HomeCalendarFAQSearchMemberlistUsergroupsRegisterLog in
. . . .Unofficial Syracuse Crunch Fan Forum . . . .

Share | 
 

 Amerks to go independent?

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
Amerks6

avatar

Posts : 99
Points : 111
Join date : 2010-08-23
Location : Rochester

PostSubject: Amerks to go independent?   Sun Nov 28, 2010 3:46 pm

Back to top Go down
View user profile
MrBigMike
Admin
avatar

Posts : 235
Points : 480
Join date : 2010-08-08
Age : 36
Location : Syracuse

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Sun Nov 28, 2010 11:56 pm

it would be interesting to see how that works out. My main question is, how many players are you going to get to sign a deal where they know they have zero chance to go up to the NHL? All while keeping it under the "vet" limit?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://syracusecrunch.forumotions.net
lettucehead

avatar

Posts : 123
Points : 195
Join date : 2010-08-28
Location : Syracuse,NY

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Mon Nov 29, 2010 5:38 pm

Boy after reading that we might have took Cbus a liitle for granted.
Dale Tallon sounds like a dictator instead of an NHL GM.
I'd say your best shot would be Phoenix.
I don't recall attendance figures but do people watch hockey in San Antonio?
What the hell would it matter if they are having a winning season this year?
The only thing they have going is the proximity to Phoenix and who knows how long there will be a team there.

13th in attendance 4700 per game
about average during a winning season
Back to top Go down
View user profile
sec13crunch



Posts : 33
Points : 35
Join date : 2010-10-01

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Tue Nov 30, 2010 4:38 pm

MrBigMike wrote:
it would be interesting to see how that works out. My main question is, how many players are you going to get to sign a deal where they know they have zero chance to go up to the NHL? All while keeping it under the "vet" limit?
I think they could do very well. They could go out and sign guys like Linger to AHL deals and then bring in non vet fringe NHL players like Trevor smith that can be signed by anyone during the season.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
MrBigMike
Admin
avatar

Posts : 235
Points : 480
Join date : 2010-08-08
Age : 36
Location : Syracuse

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Tue Nov 30, 2010 6:03 pm

sec13crunch wrote:
MrBigMike wrote:
it would be interesting to see how that works out. My main question is, how many players are you going to get to sign a deal where they know they have zero chance to go up to the NHL? All while keeping it under the "vet" limit?
I think they could do very well. They could go out and sign guys like Linger to AHL deals and then bring in non vet fringe NHL players like Trevor smith that can be signed by anyone during the season.


So what you're saying is that (for the sake of argument) Rochester's fringe non-vet guys would be free to sign elsewhere mid season? Where does that leave the Amerks?

I don't see a set up like that working. Back to my original question, what kind of non-vets are going to want to sign with a team that has no NHL club?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://syracusecrunch.forumotions.net
Amerks6

avatar

Posts : 99
Points : 111
Join date : 2010-08-23
Location : Rochester

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Tue Nov 30, 2010 9:13 pm

MrBigMike wrote:
sec13crunch wrote:
MrBigMike wrote:
it would be interesting to see how that works out. My main question is, how many players are you going to get to sign a deal where they know they have zero chance to go up to the NHL? All while keeping it under the "vet" limit?
I think they could do very well. They could go out and sign guys like Linger to AHL deals and then bring in non vet fringe NHL players like Trevor smith that can be signed by anyone during the season.


So what you're saying is that (for the sake of argument) Rochester's fringe non-vet guys would be free to sign elsewhere mid season? Where does that leave the Amerks?

I don't see a set up like that working. Back to my original question, what kind of non-vets are going to want to sign with a team that has no NHL club?
Where would they sign elsewhere during the season? The NHL? So players that couldn't get an NHL deal all summer would suddenly have NHL teams banging down the door? To Europe? If they wanted to go to Europe, they would have just opted to go there anyway.

As far as the "non vets" there's guys all over the AHL like Jacob Micflikier, Kyle Rank, Mike Kostka etc. that are quality players that are on AHL deals and would be nice complimentary players.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
MrBigMike
Admin
avatar

Posts : 235
Points : 480
Join date : 2010-08-08
Age : 36
Location : Syracuse

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Tue Nov 30, 2010 10:29 pm

Not sure if you were directing your question at me. I was stating a scenario as I understood it the way sec13 explained it.

