Login

*NorwegianDemon* · 06-09-2018, 02:14 PM

-Ah, yes, everyone's favorite debate - whether we should pay GMs or not. Where do you stand on this, and if it's in the affirmative, how should this be carried out?

Yes, I think everyone that has a "job" should be paid. We need to value the important role that the GM has in the good running of the league and they should be compensated appropriately for it. I also think that giving people rewards for the jobs they do for the league will only increase their attachment to it.

GoonerBear · 06-09-2018, 02:15 PM

On sitting out IIHF Tournaments:

I think players should have the right to remove themselves from consideration without having to transfer out. If we are to call ourselves a simulation league, we should allow players to simulate not going to a tournament for whatever reason. If GMs have the power to include or exclude their selections, players should have the leverage to decline invitation.

karey · 06-09-2018, 02:45 PM

Quote:Originally posted by Leafs4ever+Jun 9 2018, 10:02 AM--><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1' id='QUOTE-WRAP'><tr><td>QUOTE (Leafs4ever @ Jun 9 2018, 10:02 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Ah, yes, everyone's favorite debate - whether we should pay GMs or not. Where do you stand on this, and if it's in the affirmative, how should this be carried out?

I actually don't think that GMs should get paid. I can understand updaters or bankers or other jobs getting paid because sometimes those are a chore. Being a GM never felt like a job to me. It was always exciting, building and creating your own roster of players. That's not something I need payment for.[/b]

The ammount of work the GM's do deserve pay. It shouldn't be as subjective as how much you enjoy it, unfortunatly that has been the case where GM's who enjoy that aspect of the league are taken advantage of.

What would some of the problems be in giving GM's money? I am genuinely curious because right now, its sad when my GM, <a href='index.php?showuser=1163' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-13'>WannabeFinn</a> who puts in hours and hours of work, is in debt. He will be the first to give himself a minimum contract to ensure our team succeeds, and as a result, worsens his own player for the betterment of the team.

<!--QuoteBegin-GoonerBear@Jun 9 2018, 10:15 AM
On sitting out IIHF Tournaments:

I think players should have the right to remove themselves from consideration without having to transfer out. If we are to call ourselves a simulation league, we should allow players to simulate not going to a tournament for whatever reason. If GMs have the power to include or exclude their selections, players should have the leverage to decline invitation.[/quote]

Yeah, I don't understand the hooplah about why a player can't sit out if requested. It's an odd request and not often seen, but it brings forward the question. Is the player property of the member or the league. Its a question that isn't brought up because there hasn't been much need to, but how can we force a player to do anything if the member is still active and wishes against it (outside of contractual obligations)

Dude · 06-09-2018, 02:49 PM

I believe we should be paying GMs, but they should also be held to a certain standard. If it's clear they are only doing the bare minimum work to get the paycheck they should be removed from their post. That's not to say that a hard-working gm that sucks should be dethroned.

Clint Eastwood, Jun 10 2018, 09:36 AM Wrote:Can't buy love, but love can buy a lot.

sash · 06-09-2018, 02:49 PM

-Ah, yes, everyone's favorite debate - whether we should pay GMs or not. Where do you stand on this, and if it's in the affirmative, how should this be carried out?

Yeah they should be paid, unbiased. GM's are incredibly important to the website, some pay as an award makes more then enough sense.

-There's been a lot of chatter about IIHF lately, though not entirely for the best reasons. Do you think players should be allowed to bench themselves without having to transfer out? Additionally, do you think the transfer rules are good as they stand? If not, what would you like to see in place of the system currently present?

Yeah, players should have the option to sit out if they want. It's their player, they should be allowed to decide whether they want to play or not

-A lot of players have (re)created for this upcoming draft class, and it's slated to be a big one in both size and potential. Are there any players you'll be keeping an eye out for, out of the new crop? Early favorites for first overall? Give them a shoutout!

