Time to re-evaluate HFNHL?

[Ohio Jones]

Gentlemen:

I am wondering if perhaps it is time to review whether the HFNHL is worth the effort invovled to continue it. There is an enormous amount of work involved just to update and manage the files, (work which has apparently become further complicated with the transfer of sim duties and the attempt to update the files to a newer version of FHL, the result of which appears to be many corrupted/damaged files which have to be manually reset). There are also very large upcoming questions related to the strike, among them wheher player ratings should change next year (assuing this year happens at some point) and what happens to the entry draft. And then there are the changes that can be expected coming out of a new CBA...

Meanwhile, our league has definitely evolved into group of haves and have-nots, with people's finances spiralling more and more out of control.

I know that the NHL does not yet have the stones to consider this option, but has anyone here considered the possibility of scrubbing the league and then either starting from scratch, or walking away (for those who are simply too tired of the hassle)?

This is not a proposal - I myself am not sure where I land on the question. It's more opening a subject for consideration and discussion. I just wonder what the relative merits are of continuing this obviously tortured process...

I certainly recognize from first-hand experience just how work and time people have invested into running their teams (myself included), and I don't want to devalue that commitment. Nick, for example, would surely have a coronary if he thought that his super-team was going to be denied another shot at finally winning a Cup! :lol

But I think it's a serious discussion worth having. Do we fish? Or cut bait?

Click to read more...

 

[Mandaou]

My Opinion

I think too many of us have put to much time into our teams to start anew. I don't
have the club Nick does or Keith does but it makes us strive to reach those goals.

I took my shots for the Cup my first two years in the league because of the aging team I adopted. Although I didn't win I competed hard to win and at the time outspent what I brought in. Since then, I've been rebuilding while staying competive.

A few teams in the early years got away with murder in some trades but with a great admin team we have now, those situations don't occur anymore. It will just take some time for those teams to age a little bit and for the NHL finance environment to change.

Once the NHL has a cap in place, it will allow the poorer clubs to compete again but it will take time for some teams to get out where previous owners dragged the teams to. A perfect example is Carolina. They've struggled the last couple of years to say the least but they now have Ovechkin, Zherdev and Phenuef waiting to lace on the skates. Our league is no different than the NHL except we don't get paid the big bucks that they do.

Our league's strength comes from the passion of the "older" owners built from years of meshing our franchises ie BLUES (Nick), DET (Drew), Habs (Martin), SJ (Billy), ANA(Matt), EDM (Andrew), BOS (Rob), NJ (Rich), TB (Martin), NYR (Sean G), LA (Mike) Doug (CBJ)
AND from some of the new passionate owners, BUF (Josh), CAR (Dion), FLO (Brock), NYI (Hass), TO (Eric), Nash (Trev) etc...(Can't list everyone..ok..i can but I'm at work and i don't have time).

Wow, once you start listing everyone out you realize how strong our gm's are now and I haven't listed everyone I've dealt with that has always responded to each e-mail I send or has been to most drafts (entry or waiver) and attended trade deadlines.

If we start anew I think the older owners will lose some of that passion and that could lead to our downfall.

Let's keep it going guys. It's been tough getting things going this year and its probably not a coincidence that its at the same time the league is on strike or lockout as pro-players want to say.

BTW, I'll help in anyway I can. Ordered a new laptop so I can even help in simming games in the near future.

Claudio

PS No spell check or review of what I wrote so be nice.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

Aside from the fact I've spent several years building my team, which I do hope is poised for a Cup in the next few years, I also think there is a much greater risk of not playing this year, and/or trying to start a fresh. Starting from scratch will involve a lot more work than doing what we're doing now, and the commitment of GM's will be much less (given there is less personal ownership of your team and players). I think that would put the entire league in jeopardy, with a fairly good chance it doesn't come back on line.

Aside from top teams right now, I know a lot of GM's look at their younger players and prospects with a lot of pride. They too feel a tremendous sense of loyalty and connection with their teams. And I also think the competitive balances that have been put in place to avoid teams tanking, and the stellar job so many GM's have done in turning franchises around to make them competitive, will create an even more interesting season this year.