Nothing personal, I just don't see it happening. To get quality AHL guys, owners are going to have to shell out 6 figure salaries. And again, good luck finding a full roster of has been vets and never will be top dollar AHL snipers.

You're confusing an AHL deal (with an affiliate) which still leaves the possibility of getting a shot up top, to an AHL deal with no chance at all (with out an affiliate).

I just don't see it. Drop the vet rule and maybe it's possible.

Not for nothing but I don't see Amerks brass shelling out a million+ on a roster when attendance is in the dumps. You have seen both sides of the coin when it comes to how good a roster looks in the off-season too. Big names won't draw flies and big names don't always pan out. Hell we've seen the same.

Outside of a big name NHL club, or a very rich owner with the ability to sign his own players, it is what it is.

Back to top Go down
View user profile http://syracusecrunch.forumotions.net
Amerks6

avatar

Posts : 99
Points : 111
Join date : 2010-08-23
Location : Rochester

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Tue Nov 30, 2010 11:07 pm

MrBigMike wrote:
Not sure if you were directing your question at me. I was stating a scenario as I understood it the way sec13 explained it.

Nothing personal, I just don't see it happening. To get quality AHL guys, owners are going to have to shell out 6 figure salaries. And again, good luck finding a full roster of has been vets and never will be top dollar AHL snipers.

You're confusing an AHL deal (with an affiliate) which still leaves the possibility of getting a shot up top, to an AHL deal with no chance at all (with out an affiliate).

I just don't see it. Drop the vet rule and maybe it's possible.

Not for nothing but I don't see Amerks brass shelling out a million+ on a roster when attendance is in the dumps. You have seen both sides of the coin when it comes to how good a roster looks in the off-season too. Big names won't draw flies and big names don't always pan out. Hell we've seen the same.

Outside of a big name NHL club, or a very rich owner with the ability to sign his own players, it is what it is.

What's the difference between an AHL deal when a team has an affiliation or not? On an independent team, you could essentially be showcasing yourself to the entire NHL. As far as guys on AHL deals, just in the last 2 years the Amerks have had Chris Taylor, Mike York and Mike Kostka on AHL deals. Lawrence Nycholat in Hershey is on an AHL deal. Haydar is. Contrary to popular belief, not every single player in the hockey world has to have the NHL allure. Some guys just realize their time has passed and still want to make a good buck playing hockey in North America.

As far as shelling out money, Curt Styres spent 2 million dollars last season on players/fees so I don't think it's a big deal to him. Styres IS a very rich owner.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
MrBigMike
Admin
avatar

Posts : 235
Points : 480
Join date : 2010-08-08
Age : 36
Location : Syracuse

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Wed Dec 01, 2010 1:13 am

Amerks6 wrote:
MrBigMike wrote:
Not sure if you were directing your question at me. I was stating a scenario as I understood it the way sec13 explained it.

Nothing personal, I just don't see it happening. To get quality AHL guys, owners are going to have to shell out 6 figure salaries. And again, good luck finding a full roster of has been vets and never will be top dollar AHL snipers.

You're confusing an AHL deal (with an affiliate) which still leaves the possibility of getting a shot up top, to an AHL deal with no chance at all (with out an affiliate).

I just don't see it. Drop the vet rule and maybe it's possible.

Not for nothing but I don't see Amerks brass shelling out a million+ on a roster when attendance is in the dumps. You have seen both sides of the coin when it comes to how good a roster looks in the off-season too. Big names won't draw flies and big names don't always pan out. Hell we've seen the same.

Outside of a big name NHL club, or a very rich owner with the ability to sign his own players, it is what it is.

What's the difference between an AHL deal when a team has an affiliation or not? On an independent team, you could essentially be showcasing yourself to the entire NHL. As far as guys on AHL deals, just in the last 2 years the Amerks have had Chris Taylor, Mike York and Mike Kostka on AHL deals. Lawrence Nycholat in Hershey is on an AHL deal. Haydar is. Contrary to popular belief, not every single player in the hockey world has to have the NHL allure. Some guys just realize their time has passed and still want to make a good buck playing hockey in North America.

As far as shelling out money, Curt Styres spent 2 million dollars last season on players/fees so I don't think it's a big deal to him. Styres IS a very rich owner.

I'll try this one more time. My point is:

In keeping within the vet limit, a team would be hard pressed to find non-vet players willing to sign off on a shot at the NHL. The guys that realize they are "past their time" will most likely fall into vet status.

