MOVING TOO FAST

[cakeuneke]

I don't know about other people, but I have a hard time thinking that the CRHL runs great right now. I realize people put a lot of time into it, and they do a great job, but there are a lot of improvements to be made. Why in the world are they trying to expand with the Premier league and now Europe, after only 4 years of a fairly organized league. I think it would be appropriate to get straight and very organized with what's happening now before getting big heads. I think the league is in huge danger of outgrowing it's capabilities, anyone agree?

[macmill1]

No.

[cakeuneke]

Anyone not from Michigan State or currently running the league agree?

[umroller]

I agree in some respects. I feel the internal issues and goals need to be addressed first. But, that is all I am going to say on a public message board. There are some very skilled and dedicated people running both the CRHL national governing body and the member organizations/regional leagues. Everyone needs to work together and listen to each other (be given a real say in how things work) for things to run smoothly.



http://members.aol.com/umroller/images/benecrha.jpg

[John_S_Osborne]

Now, I am going to agree with the first poster. And, before people go ahead and label me a CRHL basher, or a critic without solutions, let me abruptly say, I am neither. In fact, a quick review of responses I've posted in various facets of the Internet will quickly assure you of that.

One of the more obvious problems that CRHL is confronted with is a missing avenue of communication between a team in any region and the top of the cake at CRHL. Now, before Alan jumps in here and tries to correct me, in the current model of college roller hockey, the concerns of the teams are supposed to filter through the regional directors of the leagues -- or the MOs, depending on how current on CRHL lingo you happen to be -- to the board at the CRHL. Does this necessarily work? Is this correct?

Some may be asking, why the hell do I bring this up? Most of the posting regarding CRHL has been with more concrete issues as of late; CRHL Premier, CRHL Europe, and an abundance of discussions by some teams on whether paying the $185/team CRHL membership fee is necessary in light of the extremely low return on investment it brings them. But, just look at the situations there for a second and you will see...

Every single little "disorder" that interested parties point out underscores the total lack of communication between the top to the bottom, and vice versa. To a large majority of teams, CRHL Premier wasn't even heard of until the decision to go ahead with the plan was already made.

I recall reading a series of very brainy, even idealogical bulleted-items on CRHL's website sometime ago. They were called the CRHL Vision and CRHL Values. They seemed pretty straightforward, but set a precident to which the league could operate. One of the little bulleted-items read, as it still does to this moment today...

"Communication: Without communication, there is no organization. CRHL must recognize the importance communication, both talking and listening at all levels, has played in getting CRHL where it is today. Communication starts with players communicating with each other, to other teams, and to regional governing bodies and graduates to Inter-league communication, communication with other professionals, and within CRHL Board meetings."

And, I politely ask, when a leader of collegiate roller hockey on the national level, posts a response to a message merely making a point, asking a question, and the response is the simply-stated negatory (the typed string of characters N-O-<period&gt, what then does that say about communication regarding the CRHL?

As I have said and said again for quite some time, we need to hold a very structured and organized national conference on the state of collegiate roller hockey. There needs to be resolutions made, and a new state of governance agreed to, one in which the opinions of the smallest teams are heard, and in which decisions are made accordingly. Without such an event, issues will continue to spiral, reinforcing the Us vs. CRHL mentality that many seem to be a host to, and leading further and further into the toilet which houses so many other failed roller hockey ventures.

People worry that such a conference would be a glorified shouting match, solve no problems, and be a waste of airfare for numerous interested parties. But, I swear to you, if agendas for discussion are set, discussions are organized, and solutions/resolutions are the concentrated goal, then it could be the single-most groundbreaking meeting of the minds ever in the history of CRHL. Hell, if people ask me, I would even help organize it.

But that is what needs to happen. And that's pretty much the end of the story...



- john

[cakeuneke]

I completely agree. Again, I give a ton of credit to people who run the league, I personally wouldn't have the time to be involved to that degree. But I graduated from a DII school last year. From the perspective of a DII team, it certainly seems the CRHL is running away from them.

