View Single Post
Old
09-12-2004, 01:50 PM
  #41
Winger98
Moderator
powers combined
 
Winger98's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Cleveland
Posts: 14,474
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to Winger98
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCoyotes
One expression I've always loved is "you are only as strong as your weakest link", and I think it very much applies to today's NHL. You could argue that the weaklings of the NHL should be removed and it'd make the overall product stronger, it probably would in some cases, but that isn't to debat right now. Something has to be done so that the strongest team and weakest team are essentially on the same footing, they have equal chances at success although the stronger team may have far superior management.

I'm not a follower of the hard cap, because I think the owners are trying to hardline that in for their own benefit, but some type of considerable cap has to be put in place, or the only other solution is revenue sharing. If the Rangers can afford to sign a guy like Holik, the Bruins can afford to sign a contract like Lapointe's, and others out there, then Nashville - Carolina - Edmonton - etc have to be able to do the same thing. Again, unless you eliminate the perceived weak links, it must be done for the health of the league.

I do buy that the majority of the losses are probably coming from just a fraction of the league, and I'd suspect that there is not as much solidarity amongst ownership on the issue of cutting losses as there is about making more money. The current system doesn't work, and if you want to save those 6 or so teams that aren't cutting it, something has to change. Otherwise the "weakest link" in the chain is broke, and so does the league to some degree.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your post, but I don't see why teams have to be on equal footing, despite one having better management than the other, unless you're talking about on a purely financial level. If a team is badly managed, they deserve to fail. If Holik was signed for that kind of money on nearly any other team, and it would nearly cripple them, and deservedly so.

This is part of the reason I'm in favor of a luxury tax, rather than a cap. If a team wants to spend stupidly, let them. They'll be penalized with the tax and more responsible teams would benefit with a bit of extra cash to invest in their own products.

Winger98 is online now