HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Hockey Talk by Country > Sweden

Should the worst team in SEL be relegated?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
04-27-2010, 02:58 AM
  #1
GoHomez
Registered User
 
GoHomez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 8 km from the Globe
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Should the worst team in SEL be relegated?

Or maybe two teams?
Or should we keep things as is?

Discuss.

GoHomez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 04:47 AM
  #2
1992LuckyTown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 98
vCash: 500
Yes but it is going to hapend don´t think so the ruling persons in hockey is idiots

1992LuckyTown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 04:53 AM
  #3
zecke26
Registered User
 
zecke26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 10,253
vCash: 500
it happened this season, didn't it?

kvalserien is fine. traditions need to stay alive and leksand failing in kvalserien is one of the best traditions in swedish hockey.

zecke26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 05:00 AM
  #4
GoHomez
Registered User
 
GoHomez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 8 km from the Globe
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zecke26 View Post
it happened this season, didn't it?

kvalserien is fine. traditions need to stay alive and leksand failing in kvalserien is one of the best traditions in swedish hockey.
It did!
Seems to be every third year or so.

You could still keep kvalserien.
Either make it a 4 team series with the 11th placed team in SEL and the top three teams from Allsvenskan fighting for two places. Or take two teams from SEL and four from Allsvenskan to make it a six team series.

Leksand would probably still find a way failing.

GoHomez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 07:09 AM
  #5
joe89
#5
 
joe89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 16,684
vCash: 500
Short answer: Yes. But first of all make it a 16 team league. No need to have a glorified 2nd tier with teams like Leksand + Malmö and also Mora, Växjö, Västerås and Almtuna that are clubs with elite ambitions and a solid fan/population base. We have somewhere around 18-20 teams that would like nothing more than playing in Elitserien, and spots for 12. Thats why the club economy is utter crap in HA, to even compete for a spot you have to take a big risk. More teams, more spots for juniors and in the end better development spread over the country.

joe89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 07:25 AM
  #6
GoHomez
Registered User
 
GoHomez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 8 km from the Globe
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joe89 View Post
Short answer: Yes. But first of all make it a 16 team league. No need to have a glorified 2nd tier with teams like Leksand + Malmö and also Mora, Växjö, Västerås and Almtuna that are clubs with elite ambitions and a solid fan/population base. We have somewhere around 18-20 teams that would like nothing more than playing in Elitserien, and spots for 12. Thats why the club economy is utter crap in HA, to even compete for a spot you have to take a big risk. More teams, more spots for juniors and in the end better development spread over the country.
Yeah, those two are major concerns moving forward.

We need to find a way to have a larger number of clubs that are financially strong, hate it when clubs have to fold, like Björklöven just did.

I am not entirely sold on 14 or 16 teams but I fully understand your reasoning.
On the other hand, one could point to a "signifact" gap between SSK/Rögle and the rest of the teams.

GoHomez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 04:20 PM
  #7
KCrushers
Registered User
 
KCrushers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 651
vCash: 500
No.

Kvalserien is a great way to make sure that it's the 12 best teams that gets to play in SEL next season.

For the people advocating for 14 or 16 teams.
We don't have that many teams that are good enough. We har more like 10 and then 4-5 teams that are in limbo between SEL and HA.

I prefer to keep the number of less good teams to a minimum no matter what their history is, if they got a new arena or if they are located in a big city or have lots of fans.

That don't matter to me cause I want a good leauge.

KCrushers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 05:34 PM
  #8
KRM
Registered User
 
KRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Gothenburg
Country: Sweden
Posts: 11,001
vCash: 500
No, Kvalserien is a good way to determine which teams get promoted or relegated. And I don't think the expansion to 14 or 16 is the best idea either for the Swedish hockey. Work to increase the status and popularity of Allsvenskan, right now it's better then it's ever been but there are still big improvement that can be made.

KRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 05:38 PM
  #9
1992LuckyTown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 98
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCrushers View Post
That don't matter to me cause I want a good leauge.
But that is bull **** because a good league is crated with more money and more is rinks in Sweden to practice in so with a bigger league we can create more interest in the sport = More money and more is rinks.

