TcNorth
Registered User
- Jan 25, 2015
- 2,545
- 431
Interesting, I like this idea.
No. They would all end up in London, or at least the best players would.
Interesting, I like this idea.
No. They would all end up in London, or at least the best players would.
I'm a little confused here - Are you suggesting players have the right to "self-wave" at the draft? What is the point of the draft then? Players can go where they want? How does the team/league control this? This looks full of flaws.I beg to differ. Waived players typically go initially, to those teams that finished nearer to the bottom. To have a shot at any self-waived player, most of the other teams would first have to pass, before London ever got a chance to sign them. ( Unless of course. London had finished way down the standings).
This also is a benefit to a player opting to self-waive. They would most likley be claimed by a team who are in a rebuilding mode, and just might have a better chance at nailing down a roster spot against some lesser competition. Perhaps, better ice time ?
There's also a "put up, or shut up " element to this idea, as well. Once a self-waived player is claimed, it's then up to them to demonstrate their value, to their new team. The player, his parents, and agent, must have some level of conviction before opting for this escape clause. If the self-waived player can not perform with a clean slate before them, then perhaps it was best for all concerned that they left, since a malcontent doesn't bring much to a team environment.
If you read my previous proposal in page 3 of this thread, that should explain the what & the how.
It's basically a way for the league to address the discontent that some players encounter, when they
feel relegated to playing behind a less-talented individual who occupies a roster spot due to nepotism.
I'm not proposing that players do this at the point of the draft, but rather as an "escape clause" when they find themselves in an untennable situation. It's also somewhat punative toward a team that consciously opts toward nepotism, as a routine policy. It's an attempt to discourage the practice, and attempting to level the field of opportunity for players.
They should have forced Flint to trade Rolf's son. That would finally set things right.
...Since the entire Flint team walked out last fall, though, the league may have still had a huge problem to deal with if the entire team had applied to have their cases reviewed by such a committee.
I did read through the entire thread a couple of times - that is why I was confused. All of this exists although rules are not in place. Player not happy - goes home - sits and waits for a trade or heads off to school. Happens every year. 1st rounders have a system in place to help the drafting teams if they don't report. Setting up a program where the league has to listen to players/parents/agents on why little Johnny doesn't want to go to Soo ( too cold) or Owen Sound ( my allergies bother me) or London ( nothing to do there) would be a full time job for 10 people. All of this seems like a lot of bother to fix one or two issues. Nepotism is never going away and the majority of teams handle this very well. I said this before but Parents supporting their kids is the backbone of hockey and without it hockey as a sport is done.If you read my previous proposal in page 3 of this thread, that should explain the what & the how.
It's basically a way for the league to address the discontent that some players encounter, when they
feel relegated to playing behind a less-talented individual who occupies a roster spot due to nepotism.
I'm not proposing that players do this at the point of the draft, but rather as an "escape clause" when they find themselves in an untennable situation. It's also somewhat punative toward a team that consciously opts toward nepotism, as a routine policy. It's an attempt to discourage the practice, and attempting to level the field of opportunity for players.
I did read through the entire thread a couple of times - that is why I was confused. All of this exists although rules are not in place. Player not happy - goes home - sits and waits for a trade or heads off to school. Happens every year. 1st rounders have a system in place to help the drafting teams if they don't report. Setting up a program where the league has to listen to players/parents/agents on why little Johnny doesn't want to go to Soo ( too cold) or Owen Sound ( my allergies bother me) or London ( nothing to do there) would be a full time job for 10 people. All of this seems like a lot of bother to fix one or two issues. Nepotism is never going away and the majority of teams handle this very well. I said this before but Parents supporting their kids is the backbone of hockey and without it hockey as a sport is done.
Purple Phart said:Should any player (s ) feel that they're being unfairly treated as a result of an owner/manager/coache's son or others
being affordrd prefferential treatment., then those player(s) can apply to have themselves waived, without compensation. There should be an independant tribunal appointed by the league to determine if the player's claim has substance. If the tribunal is in agreement, then that player ( or players) can be freely acquired by
any other team, without compensation.
