Breaking the rules set by the OHA(In Response to 'Stats Primer')

[Port hockey1]

A recent thread that points out many statistics about the Caledonia Corvairs has stirred up a lot of controversy. There's talk of players being paid large amounts of money to play for them. Actually, there's bold accusations. Now I don't know, maybe they do, maybe they don't... But one thing I know for certain is many Caledonia players jumped at the chance to be top players on a team again. Those same players were also excited about playing for a team that has a chance to set history with a 3rd straight Sutherland Cup. So several players could care less about any money, its about playing together and being point producers once again.

But if Caledonia is paying a few players... So what There's a large list of OHA hockey clubs that are guilty of doing the same. The only reason Caledonia is being picked on is because they've found several ex-CHL players, all of whom give it everything they have every night. So to be clear, the reason for this so called outrage is due to the number of players.
Well what's the magic number that would've made everyone happy? Trick question... There isn't one!

I know this because I've seen St.Catharines do the exact same thing both of the last two seasons.(not this season) N.Dozzi, J.Evans, P.DeSousa, J.Felker, B.Welsh, J.Andrews, B.Dubois, etc. The list goes on. The only difference is that Caledonia gets 100% commitment out of their kids. St.Catharines hasn't been as lucky. Having Mike the 'Bully' Bullard who's played several years in the NHL is the reason why Caledonia gets such a better work ethic out of their players.

So it isn't fair to be piling on to this team simply because it worked for them! Caledonia was the underdogs against the CHL filled St.Catharines Falcons two years ago. Caledonia was led by a 17 year old kid in scoring that year. That team had less than ten 20 year olds on it. This is a witch hunt, look at the above and tell me it isn't!

And if that's not enough to convince you, I've made a list of teams that, according to at least two reliable sources, have paid players at some point between 2000-2016. I'm not saying these teams did pay players, I'm only saying that at least two solid sources say they have(In a way that violates league policy). Some teams have done it often, and paid very large sums of money in that time period, at one time or another... Or are doing it now.(According to sources, several in some cases)

The teams that have allegedly been the heaviest hitters will be underlined.



Teams from the GOJHL:


London
Strathroy
Sarnia
Leamington
Chatham
Stratford
Kitchener
Guelph
Elmira
Listowel
Waterloo
St.Catharines
Niagara Falls
Thorold
Stoney Creek(now Ancaster)
Port Colborne(now Pelham)


Teams from the OJHL:(Jr.A)

Aurora
Wellington
Georgetown
Orangeville
Newmarket
Oakville


Teams from across Jr.C:


Exeter
Dorchester
Grimsby
Alliston
Mount Forest
Port Hope
Essex
Paris
Ayr
Kincardine



So those of you wanting the Caledonia Corvairs investigated for breaching OHA rules... I wan't the teams above, the ones who are still doing it, to be investigated as well! Investigations should be done in the other teams past cases as well.

My point..... Punish everyone who breaks the rules and what do we have left? This witch hunt needs to end!!!

[Port hockey1]

BTW:

This was posted to the West forum for several reasons.

A) It's in response to a thread that was posted on this board

B) The thread concerns teams from the West

C) This is the most active board & the topic is the talk of the entire league.

[Cali vairs!]

Port your exactly right. These players are playing together because their great friends. Davis Brown came back from Sweden for many reasons. Number one was concussion issues. But during a break in hockey in Sweden he met fitzmorris in a bar one night. They used to play together before jr hockey. They started taking about hockey and where they were playing. Fitzmorris told him about Caledonia and Davis was the one who call rizzeto. Like Ratch said on the other post, 20 year olds are kids too. Most people on here view them as horrible creatures who are ruining the league. Their here for fun. Are they getting money, compensation for going to the games. So next time you speak about limiting these 20 year olds, think about what you're saying. Your saying that they shouldn't be in this league when they obviously don't have anywhere else to go. You want some of these kids career cut short because of a rule. Think if you were in that situation.

[keepcalm]

Port Hockey and Cali vairs! Thanks for the excellent points you've identified in your posts. Others with opposing points of view have also pointed out some interesting arguments. These forums give everyone the opportunity to post opinion. Opinion is valuable and the source of many great conversations and debates - but there are times when fact becomes the most important factor.