Younger guys, who are not vets, likely still have a shot at the show. Not all, but some.

The difference, as defined by me:

An AHL deal on an affiliated team, means without violating your contract the NHL club can bring you up if needed or desired.

An AHL deal on a team with no NHL affiliate means the "younger non-vet" players who are still in their prime and have a shot, will not get a call up. Unless they have an "out clause", they're riding out the season in the AHL.

I'm sure some guys accept that they have peaked in the AHL, I'm also sure that some may want to wind down their career in the AHL. All I am saying is that IN MY OPINION it would be hard to fill an entire roster full of these players.

Now add another million or more on top of the 2+ million Kurt dished out last year and you're talking about a big risk on a product he probably is already losing money on, in a failing economy, on a slumping team with a diminishing fan base.


Maybe I'm wrong, maybe I'm not. Maybe you agree, maybe you don't. It's my take on a topic that was presented for discussion.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://syracusecrunch.forumotions.net
Amerks6

avatar

Posts : 99
Points : 111
Join date : 2010-08-23
Location : Rochester

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Wed Dec 01, 2010 1:38 am

MrBigMike wrote:


In keeping within the vet limit, a team would be hard pressed to find non-vet players willing to sign off on a shot at the NHL. The guys that realize they are "past their time" will most likely fall into vet status.
I've already given examples of non vet players under AHL contracts.


MrBigMike wrote:
I'm sure some guys accept that they have peaked in the AHL, I'm also sure that some may want to wind down their career in the AHL. All I am saying is that IN MY OPINION it would be hard to fill an entire roster full of these players.
You don't need an entire roster of these players.

MrBigMike wrote:
Now add another million or more on top of the 2+ million Kurt dished out last year and you're talking about a big risk on a product he probably is already losing money on, in a failing economy, on a slumping team with a diminishing fan base.
At 2 million, that's almost over 90,000 per player. Considering many of the low end players on the roster would cost you 40 or 50 grand, 2 million seems a fair estimation on a player budget. And economy and all this other crap really means nothing. Dropping 3 million on a team could be like us throwing 300 bucks down on something. It's not how we interpret the money, it's how he does.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
sec13crunch



Posts : 33
Points : 35
Join date : 2010-10-01

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:12 am

MrBigMike wrote:
sec13crunch wrote:
MrBigMike wrote:
it would be interesting to see how that works out. My main question is, how many players are you going to get to sign a deal where they know they have zero chance to go up to the NHL? All while keeping it under the "vet" limit?
I think they could do very well. They could go out and sign guys like Linger to AHL deals and then bring in non vet fringe NHL players like Trevor smith that can be signed by anyone during the season.


So what you're saying is that (for the sake of argument) Rochester's fringe non-vet guys would be free to sign elsewhere mid season? Where does that leave the Amerks?

I don't see a set up like that working. Back to my original question, what kind of non-vets are going to want to sign with a team that has no NHL club?
What im saying is i can see this working very well. They can sign guys like Tim Stapleton, if he does well with the Amerks a team can come in and sign him to an NHL deal and then the amerks could go out and get another quality player. I think fringe guys will look at that situation as a good one to audition for all 30 teams.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
MrBigMike
Admin
avatar

Posts : 235
Points : 480
Join date : 2010-08-08
Age : 36
Location : Syracuse

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Wed Dec 01, 2010 8:11 pm

Amerks6:


All i can say is 3 million, is 3 million. I highly doubt that the amerks owner is soooooo rich 3 million a season with little to no return is not an issue.

Good luck with it, I hope it works out well for you. I have nothing more to say other than what i have said 3 times already.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://syracusecrunch.forumotions.net
Amerks6

avatar

Posts : 99
Points : 111
Join date : 2010-08-23
Location : Rochester

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Wed Dec 01, 2010 9:21 pm

MrBigMike wrote:
Amerks6:


All i can say is 3 million, is 3 million. I highly doubt that the amerks owner is soooooo rich 3 million a season with little to no return is not an issue.

Good luck with it, I hope it works out well for you. I have nothing more to say other than what i have said 3 times already.
Well considering this isn't a long term idea, I don't think money is the issue. Especially when he dropped 2 million on the Amerks last season.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
MrBigMike
Admin
avatar

Posts : 235
Points : 480
Join date : 2010-08-08
Age : 36
Location : Syracuse

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Wed Dec 01, 2010 11:40 pm

Amerks6 wrote:
MrBigMike wrote:
Amerks6:


All i can say is 3 million, is 3 million. I highly doubt that the amerks owner is soooooo rich 3 million a season with little to no return is not an issue.

