New Rules Good for NHL Only?
There’s been a good amount of talk recently about the trickle down effect of the “new” NHL rules to other leagues from minors to juniors to rec leagues.
Some reference: Eric McErlain, Smiley Tom Benjamin, Hockeydirt, Jes G?lbez
Blake Sebring, covering the Fort Wayne Komets for the News-Sentinel, had this to say in a piece title League risks boring fans:
It’s a good thing I had a late deadline because I just finished typing in all the penalties from Saturday night’s Komets game. I got my first blister Saturday night during the game writing them all down, and then added two more typing them in after Fort Wayne’s 8-3 win over Quad City.
Referee Jim Hawthorne called 30 penalties in the game, giving each team 12 power plays. That seems to be typical of all the games around the United Hockey League.
There might not be many UHL fans left. It was obvious at least 3,000 of the opening-night crowd of 10,058 left Memorial Coliseum very early Saturday night.
The game really wasn’t that entertaining, which is a huge problem for the league administration, owners, officials — and even the players.
The NHL is a business with a pretty solid foundation, minor leagues are not in comparison. Penalty parades (when not from the aftermath of a brawl) doesn’t sit well with minor league fans. Raw entertainment is where it’s at and if it’s not fun, it’s not going to last.
Comments:
But this is nothing new for the minor leagues. Consider that, unlike the top-level clubs, the priority for the farm teams is to develop and maintain talent—not to win games. The outstanding players tend to get called up, regardless of the effect that has in the minor-league standings. That doesn’t sit well with fans in Peoria, but I think most understand the set-up.
Sure, it’s a challenge to sell tickets that way, but they’ve been doing it for decades. Somehow, I think they’ll adapt to this new wrinkle.
Related to that, the guys in the farm system have to get used to the stricter rules if they want to move to the next level; if they don’t, they’re not going to help NHL clubs. In fact, they’ll drag down play at the major-league level. Is it worth a degradation from the bottom-up, just to edify minor league fans? Of course not.
Posted by CT on Oct 25, 2006 at 10:44 AMCT, you’re too used to baseball. AA hockey is far, far more about entertainment than development. They want to be development leagues, but in reality few make it, and the ones who do are mostly goaltenders (and via the ECHL).
These teams are independently owned and operated and the NHL is not covering losses. You must appeal to the fans or the team is gone, it really is that simple. No gate, no team; and no one wants to see boring hockey in the minors.
Another quote from the article:
The NHL players have the talent to make something like that work, but UHL players haven’t shown they are disciplined enough, mentally and physically, to allow the system to work.
That’s a bigger problem with the implementation of the rules than most think. A lot of these players simply don’t have the legs or skillset for them.
Those who can make the National league aren’t going to drag down play, no matter what the rules are. These leagues have had considerably different rules for some time, and they’ve always managed to adapt before.
Posted by David M Singer on Oct 25, 2006 at 12:11 PMIf this is specifically addressing the AA level, then fine. I was thinking more in terms of the minor-league system as a whole, from AHL on down. When the mission is to develop talent, the rules should stay fairly consistent (with room for experimentation).
If it makes more sense for the UHL to be more akin to the Arena Football League—similar game, but not aiming at being a feeder system for the big leagues—then I agree it’s pointless to mandate NHL-style rules in places like Fort Wayne. In fact, maybe the UHL should go even further and go with a more completely divergent game, just to be different. That would be the hook for fans, versus the “see the future big-leaguers” angle. And maybe some of the more fun innovations there could trickle upward.
Posted by CT on Oct 25, 2006 at 12:37 PMThe ECHL, which bills itself as AA hockey, has a pertinent addition to this debate.
The E has clearly hitched its wagon to being the third-tier developmental rung in North American pro hockey. Like I said, if the UHL doesn’t want to go that way—and maybe it shouldn’t, because one AA league is enough—then it should, indeed, further develop along an Arena Football model.
Posted by CT on Oct 26, 2006 at 04:35 PMI’m not saying AA leagues need to go LNAH-style. Fighting’s a large part of games there, mostly for for entertainment (and what I’m getting at is just games having a second angle, not necessarily a fighting angle). Entertainment is simply a bigger factor in selling the sport below the major league level (in every sport).
At the end of the day, they have to sell tickets and you can’t sell them on being a development league.
I do think the AA leagues can have different rulesets and still have players make the transition with little/no problem. They’ve been doing it for years from the juniors/minors/NCAA/Europe. Only now are all the AAs aligning to try and match the NHL ruleset and it just doesn’t seem like it translates well. MLB and the NCAA/minors rules are almost in sync, but not quite. Players move up fine.
From some of the links in the post you can even read about midget leagues taking on these new rules. Imagine forcing Little League to use the same rules (and have them called the same) as MLB? It just doesn’t work.
Posted by David M Singer on Oct 26, 2006 at 06:00 PM
Next entry: Harney's Sentencing Delayed
Previous entry: Randomness Oct 22, 2006