Commish for the Day!

[Scurvy 1,495]

As Commission of the VHL for a day (a job I would never really want) my changes wouldn’t be 

drastic.  However my changes would impact the league’s dynamics somewhat. Let’s break my suggestions down and discuss implications:

 

I would increase the number of fights over the course of a season.  Last season I had 8 total which was an all-time high but would have liked to see more.  By increasing the frequency of fights, I would be emphasizing the physical aspect of the game.  Even in SIM hockey there is nothing better than to see a 2^ndperiod box score of an all-out line brawl.  Now in real life fighting has historically been part of the game, in today’s era the league has taken several steps to reduce the prevalence due to safety concerns, real or perceived. I know the NHL is trying to balance the entertainment value of fights with player safety and league image.  HOWEVER, in a SIM league we don’t have ANY of those concerns. 

 

 

I would also create an Enforcer build style that had value to in game success.  The enforcer role typically refers to a player specializing in physicality, toughness, and fighting.  By making this build more relevant to in game success, I would encourage players to focus on physical attributes rather that overall skill development. This could impact the league’s competitiveness and shift focus away for some players who want to make a bruiser to combat opposing team’s bruiser.  I also feel it balances out and can add to overall scoring due to power plays and certain matchups. 

 

Introducing an Intimidation attribute would also be added with the removal of penalty shot or leadership.  Adding an intimidation attribute would enhance the role of physicality in Enforcers or even stay at home defensemen types such as Mo Probert and Phil Strasmore.  The negative in this attribute is it may lead to imbalance in gameplay that maybe favors players who focus solely on intimidation rather than skill and defense.  

 

Next, I MIGHT consider removing the VHLE and offer players two seasons in VHLM to grow their player.   Now players can earn and take their chance after one season in the VHL but adding the VHLE teams (or some) to the VHLM and making it two complete seasons would increase the competitive commitment required from players before making the jump to VHL.  It creates a league where GMs can have two season (at least) to win a cup, make necessary trades, and draft better knowing they have two seasons to develop and mentor new talent.  It could result in a higher skill level overall, as players gain more experience and development in the minors. The biggest negative in removing the VHLE is it could limit opportunities for players who enjoy that experience (as I did) or prefer that development path.   Now don’t get me wrong.  I need the TPE for this article and this seemed to be a good and often talked about topic in forum.  I loved my time in the VHLE and would not change my player’s career path at all.  It just seems like an interesting topic to throw out there.  

 

Oh and I’d bag skate Rip Wheeler @ScottyPtil he threw up! 

 

Commissioner Payne

 

Will claim normal media spot on next weeks but theme this week.