Good luck with it, I hope it works out well for you. I have nothing more to say other than what i have said 3 times already.
Well considering this isn't a long term idea, I don't think money is the issue. Especially when he dropped 2 million on the Amerks last season.

Ok, I present you this. The whole reason behind this is presumably that FL sucks. As a result, the Amerks are sub par. Continuing with the **** rolls downhill theory, attendance is down.

How much better can an Amerk team be that is thrown together in the off-season, with players that have likely yet to play together? Add a new coach, and it can get hairy. Just ask Crunch fans.

While the change may be exciting and spark a rejuvenated love for the team, that will wear off. Just ask Crunch fans.

So, from a business perspective, what sense does it make for your owner to dish out a MILLION + more (don't forget coaching staff) for essentially the same result?

Yeah maybe the team will be great, who knows? But it will take time for the (possibly) good team to draw fans, both old and new thus turning a profit. Then what? Next year if a new affiliate is signed, start from scratch again?

I understand that to you guys, something right now is better than nothing. To me it makes no financial sense. Then again, I am not a millionaire.

Take a player's stance. Insert the same variables as above, and I think your already small pool gets smaller. As mentioned, yeah it might be a good chance to advertise yourself to all 30 NHL teams but maybe not.

It would seem that the only reason Amerk brass would humor this idea for financial reasons. Put a winning team on the ice and everyone is happy.

Unless it would be a long term thing, to me it makes no sense. A one or two year deal is just a band-aid. Remember, a polished turd is still a turd.

To be honest, I'm over this thread. I have exhausted my self trying to explain, and re-explain my points/ opinions. You either don't get it or don't agree. Every retort you have posted, in my eyes, fails to answer my questions.

That's fine. Your team, your opinion. We can't all always agree.

If it happens, and you end up with a better team on the ice, come to the WM and beer is on me.

I just can't explain my points any differently. No hard feelings.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://syracusecrunch.forumotions.net
sec13crunch



Posts : 33
Points : 35
Join date : 2010-10-01

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Thu Dec 02, 2010 10:24 am

Amerks6 wrote:
MrBigMike wrote:
Amerks6:


All i can say is 3 million, is 3 million. I highly doubt that the amerks owner is soooooo rich 3 million a season with little to no return is not an issue.

Good luck with it, I hope it works out well for you. I have nothing more to say other than what i have said 3 times already.
Well considering this isn't a long term idea, I don't think money is the issue. Especially when he dropped 2 million on the Amerks last season.
I know he dropped 2 million last season but if this does happen he will have to spend the dough more wisely, he spent that on 5 players and the Panthers took care of the rest. I do however think if you guys are gonna do it you sure do have the right owner for it.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Amerks6

avatar

Posts : 99
Points : 111
Join date : 2010-08-23
Location : Rochester

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Sat Dec 04, 2010 7:56 pm

MrBigMike wrote:

Ok, I present you this. The whole reason behind this is presumably that FL sucks. As a result, the Amerks are sub par. Continuing with the **** rolls downhill theory, attendance is down.
Not really, paid attendance has been increasing for 3 years.

How much better can an Amerk team be that is thrown together in the off-season, with players that have likely yet to play together? Add a new coach, and it can get hairy. Just ask Crunch fans.
The AHL is all about roster turnover. That wouldn't be much of a concern, especially considering this team would have an entire training camp together while other AHL teams won't be fully together until possibly a couple days before the season.

While the change may be exciting and spark a rejuvenated love for the team, that will wear off. Just ask Crunch fans.
This is assuming they are a bad team, which you cannot make.

So, from a business perspective, what sense does it make for your owner to dish out a MILLION + more (don't forget coaching staff) for essentially the same result?
Again, you have no idea what the result may be. Don't presume to know what Nolan and Gage know. They could have an excellent plan in place and could very well form a quality team. And as for money, again. it all comes down to Curt Styres. If he wants to drop a couple million for his own team, then he will.

Yeah maybe the team will be great, who knows? But it will take time for the (possibly) good team to draw fans, both old and new thus turning a profit. Then what? Next year if a new affiliate is signed, start from scratch again?
That's the whole point, to be good. You're looking way too deep into this. If the team is good, they will draw fans. When Rochester was 18-3 last season, people were waiting for tickets until the end of the first period. Win and people come. As for a new affiliation, you don't have to start from scratch. If they sign on with a good, respectable NHL team, that will get fans excited all over again.

