ProFSL: Pro Fantasy Sports Leagues
Fantasy Leagues => NHL Leagues => Franchise NHL => Topic started by: PigsRule on January 23, 2014, 02:18:25 PM
-
Here's the OFFICIAL guidelines based on feedback from various owners given the discussion about boosting activity level and managing multiple teams...
Guidlines to allow owners to purchase a 2nd FNHL franchise:
1) NOT SAME DIVISION - Owners can only purchase a 2nd franchise from the Division their 1st team is not part of.
2) MAX 3 - Owners can own a maximum of 3 2 Franchise NHL teams at any given time.
3) VALUE & FEES - Fees for a 2nd franchise are the same as for the any new owner (see franchise purchase fees and returning team annual fee); $Market Price Set by Owner and Year-2 20$ or FNHL determined fee thereafter.
4) TRADING - No trading between teams owned by same owner (or ensure the players don't find their way to the other owner's teams without a stop on 1-2 other teams) but at the same time isn't that the job of TC members to determine fairness of deals!?
5) MATCH-UPS - If teams owned by the same owner meet in a Weekly or Play-off match-up, all eligible players must be active (can't bench one of their teams).
6) LESS THAN 20% OWNERSHIP RULE Maximum of 6 owners (19.3%) holding multiple franchise at any given time.
7) SALE - Owners may set the sale price for their team(s) if they want to sell but must repay the 1st Year Buy-in fee submit $20
8) TRANSACTION THRU COMMISSIONERS - All sales must pass through Commissioners to be official or the new owner will not be allowed to enter league. This means Commissioners handle transaction to ensure payments are properly exchanged.
Personally, I think it's a good thing that
* helps pay the $80 Fantrax fee (allows us to have 31-teams in 1 league, avoid split league like yr 1 of FNHL)
* helps FNHL offer a minimum prize of approx $500 USD (varies depending on year) to the FNHL Champion,
* Boosts league activity - owners who pay want to play,
* as long as the owners are dedicated and willing to buy-in, it's a positive thing for the league and other owners IMO
june11-14: edits to annual franchise fee + subject as these guidelines are now official!
-
I second this motion.
-
Here here!
That's a good set of guidelines if we move forward.
-
The more I think about this the more I want to own a second team here. My schedule though still busy is opening up more each week and the fact the rules are already a known entity to me makes the adjustment a non-issue and plain good sense to spend a little extra play money here.
I take it the available franchises in the Western Conference are :CGY: :COL-NHL: :LAK: :VAN: is that correct?
-
:MIN-NHL: will be available next season.
I'm guessing all other ownership rules apply such as guys must complete a year term with the same team before buying a different team or transferring to a different team?
-
:MIN-NHL: will be available next season.
I'm guessing all other ownership rules apply such as guys must complete a year term with the same team before buying a different team or transferring to a different team?
Yes, Tyler will be stepping down at the end of the year and that Wild franchise might have another championship to their name when he does.
Yes, all other ownership rules will also apply including the need to serve a season before transferring to own another franchise. BAsic common sense stuff to keep the league stable and avoid transient owners jumping in and out of the league.
-
The more I think about this the more I want to own a second team here. My schedule though still busy is opening up more each week and the fact the rules are already a known entity to me makes the adjustment a non-issue and plain good sense to spend a little extra play money here.
:iatp: Great. We want active, knowledgeable owners guiding franchise in this league.
I take it the available franchises in the Western Conference are :CGY: :COL-NHL: :LAK: :VAN: is that correct?
Correct. Those 4 franchise are currently League owned, managed and are available for sale.
In the East, :CLS: :MON-NHL: :NJD: :NYR: are available for purchase.
-
So if there are already 5 owners with multiple teams in FNHL there won't be anymore for sale as a 2nd team? Do I have that right?
-
So if there are already 5 owners with multiple teams in FNHL there won't be anymore for sale as a 2nd team? Do I have that right?
We can vote on it if there's a demand over and above the initial limit of five we outlined. It will probably boil down to the caliber and commitment of the owner makng the request.
-
2) Owners can own a maximum of 2 Franchise NHL teams at any given time.
I will be relentless on this issue but I have no hostility. With that said hopefully we can agree that multiple ownership should gradually be curtailed starting with enforcement of existing rules. To be clear I am speaking to the ownership of 4 teams by e40. Perhaps next season we could see a change there?
-
I will be relentless on this issue but I have no hostility. With that said hopefully we can agree that multiple ownership should gradually be curtailed starting with enforcement of existing rules. To be clear I am speaking to the ownership of 4 teams by e40. Perhaps next season we could see a change there?
If nothing else I would applaud e40 for investing in the health and long-term outlook of this league.
In fact I think you also deserve congratulations for introducing Favo to the league through your second franchise which he eventually took ownership of.
Do I agree that Franchise NHL should move toward one owner per franchise? Yes, absolutely! Do I agree it needs to happen this upcoming season. Absolutely No! We need to ensure ownership and roster stability of most if not all teams before asking committed owners to sell their extra team(s).
That said, I will choose the current situation however would like us all to revisit the policy at the end of the 2015-16 FNHL Finals.
- DD
-
Dude, I'm not saying we should only have one owner per team this year. But capping it at two wouldn't be a bad idea. You know.....like it says in the rules? :doh:
-
Slack there's a plan. Health of the league comes first.
Serious owners who want to build winners and believe in the league is what we want. Everything else will fall into place like any strong league.
-
I'm not saying we should only have one owner per team this year. But capping it at two wouldn't be a bad idea. You know.....like it says in the rules? :doh:
Commissioners building the league have also made it clear
It will probably boil down to the caliber and commitment of the owner makng the request.
E40 is a standup owner. He invests in Profsl teams. It was a great gesture to the league he invested in additional teams. When we find smart new hockey men to join we will invite them in.
-
The goal is to move closer to one owner per team when the time is right.
Am I in a rush to do that given strong ownership is in place, nope! FNHL has worked hard to bring in the best owners and create a stable environment. It's stable, we got a plan moving fwd.
Bottomline SL we hear you + we're on the same pg.
-
Slack there's a plan. Health of the league comes first.
Serious owners who want to build winners and believe in the league is what we want. Everything else will fall into place like any strong league.
Glad to hear it. My intention is to continue expediting the process by purchasing another team and bringing in another strong GM as I did in Carolina. If I gift one franchise a year it shouldn't take more than a decade to make a real difference. :rofl:
-
Glad to hear it. My intention is to continue expediting the process by purchasing another team and bringing in another strong GM as I did in Carolina. If I gift one franchise a year it shouldn't take more than a decade to make a real difference. :rofl:
:rofl: :iatp: