You're right, the ECHL might actually be better now!
While there's no question that the talent level in the AHL is better, IMO the actual on ice product is better at the ECHL level and with each year that the AHL is NHL Lite, the ECHL product will continue to get better.
Can we please just get away from the chest-puffing (or sometimes reverse chest-puffing) "My league is better/worse than your league" rhetoric? It's silly and makes people look stupid.
Wouldn't it just be better for us all to say "I PREFER to watch (league x)", rather than engage in fights over who's the better person because their league is better?
Can we please just get away from the chest-puffing (or sometimes reverse chest-puffing) "My league is better/worse than your league" rhetoric? It's silly and makes people look stupid.
Wouldn't it just be better for us all to say "I PREFER to watch (league x)", rather than engage in fights over who's the better person because their league is better?
Misinterpretation. I wasn't looking for a fight really, as I watch both leagues and follow them close. It was just an observation I was noticing following both leagues, would watch either any day over the NHL even if the NHL tickets were free.
Can we please just get away from the chest-puffing (or sometimes reverse chest-puffing) "My league is better/worse than your league" rhetoric? It's silly and makes people look stupid.
Wouldn't it just be better for us all to say "I PREFER to watch (league x)", rather than engage in fights over who's the better person because their league is better?
I don't think anyone is doing what you are saying and your post here is a bit of an overreaction.
While there's no question that the talent level in the AHL is better, IMO the actual on ice product is better at the ECHL level and with each year that the AHL is NHL Lite, the ECHL product will continue to get better.
I see a ton of ECHL games each year and only a few AHL games. But, I think I understand what you're saying.
One of the great things about ECHL hockey is the number of small players who can really skate and are natural scorers. Many of these players aren't quite quick enough to make it to the AHL or be effective in that league if they make it there, but are far more enjoyable to watch than some plodding AHL 3rd and 4rth liners.
The ECHL is also much more "winning oriented" than the AHL. The primary mission of an AHL coach is to develop a few of his players for future roles in the NHL and the systems that are played (usually dreadfully boring defensively-oriented ones) aren't as entertaining as those employed in the ECHL. For instance, the Cincinnati Cyclones play a very up tempo, offense first style. They'll give up some goals that they wouldn't if they played a different style, but they score some incredibly cool goals (and give up some) as a result of their offensively geared system. In the AHL, winning is sometimes sacrificed for the greater goal of development and that is rarely the case in the ECHL.
I see a ton of ECHL games each year and only a few AHL games. But, I think I understand what you're saying.
One of the great things about ECHL hockey is the number of small players who can really skate and are natural scorers. Many of these players aren't quite quick enough to make it to the AHL or be effective in that league if they make it there, but are far more enjoyable to watch than some plodding AHL 3rd and 4rth liners.
The ECHL is also much more "winning oriented" than the AHL. The primary mission of an AHL coach is to develop a few of his players for future roles in the NHL and the systems that are played (usually dreadfully boring defensively-oriented ones) aren't as entertaining as those employed in the ECHL. For instance, the Cincinnati Cyclones play a very up tempo, offense first style. They'll give up some goals that they wouldn't if they played a different style, but they score some incredibly cool goals (and give up some) as a result of their offensively geared system. In the AHL, winning is sometimes sacrificed for the greater goal of development and that is rarely the case in the ECHL.
You are saying that the ECHL has replaced the old IHL. Milwaukee scored 400 goals one season in the 1980s. That is averaging 5 goals a game with the same style.
You are saying that the ECHL has replaced the old IHL. Milwaukee scored 400 goals one season in the 1980s. That is averaging 5 goals a game with the same style.
I wish My point was that ECHL teams have more license to "run and gun" it instead of playing some unstated variation of the crappy "trap" which still, unfortunately, has a great deal of influence in hockey-especially at the higher levels. However, most ECHL teams are very defensively oriented-even when they don't have to be, imo.
The Cyclones are averaging close to 4 goals per game for on home ice and their defensmen pinch even when they shouldn't
I wish My point was that ECHL teams have more license to "run and gun" it instead of playing some unstated variation of the crappy "trap" which still, unfortunately, has a great deal of influence in hockey-especially at the higher levels. However, most ECHL teams are very defensively oriented-even when they don't have to be, imo.
The Cyclones are averaging close to 4 goals per game for on home ice and their defensmen pinch even when they shouldn't
They average 3.65 at home, nowhere near 4. That is what Kzoo is averaging the entire season. Road average is 2.79, however, this is an AHL board and last I looked, the clones are not in the AHL.
The ECHL quality is slightly better than major junior and college but not near the AHL level.
If Gwinnett wants to go to the A, they still need to get a franchise and who knows if their current fan base would even be interested in the A. Rockford fans weren't and neither were QC fans.
Last edited by Tommy Hawk: 03-11-2012 at 11:10 AM.
If Gwinnett gets an AHL team I could see myself going to 5-10 games a year, maybe even more. After having Devils season tickets for 10+ years and moving to Atlanta, I just cant justify driving 30-40 minutes to watch an ECHL team.
They average 3.65 at home, nowhere near 4. That is what Kzoo is averaging the entire season. Road average is 2.79, however, this is an AHL board and last I looked, the clones are not in the AHL.
The ECHL quality is slightly better than major junior and college but not near the AHL level.
If Gwinnett wants to go to the A, they still need to get a franchise and who knows if their current fan base would even be interested in the A. Rockford fans weren't and neither were QC fans.
Rockford may be 25th in AHL attendance, but they are still averaging 4200 a game. Not a huge amount, but more than OKC, Bingo and Albany.
If Gwinnett gets an AHL team I could see myself going to 5-10 games a year, maybe even more. After having Devils season tickets for 10+ years and moving to Atlanta, I just cant justify driving 30-40 minutes to watch an ECHL team.
Does one more level up really make that much of a difference? If I can make the hour drive 8 times in a season you can surely make the 30-40 minute drive at least 5 times. Get the weekender package or the game of the month package(guarentees you 7 regular season games).
) as a result of their offensively geared system. In the AHL, winning is sometimes sacrificed for the greater goal of development and that is rarely the case in the ECHL.