Aside from implementing whatever the NHL implements when they start playing hockey again (yes, if), there are other things we could do to balance things in the league next year. I also agree with Claudio that the league now has the strongest group of GM's we've ever had. Admittedly, the exec has been a little fragmented and removed this season - mostly connected to the disenchantment with the NHL labour talks - but we are close to getting this season going. Let's not falter now.

This season will no doubt be a bit of whirlwind, as we condense an 82 game season into what will most likely be two months. But it will be a season, which will create a champion and a draft order, and allow our league to continue on. We have a tremendous legacy going back to the late 90's with this league, and it would be a shame to put the whole thing at risk just because we're running late in the game and have little connection to the NHL right now.

If nothing else Douglas, I'm hopeful your post will drum up the passion that makes this league what it is - one of the best FHL sim leagues out there.

 

[MatthewFlames]

It sounds to me like the biggest hurdle to overcome to keep the league going, to keep the league strong, is to find a way to remove the burden and time needed to actually run the league. It seems that the GM's put in the time, and yes, the management of the league has put in an extraordinary amount of time - yet there is still a struggle because of the sheer amount of data, processing and effort required to keep things moving.

So - If I may - can I add in another question - which is how do we lower the time commitment for those involved in the simming and management etc.? The obvious one is that the burden is shared amongst more of the GM's. The less obvious one is that we find another way in which we run the league, and my primary thought on that one is the software, my other is the way in which ratings & simming are handled. I haven't done any research on either topic, so this may be the best way to do things at this time, but maybe somebody has some other suggestions on software or, heaven forbid, perhaps we lower the complexity of the league.

 

[Wildman]

I for one do not to want scrap the league. I also don't mind taking over some of the duties if the admin team are short of time. I know I have made few mistakes with my team but am looking forward with this season and the fiture of NYI.

 

[Hossa]

I think the core of the problem is the finances, in my mind. It's been easy to slowly get this season going becuase there is no NHL hockey. There is no real schedule to keep up with. The only problem we could potentially have is to get the season done before the NHL draft, which now looks unlikely to take place. So, I don't take the fact it's February and we haven't started the season yet, as a sign that things are in decline. I think it's more just a product of not having an NHL season going on.

The problem seems to be the finances. I'll admit, I don't pay the close eye to the finances of the league as do some. I know at least on GM who has done a thorough review, and realizes the bleak nature of the situation. This is one area that I think we need to review. The endorsements are great, but doesn't make up for the gap. One big problem is that television revenue, not ticket sales, drives the market now. The NFL is arguably the most healthy league in the world, and they certainly aren't paying those 70-80 million dollar payrolls with ticket sales. That league thrives on its broadcast deals, and our league, although different in many ways, doesn't take that into account. The endorsements maybe cover things like merchandise sales, but certainly not television revenue.

Solving the financial situation is hard. First of all, something has to be done in my mind to prop up the league. I think it would need to be a league-wide subsidy or something, not just the teams that need it most. Perhaps just something to get these teams through this strange period of no NHL hockey, and then whenever NHL hockey returns, whether it be next week, next year or next decade, we just adopt that system. The only problem with that is it could foster wild spending. Tight finances can keep teams under control. I know one GM that makes every decision based on contracts, which is the way it's handled in the NHL, but it's a different mentality when you're dealing with real money. We aren't even dealing with monopoly money, and yet everybody is freaking out about the finances.

I guess my point is those who spend poorly should still be punished (indirectly), but if 25 of the 30 teams or whatever it is are heading for financial oblivion, something needs to be done on that side. It doesn't take starting over again, because that's just sweeping the problem under the rug. 25 of our 30 GMs are not inept, our system is flawed. The question in my mind is not whether to do something about it, but whether to bother doing something before the NHL sets up a new system. In my mind, something needs to be done to take into account television revenue, without adding another huge complexity for each GM. Maybe a shared-revenue system for the entire league, or run it like the endorsements, I'm not sure.

