150$ BUFFALO SABRES for SALE! Franchise NHL

[DToxFan]

PPG, let's wait for new ownership.
We want to move away from ownership multiple teams longrun. Allowing ownership of multi teams in the same Div. is moving FNHL away from our goal of 1 owner, 1 team.

That said, we all appreciate the owners who have invested in several teams and believe in + enjoy this league.

As a new owner in FNHL, I have to agree with PigsRule despite the fact I also had some interest in buying the Buffalo Sabres. But I understand the longterm goal of the league and it makes good sense.
If by chance the franchise is still available in say December, I will make an offer as I do enjoy the challenge of this league.

[LIVE DynastySports]

As a new owner in FNHL, I have to agree with PigsRule despite the fact I also had some interest in buying the Buffalo Sabres. But I understand the longterm goal of the league and it makes good sense.
If by chance the franchise is still available in say December, I will make an offer as I do enjoy the challenge of this league.

No way that team is on the market till December. I doubt it lasts a week.

My concern is FA has begun, and to leave the team vacant handicaps them. Now if they are actively being GMd by the seller that's different.

Also as the newest owner of 2 franchises (Tampa + Vegas) I'm putting it out there that this ol boy will be last to sell one off. Vegas was expansion, and Tampa popped my cherry 4 years ago.

I ain't selling chit.
(Unless I'm made an offer I cannot refuse...and I'm a refuser so.)  :beer:

[Jonathan]

I'd prefer setting limits on the number of teams one can GM than own. That would give GM's an opportunity to be apart of the league without having to drop $150. That would also give the owner an incentive to dump a bad gm, but that is how it works lol. Perfect example of that would be Snug. He didn't want to pay, just be a GM. I gave him that opportunity. I ended up selling the team, but it helped the league to have another GM taking part and building the team.

[blkhwkfn]

I'd prefer setting limits on the number of teams one can GM than own. That would give GM's an opportunity to be apart of the league without having to drop $150. That would also give the owner an incentive to dump a bad gm, but that is how it works lol. Perfect example of that would be Snug. He didn't want to pay, just be a GM. I gave him that opportunity. I ended up selling the team, but it helped the league to have another GM taking part and building the team.

which is my plan with the CBJ franchise. After next season i will have this franchise where i think it should be. I will then go on a GM search.

[LIVE DynastySports]

which is my plan with the CBJ franchise. After next season i will have this franchise where i think it should be. I will then go on a GM search.

And hire someone who will want to make it where he thinks it should be...LOL

We are all so very different in how we build franchises.

[blkhwkfn]

And hire someone who will want to make it where he thinks it should be...LOL

We are all so very different in how we build franchises.

haha right! I have a feeling i would be an owner like the late George Stienbrener was or maybe Jerry Jones.

[dickiedunn]

I'd prefer setting limits on the number of teams one can GM than own. That would give GM's an opportunity to be apart of the league without having to drop $150. That would also give the owner an incentive to dump a bad gm, but that is how it works lol. Perfect example of that would be Snug. He didn't want to pay, just be a GM. I gave him that opportunity. I ended up selling the team, but it helped the league to have another GM taking part and building the team.

That is an interesting idea, that an individual can own multiple teams but the restriction should be on the number of teams an individual can manage day-to-day.

Granted there are a number of people who enjoy managing two franchises in this league and it offers them the opportunity to try different strategies with their two clubs. I did just that with Ottawa and Los Angeles.

Up to this point, the Commissioners have made the right decisions in developing and growing the league. It has been quite the journey and I am very pleased to be part of it heading into my 6th season.

- DD

[EndGame]

In a league as big as FNHL with 31 teams, there should not be much concern for owning too many franchises unless ownership exceeds 20% of the total number of franchises. In FNHL, that would work out to ownership of more than 6.2 teams.

Ultimately, it should be the quality of ownership that is the deciding factor in any real world or fantasy environment.
FNHL appears to have an enviable group of owners competing and knowledgeable commissioners overseeing the operation.
Cheers.

[PsychoticPondGoons]

PPG, let's wait for new ownership.
We want to move away from ownership multiple teams longrun. Allowing ownership of multi teams in the same Div. is moving FNHL away from our goal of 1 owner, 1 team.

That said, we all appreciate the owners who have invested in several teams and believe in + enjoy this league.

Approve

I'm good with that.

[Mordecai]

Approve

I'm good with that.

As am I.