View Single Post
Old
09-17-2004, 07:30 PM
  #54
David A. Rainer
Registered User
 
David A. Rainer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Huntington Beach
Country: Italy
Posts: 7,293
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to David A. Rainer
Quote:
Originally Posted by djhn579
I know this wouldn't solve all the problems, but could the NHL pass a by-law that if an NHL team lost more than $5M in any one season, or has lost money for 3 straight years, or has a combined loss of over $10M over a 5 year period, the NHL could put a control board over that teams finances, with the goal of ensuring decisions are made to keep the team competetive and profitable? The nunbers of course are debatable, and what constitutes profit or loss would need to be defined.

This would not be directly aimed at lowering salaries, but maintaining the NHL's long term viability. Lower salaries would be a by-product though, since teams couldn't afford to risk paying high salaries and losing money.

There would still be a disparity in what teams can afford, but it wouldn't be as heavily skewed by teams that currently don't care if they lose money.
I think they could do this unilaterally (so long as the reason why they are stepping in is to right a failing ship and not to just slash salaries), but, as you mentioned, it would be a by-law, so it would have to be passed by whatever voting process the NHL has set-up. I'm not too sure there would be very many owners in favor of giving up control of their teams. HOWEVER, if a trend developed where everytime the NHL stepped in, they slashed salaries, there will definitely be a grievance filed by the union and might result in a collusion lawsuit.

__________________
Saxon Sports Information and Research
David A. Rainer is offline