This is completely separate from the who should be in DI vs. who should be in DII argument. I see a lot of people on this board from DI schools, powers in fact (Purdue specifically) who only seem to be involved because that's where the good teams are. Who can blame them? My point though is, the smaller schools are losing their voice within the league (assuming it was there to begin with). The CRHL will not survive with 10 teams. There seems to be a lot of MSU influence running the league, which is fine, I think they're great. However, the league will tend to be run from the perspective of the national DI power, as opposed to the average member. I guess my point is, the league has to be careful about leaving its average members, not just its smallest members behind.

I'm going to point to the IHL. For those of you that didn't grow up around IHL teams, it was predominantly a bus league for many years. With the growing interest in hockey, and the high price of an NHL seat, the league began going to large cities like Detroit, Chicago, San Antonio, Long Beach, etc. What happened is that the teams that the league were founded on were not able to stay afloat, and without those average, founding members, there were only a few big markets who could support two teams, but not enough to sustain a league. The parallel is that average CRHL members, if they continue having to pay more for less attention will leave the league. There will only be a few teams left, and the league won't be able to support itself. The idea that decisions are made so that MSU and RIT don't have to put up with beating teams 15-0 is not smart. Their opinion should be taken into account, but it should not be more valuable than any other team's opinion. The fact is, the league won't survive without the teams that get beaten bad sometimes. And the bigger fact is that having that lack of competition in the first couple of years has created an amazing amount of competition the last couple because teams have tried to get so much better.

I hope this points out something, I'm kind of taking ideas off of the top of my head, but I think the league would be advised to make communication the highest priority of the league, as the last post mentioned.

[AndrewMacMillan]

John,

Andrew MacMillan is the Executive Director of the CRHL.

Alan MacMillan is an old washed-up has-been who played for MSU years ago. He's also my brother

I do not usually answer questions such as this in public forums, but since I am clearing up the air about Alan, I might as well address your point.

The CRHL is working very, very hard to improve communications. Right now the channel is primarily your league director, through a representative-based communications structure. We are, however, working on things such as the new improved CRHLnet to give CRHL even better channels of communcication.

I have also personally been answering questions as they have been sent to me through email by schools, usually at a detail of about two pages in length. I'm averaging about 4 hours of CRHL email a day right now, and have posted two 'open letters' on CRHLnet for people to read. I guess what I'm saying is, we hear you, and we are working on it.

apm

Andrew MacMillan
Executive Director
Collegiate Roller Hockey League

[John_S_Osborne]

Sorry, Andy. After my post, I realized my mistake, but nonetheless I decided to let it stand as is. However, let me thank you for your timely response to my post.

<<"I do not usually answer questions such as this in public forums, but since I am clearing up the air about Alan, I might as well address your point.">>

Now, this seems quite odd to me. From your point-of-view, I would agree that your time can be better spent replying to the numerous e-mails from member teams, those of which who make the CRHL possible and who took the time out to ask direct questions.

However, I think there are some very important topics addressed on message boards around the 'net, as you probably are aware. And, in the time it would take for you (or someone) to drop in, present the CRHL's viewpoint, and add to a discussion, I think you would make a marked impact on the level of communication between your member teams and yourself.

Now, obviously, IHC isn't the most targeted of mediums. I think most of the people who post around here are not the decision-makers when it comes to the CRHL and it's member organizations. But, that doesn't stop these people from having ideas/opinions/solutions, and I think it would be a great idea for you (or, again, someone at your level) to be involved in the discussions regarding them.

>>"The CRHL is working very, very hard to improve communications. Right now the channel is primarily your league director, through a representative-based communications structure. We are, however, working on things such as the new improved CRHLnet to give CRHL even better channels of communcication."<<

Again, in those three sentences, more doubt as to whether the solutions you are actually working on will indeed solve the problems that both you and I agree exist.

