View Single Post
11-24-2004, 01:31 PM
Registered User
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Misplaced SOB
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,262
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Blindside9711
Originally Posted by David Puddy
Many owners are losing less money with a lockout than they would if the season. Philadelphia, Toronto, Montreal, Detroit and Colorado are probably the only clubs that would have turned a profit.
Oh, I know that, but losing less money is still LOSING money. No owner likes to lose money, regardless of how much.
I don't know how long it will take the owners to realize their being told what they want/need by a complete jackass... but it will happen. I agree that there needs to be a system in place, and it has to be the right system for both sides. That being said, the right system does not, nor will it ever, include a $31 million hard cap and non-guaranteed contracts. The players are the attraction, the money-makers, but they are people and most of them have families, you can't just treat them like a trading chip all the time.
My best proposal would be to have a base salary that is the same for every player, based on years in the league. Then everything on top of that is all performance-based, kinda like goal bonuses or clauses in the contracts of today's sports market. Players can't complain about the money they make because it's all up to them. They can't do the whole comparative salary leveraging based on "similar players" because all similar players would be getting the same amount. If players don't produce, they don't get paid, simple as that. I think this would make the game more entertaining and spirited as well because the players will be putting forth more effort with more incentive on winning. More entertainment = more fans = more money.
Of course, all this "making sense" is too much for Gary Butt-lick to handle... plus he won't sign anything that wasn't his idea, so nix that one and we're back to the drawing board.

Someone needs to assasinate Gary the assmunch very soon.

Blindside9711 is offline