Would rather have a seminar than a conference...

With teams joining the EIHL, causing the strengthening of one league and the probably collapse of another, there has been a lot of discussion about merging, becoming one 15 team Elite League, split into conferences etc etc. While playing "design a league" can be fun, it ignores one very relevant point.

Its easy to dictate where your team should play when you aren't the one writing the cheques.

Must admit, a month or two ago I thought that we should have a 15 team Elite League, split into North and South conferences. But as time and arguments have gone by, I've realised that I was forcing the Phoenix into a setup that might not work.

It looks like we will have an 10 team EIHL next year - the current clubs, plus Edinburgh, Newcastle and ourselves. From a stability perspective, that seems to be about right. You don't introduce a shock to the system like that in one big bang and hope for the best.

Similarly, from a finances point of view, you don't suddenly double your customers in one fell swoop, either. Lets remember that the Phoenix are a business. To use an analogy, they supply 7 other "customers" - the other EIHL teams. To mash together the BNL would add 8 new customers in one go - no business can actually handle that kind of growth, literally doubling everything in the stroke of a pen.

So 10 seems about right. It might be 11, with Guildford. Thats a 50% jump. But a maximum of 12 seems to work - Heineken Premier had 10 (or 12 for a season), so we've got some precedent to work with.

And that means we have to lose stable, well run teams like Bracknell, Fife and Hull. But should the EIHL be forced to take on clubs even though it increases the risk to themselves? The answer isn't easy - but remember, you aren't the one writing the cheques.

As for conference format, even if the EIHL had 16 clubs, I'm not convinced it should be done. The main arguments for a North/South split are travelling and "derby games".

To deal with the travelling issue - conferences were set up in the US because it is 3,000 miles wide. Travelling is a problem. The UK isn't close to that size - for perspective it can fit in a minor state like Kentucky. I drove from Manchester to Thurso (on the tip of Scotland next to John O'Groats) in a day. I can be in Dover in five hours. Four if it is a rental car. Cutting journeys in half doesn't cut travelling costs in half - it just doesn't work that way.

"Derby games" - Some advocates have cried out that they need the big games - Sheffield vs Nottingham - for revenue purposes. I don't get it. Why should an eight-month budget rely on just four home matches where you have no guarantee on how many turn up? Sheffield may go on about their derby games, but which is the Cardiff equivalent? Manchester? It just doesn't work.

Of course, familiarity also breeds contempt. In the first ISL season, the first home game vs Sheffield was special. We got dicked 7-2 but what the heck, it was special. But it got to the point where one season we played Sheffield 14 times. (2 x friendly, 2 x B&H quarterfinal, 8 x league, 2 x playoffs) That's stupid and sucks all intensity out of the matches. Oh, and when the ISL trophy was lifted in the MEN - Sheffield brought 50 fans. So much for large travelling support. (Although thousands of glory hunters turned up the Sunday when guaranteed a victory in the second leg of the Challenge Cup semi.)

In our hypothetical 16 team league, it should be one division. 2 home, 2 away. Make derby games an occasion. Burnley and Blackburn have played each other four times in 19 years - tell me that intensity no longer exists. With the focus removed from the opposition, it becomes incumbent on the club to sell the home game no matter who the opposition is - don't come to see "Phoenix vs Sheffield", come to see "Phoenix". Not "The Panthers are in town" but "Sunday night is hockey night".

Too many times I've seen "our attendance jumps by 1500 when Nottingham come to Sheffield". The question should not be "how can we play Nottingham more often?" it should be "where are those 1500 going when you aren't playing Nottingham and why?"

The Phoenix budget should not include a single away fan walking through the door (hell, when I first started watching the sport, away fans tended to get in free!). The numbers should be made to add up based on home following only. Any away fan is "free money", gravy on top.

I'm probably sounding very cautious. The reason is Neil Morris' phrase - "this is the last chance for hockey in Manchester". I agree, and we have to get it right. Selfish as it may sound, if dropping Bracknell to the EPL for a short while means Manchester can have a secure base to build on, then I'm all for it.