the 1-1 affiliation where every team has to be represented, should've been suspended if you gave the option for teams to opt out.... no other league has this as a requisite to be an active franchise..... the league was right to end the independent era, the "taxi-squad" makes this redundant.
AHL 2020-21 season start in February; 28 teams, five divisions; UPD: no playoffs?
- Thread starter LadyStanley
- Start date
the 1-1 affiliation where every team has to be represented, should've been suspended if you gave the option for teams to opt out.... no other league has this as a requisite to be an active franchise..... the league was right to end the independent era, the "taxi-squad" makes this redundant.
royals119
Registered User
It does appear that the 1-1 affiliation requirement has been suspended, since there are three examples in the current grid where there is a 2-1 affiliation.
I never saw where the NHL required teams to find an AHL affiliate for this season. All three teams whose AHL affiliate suspended operations did chose to affiliate with a different AHL team for this season, but I don't believe they were forced to do that.
As far as AHL teams going independent for this season, whether it is allowed are not, would be very unlikely. AHL teams with reduced or no fans in attendance are going to have a very hard time, even if their entire roster was paid by the NHL club. Trying to ice a team entirely on AHL contracts with no affiliate and no fans (or reduced fans) would be a financial disaster. Why would anyone want to do that?
no the AHL specifies every team has to be represented, royals, it doesn't matter if the affiliate was granted an opt-out or not.... it's now woven in to the PDC of each member club, it has been that way for a long-time, and suspect it was a condition when the league expanded to 27 as it was in 2000/2001,
in essence, Milwaukee is an independent ownership, so is Springfield, where the Blues would've started this season, as is Charlotte...... it has nothing to do with the independents which the AHL made illegal in the early 1990s, after Baltimore and Binghamton weren't icing a competitive franchise.... it is also why independent affiliations can work for a year, but not longer than a year or long-term.
that's the disconnect between the AHL and the ECHL, BUT it's not the only disconnect.....
To be accurate, the Bears were established in 1932 which is after all of the "Original Six" had joined the NHL: Montreal and Toronto (1917), Boston (1924), and New York, Detroit, and Chicago (1926),
false.... you don't know the Bears history then, nor the AHL's, rojac.... why is 1936 the cornerstone year the AHL references, then, the Bears, themselves champion themselves that.
Hershey remains the 7th oldest professional hockey franchise, independent of league affiliation
I honestly have no clue what you are trying to say in the first part of your reply. Are you saying that the Bears were not founded in 1932? Or that the AHL was not founded in 1936? I'd like to see your sources on that.
In any event, I don't disagree that Hershey is the 7th oldest professional hockey franchise. But the NHL "Original Six" are the six that are older and thus, by definition, Hershey is NOT as old as the NHL "Original Six". If you had said that Hershey was almost as old as the "Original Six," I would have never replied.
go back to the every anniversary the league has had..... it HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE NHL
I still have no clue what are you trying to say.
I simply took issue with your statement "some posters forget Hershey is as old as the NHL Original 6" in that it was slightly inaccurate becuase while Hershey is almost as old as NHL "Original Six", it is not "as old as". And it seemed that you agreed with this when you said "Hershey remains the 7th oldest professional hockey franchise, independent of league affiliation."
So, I don't know if you're think I'm saying more than that but I'm not.
Is your objection that I used the dates that teams joined the NHL as opposed to their founding dates? I did that to avoid arguments over the founding dates of Toronto and Detroit. By using their joining dates, I was merely pointing out those teams existed as of that date and thus were older than the Bears.
But, honestly, if you can't clearly state what you are arguing with about my post, I will no longer bother replying.
tarheelhockey
Offside Review Specialist
Possible compromise: the Hershey Bears were founded and graduated to the IAHL and that league changed its name to the AHL before the Brooklyn Americans folded, which was the actual start of the Original Six era.
royals119
Registered User
It sounds like you are saying the AHL requires every NHL club to have an affiliate in the AHL, and they also required that for this 2001 season. The AHL can't require NHL clubs to do anything. If an NHL team had decided not to have an AHL affiliate this year the AHL doesn't have any recourse against that team.
You seem to be confusing the term "independent" in reference to locally owned teams vs NHL owned teams and in reference to AHL teams with no NHL affiliate. I suppose both of those could be called "independent" in a way, but it is very confusing to use the same term for both situations. No AHL team is going to go without an NHL affiliation - it is financial suicide, and the league isn't going to permit it. There might technically be a way to end up that way within the rules, but its not realistic. There will certainly be AHL teams that are not owned by an NHL team for the foreseeable future. No one is disputing either of those things. I'm not sure why you bring this up, but I'm sure everyone understands and agrees on these two points.
Not sure what this has to do with the discussion. No one brought up the ECHL, we all know the three leagues have many differences.
incorrect, again, royals:
why did the AHL decree in 1990/91 that no member club can operate as an independent..... that's totally different than the independent ownership.... that rule then was applied to those member clubs not a whole subsidiary of the parent club, of which, MIL/SPR/CHA are not, independent of the AHL allowing them to opt-out, which everybody agrees why those ownerships did so.
royals119
Registered User
What? Sometimes I wonder if you are using google translate to read the posts here and then to translate your replies before posting. Your posts remind me of those owners manuals you get with Korean products where nothing quite makes sense.
I was a part of the league, then, when the Independents were banned outright, royals, when you have almost 4 decades involved in a market, same goes for those posters in Worcester, and any other market that was replaced 8 years ago.
that is also why you no longer see signings for players if they elect to leave North America for Europe, once that avenue is taken, they're not allowed to return to North America....the AHL had that loophole for several years allowing member clubs, if they chose to do so, could sign veteran players, who have just completed a season in Europe...
ECHL does that as well, but it hasn't risen YET to where it's a requirement to operate as an active membership.
my point is, not every team should be represented if a member club, such as CHA/SPR/MIL were given the option to opt out, due to the pandemic, because in essence, a) it's not going to be a lost season prospect development-wise, like the Oilers tried pulling back in 2004, until the AHL flat out told them pick a market for your affiliate or lose the rights to the affiliate permanently.... which goes against the same bylaw you're seeing now w/ the Blues/Panthers/Predators aligning as a secondary affiliate.... everybody understood why the 3 AHL Markets (nevermind the 13+ ECHL Markets THAT made that choice back in November, 2019) made the decision they made...
NOT everyone agrees with everything the AHL Does, but just like the pandemic, you have to pivot to what the league requires.... you'd be surprised what a PDC Details when you look at one back in the 80s, to as recently as 2015, and that is a moving target as to what the parent club is responsible for, and what the affiliate member club is responsible for.... some will assist the affiliated member club like arena leases, some will let the member club negotiate those parameters.
royals119
Registered User
Assuming your second paragraph refers back to the first, what is the reason we no longer see European players come back to North America? Because you were involved? Because Worcester was replaced? Because independents were banned?
Also, afaik, players can return from Europe and play in North Ameria, in the ECHL. There is a specific date that they have to return by each year. It is before the European seasons end, so those players who leave their team prior to the end of the season can come back, but those who play a full season in Europe can't. I don't believe that has changed (although obviously not this season due to covid). I don't know about the AHL for sure, and I'm not interested enough to look it up, but I wouldn't be surprised if they have a similar rule where players have to return before a particular date. I am pretty sure players who complete a season in Europe can return to the AHL the following season though. They aren't banned permanently as your post might indicate.
no, you keep misinterpreting it, royals:
once a North American player leaves, they likely will not return to North America, independent of league....
you keep forgetting what the AHL/ECHL are DEVELOPMENT
royals119
Registered User
You keep saying things that don't make sense. At least this post was mostly coherent, although the use of capitalization still seems to be a challenge.
If they go to Europe and everything goes well, they likely won't return. Obviously, they explored their options and made that choice, most times they will stick with it. However, sometimes it doesn't work out. The team is bouncing paychecks, the "free car" turns out to be a company vehicle with 100 sponsor stickers on it that 10 guys have to share, the apartment has rats, the food sucks, teammates are jerks - whatever. There are players who came back to the Royals during a season from Europe. It doesn't happen a lot, but it does happen, and at least in the ECHL, there are specific rules that govern how and when it happens.
I haven't forgotten about the development aspect of the ECHL/AHL.
read every AHL Transaction here..... where does it state they're likely to return to North America...... it doesn't happen and who ultimately owns those contracts, royals, the NHL Parent club, if they do not ultimately own and operate the franchise
when has Reading ever been owned and/or operated by the Philadelphia Flyers, answer, they do not and never have been, whereas Comcast aka the Flyers owns the ECHL franchise outright in Portland
I can certainly remember in the Flyers era, that the loophole that the AHL Allowed veteran players to routinely agree to standard player contracts even after the AHL Seaon commenced..... that no longer is in play, long before the "veteran rule" was approved based off # of games played
Last edited:
TheLegend
Megathread Gadfly
LadyStanley
Registered User
http://theahl.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2021/01/20-21_teambyteam.pdf
Yet the schedule currently has them playing in Stockton.
Yet the schedule currently has them playing in Stockton.
but remember, prior to the pandemic, the deal long-term hadn't been broached past 21.....
TheLegend
Megathread Gadfly
I get that... Roadrunners just released their schedule with Stockton on it. But they can’t play in their arena due to a county mandate ( just as the Sharks can’t either atm)
So it makes sense on more than one angle for the Flames to pull them up to play out of the Saddledome.
think the Toronto to Edmonton Road Runners, TL... they pulled the exact same stunt in 2004
TheLegend
Megathread Gadfly
Ad
Latest posts
-
Pre-Game Talk: WCQF | Vancouver Canucks vs. Nashville Predators- Latest: SeawaterOnIce
-
-
