View Single Post
07-20-2012, 11:38 AM
Coo coo ca cha!
brs03's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by californiacapsfan View Post
This is not entirely true. Parity was a key goal for the league during the last CBA negotiations. I think the ability of teams to be competitive on the ice and in the FA market is something they at least claim to care a lot about. I suspect that the league will be looking to put a stop to these kind of shenanigans.

Mirtle tweeted about wanting to see a term limit. I don't know if I agree with that. I think, if a team and a player want to get married, they should be able to, but I don't believe they should be able to structure the deal in such a way as to circumvent the cap. Should be an interesting rest of the summer. I just hope there's hockey in a few months.
I think parity being a goal is a claim that's put in place to make fans of small market teams feel good about themselves. I think it's a totally empty one as long as the revenue gap continues to be as large as it is without being addressed somehow (and if they really do up revenue sharing this time through that'll help, probably significantly). You'll never have parity as long as you've got teams losing money while spending the bare minimum.

Agreed on term limits. Maybe put extra measures in place for retirement issues (when the cap hit applies and when not etc.) and adjust the limits for frontloading/backloading in conjunction with that, but if both sides want to commit heavily to each other might as well let them.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote