office than you do, so I am not uninformed thank you very much.

Absolutely, positively absurd in virtually every way. I've been around and worked with "pro" hockey (players, teams, management, leagues, events, NGB's and sponsors) at all levels (both North American & International) for over 25 years and you, my impetuously youthful friend, are absolutely wrong and very "misinformed" about your "definitions", as well as even more incredibly "uninformed" about your supposedly "know(ing) a little more about what goes on in the Front Office than (I) do" -- LOL! I got a great chuckle out that one! Hmmm, you "know" this, eh -- being what teenaged-year-old?).:rolleyes:

[RichardGraham]

Guys, this is a great thread to take private... hint, hint.

[whalercane]

It might be one worth locking altogether since this topic's been raised and beaten to death in other similar to identical threads about 47x in the last year alone...

-Ryan

[rhhof]

What is wrong with this thread...

Guys...there are a few "professional" players in this industry - guys that get payed a living wage to do one job in the industry and are provided expenses to promote their products at events like NARCh...some guys work for Mission, Tour, Revision...and so on

There are no true professional players that get paid just to play this great sport of ours - some day we will get it back to where it was a good summer job, but I dont think it will ever be more than something seasonal

In regards to the minor league discussion, I have worked in both hockey operations and in the front office of minor league teams, as well, as having numerous friends that do and I know the ins and outs, plus numbers.

If you play in the minors, each league has a cap...AHL, CHL, ECHL whatever - the most Ive seen some players make is around $900-$1000 per week. THats mostly at the AHL level and that salary would blow the ECHL and CHL salary caps out of whack....the AA and single A teams operate between $5000-$6500 per week, so its not much room to spare when you sign a veteran player...this is why you always see a ton of new names year after year. All of these players pretty much have summer jobs, not jobs during the season, although I have seen a few do something part time, like work at a gym or do hockey clinics...hell one of my buddies was playing in the SPHL two years ago and was in Jacksonville and asking their winger onthe opening draw where one of their top players was, out with injury? THe player said no, hes working the drive thru at Wendy's down the block and the manager wouldnt let him off tonight...so you never know

There are few minor league player making $100's of thousands - they need to be on a two way contract with an NHL team and most AHLers are but they dont get the big bucks unless they are playing for the big club...granted they do get some of it and the AHL team stays a float with the NHL teams paying for the majority of the players plus their travel.

Most minor league guys in the states want to get some minimal experience here and fly over to Europe to be a part of any organization there...the pay is 5-8x better, they provide a car and housing that is 1 to a house or apartment instead of maybe two or three - the perks are so much better there for a minor league player it almost isnt funny - the only down side is that your car and uniform have a million advertisments all over, but I think its worth it - plus your salary is tax free!! some teams even pick up your flight to and from...but if you have to lay out a few thousand, you can afford it then...

[ACCCT2]

What is wrong with this thread...

Guys...there are a few "professional" players in this industry - guys that get payed a living wage to do one job in the industry and are provided expenses to promote their products at events like NARCh...some guys work for Mission, Tour, Revision...and so on

There are no true professional players that get paid just to play this great sport of ours - some day we will get it back to where it was a good summer job, but I dont think it will ever be more than something seasonal

In regards to the minor league discussion, I have worked in both hockey operations and in the front office of minor league teams, as well, as having numerous friends that do and I know the ins and outs, plus numbers.

If you play in the minors, each league has a cap...AHL, CHL, ECHL whatever - the most Ive seen some players make is around $900-$1000 per week. THats mostly at the AHL level and that salary would blow the ECHL and CHL salary caps out of whack....the AA and single A teams operate between $5000-$6500 per week, so its not much room to spare when you sign a veteran player...this is why you always see a ton of new names year after year. All of these players pretty much have summer jobs, not jobs during the season, although I have seen a few do something part time, like work at a gym or do hockey clinics...hell one of my buddies was playing in the SPHL two years ago and was in Jacksonville and asking their winger onthe opening draw where one of their top players was, out with injury? THe player said no, hes working the drive thru at Wendy's down the block and the manager wouldnt let him off tonight...so you never know

There are few minor league player making $100's of thousands - they need to be on a two way contract with an NHL team and most AHLers are but they dont get the big bucks unless they are playing for the big club...granted they do get some of it and the AHL team stays a float with the NHL teams paying for the majority of the players plus their travel.

Most minor league guys in the states want to get some minimal experience here and fly over to Europe to be a part of any organization there...the pay is 5-8x better, they provide a car and housing that is 1 to a house or apartment instead of maybe two or three - the perks are so much better there for a minor league player it almost isnt funny - the only down side is that your car and uniform have a million advertisments all over, but I think its worth it - plus your salary is tax free!! some teams even pick up your flight to and from...but if you have to lay out a few thousand, you can afford it then...