In terms of the recent GOJHL ruling regarding the limitations of 20 yr old players and those with CHL experience, I recognize that change can be positive if implemented based on fact. My concern in this situation is that this rule change will have a significant impact not only on players, but on the league overall. My understanding is that based on the GOJHL's vision of player development, there is concern that the rostering of 20 yr old players, some with CHL experience, is negatively impacting the development of younger players; simply stated, they are taking roster positions from younger players, thus denying them development opportunities. The only tangible facts I can identify from this argument are numbers. It's simple to add up the number of 20 yr old players one a team; subsequently it's just as simple to calculate the number with CHL experience. My question is, how can the league truly identify that younger players are not developing simply by not playing in the GOJHL? Firstly, can the league identify those players who would be playing in the league if there were actually fewer 20 yr olds? Secondly, of those they could possibly identify, by what measure can the league reasonably conclude that these players have not developed as thoroughly by playing in their current league (say for example Midget or Jr C). as they would have by playing in the GOJHL? I would argue that younger players develop more fully by receiving quality and consistent minutes. A 17 yr old for example, who receives regular minutes in varying game situations will develop more thoroughly than one receiving 4rth line minutes on a Jr B team. For those that argue there are young players who can have significant roles in the GOJHL, I would agree - and would add that these players will earn positions based on their skill-sets, regardless of the numbers of 20 yr olds. Player development is largely the result of consistent minutes played with and vs players with experience and a high skill-set. Limiting the number of skilled, experienced 20 yr olds, with or without CHL experience, lowers the overall quality of the league; therefore potentially limiting player development. This is the reason I suggested in an earlier post that before implementing a rule that will significantly impact players and the league in general, further monitoring and statistical evidence over the next few seasons would have been prudent rather than implementing a rather drastic change based on largely on one team in one season. For those who identify the 3 overage player per team limit in the OHL, it is necessary to recognize that the OHL is a very different league with very different mandates. The key focus of the OHL is moving players to professional hockey. Restricting the number of 20 yr old positions results in more roster positions being available for players eligible for the draft and professional camp invitations, in addition to ensuring roster positions for previously drafted players to continue to develop prior to moving on to their professional teams/affiliates. While development is integral to the structure of the OHL, the league is heavily focused on supplying players to professional hockey, most predominantly the NHL and its affiliates.

Now that the so-called Caledonia Rule change has been implemented, it's my hope the league will develop a factual method for analyzing whether or not it has been successful, rather than simply changing the rule based on opinion rather than fact.

[Port hockey1]

Port Hockey and Cali vairs! Thanks for the excellent points you've identified in your posts. Others with opposing points of view have also pointed out some interesting arguments. These forums give everyone the opportunity to post opinion. Opinion is valuable and the source of many great conversations and debates - but there are times when fact becomes the most important factor.

In terms of the recent GOJHL ruling regarding the limitations of 20 yr old players and those with CHL experience, I recognize that change can be positive if implemented based on fact. My concern in this situation is that this rule change will have a significant impact not only on players, but on the league overall. My understanding is that based on the GOJHL's vision of player development, there is concern that the rostering of 20 yr old players, some with CHL experience, is negatively impacting the development of younger players; simply stated, they are taking roster positions from younger players, thus denying them development opportunities. The only tangible facts I can identify from this argument are numbers. It's simple to add up the number of 20 yr old players one a team; subsequently it's just as simple to calculate the number with CHL experience. My question is, how can the league truly identify that younger players are not developing simply by not playing in the GOJHL? Firstly, can the league identify those players who would be playing in the league if there were actually fewer 20 yr olds? Secondly, of those they could possibly identify, by what measure can the league reasonably conclude that these players have not developed as thoroughly by playing in their current league (say for example Midget or Jr C). as they would have by playing in the GOJHL? I would argue that younger players develop more fully by receiving quality and consistent minutes. A 17 yr old for example, who receives regular minutes in varying game situations will develop more thoroughly than one receiving 4rth line minutes on a Jr B team. For those that argue there are young players who can have significant roles in the GOJHL, I would agree - and would add that these players will earn positions based on their skill-sets, regardless of the numbers of 20 yr olds. Player development is largely the result of consistent minutes played with and vs players with experience and a high skill-set. Limiting the number of skilled, experienced 20 yr olds, with or without CHL experience, lowers the overall quality of the league; therefore potentially limiting player development. This is the reason I suggested in an earlier post that before implementing a rule that will significantly impact players and the league in general, further monitoring and statistical evidence over the next few seasons would have been prudent rather than implementing a rather drastic change based on largely on one team in one season. For those who identify the 3 overage player per team limit in the OHL, it is necessary to recognize that the OHL is a very different league with very different mandates. The key focus of the OHL is moving players to professional hockey. Restricting the number of 20 yr old positions results in more roster positions being available for players eligible for the draft and professional camp invitations, in addition to ensuring roster positions for previously drafted players to continue to develop prior to moving on to their professional teams/affiliates. While development is integral to the structure of the OHL, the league is heavily focused on supplying players to professional hockey, most predominantly the NHL and its affiliates.