Look at how you use the words "CRHL" and "We" in your paragraph. In my five years of involvement in college roller hockey, my working definition of the word "CRHL" is a league of about 150 member teams, competing in regions around the country under standardized rules, ultimately working towards a unified yearly national champion (and champion should be plural, since it's now done in multiple divisions). But, in your paragraph, the word "CRHL" is an allegory of yourself, and the CRHL's leadership. "We" does not refer to the 150 member teams (give or take) that form the CRHL, it again refers to yourself, and your colleagues.

Now, I'll stop for a second, because I probably just lost about half of the people who were reading me up to this point because they all said, "Well, what the hell is he saying? This has no point whatsoever." I notice that I make more and more of these pauses in my posts, so maybe people are learning to keep up with my circuitous lines of reason. But, I continue...

Look at how you view the CRHL. There is even a descrepancy in the literal context you use the word CRHL and how I use it! This points to the almost oceanic gap between where I'm at and where you are. With these differing points of view explained, how can a new model for the open share of ideas, concerns, solutions be solely based on what you, as the Executive Director of the CRHL, think it should be? Ultimately, to solve this problem, just about every organization involved in the CRHL -- and as I say that, I mean the actual CRHL, not the CRHL's Board -- must be capable of making an opinion.

My point, in short, is that solutions which you think will address these problems must be discussed in an open forum, analyzed, and counter-points offered. That is the only way that true solution will be agreed to. The issues that clog your inbox probably daily are too large to be effectively solved by the mind of one person, or perhaps even the three or so that make up the CRHL Board. The two-page responses you send back to people are lost, Andy. You might as well start printing them up, crumbling them, and throwing them out the window. Because until the other hundreds of people that had interest in knowing what the hell you said are aware, the response is about as effective as throwing darts with a blindfold on.

>>"I guess what I'm saying is, we hear you, and we are working on it."<<

I'm glad you do hear me, and I sincerly hope you involve the MO's and their member teams in coming to a complete resolution regarding the issues that this thread has touched upon. I hope for a time when the word "CRHL" will again refer to the great collegiate roller hockey league, the one that grows by several new schools yearly, the one that gives a new level of competition to roller hockey players around the nation (hey, and even the world as you point out in your open letter). I hope for the end of the time when "CRHL" means the people who make a figurehead for the organization I just described. Only then will this Us vs. CRHL mentality leave your member teams and players.


[Edit: a typo.]

- john<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by John_S_Osborne on 10/17/02 01:41 PM.</EM></FONT></P>

[macmill1]

As a post in another thread discussed, I would have loved to have this format back when I was playing. It follows the same type of concept as the ETS (Elite Tournament Series).

There was a comment, also in another thread, that said something to the tune of "the good teams now won't always be the best teams and that some teams will get better and eventually everyone will be on the same level". Remember, I'm paraphrasing. If the teams that have the ability and resources to travel more and play the other elite teams, it will only raise that level of competition. On the same concept, teams that may not have the resources or the desire to play in the premier league format will play against mainly teams of the same level, thus increasing that level of play. Neither the winner nor the loser get any better from blowout games. Trying to bring publicity to the league is better accomplished via a solid structured, single game format, well organized format. I'm not knocking any region, league, or personnel but it's hard as hell to promote a 50 minute game that is scheduled at 9am on a Saturday and will likely start 30 minutes late and have a team win by 5+ goals.

I seem to remember this same type of conversation about forming a national organization, trying to standardize playing format, trying to standardize rules, splitting into DI, DII and DII, and damn near everything else anyone has every tried to change in the history of college roller hockey.

Andy (again, not me) is working hard on CRHL and confusing my smart-ass remarks for his is something I don't want. I can either A) change my screen name to "Not-Andy" or B) stop giving my $.02 on CRHL issues.

So..... You may bitch in peace. I'm out. I now just a fan who hopes the league continues getting better and more entertaining to watch. If you want to return to CRHL circa 1996 and play 72 games a weekend with 2 people watching a 40,000-student school mercy a local college, be my guest. If you want to question everything the league does, again be my guest.

Reply all you want, tell me I'm a baby, whatever. I won't see it or give a damn. I don't even play this game anymore.

Al (not Andy)


Al MacMillan

[cakeuneke]

I don't think anyone, or at least I'm not saying that the CRHL is incredibly marketable in its current state. And I do think that's important for the future. But last year, we probably could have had a former professional hockey player to play for us and nobody would have asked eligibility questions. At least one region doesn't have a director right now. I've never seen two referees that agree on all the rules of the league. And I wouldn't have even known who to turn to when I had a question about a rule, ruling, eligibility, or administration issues. My point is that these types of things should be running efficiently before expanding to become more marketable. I would think marketability would be a little lower on the priority list, that's all. And last I checked, it's not like there are any teams that are coasting through the national championship, so I really don't think the non-competitive argument is valid whatsoever.

[paddymac]

I think everyone needs to slow down with the criticsms of the way the league is being run. Andy has only been in charge of the CRHL for a few months now. Give him a chance to make something of it. At least let the season progress before you bad mouth how things are running. If everyone is going to keep criticizing the way the league is running why be a part of it?

[cakeuneke]

Lindenwood 17, EMU 4
Lindenwood 10, Purdue 4
EMU 12, U of M 6
RIT 16, U of M 4

All I can say is thank God we have the Premiere league to avoid those boring blowouts.

[bonesy21]

hey i was just thinking?

how many of your kids do you actually think would come to lindenwood if you hadnt given them any money? obviously khare didnt play this first part of the season cuz something happened to his scholorship, but you will soon see that nobody wants lindenwood in the league because you guys are a disgrace to sportsmanship. nothing in your games have even shown that you guys are good moraled hockey players...if kids wanted to play ice hockey, they would play ice hockey, and the reason why you guys win, is because you guys are given money to give to players? if any other school had the chance to give out thousands of dollars in aide, then im sure you guys wouldnt be whiping smelly bottoms like you are now, but how can a school compete at your level? you have half of the world team on your club? get a life....theres going to be many teams that dont want to even play you because the stuff you pull...theres a lot of teams that would rather forfeit than play your club, cuz you guys are way to chippy and way too cocky? whats the point of playing if its no fun??

[MBurke]

While I can't say anything about sportsmanship, having never experienced anything negative about Lindenwood's program in the time I've seen them, I have to hand it to them.

Yes, they have a great team because of their recruiting. Yes, most of those players would never have considered attending Lindenwood if not for the scholarship deal. On the other hand, can you blame them? Is this any different than any other major college sport? They've merely beaten every other school in the country to the punch, so to speak. Is there really anyone here who wouldn't love it if their college were to give out scholarships to play this sport?

Mike Burke
Commissioner
Eastern Collegiate Roller Hockey Association
http://www.ecrha.net

[bonesy21]

Mike,

dont get me wrong, what the school did for their team was exceptional and a step in the right direction. i agree with you that every school drools over scholarships like that, but its probably not realistic to any other schools in the near future. conversely, im not baggin on lindenwood, they are definitely a phenominal team and rightfully so deserve to win the national championship at this point in time. i havent seen a team that even remotely compares to their talent level, but just like you guys made the premier, competetive, and the developmental league because you dont feel that getting whooped does anything for a school, is this technically the right and fair thing for them to do, especially when a teams winning by numerous goals and a coach goes and tells his players to pummel certain opposing teams players? all i am saying is that if they had any class, they would stay out of the box, and shut their mouths...the teams that have always won or had great programs in the past in any sport, have always won with class, and have always had the upmost respect for any and every player...in the entire season so far, they havent showed any class, as i have seen numerous games and or talked to other teams re: those games that i havent seen personally. i was just hoping that a caliber team of that nature had any common curtiousy, they would be human beings on the rink rather than donkeys or animals......