I think if we solve the finances, everything would fall into place. I will admit I'd hate to lose my team, or more specifically my prospect list , and there are far too many committed GMs who would feel the same way. The problem isn't commitment to me. I think Matt Kershaw summed up the file problem well, but the finances to me are one problem we can't run away from.

 

[HFNHL Red Wings]

It sounds to me like the biggest hurdle to overcome to keep the league going, to keep the league strong, is to find a way to remove the burden and time needed to actually run the league.

The above statement is very true.
The reason this league has survived as long as it has is b/c years ago we divided the league administration. Many of you have been in other leagues where one guy has done everything and those leagues usually fall within one year.
The one task though that is the biggest burden, and not easily divisable, is the yearly prepping of the files. Having done it 3 years I always hated the task and it literally took 100+ hours of work effort. There is supposedly a way of simpliying the work effort in the ratings by uploading new ratings databases but b/c there is no documentation provided with the software I never figured out how to get it to work correctly (I actually corrupted the files outright at least once in the attempts). Dion was trying to sort this 'shortcut' out but appears to have also encountered an 'oops' that partly corrupted info and so he has been delayed in recreating some of the data.
As only one person can work on the files at a time, splitting time is the only option to speed things up. That has a couple of pitfalls itself, primarily around different versions of the software being used leading to further file corruption concerns. That said, with careful planning and ensuring all participants are on the same version it could be done.

 

[BlueAndWhite]

Let me preface this by saying; "I love you guys".

Alright, well I'm not going to flog the poor horse, as the identification of the specific problem(s) have already been stated.

The limitations imposed by the current software make dividing the work rather hard - however if there is any way we could do it - then sign Keith up.

I don't have a particular solution but I'm willing to help.

 

[BiLLY]

I will say right now I really enjoy this league and have been a fan of it well before I was ever the GM of the Sharks. I know my relationship with admin over my tenure of GM has not always been great but I honestly respect them for the work they have done. This league would have never lasted this long if it wasn't for their dedication. If it's volunteers you need I would be more than willing to help out. I have a tight schedule but I would be willing to make sacrifices to keep this league going.

As for the finance situation I am one of the teams who has a serious shortage of capital, but that doesnt mean I won't try everything to rectify the situation. I actually view this as a challenge and have made a number of deals this offseason. On the tradefront this is probably the most active I have been since my first season in the league. I will tell you this right now my team will not go bankrupt and if it does I will gladly step down.

With this in mind though I think it is important to point out that one of the major ways one could now currently generate revenue (endorsements) was not available when my team won the Western Conference for 3 consecutive years. Nick made probably close to $15,000,000 last year off of endorsements. If these were aroudn 3 years earlier I htink it is safe to say my team would be in an entirely different position. I wont deny endorsements were a great idea, but the gap between the rich and the poor will continue to increase with this system. Nick has a team now that he can realistically get back $15,000,000 in endorsement money every year. Same with a few other teams. Bottom feeders or middle of the pack clubs are lucky to get $5 to 9 million. This disparity caused by endorsement revenue was illustrated first hand this offseason when CGY got absolutely bent over a barrel by OTT. Our league in many ways is very similar to the current NHL. Teams can't compete with the money soem teams have accumulated over the years. And I know I am gonna get those responses stating those GM;s were cost conscious, but that is ********. Most of the teams that have cash now tanked it or were barely competitive. Nick didnt always have an unreal team his first few years in the league his Blues were far from the level they are today. Like Claudio said he went for it his first two seasons and now he is cash strapped. There was no way previously to generate additonal revenue as I mentioned earlier. Now all the superpowers from the pre-endorsement era can barely survive (NYI, MON, SJS, ATL, COL, TB). There is one obvious exception OTT but they would also be in our boat if it werent for the revenue they receieved form endorsements last season. In the pre-endorsement era you could sustain a competitive team for a max of 3 seasons.