Is this a way of trying to figure out who I'm taking with my first? Go away

AssPancakes · 06-09-2018, 02:51 PM

-Ah, yes, everyone's favorite debate - whether we should pay GMs or not. Where do you stand on this, and if it's in the affirmative, how should this be carried out?

I feel GM's need to be paid a lot of money. They are doing so much already in terms of managing the LR, scouting and drafting they sometimes fall behind on money on media stuff. They should get paid

karey · 06-09-2018, 02:55 PM

I think a new question could be brought up in having the Head Office be represented by one member of each team advocating on their team behalf.

Make the member the team owner so that they will act like a GM in that they are able to have one player on the team automatically on the roster.

The benefits are that they will eliminate any question of bias. With the <a href='index.php?showuser=1263' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-3'>kit</a> suspension, it was brought up multiple times that the suspension benefitted the head office members who many of which were members of Hamilton Steelhawks.
We would still have commissioners who can belong to any team, but there should be some ownership commitee equally made up of SHL teams.

These owners would also be given a base budget that they can distribute to their GM's and team bonus'. Nothing crazy, maybe 5M a season, but something that can help build the team morale and motivation internally. This way, a GM who barely works can be given a lower salary, but two GM"s who share duty can both get equal pay regardless of title.

What are your thoughts?

CFJ · 06-09-2018, 03:09 PM

I'm really looking forward to the Winnipeg-Calgary series and seeing if my player can avenge turning over the puck to Esa for the GWG to end the series and what was the end for the Lunatic Fringe Luke Fleming's career in the SHL as well. Both teams have added some new faces and lost some impact players, so it will be interesting to see which team comes out in the first round.

Thanks to prettyburn, TML, Carpy, JNH, Jepox, Engi, Karey, Flappy, Skolpadder, Mook, DollarAndADream, Smirnov and Toe for the sigs.

Code:
Crossfit's First Career SHL Goal, 4. Manhattan Rage , Crossfit Jesus 1 (Pedro Sarantez, Nucky Toohoots) at 5:51

Code:
Devitt's First Career SHL Goal, 5. Calgary Dragons , Prince Devitt 1 (Barry Batsbak 21, Mike Izzy 14) at 10:43

Barracuda · 06-09-2018, 03:15 PM

Yes, I do believe the GMs should be paid for all of the hard work that they put in. I believe that the pay should be given to what the HO as whole, deems as fit for the GMs.

Sleepy · 06-09-2018, 03:30 PM

Quote:Originally posted by karey@Jun 9 2018, 01:55 PM

The benefits are that they will eliminate any question of bias. With the <a href='index.php?showuser=1263' rel='nofollow' alt='profile link' class='user-tagged mgroup-3'>kit</a> suspension, it was brought up multiple times that the suspension benefitted the head office members who many of which were members of Hamilton Steelhawks.

Of course Iâ€™m going to sound like a homer saying this. But you need to come off it with the conspiracy theories about the HO coming after Buffalo in an attempt to ruin your guysâ€™ season.

Yes, three members of HO are on the Steelhawks. But Teddy, Formx, and cruth are some of the best members in this league and have more than enough integrity to hold an HO position and make unbiased judgment calls that will affect the league, as a whole.

If you think that any of those three would punish a team/player for personal gain, you need to take a look at the Kook Aid youâ€™re drinking.

I can safely say I would repat this even if I wasnâ€™t on a team with them and Iâ€™m sure the wide majority of this website will backup these statements.

Kit was punished for breaking a rule in the thread about the rule. He is a repeat offender. I donâ€™t understand why that is such a hard concept to grasp. Again, Iâ€™m not making these statements as a teammate of Teddy, Formx, and crutch but rather as a member of this league defending some of the best people I know from this league.

If you still feel antagonized by their decision that was eventually appealed, you should take that up with the totality of HO instead of pointing fingers at a few of them because they also happen to play on a team in your conference.

karey · 06-09-2018, 03:34 PM

Quote:Originally posted by Sleepy@Jun 9 2018, 11:30 AM

Of course I’m going to sound like a homer saying this. But you need to come off it with the conspiracy theories about the HO coming after Buffalo in an attempt to ruin your guys’ season.

Yes, three members of HO are on the Steelhawks. But Teddy, Formx, and cruth are some of the best members in this league and have more than enough integrity to hold an HO position and make unbiased judgment calls that will affect the league, as a whole.

If you think that any of those three would punish a team/player for personal gain, you need to take a look at the Kook Aid you’re drinking.

I can safely say I would repat this even if I wasn’t on a team with them and I’m sure the wide majority of this website will backup these statements.

Kit was punished for breaking a rule in the thread about the rule. He is a repeat offender. I don’t understand why that is such a hard concept to grasp. Again, I’m not making these statements as teammates of Teddy, Formx, and crutch but rather as a member of this league defending some of the best people I know from this league.

If you still feel antagonized by their decision that was eventually appealed, you should take that up with the totality of HO instead of pointing fingers at a few of them because they also happen to play on a team in your conference.

Oh yeah, I didn't clarify. I didn't agree with that rhetoric AT ALL. I don't believe in one bit that Head Office acted for selfish gain. However, there was grounds for that impression that can't be denied. The unlikely potential of something like that exists and is only held off on blind faith in our Head Office.

My suggestion would try to eliminate that as well as give teams the security and comfort of having an advocate in the Head Office.

I am only using the Kit suspension as an example of when this could happen. The suspension prior to the alteration was an in game suspension when previous precedent for similar actions resulted in a league posting suspension. I think a mistake was made by HO that was corrected really quickly, and I respect that. But in the moment prior to the penalty adjustment, my teammates felt that the suspension was not appropriate for the penalty and associated that with the HO being members of a rival team (again, something I don't agree with but I see how they came to that conclusion)

dankoa · 06-09-2018, 03:36 PM

Malone is going to be a great player and could be a serious contender for first overall already

DeletedAtUserRequest · 06-09-2018, 03:37 PM

-Ah, yes, everyone's favorite debate - whether we should pay GMs or not. Where do you stand on this, and if it's in the affirmative, how should this be carried out?

SHL GM's are the most pristigous jobs on the site. i agree that they should be compensated.. but the people paying them should have the same rights to review there work and make changes in the way that all other payed jobs in here fall under. Also, if its a payed job then im not sure if its fair to allow the GM's to pick there successors. 1 last thing... there are allot of GMs in the IIHF doing good work... in my 10 games as IIHF GM i probably work as hard as many of the 50 game GM's... give the the IIHF GMs alittle love.. say 1M a year!

|

|

|

|

iamslm22 · 06-09-2018, 03:37 PM

We should 100% pay GMs. General Managers are the lifeblood of the site. They put in a lot of effort and without them the site wouldn't exist.

It also adds accountability to their actions. Pay them

Sleepy · 06-09-2018, 03:44 PM

Quote:Originally posted by karey@Jun 9 2018, 02:34 PM

Oh yeah, I didn't clarify. I didn't agree with that rhetoric AT ALL. I don't believe in one bit that Head Office acted for selfish gain. However, there was grounds for that impression that can't be denied. The unlikely potential of something like that exists and is only held off on blind faith in our Head Office.

My suggestion would try to eliminate that as well as give teams the security and comfort of having an advocate in the Head Office.

I am only using the Kit suspension as an example of when this could happen. The suspension prior to the alteration was an in game suspension when previous precedent for similar actions resulted in a league posting suspension. I think a mistake was made by HO that was corrected really quickly, and I respect that. But in the moment prior to the penalty adjustment, my teammates felt that the suspension was not appropriate for the penalty and associated that with the HO being members of a rival team (again, something I don't agree with but I see how they came to that conclusion)

I mean, thatâ€™s understandable and Iâ€™d agree with you that the 5 game suspension was a harsh blow but I think that an example was trying to be made that HO was serious about the rule adjustment.

And I would also agree with your other point, it would be interesting to see the league move to a more â€œteam ownershipâ€ type HO than what we currently have.

Navigation

Extra Menu

About us