View Single Post
Old
09-06-2004, 07:14 PM
  #74
djhn579
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Tonawanda, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 1,747
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DementedReality
well of course a concern is about whether you can afford a salary or not. thats part of managing a business.

you gave me two examples and i showed you why your examples were flawed. you mean to tell me that CGY can afford to pay IGinla 7,5m but BUF cant afford to pay Peca 4m ? they made a decision they didnt want to pay him, not that they couldnt pay him.

dr

Like I said, you will refuse to see anything that does not support your position...

You always have some excuse or reason, anything but see things as they are. Buffalo was already losing money at the time. Hell, the owner was stealing money from his cable company to pay for some of his toys (such as golf courses and hockey teams). Was it bad management? Maybe. Is it bad management that 2/3's of the league is losing money? Probably in some cases. In others, owners are doing what they can to keep their team viable until a solution is made.

Your entire argument is that owners and gm's need to make smarter decisions. Then you look back with hindsight and say "That wasn't a smart decision..." How is it that the best minds is the business (the gm's) and the heads of multi-billion dollar corporations (the owners) with all of their advisors, can only make "bad" decisions when it comes to hockey? You must know, or must be sitting in on their meetings to come up with such a simple solution to this problem...

The only way to solve the NHL's problems right now, which I see as escalating player salaries driven by teams having vastly different spending constraints is to put some kind of limit on what individual teams can spend. I don't care if it's a hard cap, a soft cap, a luxury tax or any other idea people can come up with. I'm not going to put blinders on and pretend that there are things that are outside of individual teams ability to control.

Believe me when I say I want to see hockey this season, because I do. But I also want to see NHL hockey in all 30 cities 10 years from now as well. If the players have to sacrifice some salary for this to happen, I'm not going to cry for them. They want more money each year, mainly to assuage their egos, then get lazy when they do get it (some of them anyway).

A salary cap, even with it's problems is still better than sticking your head in the sand hoping the problems will go away. Personnally, I would like to see a luxury tax starting at $35M (50% or 100%) that increases by 50% or 100% every $5M, with cost of living increases using the gov'ts infaltion rate each year.

djhn579 is offline