View Single Post
Old
09-27-2004, 11:45 PM
  #15
Vlad The Impaler
Registered User
 
Vlad The Impaler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,727
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nomorekids
If i'm not mistaken, the Flames had only a slightly higher payroll and a great deal of playoff success, and only made a pretty small amount of money. Nashville's case was largely due to the fact that in the early part of the season..when the team was doing pretty mediocre, attendance dipped about as low as it ever got. When they say losses, the number I read was about 3 million...and Leipold\Poile seem to believe that's the kind of thing that's going to work out. We'll see, though.
Yeah, I'd like to see the numbers for all teams, see if a luxury tax is desperately needed for several markets.

I must admit by memory I don't pay too much attention to the different $ figures in the NHL (total salary masses, attendances, profits, losses) too often. If you find the Flames figures, throw them my way.

One thing I remember is they had to solve that unbelievably dumb situation with Roman Tur-hack. Just one buyout on a stupid contract can set you back. The Flames have made some slight mistakes like that under the former regime. However they went pretty so deep in the playoffs, you'd think they would be profitable.

The thing with the Preds is that I have always heard they were more of a model franchise financially.The NHL has to work for teams who are spending smartly or we have a problem. Personally, I like luxury taxes mixed with some sort of soft cap. There are many ways to make things work but it has to work for everybody.

Vlad The Impaler is offline