I am not asking for a handout from the league. But its obvious the top tier teams under the new system will continue to seperate themselves from the financially weak teams in this new system.

 

[MatthewFlames]

Perhaps one option as far as the financial situation is to take a longer term approach - as mentioned before - but rather than hand-outs there could be a very simple system of banking imposed.. a team can borrow a set amount from the bank and pay it off over the next three years in three instalments... add to that a revamped endorsement system that has higher revenues and a new CBA with a salary roll back or salary cap and it might be possible with good management to get the league back into the black.

Of course this doesn't solve the manpower problem... a 100+ hours of database management for something that is just FUN is outrageous.. there has to be a better way... I just don't know what it is...

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

Uploading the sim ratings file sounds like the best solution for next year. Could we simply borrow or buy the file from another league? We'd lose out ability to rate players ourselves, but that's better than 100+ hours of work load given it would still be an objective rating file.

In terms of finances, that is simple enough to solve - we just need a new collective bargaining agreement. Reggie is currently working under the open system of the NHL, but he is easy enough to control through a new CBA. We could simply roll-back salaries a certain % and place a soft cap, and possibly even a hard cap, calculated on team salaries twice a year. There are several ways we could do it.

 

[BiLLY]

I could probably get a rating set. I dont know how accurate it will be. But I know a few leagues that use it.

 

[Chuzwazza]

As one of the 2 major players involved in getting the league going from a daily basis (Dion being the other of course) I am happy to continue with my simming duties. I know he has taken on the brunt of the tough work, and 12 months ago i would have had no trouble finding the time to be able to help hiom out. Times have changed somewhat, and with my knowledge of programming etc. not at the level of some of the league's GM's have been reluctant to try to jump in and help, especially when i know I'm going to be simming on a full time basis soon.

I love this league, and am a firm believer in what we're trying to achieve. I am one of the few people who honestly believes that our financial structure is not out problem, it's the GM's. I lost money last year...and lots of it, but I know that was my own fault. at the end of the day, if you're on life support financially, its up to you to have the discipline to not spend that extra $5million that's going to put your team at the risk of going bankrupt. Eric has done so in toronto for some time, and done a good job of it, so it can be done. Now it's about amassing talent there, but that was always going to be a nasty situation, even with talent. I would however like to see any new GM get at least $10M in the bank to start with. I've been pushing for that for some time. I understand some teams are finacially stronger than others, but to put a new GM into a situation like that isn't fair to him. if the're below $10million in the bank....let them have that much to start with, and then they're on their own.

at the end of the day, if $20M is your break even budget, then the league will adjust. Truth is, we all have our salary cap (we all started with the same money) and we all have the ability to earn similar revenue (ok, some may sight a 1000 seats as a major difference, but I'm not stressed, even if Dion starts packing out his 22,000 seat stadium while I'm stuck in my 18,595 hole ) then the financial work should be done, it's just a more felxible cap as it allows you to spen more one year and less the next.

And billy, as for your comments, there is some argument, but St.Louis and LA built their war-chests in the old system, so its hard to say it's all because of the new system. and I like the new system more, because it does benefit the teams that make the post season more (like the NHL) encouraging teams to win, rather than do what many did before and cut spending down to nothing because that was the best way to make a profit. I myself made $6million my first year on a 12 million payroll, and just broke even on a $20 million payroll the next year. I finished with 36 points my first year, and 70 the next. and yet the improvement was worth only $2million in revenue. something had to change.

Finally, I think that the problems this year were partly related to the newness of Dion and myself to this part of the league. now that we have a lot more experience and have learnt from out rookie mistakes, we'll be the ones cracking the whip in order to get the league in act early next season to make sure this doesn't happen again. I know I certainly will!

 

[BiLLY]

Josh your comment on how you made 6,000,000 in your first year under the old system prove smy point about the old system 100%. Teams that tanked it in the old system made money while teams that were competitive were now suffer from cash shortages. You might not be aware of this but Nick initially wasn't a power he re-built his team. I remember him trading Turgeon and a couple other high-end assets for Lecalvier in the early years. A good portion of Nick's warchest was accumulated in his earlier years when his team wasn't a power. What I have been arguing is the teams who tried to compete in the early years such as myself and the list I included above are now in rough shape because additional revenue was not available before then. You commend yourself for your financial stability but your team tanked it. To say its 100% the GM of those team's fault is ridiculous. I for one did not go out and buy my team. I have never in all my years as GM signed a high priced free agent except for Ed Belfour in my first year and it was for only 3.5 per. I'd say last year I made some ill-advised decisions especially bringing in Forsberg's $9,000,000 when realistically I was not as strong as I used to be. I am willing to accept the blame for that but when you win the cup and you lose $10-15 million and dont have the highest payroll in the league something is wrong.

Also your seating capacity example is very relevant. I have one of the smallest arenas in the game I sold out probably 98% of my games in my first 2 years in the league, while having one of the highest ticket prices. If I had 2000 more seats I likely would have sold them as well. Over a 42 home game schedule with a reasonable ticket price thats almost $3,000,000 in additional revenue. In addition, say 10 home playoff games where your ticket price is around 50 bucks those seats add up. I think anyone with any knowledge of business would realize that some teams are at a serious disadvantage. Imagine a team like OTT with its current roster and an arena the size of CAR's. Keith currently charges $70 bucks a seat. With 3500 extra seats think of the potential revenue he could amass over a season. I dunno of hand if he soldout everygame this year but I know the year I won the cup I don't remember not selling out a game.

 

[Ville Isopaa]

I guess it's time for me to join the discussion. I started out as one of the GM's in the experimental HFAHL as the Hersey GM. That league wasn't really working, as the hands were tied by the needs of the HFNHL, and therefore it was scrapped. I then join on with Martin Trembley as the AGM of Colorado prepping the drafts, and assisting with trades.
When I then took over the team in mid-season from him, I was left with less than 20m in the bank and a payroll of +60m of older players with high contracts. I thought I'd give it a shot and went for another cup run. I made the 2nd round and lost out to the top team in the west that year (SJS?). I was really supposed to play a worse team that round, but the sim had a mistake and it put the top 2 teams left against eachother instead of us kicking out the 2 worse teams. Ofcourse I could have lost that round anyways, but at the time it felt that I was robbed of a round(3 home games) of ticket sales. The season before last I lost out in 7 games and playoff money was too small, so there was nothing else to do than start rebuilding. I took the chances I had to go for the cup and I didn't make it. Now I'm paying for it by being out of the playoffs for something like the next 2-3 seasons.
I've spent the past 1½ years trying to get rid of the old bodies and add some quality youth. I realised pretty soon that there was no chance I was going to stay competative with the lack of youth I had, so I better start from scratch. Now I've got structure and depth in the team, both on the prospects and the roster. I've lowered my salaries to as low as I feel I can go, and I'm ready to bring back this team to glory over a 5 year period. I'd hate to have done that for nothing.

I think Billy has a point in the seating capacity of the stadiums. I don't see why there would haveto be a difference between teams. It's not like any of us have spent HFcash to build the arenas or have had the option to have a 22000 or a 17000 arena. I think we could change the seating to be the same for all, say 18500 or 19000. That should be about league average.

As for taking over some duties within the administration, I could do some stuff. I've been in the council of another league for 8-9 seasons, and I made most of the work when we changed from HLS2 to FHL 2 years ago, so I know how much work there is with ratings, databases, etc., etc. At the moment I have the spare time to put down, but I'm not sure how my schedule will look like or where(city, country, continent I will be living after the summer. Once that's settled I'd know more on how much work I could take on.

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

A few quick points on the finances - which this discussion has turned into...

- I and Mike built up our war chests while NOT tanking it. I only missed the playoffs one year (and just) and Mike made the playoffs pretty consistently. The truth is tanking it makes it harder to make money (although easier to get better drafts picks, which is still a dubious way to build a winner in the first place).

- As a team with a big arena, I can tell you the advantage is marginal. Ottawa made as much ticket revenue as St. Louis last year, with 2,000+ less seats. There is a demand curve in the sim - so if you only have 18,000 seats, you SHOULD be charging more, as you don't have to worry about selling as many seats (as Keith figured out). This allows teams with smaller arenas to achieve similar revenue - it's just a point of trying to determine the right price (something I have yet to figure out). This is also the reason we made one of the main endorsement bonuses around % capacity filled - it's much easier to get 90% of a 18,000 seat arena filled than a 21,000 seat arena. This helps level the playing field.

As I've said before, we can tinker with our financial system in several ways to help level the playing field, but I think we need a tinkering more than anything. And yes, that is rather self-serving, but I don't think the teams who've managed their finances best, should all of sudden have the fruits of their labour pulled away. The truth is I could have spent a lot more money a long time ago - and have taken shots for being cheap many a time in season previews - but hey, patience is the one virtue I happen to actually have.

The best idea I've heard thus far, is giving a new GM of a financially troubled team a certain cash minimum to help them build their team back. Think of it as a new owner coming to the save the team who has a bit of cash to spend, which is the case given the team is basically bankrupt. It's something that has been discussed before, and I believe has good merit.

Of course, the good part of that system, is no GM can turn to the league to help them dig themselves out of hole they have dug themselves. A few of you will still have to do that on your own, and no 'system' should be put in place to help you recover from your financial indulgences of past seasons...

 

[Ville Isopaa]

About added funding from the league: First I'd like to say that even if I currently have the second least money in the league, I don't expect the league to bail me out by giving me cash for nothing. I think that the teams who have saved their money and now have +40m in cash to spend if they want, should not lose that advantage towards us who are low on cash.

Second, I like the idea of a giving new GM's a starting cash. Not too big, but big enough to get them through atleast one season of getting rid of the overpaid players the previous owner left them with. The finances are a tricky business if you're new to it and it takes some time to learn your team, etc. If you're faced with a situation of being broke and having to dump salaries, you're bound to do a lot of bad trades just because you don't know how this league values players. Therefore a buffert would be great for new GM's.

One idea to help make teams with bad finances help themselves is the Endorsements. We could add some endorements to make it easier to get cash that way.

 

[Wildman]

I really don't know how this topic got to be about "finances". To me its up to the GM's to control there payrolls (its called a budget). I know the NYI payroll is high and we are trying to lower it (so far we have it down about 5-6 million). But the reason its high is because of Hasnain and myself, not the HFNHL system. In defense, you also have to remember that the NYI team we got (about 3 years ago) was original around a 69ov with certain players making way too much money, and missing the playoffs the first 2 years. Last year was the first time we actual had a good team and we made the playoffs. Its a lot more fun to win games (and loss some money) then lose games (and make a small profit).

The main reason the original note was written was because the time it takes Admin to run the league. Im not a "tech" person and I don't have an expensive computer to run files, etc, but I volunteer to be the person that reviews/approves trades. I don't know if that helps or not.

I love this league, its the closest thing to the real thing. Having this league gives me my hockey fix. Its even more important to have the season with the real NHL locked out. I still get the buz when Im making a trade. Lets keep the league going.

As for the draft next year. I can't see why we can't have the draft even if the real NHL doesn't have one.

Barry Corras
AGM NYI

 

[Dr.Sens(e)]

As for the draft next year. I can't see why we can't have the draft even if the real NHL doesn't have one.

I agree. The league will likely hold a draft before they start a new season (so if they start next January, they'll probably hold a draft in Dec/Jan).

So we might as well do our draft when the league is supposed to - this June. All the rating services are still chugging along, so there will be no shortage of guidance on the players who are eligible. And we'll actually have a season of results to base our draft order on. The NHL will have a much more touchy issue to address.

 

[Vaive-Alive]

My two cents

Thought I'd throw in my two cents:

$0.01: Kudos to Doug for getting everyone talking . I think the recent decline in HFNHL activity can be attributed to the NHL lockout - there are no NHL player statistics to monitor; the NHL for the most part has been off the radar, with the exception of the daily doom and gloom stories that circulate in the Canadian press and on a few sports networks; and the uncertainty as to whether or not there will be an NHL season, seems to have manifested itself into uncertainty regarding our own HFNHL season. I personally believe that we should 'fish' as opposed to 'cut bait'. There are far too many good GMs who have worked hard to build their teams over the years, and to scrap the existing league would only reward those very few who have either not put in the effort, or have mismanaged their franchise.
The time required to run the league is a concern - an enormous amount of effort is necessary to run it the way we have in the past. I have a suggestion that I think would cut back on the amount of time required to prepare the files for a season: When we agree on a new season's rating source, cut out the universal rerate of all players in that db - there may be a few disputable ratings, but for the most part they're acceptable. Drew, Dion and Josh can correct me if I am wrong, but every change to a player's rating needs to be implemented manually - lets minimize that manual input as it is painfully time consuming. Keep the rating challenge process in place for GM's to challenge individual players ratings like usual - that will weed out quite a few of the disputable ratings anyway. This would take a large burden off the person(s) preparing the files for a season ( and harp in if I am wrong ).

$0.01: Finances. I've looked at the leagues finances in depth. I'll keep this short...Player salaries have continued to rise on par with the NHL since the inception of the leauge while our ticket-sale revenues have essentially been capped and remained constant. The disparity between costs and revenues increases every year - this has been fed mostly by an apparent lack of fiscal responsability on the part of GMs during free agency, although Reggie has generally insisted that salaries be kept on par with the NHL over the past few years ( and we know all to well what those salaries have done to the NHL - and the NHL has more than two revenue streams...), and GM's are pressured to be competitive which is necessary to run a league. The endorsement structure introduced last year has narrowed the gap between costs and revenues to some extent, but more is required to create a financial atmosphere in which the average HFNHL team can turn a profit. How can this be done? The average ticket price in the HFNHL is $41.90. The average ticket price in the NHL is $44.20. The first step to alleviate this problem is to bring the league ticket price average up - particularely for those teams who are sitting far below the average. This can be done at the start of this season. The next step, is to implement a new CBA before our next period of free agency. That can be done after our season is over, and once the NHL lockout is over. Hopefully they'll coincide with each other.

Thats my two cents.

Kruegs

 

[Donga]

Uploading the sim ratings file sounds like the best solution for next year. Could we simply borrow or buy the file from another league? We'd lose out ability to rate players ourselves, but that's better than 100+ hours of work load given it would still be an objective rating file.

This could be an idea. Definitely would help. The only file we need from a FHL perspective is the DRS file, maybe we could use one Ville's league's database file for next season for example. But I'm weary about it because if we use Zubials for example, the backup goaltenders are undervalued a lot. I know that the goaltenders for the Penguins were bad even though it was split between three tenders in Aubin, Caron and Chiodo.

The reason, why I've taken this long to do, because I stuffed up big time by pressing the wrong button and now I'm paying for it, as Drew stated. I was trying to get it done quick by using the database method.

 

[Ville Isopaa]

This could be an idea. Definitely would help. The only file we need from a FHL perspective is the DRS file, maybe we could use one Ville's league's database file for next season for example.

I think that's out of the question, as we don't update the ratings every season. I've been pushing for it, but it seems like we won't have yearly uprates in that league for a while..


But getting the ratings from anonther league would be a good idea. I'm also helping out as an AGM in TFNHL(www.tfnhl.com) which we might be able to use. The ratings are slightly high IMO in that league. Especially for young players.

 

[Ohio Jones]

Kudos to Doug for getting everyone talking .

I don't know what you mean, Rob...

