View Single Post
08-17-2012, 07:00 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,009
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Baby Punisher View Post
Amazing, but Bettman isn't the problem.

I think until the nhl startes to shed it's dead weight teams by moving them to hockey rich areas or contraction the situation will not improve.

Franchises will continue to struggle & be proped up by the NHL, some owners will spend wildly, others will be the Islanders, fan bases feel alienated & we do the dance again in 3 to 5 years.

Not a smart business model.
That would be putting a band-aid on a shot gun wound. If they contract 2 teams, that means the HHR is divided by 28 and then multiplied by whatever percentage to get the new cap. If you contract the two lowest revenue teams, that cap number will go up. Those two teams are not contributing a lot of money to the total HHR.

Same if they move two teams to stronger markets. Increased revenues will cause the cap to go up.

In either case, the teams at the bottom of the revenue rankings, whether post-contraction, or post relocation of a few franchses, are going to struggle to just get to the salary floor. They will have a higher floor which they need to reach, but the same revenues for which they are operating with now.

Only way Bettman's system can work is for there to be serious revenue sharing. Whether that means teams have to pay a portion of their local tv deal into a centralized fund, or if the smaller revenue teams get a bigger cut of the national deals, or a split of ticket revenue, or a bigger cut of merchandise revenues to the smaller revenue teams, or anything else one can think of. The NFL works BECAUSE of the revenue sharing. Until the NHL does the same, it is just going to be the same cycle every few years.

patnyrnyg is offline