So with your logic we should only have 2 teams in the league for better quality? for example now we don´t have any teams in Skåne land with 1,5-1,7 million that is really stupid from Stockholm with the same amount of people they create 60% of Swedish junior players in Hockey so their is a huge potential if more is rinks where built in Skåneland but then we needs interest and that is created of Elite-teams.

So with a bigger league more interest = more kids playing hockey a better league and a better national team but the Hockey League doesn´t care about growing hockey in Sweden

1992LuckyTown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 06:25 PM
  #10
KCrushers
Registered User
 
KCrushers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexKarlRobin View Post
But that is bull **** because a good league is crated with more money and more is rinks in Sweden to practice in so with a bigger league we can create more interest in the sport = More money and more is rinks.

So with your logic we should only have 2 teams in the league for better quality? for example now we don´t have any teams in Skåne land with 1,5-1,7 million that is really stupid from Stockholm with the same amount of people they create 60% of Swedish junior players in Hockey so their is a huge potential if more is rinks where built in Skåneland but then we needs interest and that is created of Elite-teams.

So with a bigger league more interest = more kids playing hockey a better league and a better national team but the Hockey League doesn´t care about growing hockey in Sweden

A good leauge is made by good teams and hockey.
Money, arenas and other things are important but the game is what matters.

I'm not debating hockeydevelopment in Sweden, I'm debating how we get the best SEL we possibly can and that is not by letting the quality standards of the game go over money or location.

KCrushers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-27-2010, 08:09 PM
  #11
KRM
Registered User
 
KRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Gothenburg
Country: Sweden
Posts: 11,001
vCash: 500
lol, since when does Skåne have 1,7 million inhabitants?

KRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 01:25 AM
  #12
GoHomez
Registered User
 
GoHomez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 8 km from the Globe
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
I guess we are touching two topics right now.

A: How do we improve SEL, especially with the emergance, and big bucks, of KHL?
B: How do we improve Swedish hockey in general?

The answer to A does not have to be the answer to B. It could be, but it is far from a guarantee.

The point och relegating 1-2 teams each year is to improve the chanses for AS teams to advance, thus somewhat leveling the playfield a bit. There is a finite number of years a team, like Leksand, can spend big cash on trying to advance. If that doenst pan out, I see a risk teams overspending to advance, but instead ends up bancrupt.

Of course there are a number of ways to answer both A and B.
Distributing more money to AS and junior hockey is probably a terrific answer to B, but not to A.

GoHomez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 04:12 AM
  #13
1992LuckyTown
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 98
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRM View Post
lol, since when does Skåne have 1,7 million inhabitants?
No i said Skåne land (Skåne,Halland,Blekinge) Skåne has ca1,2m but when including Halland and Blekinge it is ca1,7m.

And more teams do not have to mean lower quality standards of the game if you grow the junior side but for that you need to have Teams in no traditional markets in Southern Sweden and that is not happening with out more teams.

Now they have in the 3 teams in the 3 regions in Sweden Where the majority of the population lives Mälardalen(2,7mil) 2teams(Dif,Aik) Västra Götalands län(1,5mil) 1team(VF) Skåneland(1,6) 0teams and if we throw in Dalarna we have 6,1 million with 3 teams and 9 teams on 3mil.

So what i want to say is if we want more money and more kids playing (a better league Hockey) we need to expand to the where pepole lives.

A: How do we improve SEL, especially with the emergence, and big bucks, of KHL?
We have to include the areas where people live =More sponsor money, More Tv money = better players

B: How do we improve Swedish hockey in general? We have to include the no traditional areas in southern Sweden= more ice rinks more kids playing.

1992LuckyTown is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 05:34 AM
  #14
KRM
Registered User
 
KRM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Gothenburg
Country: Sweden
Posts: 11,001
vCash: 500
And since when is Halland part of Skåne? Tell that to a Hallänning and he'll sedate you and use you as a scarecrow on his crop field.

