View Single Post
12-14-2004, 08:10 PM
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Ranger fan in Philly
Originally Posted by
Just out of curiousity, why are you guys so anti-owner, pro-union in this?
At times, they are both to blame, and at times, they both make good points. Im not sure why we are so against the owners and so extremely pro union.
We all recognize that neither side are angels in this mess. But the pro-PA folks here, if I may be so bold as to speak for them, tend to believe the following:
The players have made significant concessions while the owners have not.
The owners have not been entirely honest in reporting their profits and losses.
A hard cap will force GMs to break up good teams and impose mediocrity throughout the league.
Revenues are generated (either directly or indirectly) through fan support, so teams that generate more revenue should be allowed to put some of that revenue back into the product (or alternatively, a hard cap will only allow the owners of the big revenue teams to rake in more money).
A harsh luxury tax/soft cap would allow the NHL to bring salaries down without the side effect of league-wide mediocrity.
The owners' proposals are asking the players to pay the price because they can't stop spending like drunken sailors on shore leave.
Last edited by Kodiak: 12-14-2004 at
. Reason: Added #6
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Kodiak