I wish I had the hangover excuse ..the Jim Beam name makes it a little funny

Welcome to Quinet!

I've asked another player to take over the Dutchmen... but we need to get on this renewal issue. I'm getting nervous. If the MLD goes away that's going to punch a serious hole in my day.

Exactly how many new GMs are we going to need? And how many have committed to the six-pack renewal?

If we need to give okp some temporary help at the moment, let's do it.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

Like posted on league message board the other day:

- 22 confirmed for another 6 seasons

- still waiting for a reply from the last 2

First rebuttal to the new MLD records posted:

Goalie (250 TOI) records - Leo Xavier had 162 wins in 351 games (ties Hanhimaki) and 46 shutouts (beats Hanhimaki).

Thanks damag - record thread updated.

This post could not be converted. To view the original post's thread, click here.

I just love your commas instead of periods. It's so European.

Looks like we have a nice level going for us now.... offensively anyways, not so much in the shots on goal category but I suppose ya can't win em all!

Seasons 1 and 2 were a lil too explosive.

Seasons 4 thru 15 were "dead puck" times

Season 16 to present have been good... we'll have to keep an eye on it to make sure it doesn't decline too much as we move forward.

I have a suggestion... something that's been bothering me for some time.

The MLD initially put in retirement rules to prevent players from never moving on - so that older, quality vets would move on and younger players would have to come in. Of course, we all figured out pretty quickly that you could "warehouse" a favorite player by having him play his 19 games and then come back for the playoffs.

Recently, the trend has emerged that some teams are warehousing an entire second team, every single year... so that the players in the regular-season change over, but the playoff team is the same bunch of 15-20 "year" old veteran players who never age or retire. I feel like this both destroys the competitive nature of the league, and although it follows the letter of the law, it is a clear violation of its spirit. Hanging on to one or two favorite players is one thing, but its a bit, well, not cricket to dust off an entirely separate playoff team year after year.

I would like to suggest a rule that says only a certain number of players that play fewer than 20 regular-season games should be allowed into the playoffs that season... say 3 or 4, with a possible allowance if the team actually gets more injuries than that all at once.

It's kinda sucking the fun out of the league the way it is. It's important for me to put out there, however, that this has nothing to do with my bad mood for my team's crummy playoff this year, as I didn't lose to a team using this strategy. It's just something I've been observing for several seasons around the league. I'd really like for us to talk about it.

I couldn't agree more...it is tough to play a completely different team in the playoffs. I would be in favor of a warehouse limit as I believe the spirit of the Franchise player was for him alone to be the guy that hangs around as opposed to 10 players that have 20 year careers at peak ability. Just my two cents.

It would have to be something we could enforce. I don't see any easy ways to do that.

For the record... since I was called out for having a "relentlessly warehoused" team... which got murdered in the quarterfinals anyway... I don't care what the rule is.

I have retired around ten players over the past three seasons anyway.

I played the majority of this season with seven rookies in the lineup, and moving them out for the vets did nothing to change my place in the standings.

I accepted about five seasons ago that I have no idea what it takes to win an MLD cup, and that I am never going to win one, so I stopped trying.

The only principle I've been running my team on for the past five seasons is, I like having good players on my roster to look at. So I just won't retire them for what seems like no reason at all. My only goal now is that, if I like a player, I will prolong his career as long as possible. I actually reached a roster crunch three seasons ago when it was impossible for me to even draft more players without retiring some.

If we pass a rule that I'm not allowed to play those players in the playoffs, that's fine.

I still have the second player I ever drafted. I still have the team's original backup goalie and I will never retire him. I still have the one guy I ever got to draft number one overall, I just don't want to retire him because it'll all have been a waste.

All I'm doing this for is to amuse myself.

Well, I've got 6 warehoused players that I brought up for my playoff run. Personally, I don't consider that number to be excessive, mainly because I've been pretty consistent about graduating players. I feel that eventually, over-warehousing will come back to bite anyone who does it in the butt, since you end up having a ton of graduating players all at once. All that being said, I am all in favour of this idea. Loading up for a playoff run should be done via trades, but instead some GM's are doing it by warehousing players. This isn't what was intended when this league was founded.

Now, the way I see it, there's a couple of ways to address this issue. One is yog's idea, basically naming the (whatever number of WH players) you'll be using in the playoffs. I also think that we could possibly put limits on the number of 15-19 game seasons a player could play before having it count against their career total of six seasons. Maybe 4 seasons where a player has anywhere from 15 to 19 games played could count as one season for a player's career.

Dan's two cents.

I fully agree with what Yogs is saying and have been feeling the same way.