Pretty much right on (although 1st & 2nd line "developing" players will generally make more).;)

A little aside (to certain others) --

With all due respect -- why is it that when I politely 'correct' someone (of something clearly in error or "uninformed") it's considered an "attack", yet when someone "runs" me it's somehow OK -- and then, if I dare to defend myself in even the most minimal of ways (and always in GOOD humor), the thread is then somehow ready for "locking-off"?:confused:

[hcarl]

What is wrong with this thread...

Guys...there are a few "professional" players in this industry - guys that get payed a living wage to do one job in the industry and are provided expenses to promote their products at events like NARCh...some guys work for Mission, Tour, Revision...and so on

There are no true professional players that get paid just to play this great sport of ours - some day we will get it back to where it was a good summer job, but I dont think it will ever be more than something seasonal

In regards to the minor league discussion, I have worked in both hockey operations and in the front office of minor league teams, as well, as having numerous friends that do and I know the ins and outs, plus numbers.

If you play in the minors, each league has a cap...AHL, CHL, ECHL whatever - the most Ive seen some players make is around $900-$1000 per week. THats mostly at the AHL level and that salary would blow the ECHL and CHL salary caps out of whack....the AA and single A teams operate between $5000-$6500 per week, so its not much room to spare when you sign a veteran player...this is why you always see a ton of new names year after year. All of these players pretty much have summer jobs, not jobs during the season, although I have seen a few do something part time, like work at a gym or do hockey clinics...hell one of my buddies was playing in the SPHL two years ago and was in Jacksonville and asking their winger onthe opening draw where one of their top players was, out with injury? THe player said no, hes working the drive thru at Wendy's down the block and the manager wouldnt let him off tonight...so you never know

There are few minor league player making $100's of thousands - they need to be on a two way contract with an NHL team and most AHLers are but they dont get the big bucks unless they are playing for the big club...granted they do get some of it and the AHL team stays a float with the NHL teams paying for the majority of the players plus their travel.

Most minor league guys in the states want to get some minimal experience here and fly over to Europe to be a part of any organization there...the pay is 5-8x better, they provide a car and housing that is 1 to a house or apartment instead of maybe two or three - the perks are so much better there for a minor league player it almost isnt funny - the only down side is that your car and uniform have a million advertisments all over, but I think its worth it - plus your salary is tax free!! some teams even pick up your flight to and from...but if you have to lay out a few thousand, you can afford it then...

ECHL weekly salary cap is $11150

http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=echl+salary+cap

Average AHL salary is in the $70 - 80k range

http://letmegooglethatforyou.com/?q=average+ahl+salary

AJ I dont know what your agenda is here but to say the AHL isnt considered professional hockey because the players dont make enough to support themselves is absurd. How many people in their early 20s do you know making that kind of money?

[SlapShot1988]

I think you all need to really give it a rest. Personally, I am siding with one of you, but who I am siding with is not important. I'm not pointing fingers, but everyone really needs to give it a rest.

[alex]

With all due respect -- why is it that when I politely 'correct' someone (of something clearly in error or "uninformed") it's considered an "attack", yet when someone "runs" me it's somehow OK -- and then, if I dare to defend myself in even the most minimal of ways (and always in GOOD humor), the thread is then somehow ready for "locking-off"?:confused:

Maybe something to do with everyone disliking you. Just being honest champ.

[AJ Barnett]

Maybe something to do with everyone disliking you. Just being honest champ.

I'd take ACCCT2 over this new myrtleturtle guy any day.

[ACCCT2]

Maybe something to do with everyone disliking you. Just being honest champ.

Believe it or not, I'm not here to be "liked" -- I'm here monitoring the 'vibe' on our sport and providing experienced insight, info or opinion wherever it might be helpful (I know some of you will choke on that one, but it's true).;)


I'd take ACCCT2 over this new myrtleturtle guy any day.

LOL! -- though I'm not really sure how I should take that one...!?!:eek:

[quick_dry]

Maybe something to do with everyone disliking you. Just being honest champ.
when you say it 'straight out' like that, do you not re-read it and reflect on how childish that sounds?

[hcarl]

Believe it or not, I'm not here to be "liked" -- I'm here monitoring the 'vibe' on our sport and providing experienced insight, info or opinion wherever it might be helpful (I know some of you will choke on that one, but it's true).;)



LOL! -- though I'm not really sure how I should take that one...!?!:eek:

Its probably been said a million times, but people would react a lot better to you if you used anything remotely resembling proper grammar. For being in advertising, your posts probably shouldnt give everyone a headache to read. And as far as I know, the english language is the same across all occupations - maybe other than rapper.

[Alvare71]

Most sports played professionally also have amateur players far outnumbering the professionals. Professional athleticism is seen by some as a contradiction of the central ethos of sport, competition performed for its own sake and pure enjoyment, rather than as a means of earning a living.

Consequently, many organisations and commentators have resisted the growth of professional athleticism, saying that it has impeded the development of sport.

For example, rugby union was for many years a part-time sport engaged in by amateurs, and English cricket has allegedly suffered in quality because of a "non-professional" approach.[citation needed]

Just because you have a matching set of uniforms, and your name on the back of your jersey......It doesn' make you and EXPERT or a PRO!!!

[ACCCT2]

Its probably been said a million times, but people would react a lot better to you if you used anything remotely resembling proper grammar. For being in advertising, your posts probably shouldnt give everyone a headache to read. And as far as I know, the english language is the same across all occupations - maybe other than rapper.

As I said earlier, I don't really care whether people do or don't like me. And as much as it might pain some, "proper grammer" is a matter of degrees and quite frankly, also includes 'capitalizing' where appropriate (as the "English" might, eh?). We "mad-ad-men", well, we do 'do' things a little differently in the ad-biz, so just bear with me -- and if you can't, well, "Good on 'ya", as the Auzzies might say!;)

[hcarl]

Proper grammar is definitely not a matter of degree, and while often times message boards and other informal means of communication sacrifice grammatical integrity for the sake of time, you go out of your way to make your posts as grammatically incorrect as possible. In fact, Ive never seen someone butcher correct usage of punctuation as much as you do. Thats why people dont like you.

"Proper grammar" is 'DEFINITELY' not a matter of "degree", and while 'often' times "messageboards" and other 'informal' means of "communication" sacrifice 'grammatical integrity' for the sake of 'time' - (you go out of your way to make YOUR 'posts' as grammatically incorrect as "possible)". 'In fact', Ive NEVER seen 'someone' "butcher" "correct usage of punctuation" as much as you 'do'. Thats why "people" 'dont like you.'

Which would you rather read?

[SWAMPDONKEYS29]

Proper grammar is definitely not a matter of degree, and while often times message boards and other informal means of communication sacrifice grammatical integrity for the sake of time, you go out of your way to make your posts as grammatically incorrect as possible. In fact, Ive never seen someone butcher correct usage of punctuation as much as you do. Thats why people dont like you.

"Proper grammar" is 'DEFINITELY' not a matter of "degree", and while 'often' times "messageboards" and other 'informal' means of "communication" sacrifice 'grammatical integrity' for the sake of 'time' - (you go out of your way to make YOUR 'posts' as grammatically incorrect as "possible)". 'In fact', Ive NEVER seen 'someone' "butcher" "correct usage of punctuation" as much as you 'do'. Thats why "people" 'dont like you.'


I don't want to sound stupid, but I honestly never realized how drastic the difference was until two identical paragraphs were posted together this way. Interesting stuff.

I don't like or dislike ACCCT2 any more or less for his style of writing. However, pargraph one is certainly alot easier on the eyes :D.

I have had disagreements with Mr. Kramer in the past but I have to admit that he was pretty darn accurate in his assessment of a certain situation that we debated a year or so ago. My problem is not what he says, but how he says it. I too am a very opinionated person and I am willing to argue until I am blue in the face when it comes to something that I am passionate about. The difference is that I don't like to beat a dead horse and I try to put on the brakes when it comes to name calling.

My hopes are that Mr. Kramer will someday share with us some of his ideas in regards to what can be done to further develop this great sport. I would honestly love to hear what his thoughts are on how to generate more youth interest in the sport. Furthermore, I would like to know his thoughts on how to keep teenage players from dropping the sport completely when they reach a certain age. I would like to know what he thinks it would take to make any of the elite leagues more successful. I would like to know what his thoughts are as to the amount of tournament series that are out there. Are there too many, too few, or just the right amount? How, if at all, could the pie be divided so that everyone in the sport could make money while keeping the costs associated with playing reasonable?

Mr Kramer, I have a lot of questions for you. I know that you have said in the past that there is no reason for you to divulge any of your thoughts or ideas or even your business strategies and I'm not asking you to do that (unless of course you want to ;)). Perhaps you could just give a quick response to some of my questions or you could expand to other topics relevant to this sport. I for one am interested in what you have to say. I read your posts knowing that I could quite possibly turn red with anger in response to something you have written. But I also know that I could read one of your posts and get a chuckle or even totally agree with you 100%.

The fact is that when you write something ...I read it. I just wish that you could have some more civil debates with people as opposed to all of them eventually turning into a pissing match (which may or may not always be your fault).

That's all for today. Good hockey to everyone!

Ruppy Hailey

[alex]

Believe it or not, I'm not here to be "liked"

I know you aren't. But you asked why people react strongly against you and there's your answer. Even if, hypothetically, you made all the sense in the world, people have a hard time listening to someone they don't really like.