View Single Post
09-11-2004, 08:50 PM
Russian Fan
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,475
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Russian Fan
Originally Posted by djhn579
Yes it does take two sides to make a deal. But if the side that has to take all the losses decides that the other side will never give them any deal that will give them a reasonable chance to make money, they just shut down the league. That will be great for all the players, wouldn't it? Since they do provide ALL the financial backing for the league, they should have a big say in how it is run. .
Again , stop looking at salaries for 1 second & prove me that EVERY NHL TEAM HAS MADE GOOD DECISIONS ?

Are the SABRES made good decisions ?
Are the Penguins made good decisions ?
Are the NYRangers made good decisions ?
Are the Blues made good decisions ?

You can't prove that ALL THE LOSSES are related to the salaries or the CBA. All you do is do a stupid elementary result : Bobby Holik 9M$ = 9M$ losses.

Can you wake up & realize that there is more to do aside of the contract ? The market is correcting itself & it's not because of the looming lockout but because GM's now can relate that one 9M$ superstar can make that much of a difference between being a cup contender & being out of playoffs.

Originally Posted by djhn579
The options I listed answered most of the major concerns the anti-cap/greedy player side has voiced. I'm sure there are other options as well. If the players are going to outright reject a salary cap without looking at mechanisms such as this to resolve concerns, the only reason for this rejection would be greed. Why else?.
Taking a 5% paycut is being GREEDY ?
Taking a rookie entry level adjustment is being GREEDY ?
Offering a luxury tax is being GREEDY ?

Where do you live ?

They know the mechanism of a salary cap, a majority of pro-NFLer will tell you that the guy who accept a hard cap for the NFLPA should be six feet under because they are treated like MEAT.

Originally Posted by djhn579
Bad management? By some owners yes. If some owners don't mind losing money and that is causing problems with the other owners, a solution to that has to be negotiated in the CBA. The players don't want to give the owners a strong mechanism to control owner spending because of greed. If you think it is other wise, you are just a naive as you claimed everyone else is in your other thread.
You are looking only to the rich people when BAD DECISIONS & BAD MANAGEMENT is coming from the Sabres, the Penguins, the Oilers, the Canadiens not only from the Blues or the NYRangers. Wake up !

I'm laughing very hard right now.

Let's go to another context.

The public transportation administration & the bus-subway drivers are ending their CBA.

The PT Admin want all drivers to take a 25% paycut because the PT Administration had a 70M$ losses last year.

The drivers association said no because they claim that those 70% losses are mostly due to bad management & bad accountability. They are willing to offer a 5% paycut in order to give the PT Administration more breathe in order for them to get their management & accountant problem.

Are the drivers GREEDY ?
Are the drivers association GREEDY because they don't want the administration to solve all their problems on the back of their drivers ? They understand that they loss money & they are willing to take a paycut but they also see that the problem is not only the drivers salary. Some management & accountability department need a clean up also.

Do you UNDERSTAND what I'm saying ? or is it too hard for you to understand ?

Getting back to hockey ?

NHLPA acknowledge that 75% of the NHL franchise are losing money.

The way you are talking, you think that they don't acknowledge that ! but not because they loses money they should cave.

Everything need to be investigate to see what goes wrong with an NHL team.

NHLAPA acknowledge that the NHL loss 224M$ instead of 273M$

Forget for 1 second the 49M$ discrepancy. Is that because the lose 224M$ it's all their fault ?

Everything need to be investigate to see what goes wrong with an NHL team.

NHLPA saw that 75% of that 224M$ was the loss of 6 NHL TEAMS

NYRangers , St-Louis, New Jersey, Pittsburgh, NYIslanders. I still dont know the 6th!

NYRangers dig their own grave, should we blame the CBA for it ?

St-Louis loss 30M$ & told the NHL that everything is fine.

New Jersey does have a poor arena lease so that means POOR MANAGEMENT/POOR ACCOUNTABILITY

Pittsburgh does have a poor arena lease so that means POOR MANAGEMENT/POOR ACCOUNTABILITY

NYIslanders does have a poor arena lease so that means POOR MANAGEMENT/POOR ACCOUNTABILITY

Will you blame the CBA for those 5 teams that we know LOSE MONEY ? Or should they start thinking about getting a NEW ARENA or MOVING the FRANCHISE ???

25% of 224M$ losses is coming from 17 other NHL Franchises

25% of 224M$ = 56M$ divide by 16 NHL teams = 3,29M$

3,29M$ per team do you think it's all about the PLAYERS FAULT ?

Montréal overpaid for Patrice Brisebois 4M$ a year ? Don't tell me that the free market made the Montreal Canadiens paid Brisebois that much !

Boston overpaid for Lapointe 5M$ a year ? This was a market offer because a few teams were ready to pay him that much. But again, was it a GM's decisions to do so ? YES. If the team lose 3,29M$ (average) can they compensate somewhere else ?


Do they have the best MARKETING PERSONEL ?
Do they have the best ADMINISTRATION STAFF ?
Do they have the best SCOUTING STAFF ?

Everything outside of the players salary will increase of DECREASE the REVENUES of a NHL franchise ? Are the players RESPONSIBLE for what EVERY OWNER do with their personal by hiring INCOMPETENCY ? Should the NHLPA be there when there a spot open in some NHL TEAM STAFF ?

So the players offer a 5% paycut with means 108M$of savings for NHL. 108M$ = 3,6M$ less in average per team. there a VERY GOOD START !!!

Don't tell me that once the market open the GM's will continue to spend because if they do so , it's up to the NHL Owner of that team to take it's power & do something with that GM's.

The player offer a luxury tax over 40M$ where the money will go directly to the small market needs. MLB shows that a luxury taxe make the salary decrease by 3% the 1st year. Add the 5% (108M$) + 3% (= approximately 60M$) = 160-168M$ in saving !! after 1 year if it goes like the MLB.

Do you think if the owner do their job like every other companies they would be able to be competitive & making money ? I DO THINK SO !!!

Now everything I just talked about is not side with the NHLPA , it's just experience in the financial business world as an intermediate.

Russian Fan is offline