View Single Post
Old
09-20-2004, 04:06 PM
  #14
Legolas
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Toronto, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 770
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd
Oh. I was under the impression that players benefited from outrageous salaries, and that they'll continue to even under a salary cap.

How does it not benefit the game at all?
If you're paying me $8, and then you cap me at $5 but you pocket the extra $3 instead of making the workplace better, how is that improving anything except your profit margin?

Regardless of whether players' salaries are outrageous or not, if the money that teams save from a cap ends up going to the owners as profits (which they are entitled to take) then it does nothing for the good of the game. If McKenzie said that the owners have a right to make money and the NHLPA refuses to see that, then okay, that's a fine statement. Instead, he seems to be saying, in my opinion, that the NHLPA doesn't actually care about preserving jobs, they just want to maintain the top end of the salaries for the best players, which is bad and therefore they should just agree to a salary cap to help out the owners. That isn't too convincing to me.

Legolas is offline