I understand that to you guys, something right now is better than nothing. To me it makes no financial sense. Then again, I am not a millionaire.
Minor league sports almost never make financial success. He wants to win, plain and simple. It's not about money, for the 20th time.

Take a player's stance. Insert the same variables as above, and I think your already small pool gets smaller. As mentioned, yeah it might be a good chance to advertise yourself to all 30 NHL teams but maybe not.
It's essentially the same as players going to Europe, except they will basically be "showing off" to an NHL team every night instead of being across an ocean.

It would seem that the only reason Amerk brass would humor this idea for financial reasons. Put a winning team on the ice and everyone is happy.
Huh? They are humoring it because it can potentially be the best way to win. I'm not sure how the Crunch are run, but here it's all about winning all the time. And this ownership group is willing to do whatever is necessary. Has it worked yet? Nope, but it will eventually. I applaud them (or any other AHL team) that attempts to do this to win and to make fans happy.

Unless it would be a long term thing, to me it makes no sense. A one or two year deal is just a band-aid. Remember, a polished turd is still a turd.
Again, what? It's a short term idea until more attractive NHL teams are available for affiliations.

To be honest, I'm over this thread. I have exhausted my self trying to explain, and re-explain my points/ opinions. You either don't get it or don't agree. Every retort you have posted, in my eyes, fails to answer my questions.
I could say the exact same to you. The points seem to fly right over your head.



If it happens, and you end up with a better team on the ice, come to the WM and beer is on me.
Sounds good to me.
.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
lettucehead

avatar

Posts : 123
Points : 195
Join date : 2010-08-28
Location : Syracuse,NY

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Sat Dec 04, 2010 8:39 pm

Amerks6, I know your trying to be positive about the affiliation situation.
You have to be because the next option is to most likely suspend the 11-12 season.
The thing I don't get is that if teams can put a winner on the ice and turn a profit why this hasn't been attempted
in the last 23 years.

I get the feeling that the D&C put this article out there so Amerk fans won't stress so much about the future.
The one thing I disagree with is that an independent AHL team can be successful on the ice, but bad hockey is better than no hockey at all.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Amerks6

avatar

Posts : 99
Points : 111
Join date : 2010-08-23
Location : Rochester

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Sun Dec 05, 2010 1:15 am

lettucehead wrote:
Amerks6, I know your trying to be positive about the affiliation situation.
You have to be because the next option is to most likely suspend the 11-12 season.
The thing I don't get is that if teams can put a winner on the ice and turn a profit why this hasn't been attempted
in the last 23 years.

I get the feeling that the D&C put this article out there so Amerk fans won't stress so much about the future.
The one thing I disagree with is that an independent AHL team can be successful on the ice, but bad hockey is better than no hockey at all.
You likely can't be independent and turn a profit. I don't know how many more times I can say it, that's not the point. He's not trying to make money off of this move. He's trying to win.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
lettucehead

avatar

Posts : 123
Points : 195
Join date : 2010-08-28
Location : Syracuse,NY

PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   Sun Dec 05, 2010 10:08 am

Amerks6 wrote:
lettucehead wrote:
Amerks6, I know your trying to be positive about the affiliation situation.
You have to be because the next option is to most likely suspend the 11-12 season.
The thing I don't get is that if teams can put a winner on the ice and turn a profit why this hasn't been attempted
in the last 23 years.

I get the feeling that the D&C put this article out there so Amerk fans won't stress so much about the future.
The one thing I disagree with is that an independent AHL team can be successful on the ice, but bad hockey is better than no hockey at all.
You likely can't be independent and turn a profit. I don't know how many more times I can say it, that's not the point. He's not trying to make money off of this move. He's trying to win.


If Styres pays KHL type money to his team then yes they could have a winner, but I doubt that will happen.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Amerks to go independent?   

Back to top Go down
 
Amerks to go independent?
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1
 Similar topics
-
» Rear independent camping heater - needed it or not?? Advice needed
» IFS, IRS anyone tried it?
» Peter Kelly Irish Indo Article
» Indo Article
» Warrnambool BMW service?

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Unofficial Syracuse Crunch Fan Forum :: AHL Chatter-
Jump to: