Decrease Teams Increase Roster Sizes

[probably not noah 346]

I wasn't a member before the expansion.

Imagine that, new members have different opinions than old ones.

 

Oh I know, that wasn't by any means a definitive "things can never change" statement, it was a legitimate question because I remember being strongly opposed to expansion for this exact reason 

[probably not noah 346]

Also, there seems to be this image of the 'old boys club' that is used any time somebody in authority doesn't like an idea. It's a loosely defined concept used to talk about any member who has been here for a long time, even though we have all shown differing opinions on this. Know who is someone often considered in the old boys club? Frank, but he started this thread. 

 

Speaking as one of the older members in the league, we're not averse the change. I personally just don't like change for the sake of change. When something needs to be fixed (like the VHLM cap issue, or TPE inflation) we have put it forth to discussion and enacted change. It seems that far too often people try to stick all old members into the same boat.

 

I have had very heated discussions for and against changes on either side, I've gotten into it with Kendrick, Sterling, or Devise pretty intensely in the past. Just because they're some of the old guard and I've been here awhile too doesn't mean I'm going to automatically agree with everything that they say. So can we please stop it with this idea that all members who have been here for 3 generations are conspiring and running the league? It's a narrative that people bend around members to detract from logical arguments.

 

I'm fucking sick of being said I'm just part of the stubborn old boys club every time I voice my opinion regardless of what that opinion is. It detracts from the arguments, antagonizes members, and causes rifts in the community.

[sterling 1,997]

Yeah I rarely agree with a lot of people in the old boys club as defined in this thread

[AIM-11 134]

Pretty sure if things were replied to like:

 

"Interesting idea, and we've considered this in the past, but it has some challenges that we would need to work out."

 

instead of

 

"You're a fucking moron and this idea makes us all stupider."

 

You might get less people annoyed.

[Higgins 3,618]

Pretty sure if things were replied to like:

 

"Interesting idea, and we've considered this in the past, but it has some challenges that we would need to work out."

 

instead of

 

"You're a fucking moron and this idea makes us all stupider."

 

You might get less people annoyed.

 

But but but I was told to go fuck myself by the OP in the first post

[d3vilsfire 132]

Here is my idea:

 

No one really enjoys being a 3rd/4th liner.. More people would actually prefer being 1c, 3c, 4c type thing like what happens in the VHLM.. We want to see our players wreck and we want to see a ton of minutes and points.

 

So here is just an idea, bitch at me if you want idrc.

 

If the sim allows it, I would expand the league. 14 total teams where the first two forward lines must be active players, and the last two  forward lines can be a mix between actives/inactives. We could create in-actives to give the "full-team" feeling or just allow active players to play on multiple lines. With the expansion we will see actives being "rewarded" for remaining active as they will get a ton of stats and playing time. We also will see a more competitive league as there are a greater number of teams. Also, we get to add 4 more VHL GMs (4 more VHLM if we do the same there), which would mean that we could get fringe active people to become truly active as being a GM is a ton of fun.

 

There would have to be details that would need to be hammered out, but thats my idea, because honestly, I lost interest when KJA was playing 3rd/4th line in Riga and he got 11 points. I just switched my focus to Moscow and dealing with them. Being stuck on the 3rd/4th line exclusively gets really boring.

 

Edit: I didnt read through my emails to see ALL the posts, so if this idea has been posted, sorry, and basically this is my agreement post with you.

Edited November 23, 2014 by d3vilsfire

[Victor 10,942]

Pretty sure if things were replied to like:

"Interesting idea, and we've considered this in the past, but it has some challenges that we would need to work out."

instead of

"You're a fucking moron and this idea makes us all stupider."

You might get less people annoyed.

I got 8 likes though. #worthit

[sterling 1,997]

I don't see much proof that there is a problem currently. Like I said, the league is way more active now than it is was with 8 teams.

[Will 4,660]

Here is my idea:

 

No one really enjoys being a 3rd/4th liner.. More people would actually prefer being 1c, 3c, 4c type thing like what happens in the VHLM.. We want to see our players wreck and we want to see a ton of minutes and points.

 

So here is just an idea, bitch at me if you want idrc.

 

If the sim allows it, I would expand the league. 14 total teams where the first two forward lines must be active players, and the last two  forward lines can be a mix between actives/inactives. We could create in-actives to give the "full-team" feeling or just allow active players to play on multiple lines. With the expansion we will see actives being "rewarded" for remaining active as they will get a ton of stats and playing time. We also will see a more competitive league as there are a greater number of teams. Also, we get to add 4 more VHL GMs (4 more VHLM if we do the same there), which would mean that we could get fringe active people to become truly active as being a GM is a ton of fun.

 

There would have to be details that would need to be hammered out, but thats my idea, because honestly, I lost interest when KJA was playing 3rd/4th line in Riga and he got 11 points. I just switched my focus to Moscow and dealing with them. Being stuck on the 3rd/4th line exclusively gets really boring.

 

Edit: I didnt read through my emails to see ALL the posts, so if this idea has been posted, sorry, and basically this is my agreement post with you.

 

Don't worry BOG, I got this one

 

 

Fuck no 

[Kendrick 4,741]

The funny thing is as a BOG member I'm being told I answer it "Adult vs. Kid" yet the OP was created in a joking manner while high. Until you are serious, then I'll take it serious and answer it correctly. But double standards are funny.

[twillcox94 21]

The funny thing is as a BOG member I'm being told I answer it "Adult vs. Kid" yet the OP was created in a joking manner while high. Until you are serious, then I'll take it serious and answer it correctly. But double standards are funny.

A couple members had serious replies that agreed.

Edited November 23, 2014 by twillcox94

[Victor 10,942]

A couple members had serious replies that agreed.

And there have been many serious replies that disagreed. It's been a pretty fair split.

[Kendrick 4,741]

A couple members had serious replies that agreed.

And I've been reading most of them on the same level. But people just install this "elitist" view, the BOG has discussed the majority of ideas people speak up about. In fact, this was discussed before as well but there are so many negatives that outweigh the positives.

 

Pros:

Locker room activity goes from an average of 6-8 people to around 10 people

Team PT type situations have bigger meaning

Parity is spread throughout

 

Cons

10 down to 8 teams still means 4 teams miss the postseason

Inactives become more valuable to fill out a competing roster. Decreasing time for any rookie. Promoting inactivity.

Rookies come up and play on 3rd lines and get 20-40 points a season (Instant success is wanted but this won't help that)

We remove two teams which have established history/identity from our own graphics makers

The VHLM and VHL remove 4 GM's who have jobs right now.

The recruitment drives in the past 3 years have put us at an all-time high, why remove teams when we are the most active now?

Edited November 23, 2014 by Kendrick

[Phil 5,119]

I respectfully disagree. The BoG aren't our betters, they're just in charge. There's no reason for them to talk down to anyone. There's no real reason to make a suggestion like this private, considering it's something that effects the whole league. Making it a public post means Frank as well as the BoG can gauge public interest. The problem here was people coming in and insulting the idea, assuming they were serious with the insults (which they seemed to be).

The BoG aren't in charge. 

 

It's just a way that the commissioners can listen to mostly logic-minded old(er) members and to make them feel like they have a say. 

 

The ones that have been around the longest (and stayed active throughout) are the ones that have seen many-a-tweak and change work out or fail miserably. This is why there can be a lot of constructive discussions there without the random bullshit responses.

 

If an idea's being discussed on the boards, it will be discussed in the BoG - and vice versa. They've function is to help better the VHL, not to feel special. I know most members in there and I highly doubt they think they are 'better' or talk down. It's so hard to indicate tone over the internet but they are here for everyone's benefit. 

 

There are League Discussion Threads, Suggestions/Complaint threads - anyone on the site can express their views and start a discussion at any point in time. Just because one isn't a member of the BoG does not mean that their views count for nothing.

 

 

In the tl;dr version: The BoG's main function is to consolidate the league discussions on changes and suggestions and not act as an 'old boys club'

[Victor 10,942]

To be fair, the BOG has become increasingly more influential over the past 10 seasons but I don't think that's made anything worse. I'm pretty confident the average member has more say in the current structure than ever before.

[Phil 5,119]

I am saying that the BoG is an efficient way of furthering the development and success of the league. As you say, the past 10 seasons have really shown this and as Sterling said earlier, activity's pretty much at an all-time high, so that strengthens this conclusion. 

[RomanesEuntDomus 442]

Damn, that became a lot more hostile than it had to, let's just calm down and go about this a little more constructive, okay?

 

I actually like the idea that Frank proposed, I like full rosters, I like more competition and I like to break the neverending cycle of tanking and competing, but this is simply not what the VHL is. I have made my fair share of suggestions that got shot down by the established members as well and while this sometimes left my frustrated, it teached me one thing: Some things about the VHL will never change. These things might be flawed, but they are fundamental elements that constitute what this league is - and what it isn't. People agreed on them a long time ago and while the rules are always subject to discussion and everyone can make suggestions and push for change, some things simply will never change.

 

It's also what makes leagues different from each other. What Frank described is basically how the SHL runs things. And as I said, I liked his suggestions and I also like how the SHL handles the sim-side of things. To be completely honest, when it comes to the pure sim-aspect of the two leagues, I pactually refer the SHL over the VHL. But this is just a personal preference, some people strive for realism, full rosters and active locker rooms, others prefer smaller rosters that allow everyone to be a star. That's why we have two leagues that are so different, but also so similar in certain aspects. And maybe not all, but most people here have actually tried both leagues and many of them still have players in both leagues. But is it really that surprising or hard to believe that the people who chose the VHL did so because they like the system here? This has nothing to do with an old buys club mentality, it's simply a matter of preference.

 

By the way, maybe I'm just the exception to the old boys club rule but I became a member of the BOG while I was still on my first player and after being pretty inactive with him for some time earlier in my career. I know of at least one other BOG-member (Green) who became a member while being a first-gen as well and I'm sure there are others who I don't know of. Sure, an institution like the BOG will always feature more prominent, long-tentured people and I think that's a good thing, but it's not like newer people aren't heard. So I think most of your criticism in that direction is unwarranted and some of it is actually pretty disrespectful towards people who are working hard and who try to improve this league.

 

Also, even if you are in favor of Franks argument, please look at the opening post again... Can you really blame other posters for not taking it seriously and for not bothering to write a detailed, well thought out reply? He wrote it in a jokingly rude manner so some people will answer in a joking or rude way, if not both.

Edited November 23, 2014 by RomanesEuntDomus

[Victor 10,942]

That's why we have two leagues that are so different, but also so similar in certain aspects.

strictly speaking, we have two leagues because the second league decided to exist

Also, STZ is another first-gen (or was one) on the BOG. Gow close to it. FFS, Higgins joined more than halfway through the league's existence.

[Devise 4,475]

Good post Romanes.

 

Ultimately people who clamor for realism to me still need to see reason. We will never be the NHL. It isn't possible. There are way too many barriers that prevent this type of stuff from feeling real. Does that mean we should never strive for realism? Of course not. There are moments and elements that we should, but it should always be considered with the understanding of what we are giving up. 

 

The cons simply outweight the pro's for the majority of us. When we expanded, it was a controversial decision. Did we have the members? Since then, with the establishments of things like welfare, a restructured player store, we have seen the highest amount of league parity we have ever seen. If we contracted down to 6 or 8 teams, how many competing teams would we have? All of them? Some may argue that is great, but it devalues the hard work GM's put in to make a successful team. Part of the allure of the VHL is that it is HARD to be great. Not just in TPE terms, but even in sim terms. Look at this seasons playoffs. How hard did Quebec work on building a contender. They were considerably better than Calgary during the regular season, yet they still lose in the playoffs. Because it happens, because that is part of the fabric of the VHL. There are countless examples of this as well.

 

Contraction means that the all star players in this league, which there are a lot by the way. If you look at the member base, we have a good 20+ members who are on pace or have previously and look to be again earning anywhere from 700-1000+ TPE in their careers. That is HUGE. Contractions puts all those players on every team. Ergo every team just by way of salary cap restrictions would have elite players. So GM"s don't need to work to build a contender, because by default everyone would have one. We are a very top heavy league, with structured depth throughout. All the changes have been made to make it easier for newer members to come in and work on becoming an elite player, or at best a quality player. It has created a situation where "elite" level members are sprinkled throughout all the ten teams. They only join up on a single team for periods of time as teams rebuild and go through different stages of development.

 

I don't know why it's considered a bad thing for teams to go through different stages of development by the way. It happens even in the NHL. Every team isn't competitive every season. The other negative that is big I would say is how to do we pitch it then to new members coming in whose goal is to be elite? We have enough quality members as said to make up a core of every team if we contracted. The room wouldn't be there. As it stands now we have a relatively healthy league with ten teams, with room for more players to come in and make the league have enough more parity. That is a great thing. It means as we grow in size we don't need to worry about having to expand or find room for players if they become great. They simply fit in with the structure and the league can evolve fine. 

 

In regards to the BoG stuff, I can tell you there is no old boys club. I debate with Kendrick and Sterling and even ADV and Jericho I don't always see eye to eye with. There are a plethora of different opinions and perspectives in the BoG. While the BoG has enacted a bit more power over the last little bit, it was done in a way to treat the VHL much more like a democracy. Ideas simply aren't suggested and voted on and then the Blue Team goes "alright we have to implement it." It's a long process of discussions, touches and fixes so that everyone on the Blue Team and in the BoG feel happy and confident with the changes being made. The ideas you see implemented rarely look like that when the discussion first gets brought up in the BoG. It's a group process one that I feel has been working very well the last few seasons. Consistently I get chatted up or PM"d or see ideas and they got posted in the BoG, or discussed. You aren't being ignored and the BoG isn't some elite group of old boys secretly controlling everything. We have made steps to make the BoG more transparent even with my end of season posts about what has been discussed and what is happening. 

 

Ultimately we still need to have the freedom to disagree with an idea posted, and cite our reasons for it. Just because you post an idea and think it's best for the league doesn't mean everyone will agree with you. Even if those can see benefits to contraction, the fact is there are some very strong counter arguments that even people who can see benefit of contraction agree with. It makes it tough to try to implement something that has that much of a jaded opinion on it, even from those who support it. 

[probably not noah 346]

#doubleDevisepost

[sterling 1,997]

Tl;dr

[Munk 1,298]

Tl;dr

 

 

tough lick; dick rider..?

[Will 4,660]

I brought all this up once before and got shut down, yet 2 weeks later there were postings looking for more graders, despite being told that "everything was fine as it was and we definitely do not need more graders". It just honestly feels like if a newer member has an idea, it automatically gets shot down, even if it's a legitimate concern. And apparently even Frank gets lumped in with newer, considering he's apparently been around for years. I don't know if I want to stay a part of a league where in a few years if I have an idea to possibly help the league, it could get shot down in the way Frank's has. It wasn't enough to just say "Eh, we don't agree", it went all the way to being described as embarrassing. The only thing embarrassing here is how senior members are acting.

 

Don't twist my words. Also look at when I joined this league, lol. 

[Frank 5,211]

Whatever

[Munk 1,298]

Whatever

 

 

dont sass me mr.