View Single Post
02-09-2005, 09:02 PM
True Blue
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,018
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Balej20
haha, seems to me the NHLPA turned down yet another good deal. Ah, sucks for them. I hope they'll enjoy it when they get nothing in the end.
Just curious, what is it that tells you that this is a good deal? Have you looked at the components? It is the same thing over and over again. Oh wait, I'm sorry. Here's the difference. Under this latest proposal, the league would start off with a luxury tax, but the minute that 3 teams spend more than $42m, the luxury tax goes away and is replaced by a hard cap. Can you please explain why this is different than Bettman's old proposal which just insituted a similarly numbered cap outright?
Or there is this variation. Again, they start off with a luxury tax. But the minute that teams began averaging more than $36.5m in salary, the luxury tax goes away and is replaced by a hard cap. Or that happens when the 3 highest payroll teams spend more than 33% than the 3 lowest payroll teams. Wow, what a great deal for the players. Where do they sign up for this?
All of these are the same thing that has been pushed by Bettman since the beginning. Oh, and since we are on the topic of "getting nothing in the end", what happens to the owner who cannot survive the lockout? What do the owners get if the value of their franchise falls so low, that they cannot help but to keep loosing money in the end?

True Blue is offline