OK, kidding. Obviously, this is exactly why I made my (admittedly somewhat provocative) post: to get people thinking and talking about the league and what we needed to do to make sure it continues, strong and healthy, through the seasons to come. I admit, however, I'm sore aweary of discussing these issues myself, so I am pleased to defer to the energetic folks out there prepared to put forth (and research and document) suggestions for both the file management and financial issues that seem to plague us.

For the record, I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and I don't think we need an artificial new revenue stream (like TV contracts - there are no national TV contracts in the NHL - the NFL comparison is a red herring), we just need all of us to recognize that we have a sim-imposed cap in place, and we need to learn to manage within it. I might not be opposed, for example, to a league-wide rollback of salaries by, say, 10%, and then a leag-imposed salary cap at... what makes sense? $45 million? Less? More? Certainly it's very difficult to sustain a salary of over $45 million for more than a year or two without your team collapsing. That said, the teams with salaries over $45 million are not generally the teams that are stuggling, so that may not make any difference whatsoever. /shrug

It really is about the decisions we make as individual GMs. I ended up not submitting endorsement proposals this year, even though chances were good I would have cleared several million in revenues as a result. Why didn't I do it? I don't have enough in the bank to pay the up-front costs and still be protected agaisnt the possibility of a long road-trip to start the season. That was a decision on my part, and I think it was the responsible one. I made decisions in the past ($5 millino in signing bonuses to each of Carney and Brisebois spring to mind...) that were made in order to move my team forward into a competitive stance, and those may not have been (OK, weren't) as responsible. I'm prepared to live with the consequences of both.

Whatever you gentlemen come up with, I will abide by and do my best to survive under. I'm just glad to see that after several months of relative inactivity, people still care about the HFNHL.

 

[Vaive-Alive]

For the record, I don't think we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater, and I don't think we need an artificial new revenue stream (like TV contracts - there are no national TV contracts in the NHL - the NFL comparison is a red herring), we just need all of us to recognize that we have a sim-imposed cap in place, and we need to learn to manage within it. I might not be opposed, for example, to a league-wide rollback of salaries by, say, 10%, and then a leag-imposed salary cap at... what makes sense? $45 million? Less? More? Certainly it's very difficult to sustain a salary of over $45 million for more than a year or two without your team collapsing. That said, the teams with salaries over $45 million are not generally the teams that are stuggling, so that may not make any difference whatsoever. /shrug

Hit the nail on the head Doug. Reggie won't like it and a few GM's won't like it either, but when revenues are capped - it makes no sense to not cap salaries. The laissez-faire approach has obviously failed in our league based on the bidding wars that have sky-rocketed the average player salary over the years. In fact, some players are making far more in the HFNHL than they do in the NHL. I don't believe a cash injection is necessary. That will just increase the average player salary - GM's will be just as fiscally irresponsible and drive player salaries up higher. Cost certainty is a part of every business, and even Reggie knows that . If people complain that it will prevent them from competing - I say learn how to compete under a cap. Every NFL team does it. Our league brings in less revenue than the NHL - we can't keep up this pace. The league in general loses money every year. If anyone doesn't believe me - do the math. As of August 25th 2004, the league total loss for the regular season based on 90% average attendance ( thats being generous ) was projected at being $360,682,486.00. The league total playoff and endorsement revenue is projected to not even cover half of that loss - not enough teams participate in the endoresement process ( for various reasons i.e. they can't afford to bring in the talent to compete, they don't have enough cash to put upfront, or they're just lazy ) and playoff revenues represent less than appoximately 95M in additional revenue. So, even after endorsements and playoff revenue is injected into the league, it still loses approximately $180M at the least. If player salaries continue to rise - the net loss will continue to grow every year. It has to stop. Injecting more cash into the league is not a solution - capping salaries is.

Kruegs
GM Bruins

 

[Dryden]

uhm..something most be wrong with the water

This is my finances pagefrom another league...my payroll is higher and my ticket prices are lower but I'm making more money then I will in the hfnhl.
http://www.geocities.com/Colosseum/Base/7829/season9aFinance.html#FLAMES