Now that the so-called Caledonia Rule change has been implemented, it's my hope the league will develop a factual method for analyzing whether or not it has been successful, rather than simply changing the rule based on opinion rather than fact.

Excellent post.

[richard]

The OHA has placed severe penalties for teams that abuse player benefits and incentives. If teams wish to go that route they will be caught sooner then later. Personally, I believe the OHA will eventually catch the cheaters if any are out there.

[RocketGirl]

.....I've made a list of teams that, according to at least two reliable sources, have paid players at some point between 2000-2016.

Teams from the GOJHL:


London
Strathroy
Sarnia
Leamington
Chatham
Stratford
Kitchener
Guelph
Elmira
Listowel
Waterloo
St.Catharines
Niagara Falls
Thorold
Stoney Creek(now Ancaster)
Port Colborne(now Pelham)

It's been pointed out numerous times on here, especially this season, that we're a very cash strapped team, supposedly our mini-camp is just a cash grab, so I'm just wondering how it is that we paid anyone?

[Qwerty]

I want to correct Cali's inference that I or anyone on this forum is advocating to ban 20-year-olds from the GO, and the suggestion that I or anyone views them as "horrible creatures" is frankly hilarious. Never said it, never thunk it, and know there is no support for it. I personally know several 20-yr-olds in the GO (am related to one, in fact), and the majority of which I believe play essential roles their teams, especially the more competitive ones.

It's about balance, folks.

You might want to check-out the poll at the bottom of the story posted at http://www.wellandtribune.ca/2016/03/29 ... e-per-team

The sample size is small, but I think it's probably a good cross-section of opinions on this issue. I've copied the results below. Y

ou will note that the largest percentage of respondents (39%) suggest 6 is the right number of 20-yr-olds to carry. You will also note that the smallest percentage of respondents (3%) support an outright ban. You can take these numbers with a grain of salt and I respect the argument that there is no magic number. However, consider that 80% of respondents have voted in favour of some kind of limit being placed on the number.

So let's please not misrepresent the argument that this is a war on 20-yr-olds. It's not. I believe there are lots of 20 year olds in the GO that belong. I also believe there are too many 20-yr-old players -- especially ones who are CHL over-agers -- on the Corvairs this year. And so does the league in which they play.

Poll
How many 20-year-olds should junior B teams be allowed?
Friday, April 15, 2016

20%
86 votes
No limit on 20-yr-olds

3%
15 votes
No 20-yr-olds allowed

15%
68 votes
Nine

39%
173 votes
Six

16%
69 votes
Four

7%
29 votes
Two

[Qwerty]

I also want to briefly comment on the accusations about which teams may or may not pay players or provide other kinds of special incentives to play. Don't know the rules, don't know what happens behind the scenes, but appreciate the fact that some teams clearly have more resources at their disposal than others to attract and retain quality players. Not sure how you police that and frankly don't care. Players and teams decide where to play and who to add to their roster based on a number of factors. What the league needs to do -- and is trying to do with the Caledonia rule -- is set out the framework for a more level playing field that provides more room on rosters for younger players to develop while at the same time promoting greater parity in the league. Don't care how much money/perks Corvairs or any other team may be able to throw at players -- if they're limited in the number 20-yr-old CHL over-agers they can recruit, that will inevitably lead to more parity and a greater distribution of the high-end talent across the league.

[Cali vairs!]

Qwerty I I absolutely respect your opinion. But the way you argue about it makes it sound like 20 year olds are terrible. So what's your opinion on ending some of these kids careers a year early? Don't say CIS because not that many that I've talked to want to do that. I don't mind the new rule but, I fear for the players who are ruled out because their not good enough to be apart of a teams 9. I think it will affect the level of play as well.

[Qwerty]

Cali, I'm not advocating to end anyone's career "early" and I don't think 20-year-olds, or ex-CHLers, are "terrible." What I'm opposed to is having so many of them occupying roster spots, particularly on one team, at the expense of younger players getting the opportunity and at the expense of promoting greater league parity.

