View Single Post
Old
02-07-2005, 11:03 AM
  #51
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 21,032
vCash: 500
I think that the argument that pro athletes "just play a game and should accept less" type of thing is kind of shortsighted...

IMO a big part of the arguments over cap, no cap, etc etc, isn't completely about money. I bet you that most NHLers wouldn't mind taking paycuts at this point to play hockey. they'd accept making a few million less or so, whatever...but it's the issue of control that causes problems.

if the players accepted one of the owners proposals, sure they'd probably still make millions and strictly from a financial standpoint they'd probably be fine. BUT...the thing is that it puts them at a real disadvantage to the owners in a control sense...i bet the players feel it starts a slippery slope that could end up at a point where the players have no say whatsoever in what's going on and are at the complete mercy of the owners.

i don't know if i'm really making myself clear...i'd just say that neither side wants to put itself in the position where it's very subordinate to the other side because they see it as bad for their overall interests, not just the monetary bottom line

Levitate is online now