|
|
Post by Brenden-Oregon on Aug 19, 2021 13:34:55 GMT -5
That's all great and I love sarcasm but the actual rule isn't even set in stone as of yet, at least not in a way that was transparent to the owners. Nobody had a clue what the rule actually is, just that prospect status has apparently been redefined in some way. 20 NHL games? 10 for goalies? 154 games in the AHL? You may know the answers to these questions but we certainly don't. Unless you see me agree with something further down in one of the threads above then you can pretty safely assume that my latest post in the section is very close to what the change is going to be. Prospects 20/10 NHL GP instead of TOTGP. Goalies (Figure a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 5 right now). Not a huge concern as UFA hasn't even started yet. There was this in a post: "Excellent point Brenden. We might be able to add something that they would lose their prospect status after they played 80, 100, some number of total games int he AHL or NHL." Which would make it seem like you were rethinking. I know this is your baby, but it just seems wrong to say, "Last call for comments on this subject. If no additional comments in 48 hours, we will consider this adopted," and there be comments and questions that weren't answered, and it still go into effect (very quietly) anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by Brenden-Oregon on Aug 19, 2021 13:38:40 GMT -5
And as far as the rule book is concerned, yes, it's frustrating that nothing has been updated for many years. I wouldn't even join this league right now if I was a potential owner. I can't even keep a lot of it straight because when I go to look up a rule that I might have forgotten or to help someone who has asked a question, it's not even in the rule book at all. Bridge contracts? How long have we been able to do this? How would I know it was even an option? You might want to check the timestamp as to when the rulebook as last updated. I haven't fully updated it but started the process either 2 days ago or yesterday. The point is whenever something is implemented, it should be added to the rule book immediately. And since you brought it up, the previous timestamp before yesterday or 2 days ago for the rule book was 2018. |
|
|
|
Post by Glenn-Philadelphia on Aug 19, 2021 14:00:14 GMT -5
Unless you see me agree with something further down in one of the threads above then you can pretty safely assume that my latest post in the section is very close to what the change is going to be. Prospects 20/10 NHL GP instead of TOTGP. Goalies (Figure a minimum of 4 and a maximum of 5 right now). Not a huge concern as UFA hasn't even started yet. There was this in a post: "Excellent point Brenden. We might be able to add something that they would lose their prospect status after they played 80, 100, some number of total games int he AHL or NHL." Which would make it seem like you were rethinking. I know this is your baby, but it just seems wrong to say, "Last call for comments on this subject. If no additional comments in 48 hours, we will consider this adopted," and there be comments and questions that weren't answered, and it still go into effect (very quietly) anyway. I deleted most of what I was posting on here because as I was crafting it I realized 2 things. 1)It was counter productive and 2) it was just making me more pissed off. In retrospect, opening up a forum for these discussions seems to cause more issues than what its worth. I would have been better off just noting the change in the 21-22 updates and been done with it. Lesson learned |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 19, 2021 14:17:27 GMT -5
If our input is not needed, it will not be given.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Aug 19, 2021 14:22:25 GMT -5
If our input is not needed, it will not be given. 'our'... Are you speaking for other people ? |
|
|
|
Post by Brenden-Oregon on Aug 19, 2021 14:25:58 GMT -5
Why aren’t these rule change proposals discussed in a small competition committee? Then it’s not a free for all with everyone and also not a sole person making all the decisions. Because sometimes things can be overlooked but if there’s 4-5 people discussing, something getting overlooked is a lot less likely.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brenden-Oregon on Aug 19, 2021 14:28:28 GMT -5
If our input is not needed, it will not be given. 'our'... Are you speaking for other people ? It was implied (maybe even said) that everyone’s but Glenn’s opinion doesn’t matter. So why would we give it? |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 19, 2021 14:43:06 GMT -5
If our input is not needed, it will not be given. 'our'... Are you speaking for other people ? Read Brenden's response |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New Jersey on Aug 19, 2021 15:27:39 GMT -5
Why aren’t these rule change proposals discussed in a small competition committee? Then it’s not a free for all with everyone and also not a sole person making all the decisions. Because sometimes things can be overlooked but if there’s 4-5 people discussing, something getting overlooked is a lot less likely. We already have the INNER CIRCLE |
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Aug 19, 2021 17:21:09 GMT -5
^ lol
I'll continue to give input on virtually everything. I think the NHL may have committees, but here we pay our 25.00 ! I expect to have a full share of input with regards to everything lol. Seriously, we ALL should be able to weigh in and have a stake in changes ect.
I know there are 'bad' days when everyone is on edge. That's probably what happened here today.
|
|
|
|
Post by Brenden-Oregon on Aug 19, 2021 17:32:44 GMT -5
No, you actually just reinforced our point. The NHL doesn’t have one person making all the rules/changes, it has a committee made up of all GM’s, who then vote on rule changes. I don’t think one person should be changing rules in this league.
|
|
|
|
Post by Phil-Cornwall on Aug 19, 2021 17:39:38 GMT -5
there's 'our' again.....are you and Scotty 'Boyfriends' Brenden? Hmmmm  'not one person' is MY point too, now. Yes...somehow I just reinforced your point UNKNOWINGLY! But no, I don't want to get into any 'alternative lifestyle' clubs. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott-New York on Aug 19, 2021 17:51:15 GMT -5
I'm not sure where you've been, but we absolutely have a committee which discusses a variety of league business, which is the group Scott refers to as the inner circle. That does not mean that owners shouldn't have an opportunity to put in their 2 cents on rule changes, etc. It would appear at the moment, that is not welcome, so while you remain vocal, some of us might opt to say less or to no longer offer our experience in answering questions posted by other members, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Matt-Colorado on Aug 19, 2021 17:52:04 GMT -5
Why aren’t these rule change proposals discussed in a small competition committee? Then it’s not a free for all with everyone and also not a sole person making all the decisions. Because sometimes things can be overlooked but if there’s 4-5 people discussing, something getting overlooked is a lot less likely. We already have the INNER CIRCLE “The greater good” |
|
|
|
Post by Brenden-Oregon on Aug 19, 2021 17:56:54 GMT -5
Wait, I’m actually confused now. So there is an inner circle who discuss things like this? And even they didn’t know about the rule change?
|
|