CIS teams are loaded with ex-CHL players, so regardless of the players you're talking to, many do pursue this option while getting an education and transitioning into adulthood. Most of the 20 year olds I talk to would love to play university or college hockey when they finish Jr B.

On the note of transitioning into adulthood, here's another option, the elephant in the room, for 20-year-olds and CHL vets who can't land Jr B spots.

At some point these "kids" (nay, young men) need to face the real world. If, after you get your run in the CHL and you don't get drafted, well, buddy, I think the writing is on the wall. It's time to focus on the bigger picture. Go to school or get a job, or both. If you still love to play, great... find a senior men's team or beer league team who would love to have you. Instead, what we're doing by letting 20-yr-old CHL guys back DOWN into Jr B is delaying by one year the inevitable, and we're doing this at the expense of younger kids who deserve their shot to play Jr B and maybe land themselves a CHL roster spot or a ticket to the NCAA.

The GO should not be a grazing pasture for over-age CHLers who don't make the leap to pro. The GO should not be a league that permits teams to stack their rosters with 20-yr-olds to win championships. The GO should be a development league for players striving to make the jump to OHL or NCAA or CIS hockey. This means there needs to be as much room as possible in the GO for 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 year olds who remain eligible to pursue those roads. And this means there should be very little room, if any, for CHL over-agers who've already had their turn in the OHL, who have already burned their bridges to NCAA, and who already have scholarships for CIS if they choose to pursue that route.

[jfvoll]

The GO should not be a grazing pasture for over-age CHLers who don't make the leap to pro. The GO should not be a league that permits teams to stack their rosters with 20-yr-olds to win championships. The GO should be a development league for players striving to make the jump to OHL or NCAA or CIS hockey. This means there needs to be as much room as possible in the GO for 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 year olds who remain eligible to pursue those roads. And this means there should be very little room, if any, for CHL over-agers who've already had their turn in the OHL, who have already burned their bridges to NCAA, and who already have scholarships for CIS if they choose to pursue that route.

So develop them for the OHL, yet when they don't get drafted, give them a kick in the arse because they played at a higher level. What about players from the tier 2 system?

[keepcalm]

Quote by jfvoll: "So develop them for the OHL, yet when they don't get drafted, give them a kick in the arse because they played at a higher level. What about players from the tier 2 system".

jfvoll;
Regarding your post: simply stated and bang on. Couldn't have said it better myself. I considered posting a response supporting the CHL players that included consideration of their skill-set and experience, among many other factors, but when I read your post I realized you've summed it up perfectly. Thanks.

[Qwerty]

jfvoll, you speak my language. If you want to call it a kick in the arse, fine. Yes, that is precisely what I'm saying should happen to CHL over-agers. Move on. Development leagues should work like a one-way ladder. If you're not moving up, then get the hell off and out of the way of those who are still able to climb up. I don't understand the logic of wanting to move backwards other than to stack teams with guys whose skill surpasses most in the league. Guys who play Major Jr for multiple seasons then drop down to B when they have no road forward into professional ranks, are moving backward. Same goes for B players who move down to C and load up teams like Exeter and Dorchester and decimate the rest of the competition in those leagues. It's a joke. As for Tier 2, in my opinion, there is a marginal difference in quality between OJ and GO... players can and should be allowed to move back and forth. But there is a REAL difference between the OHL, Tier 2 and Jr. B. Of course the players who get the proverbial cup of coffee in the O -- couple games as call-ups, or even a full season riding the bench or watching from the stands on reserve -- they should be welcome back into the GO because 99% of the time they know where they stand before they're 19 or 20 years old. But the multi-year guys, the true CHL guys, have had their turn.

[Port hockey1]

.....I've made a list of teams that, according to at least two reliable sources, have paid players at some point between 2000-2016.

Teams from the GOJHL:


London
Strathroy
Sarnia
Leamington
Chatham
Stratford
Kitchener
Guelph
Elmira
Listowel
Waterloo
St.Catharines
Niagara Falls
Thorold
Stoney Creek(now Ancaster)
Port Colborne(now Pelham)

It's been pointed out numerous times on here, especially this season, that we're a very cash strapped team, supposedly our mini-camp is just a cash grab, so I'm just wondering how it is that we paid anyone?

I'm hearing you guys don't. But that you used to several years back. Just what my sources have said. I wen't through a lot of old notes before I started this thread.