KRM is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 05:58 AM
  #15
no.95
Registered User
 
no.95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: Sweden
Posts: 279
vCash: 500
Although I do love the kvalserie just the way it is. I reckon it's one of the greatest and most exciting, if not the greatest, moments of any sports there is. I can also see a valid point in opening up the current gap between Elitserien and Allsvenskan. I'm not saying we should expand Elitserien to 16 teams or anything like that, but rather the 12th team gets relegated straight away, the 10th and 11th placed teams go to Kvalserien while the 9th goes golfing after the regular season ends. In Allsvenskan the winner of the regular season gets automatically promoted while teams 2 through 4 goes to directly to Kvalserien. There is then, as now, the usual playoff between teams 5-8.

This would get us at least one new SEL-team every season, and a chance to widen the interest of hockey throughout the country (although I do realise that it would probably be the same odd number of teams switching places every season. But if you take this season Växjö would only have been a mere five pts. behind a place in the SEL).

What this would also do is to give more teams something to play for towards the end of the season. More teams would be involved and, barring one team, every SEL-team would be participating in the post season in one way or the other. In Allsvenskan it would limit the non post season appearing teams to four in stead of todays five. Also, it would increase the revenues for the teams involved as they get to play more games.

no.95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 06:51 AM
  #16
1978
Registered User
 
1978's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 394
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlexKarlRobin View Post
No i said Skåne land (Skåne,Halland,Blekinge) Skåne has ca1,2m but when including Halland and Blekinge it is ca1,7m.

And more teams do not have to mean lower quality standards of the game if you grow the junior side but for that you need to have Teams in no traditional markets in Southern Sweden and that is not happening with out more teams.

Now they have in the 3 teams in the 3 regions in Sweden Where the majority of the population lives Mälardalen(2,7mil) 2teams(Dif,Aik) Västra Götalands län(1,5mil) 1team(VF) Skåneland(1,6) 0teams and if we throw in Dalarna we have 6,1 million with 3 teams and 9 teams on 3mil.

So what i want to say is if we want more money and more kids playing (a better league Hockey) we need to expand to the where pepole lives.

A: How do we improve SEL, especially with the emergence, and big bucks, of KHL?
We have to include the areas where people live =More sponsor money, More Tv money = better players

B: How do we improve Swedish hockey in general? We have to include the no traditional areas in southern Sweden= more ice rinks more kids playing.
I used to think like that, but then I realized that it really isn't that easy. There's a lot of factors behind all of that, and it doesn't really mean that Swedish hockey will become richer and all that because we get these regions more involved. You do realize that there's also football that we have to compete with? Sure, there's probably more money to get for TV if we get a larger audience, but if we involve more teams it means that we have to spread that money also. Also, more money isn't always the best way to go, you need to be able to organize yourself and we've got few examples where money has shown that it doesn't give a nice and steady stream of success. Just look at Leksand and Malmö, where are they now? They've relied way to much on money from their sugardaddies. And no, more money doesn't necessarily mean that we get better players, it most likely means that our (mediocre) players get payed better. We still won't even be close to the financial muscle the KHL and the NHL has. Sad but true.

However, you've got a point that we need to have more places for the kids to play. Even if it's just means that they'll play spontaneously sometimes, but it'll create fans that will stick to hockey.

@no.95

Well, all I can say is that I like your ideas. They are clear and I think it would make Swedish hockey a lot more intersting. Though I still feel a bit ambivalent, I like kvalserien and I have fond memories of it.

1978 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 07:16 AM
  #17
Korkki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Pori, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRM View Post
lol, since when does Skåne have 1,7 million inhabitants?
Should I say that since the completion of Öresund bridge... (or there are even more).

I can't understand why Sweden should have only 12 teams in top level because the level of competition is very wide. In Finland we have 14 teams and I think that is also too less. I would like to see 16 teams in top level and lower level to work as farm level.

Korkki is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 10:17 AM
  #18
Lerik
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 48
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edmontreal View Post
Or maybe two teams?
Or should we keep things as is?

Discuss.
No the best teams shall play in SHL. But I think its time to develop SHL to a league of 14 or 15 teams. Why not 15 teams, 14x4= 56 games.

Lerik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 11:46 AM
  #19
gaven
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 23
vCash: 500
1997-98: Björklöven promoted
1998-99: Linköping promoted
1999-00: Timrå and Björklöven promoted
2000-01: Södertälje and Linköping promoted
2001-02: Leksand promoted
2002-03: NO TEAM PROMOTED!
2003-04: Mora promoted
2004-05: Leksand promoted
2005-06: Skellefteå and Malmö promoted
2006-07: Södertälje promoted
2007-08: Rögle promoted
2008-09: NO TEAM PROMOTED!
2009-10: AIK promoted

The frequently heard argument that the Elite League is a closed league has absolutely no basis in facts. That claim is just make belief, no different than the Easter Bunny or Santa Claus.

gaven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 12:53 PM
  #20
Ribban
Registered User
 
Ribban's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Could somebody, please, expalin to me what this "quality" argument is based on?!?
The SEL isn't appealing at all, and it wouldn't be anymore so becasue we trimmed down the number of teams to let's say eight, and paid the guys 1.5 times as much. Most SEL "stars" are already overpaid for what they produce.

What seems to draw is the fans' ability to identify or distance themselves from a team. Arguments such as "Stockholm fans suck," "Heja Norrland," etc. are far more frequently heard than "I really think that Linköping plays an attractive and entertaining hockey."

Whether it should be 10, 12, 14, 16 or 20 teams in the top league of Sweden seems also rather irrellevant for the moment. We clearly have "Elit Licenser" to make sure that the teams playing in HA and the SEL are somewhat stabile and can produce. That is obviously not happening. The elite license requirements are a bad joke, enforced in political manners more than as a tool to keep the leagues healthy.

Rather than discussing the # of teams in any given league at this point, I think the conversation should be about salary caps (yes, no, how high), cost averages/averaging (we're killing Norrland with the current model), # of foreign imports allowed to be dressed for each game, required # of Jr.'s/own products on each squad, arena capacity, # of games per season, how we practice/play, and rule changes (why do we not dare to pioneer something different in this so called world leading league of ours?!?!?).

When we know the scenary of what our leagues need to look like, it's easier to determine how many teams, and from where, we should have in the top league.

Ribban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 01:07 PM
  #21
KCrushers
Registered User
 
KCrushers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ribban View Post
Could somebody, please, expalin to me what this "quality" argument is based on?!?
I think it's pretty simple.
What I mean is that I don't want teams in SEL that can be competitive through october/november and then totally drop the ball and basicly hand away points after that.

Think Malmö or Leksand last time they were in SEL.

KCrushers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 03:23 PM
  #22
Ribban
Registered User
 
Ribban's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCrushers View Post
I think it's pretty simple.
What I mean is that I don't want teams in SEL that can be competitive through october/november and then totally drop the ball and basicly hand away points after that.

Think Malmö or Leksand last time they were in SEL.
Not simple at all. Quality is a "qualitative statement" and very much up for interpretation by the individual. It could be referring to the actual game on the ice (speed, ability, scoring, physicality, etc), the drama of close games (were the SEL finals gr8 cuz of all the OTs?), but I think I understand what you mean by better quality, which seems to be more parity, no danglers in the basement, like Rögle this year. Am I close?

Ribban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
04-28-2010, 03:36 PM
  #23
KCrushers
Registered User
 
KCrushers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ribban View Post
Not simple at all. Quality is a "qualitative statement" and very much up for interpretation by the individual. It could be referring to the actual game on the ice (speed, ability, scoring, physicality, etc), the drama of close games (were the SEL finals gr8 cuz of all the OTs?), but I think I understand what you mean by better quality, which seems to be more parity, no danglers in the basement, like Rögle this year. Am I close?
Yeah, you're getting there.
I want a league where 12 teams can reach the playoffs, not 10 cause the two others are too far behind already by the christmas break.

KCrushers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-01-2010, 01:29 PM
  #24
Ribban
Registered User
 
Ribban's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: USA
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,512
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KCrushers View Post
Yeah, you're getting there.
I want a league where 12 teams can reach the playoffs, not 10 cause the two others are too far behind already by the christmas break.
OK. I get that, and it would of course be the optimal model, but I'm convinced that even if we trimmed down the number of teams in the SEL to as few as six, you'd still see a team or two slump for one reason or the other. It's just the nature of all sports.

Please understand that I am not arguing with you per se, but I am skeptical to the models I have heard and seen presented in the past to bring the SEL to where you are hoping it to be one day.

I don't think that it matters what composition of league or even sport, we will never see the kind of parity you describe. Whereever you look, NHL, NBA, NFL, MLB, Premier League, La Liga, etc., you will always have a handful of teams in the bottom region, posting as forgone conclusions anytime your team is going up against them. The reasons to why we see this story hold true in all of sports may be different, but I'm saying that no system is perfect, and if resources aren't playing a role in the competitive differences, rebuilding/maturity phases will.

If we really are looking for more parity, I'd suggest the SEL brings on a salary cap, create regional division, and help cut the expenses for the Norrland teams, why not institute cost averages (all teams pay the same for travels, refs, etc.), and probably have to expand the league by a couple of teams and make it a closed league. But, the problem seems to be that the top 5 might lose the strangle hold they have on Swedish hockey right now, which is pretty far from the argument of improved quality and more parity.

Ribban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
05-11-2010, 09:57 AM
  #25
Landeskog
Registered User
 
Landeskog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Burlington,On,CA
Country: Canada
Posts: 639
vCash: 500
i'm just wondering if sweden has looked into a junior league like the CHL? how about making swedish hockey more like north american hockey. what i mean by that is

SEL = NHL
ALL = AHL
swedish teir league 1-4 = american semi pro leagues
take the u20,u18 teams and create a junior league by merging the teams together.
you could do something like this

Swedish major junior = chl
swedish junior a = junior a
swedish junior b = junior b
swedish junior c = junior c

CHL would hold a draft, where players from the age of 16-15 is allow to be drafted. non-swedish players could be drafted as well. anyone not drafted would move to the other 3 junior levels. SMJ(CHL) could have a minor team in the junior b. junior A teams would have minor teams in the junior c.

so something like this

SMJ(CHL) <-> junior b
junior a <-> junior c

allowing for better development. that's what's the key here you what to develop 10 or 15sundins and not just 2 or 3. this would allow the swedes to develop their talents and make more stars for the SEL. this way you will beable to development more players and better players. no longer would a team HV71 or Farjestads or the other top teams also be on top, maybe some of the weaker clubs become better.

SEL could also hold a draft for all 19 year olds, to be drafted from their junior team to the SEL. this way making all the teams in the SEL better and making your league better.

the SEL entry draft could also allow 19 year olds from finland, norway, denmark and the rest of europe. SEL could also look into drafting north americans, kind of like how the KHL does.

so juniors(19-16/15) would have 3 to 4 years to develop their skills. the SEL teams would have minor league teams in the ALL and one of the other teir levels most likely sweden 1. this way you you can develop the draftees that are not ready for the SEL.

if sweden did something like this it would not lose players to the CHL in the import draft and it also might not lose it's star power swedes like the lidstroms,zetterbergs and hedmans and frogrens to the nhl as much. becuase it would a higher level of play. the swedes who might level are ones who want to chase a nhl dream.

SEL could add more teams to the top level and then work it's way down the list. the junior level would work the same. in canada we have 3 major junior leagues that equals to 60 teams and each team have minor team with it that's 120 junior teams.then the Junior A,B and C all have about 20-25 teams with a minor added on to that.

i'd like to see a world were every hockey country can have a good league and fair chance of winning, i'm sick and tried of seeing canada beat the ass off of the italys and frances of the world. if the stronger hockey powers get stronger than the lower teir countries have no choice but to fallow in their foot steps. making hoceky better as a whole. now you won't see canada beat Poland 7-1 or Sweden beat France 8-2 or even Russia beat Italy 10-3. this is what all hockey leagues and countries have to do so we can always have better hockey. plus if the european counties do this they won't lose as many elite players to the NHL.


Last edited by Landeskog: 05-11-2010 at 10:09 AM.
Landeskog is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:07 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.