British players at Coventry Blaze,

[covunistudent]

The reason why I would have promotion and relegation is because overtime I reckon it would increase the competitiveness of the leagues. Teams at the bottom know that losing games means that next season they will get to play in a league that is worst.

As for copying football the reason why I would do that is simply because it works. It's big headed to say it works, but it's proven. It's in black and white.

Any team in football knows they have a chance of getting to the Premiership. I think a similar thing needs to be done in ice hockey. And I actually do think it could work, theres enough teams in enough leagues already.

Playing crossover games is confusing for a start. I didn't say that Cardiff need to be played 14 times a season to fill the amount of games, you can invite more teams into the league, and play less times between teams.

And the reason why I am uncomfortable with letting Manchester into the elite league, is because the league seems to have a closed shop facility about it.

Olympics - it doesn't matter how good or bad we are, San Marino enter every football world cup, even though they know they are not going to qualify. I find it hard to believe that the bodies don't have £20,000 (although I do believe you.) I guess the clubs in UK are doing alright though, SKY Dome is almost full every week. So how could the money be raised. Well maybe IHUK, could take a percentage of gate money from every game, and yes this will be unpopular maybe even tax clubs.

[Carpo]

Hmmm so proven that 2-3 clubs a year go into administration?

Yeah an excellent model isn't it!

Hockey needs to be run on one thing and one thing only. Financial Viability. Teams spending what they can AFFORD to spend. Which why Promotion and Relegation would be a disaster having teams playing above there level trying to spend more than they can afford... we've seen it all before in the amount of hockey clubs that have gone bust.

Re: Attendances.

The Skydome, unfortunatly is the exception to the rule. Every season since 1993/94 has seen a drop in attendances with the exception of Belfast Giants first season which skewed the statisitcs as they were getting sellouts every week.)

I've got the stats in front of me so it's:

1999-00 to 00-01 (UP 10.5%)
00-01 to 01-02 (DOWN 11.9%)
01-02 to 02-03 (DOWN 7.6%)
02-03 to 03-04 (DOWN 6%)

On the other hand, Blaze attendances have:

00-01 (1585)
00-01 to 01-02 (UP 8.8%)
01-02 to 02-03 (UP 18.5%)
02-03 to 03-04 (UP 6%)

[Carpo]

Olympics - IHUK have got a certain amount of money to spend. What should it be spent on, trying to qualify on something that is unrealistic or plowing it back into junior development.

Plus your argument doesn't hold about San Marino. As members of the IIHF every year our Mens, Women's, U20 and U18 sides do take part in World Championships Qualifciations all over the world.

We're talking about the Olympics which is compeltly different to the World Championships.

[covunistudent]

Carpo said:

Teams spending what they can AFFORD to spend. Which why Promotion and Relegation would be a disaster having teams playing above there level trying to spend more than they can afford

Is that the leagues fault though or a dodgy chairmans/board of directors fault?

I suggest its to do with a board of directors though.

And I agree junior development is important. I suppose it depends what you want to put the money on. In the end if the players coming from junior development are good enough, all the money spent on it, would pay itself back.

[Claret & Blue Army]

Another possible problem with a promotion relegation would be the following scenario,

Panthers, Squealers, or even god forbid Blaze have a bad year and get relegated. What would stop any of these big hitters deciding that playing in the second tier wasn't financially viable and coerce the others who would see the lack of revenue from the omission of the relegated team into a breakaway league involving one or two of the other more lucrative teams. Back to square one.

Sorry but I see one main league of about 12 teams maximum in the Elite league to sustain and prosper.
Anymore would see the infrastructure being stretched too far

[Carpo]

Chief said:

Another possible problem with a promotion relegation would be the following scenario,

Panthers, Squealers, or even god forbid Blaze have a bad year and get relegated. What would stop any of these big hitters deciding that playing in the second tier wasn't financially viable and coerce the others who would see the lack of revenue from the omission of the relegated team into a breakaway league involving one or two of the other more lucrative teams. Back to square one.

Sorry but I see one main league of about 12 teams maximum in the Elite league to sustain and prosper.
Anymore would see the infrastructure being stretched too far

Couldn't agree more.

[Carpo]

covunistudent said:

Is that the leagues fault though or a dodgy chairmans/board of directors fault?

I suggest its to do with a board of directors though.

It's very very easy to turn around and say that, but it's bloody tough to sell to a city.

Come and watch the <insert team here> Our team hasn't got the skill and we're going to lose virtually every game but still come and see us..

Its not the greatest marketing line in the world is it?

SO what do the clubs do, sign better players and hope the results pick up so that attendances will, which they never do, etc. etc. seen it so many times before.

The EIHL cap appears to be a sensible one. Put it this way, how many EIHL teams this season have we heard rumours about folding. Hell even the rumours about London folding have stopped!

[Claret & Blue Army]

Oddly enough when the Racers were going through their 30+ run without winning their crowds did pick up as people undertook one of either two things,
1. The chance to be there when they finally won one
2. The car crash effect of watching officially the worst top flight team ever

But they were an anomaly as their attendances have not exactly sky rocketed this year with a more succesful team. That said they do appear to be on a better financial footing these days as Carpo mentions- the rumours of folding have become nearly extinct

[Carpo]

To be honest i think a lot of that was more the move to Lee Valley...i.e a semi-decent rink with reasonbly priced beer ;D

[pedant mode on]

The London Racers were bad, but not the worst team top flight team of all time. In the modern era, the 1985-6 Peterbourgh Pirates hold that record with 4pts from 36 games (0.11 points per game) as opposed to London's 10pts from 56 games (0.18 points per game)

[pedant mode off]

Chief said:

Oddly enough when the Racers were going through their 30+ run without winning their crowds did pick up as people undertook one of either two things,
1. The chance to be there when they finally won one
2. The car crash effect of watching officially the worst top flight team ever

But they were an anomaly as their attendances have not exactly sky rocketed this year with a more succesful team. That said they do appear to be on a better financial footing these days as Carpo mentions- the rumours of folding have become nearly extinct

[Rich]

London Racers have actually been a success over the past couple of seasons as they have achieved their ambitions for every season. They may not have excelled their ambitions like Blaze have but achieving them is good enough.

Their first season they just aimed to survive, which they did and they even became hard to beat towards the end of the season. Their second season they aimed to make the playoffs and they have done so also finnishing 2 placres higher than they did last season (fair enough there is one less team in the league). So fair play to them. Maybe the Racers will be a real force next season.

[Claret & Blue Army]

Didn't Racers break the record for longest winless run from the start of a season?

[Carpo]

Yes, taking it from the said Peterbourgh pirates of 85-86.