This gives any player an out, and costs the offending organization the rights to that player. In effect, this would force teams contemplating bringing in a potential nepotism conflict, a punative cost to do so.
And in light of all that has gone on, players continue to report
I asked this question earlier what constitutes nepotism? Son? Nephew? Friend of the family?
Almost every player thinks someone on the team is getting preferential treatment? Once you open the door a crack - they will come. Creating rules to stop people from investing in the league is not the route. These are the people that put their money ( and big sums of it) up to mantain franchises. If one of them gets out of hand the league will deal with them (Flint). But creating a kangaroo court is not the answer.Here is what was posted
It's for different situations than you have stated
What do you think any GM would be willing to give in return for a player that they could have had for free, but chose to pass on for 21 1/2 rounds in two years worth of drafts???
If the league asked a team to deal for Hakon as a favor, the deal could be for "future considerations", which basically means "for nothing". It would have to be a team that was thin on the blue line, though.
Which brings up another point that I've made a couple of times already...guess who is "thin on the blue line"??? The Firebirds. Theyre heading into next year looking at only having 5 defensemen on the roster, including Hakon.
Oshawa drafts Peter DeBoer's (minority owner son) Jack Deboer in second round. Kid is already committed to Boston University and the USA National program. But the kid needs another feather in his cap and a Plan B.
Nepotism?
Oshawa drafts Peter DeBoer's (minority owner son) Jack Deboer in second round. Kid is already committed to Boston University and the USA National program. But the kid needs another feather in his cap and a Plan B.
Nepotism?
You understand that Branch doesn't have the power to make rule changes?
The Governors vote on the rule changes, does anyone actually think they will vote to ban teams from drafting/signing family members? Why would they possibly do that?
First and foremost.. no one thinks it will ever happen to them, they all have it under control
Second.. at what point do you draw the line? Sons? Nephews? Illegitimate son of a secretary they had relations with in 2001?
I'm fine with the way it is now. I think the Flint situation is a one off and Sudbury doesn't come close to this.
That being said I recognize that some feel that there should be changes made and I like the option that Purple Heart proposed
If you read my previous proposal in page 3 of this thread, that should explain the what & the how.
It's basically a way for the league to address the discontent that some players encounter, when they
feel relegated to playing behind a less-talented individual who occupies a roster spot due to nepotism.
I'm not proposing that players do this at the point of the draft, but rather as an "escape clause" when they find themselves in an untennable situation. It's also somewhat punative toward a team that consciously opts toward nepotism, as a routine policy. It's an attempt to discourage the practice, and attempting to level the field of opportunity for players.
If you read my previous proposal in page 3 of this thread, that should explain the what & the how.
It's basically a way for the league to address the discontent that some players encounter, when they
feel relegated to playing behind a less-talented individual who occupies a roster spot due to nepotism.
I'm not proposing that players do this at the point of the draft, but rather as an "escape clause" when they find themselves in an untennable situation. It's also somewhat punative toward a team that consciously opts toward nepotism, as a routine policy. It's an attempt to discourage the practice, and attempting to level the field of opportunity for players.
Wow. Just think if NHL players could have this "escape clause" before they reached free agency. It would be an absolute mess.
I'm a little confused here - Are you suggesting players have the right to "self-wave" at the draft? What is the point of the draft then? Players can go where they want? How does the team/league control this? This looks full of flaws.
Not the first time I have seen something like this posted. My question then and still is.. what due diligence could have been done that would have uncovered that there was the potential for this situation to arrive
Not exactly. There are no rules surrounding drafting and/or playing a relative of an owner.
Kirby Rychel was drafted by Barrie - traded to Missy and then traded to Windsor, but I get what you are trying to say.
The point is, there appears to have been zero due diligence when it came to Neilson. I'm willing to bet all Branch saw was a wealthy guy who could provide a new home for the Whalers.