[Oglethorp]

.....I've made a list of teams that, according to at least two reliable sources, have paid players at some point between 2000-2016.

Teams from the GOJHL:


London
Strathroy
Sarnia
Leamington
Chatham
Stratford
Kitchener
Guelph
Elmira
Listowel
Waterloo
St.Catharines
Niagara Falls
Thorold
Stoney Creek(now Ancaster)
Port Colborne(now Pelham)

It's been pointed out numerous times on here, especially this season, that we're a very cash strapped team, supposedly our mini-camp is just a cash grab, so I'm just wondering how it is that we paid anyone?

I'm hearing you guys don't. But that you used to several years back. Just what my sources have said. I wen't through a lot of old notes before I started this thread.

That is what I had heard as well

[BillyTheKid]

A recent thread that points out many statistics about the Caledonia Corvairs has stirred up a lot of controversy. There's talk of players being paid large amounts of money to play for them. Actually, there's bold accusations. Now I don't know, maybe they do, maybe they don't... But one thing I know for certain is many Caledonia players jumped at the chance to be top players on a team again. Those same players were also excited about playing for a team that has a chance to set history with a 3rd straight Sutherland Cup. So several players could care less about any money, its about playing together and being point producers once again.

But if Caledonia is paying a few players... So what There's a large list of OHA hockey clubs that are guilty of doing the same. The only reason Caledonia is being picked on is because they've found several ex-CHL players, all of whom give it everything they have every night. So to be clear, the reason for this so called outrage is due to the number of players.
Well what's the magic number that would've made everyone happy? Trick question... There isn't one!

I know this because I've seen St.Catharines do the exact same thing both of the last two seasons.(not this season) N.Dozzi, J.Evans, P.DeSousa, J.Felker, B.Welsh, J.Andrews, B.Dubois, etc. The list goes on. The only difference is that Caledonia gets 100% commitment out of their kids. St.Catharines hasn't been as lucky. Having Mike the 'Bully' Bullard who's played several years in the NHL is the reason why Caledonia gets such a better work ethic out of their players.

So it isn't fair to be piling on to this team simply because it worked for them! Caledonia was the underdogs against the CHL filled St.Catharines Falcons two years ago. Caledonia was led by a 17 year old kid in scoring that year. That team had less than ten 20 year olds on it. This is a witch hunt, look at the above and tell me it isn't!

And if that's not enough to convince you, I've made a list of teams that, according to at least two reliable sources, have paid players at some point between 2000-2016. I'm not saying these teams did pay players, I'm only saying that at least two solid sources say they have(In a way that violates league policy). Some teams have done it often, and paid very large sums of money in that time period, at one time or another... Or are doing it now.(According to sources, several in some cases)

The teams that have allegedly been the heaviest hitters will be underlined.



Teams from the GOJHL:


London
Strathroy
Sarnia
Leamington
Chatham
Stratford
Kitchener
Guelph
Elmira
Listowel
Waterloo
St.Catharines
Niagara Falls
Thorold
Stoney Creek(now Ancaster)
Port Colborne(now Pelham)


Teams from the OJHL:(Jr.A)

Aurora
Wellington
Georgetown
Orangeville
Newmarket
Oakville


Teams from across Jr.C:


Exeter
Dorchester
Grimsby
Alliston
Mount Forest
Port Hope
Essex
Paris
Ayr
Kincardine



So those of you wanting the Caledonia Corvairs investigated for breaching OHA rules... I wan't the teams above, the ones who are still doing it, to be investigated as well! Investigations should be done in the other teams past cases as well.

My point..... Punish everyone who breaks the rules and what do we have left? This witch hunt needs to end!!!

Lol port your a beauty.... If you don't think players on Cali are getting something then give your head a shake they will just never get caught with there hand in the cookie jar that is all. There not the only team to do it tho so nobody can sit here and throw all the blame on them at all. Believe me I know for a fact all teams are doing it there's no secret to it at all it happens in every league but the thing is how do you prove it? If your going to investigate a team you better have all your facts and sources b4 you do it other wise the OHA will just look stupid. These teams aren't stupid they will just burry it and say oh it's money for school or gas or books for school and so on and so on. Every team is doing it not just one.

[BillyTheKid]

.....I've made a list of teams that, according to at least two reliable sources, have paid players at some point between 2000-2016.

