View Single Post
02-21-2012, 12:37 PM
Registered User
Melrose_Jr.'s Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Providence, RI
Country: United States
Posts: 10,692
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by NHRangerfan View Post
History has shown us that owners always want to make more money as I responded to your earlier post that there wouldn't be a lockout we all thought that wouldn't happen in 94 either.

The buzz has been that the middle market teams in the US wan't a reduction in % of revenue shared,a different formula for computing revenue (since their is no huge TV contract and much of the cap growth the past few years has been a result of the stronger Canadian dollar) a rollback of UFA age, the floor being lower than it is now, an end to burying players in the AHL.
These are petty issues when compared to the situation on 2004. I can't really speak to the situation in 1994 because I simply wasn't tuned into the business side of the game the way I am today.

Negotiations will lead to all parties getting some of the things they want. Yah, one of those things could indeed be an amnesty buyout period, or some other aspect that allows the Rangers squeak through until 2014, but no one knows for sure. Maybe that amnesty buyout is something the owners concede if UFA rollback or floor enforcement is more important to them. There aren't that many owners who are in a position to need or would have a desire to use it.

Melrose_Jr. is offline