Teams from the GOJHL:


London
Strathroy
Sarnia
Leamington
Chatham
Stratford
Kitchener
Guelph
Elmira
Listowel
Waterloo
St.Catharines
Niagara Falls
Thorold
Stoney Creek(now Ancaster)
Port Colborne(now Pelham)

It's been pointed out numerous times on here, especially this season, that we're a very cash strapped team, supposedly our mini-camp is just a cash grab, so I'm just wondering how it is that we paid anyone?

Money grab? Who said that ? Why do you keep talking referring to the rockets as "WE" also? You write for the OHA magazine don't you? I understand there your favourite team and I've been told your dad and brother are associated with the team? But to sit here and say "WE" you shouldn't your a blog writer for the magazine not involved with the team by no means you a scout? Ast GM video coach goalie coach water girl ? I dunno you could be ? But your prolly there #1 fan and very loyal one to I'll give you that just don't be using "WE"

[Port hockey1]

A recent thread that points out many statistics about the Caledonia Corvairs has stirred up a lot of controversy. There's talk of players being paid large amounts of money to play for them. Actually, there's bold accusations. Now I don't know, maybe they do, maybe they don't... But one thing I know for certain is many Caledonia players jumped at the chance to be top players on a team again. Those same players were also excited about playing for a team that has a chance to set history with a 3rd straight Sutherland Cup. So several players could care less about any money, its about playing together and being point producers once again.

But if Caledonia is paying a few players... So what There's a large list of OHA hockey clubs that are guilty of doing the same. The only reason Caledonia is being picked on is because they've found several ex-CHL players, all of whom give it everything they have every night. So to be clear, the reason for this so called outrage is due to the number of players.
Well what's the magic number that would've made everyone happy? Trick question... There isn't one!

I know this because I've seen St.Catharines do the exact same thing both of the last two seasons.(not this season) N.Dozzi, J.Evans, P.DeSousa, J.Felker, B.Welsh, J.Andrews, B.Dubois, etc. The list goes on. The only difference is that Caledonia gets 100% commitment out of their kids. St.Catharines hasn't been as lucky. Having Mike the 'Bully' Bullard who's played several years in the NHL is the reason why Caledonia gets such a better work ethic out of their players.

So it isn't fair to be piling on to this team simply because it worked for them! Caledonia was the underdogs against the CHL filled St.Catharines Falcons two years ago. Caledonia was led by a 17 year old kid in scoring that year. That team had less than ten 20 year olds on it. This is a witch hunt, look at the above and tell me it isn't!

And if that's not enough to convince you, I've made a list of teams that, according to at least two reliable sources, have paid players at some point between 2000-2016. I'm not saying these teams did pay players, I'm only saying that at least two solid sources say they have(In a way that violates league policy). Some teams have done it often, and paid very large sums of money in that time period, at one time or another... Or are doing it now.(According to sources, several in some cases)

The teams that have allegedly been the heaviest hitters will be underlined.



Teams from the GOJHL:


London
Strathroy
Sarnia
Leamington
Chatham
Stratford
Kitchener
Guelph
Elmira
Listowel
Waterloo
St.Catharines
Niagara Falls
Thorold
Stoney Creek(now Ancaster)
Port Colborne(now Pelham)


Teams from the OJHL:(Jr.A)

Aurora
Wellington
Georgetown
Orangeville
Newmarket
Oakville


Teams from across Jr.C:


Exeter
Dorchester
Grimsby
Alliston
Mount Forest
Port Hope
Essex
Paris
Ayr
Kincardine



So those of you wanting the Caledonia Corvairs investigated for breaching OHA rules... I wan't the teams above, the ones who are still doing it, to be investigated as well! Investigations should be done in the other teams past cases as well.

My point..... Punish everyone who breaks the rules and what do we have left? This witch hunt needs to end!!!

Lol port your a beauty.... If you don't think players on Cali are getting something then give your head a shake they will just never get caught with there hand in the cookie jar that is all. There not the only team to do it tho so nobody can sit here and throw all the blame on them at all. Believe me I know for a fact all teams are doing it there's no secret to it at all it happens in every league but the thing is how do you prove it? If your going to investigate a team you better have all your facts and sources b4 you do it other wise the OHA will just look stupid. These teams aren't stupid they will just burry it and say oh it's money for school or gas or books for school and so on and so on. Every team is doing it not just one.

I din't say that I didn't think they were getting anything. I said maybe they are, maybe they aren't.