View Single Post
09-07-2012, 09:53 AM
Blueline Bomber
Expectations - high
Blueline Bomber's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 21,763
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Boom Boom Anton View Post
I really think they can afford another lockout. In every sport where there has been a delay, strike or lockout, the fans have always come back. It might not happen in year 1, but it always happens. The fans will come back and the value of franchises will continue to increase (which is the real value to owners, more than the P+L).

I realize the owners asking for the players to accept 43% and 46% is overkill, but the players having 57% is equally as absurd. Other major sports are closer to 50% and some of those don't even have the guaranteed contracts like the NHL does. In the NFL, they cut guys loose mid contract all the time. I actually don't blame NFL players for holding out like they do wanting a new contract when owners/GMs can cut a guy loose and end the contract at any time.
Depending on what's defined as revenue (and of course, both sides have their own definition), the split could already be considered 50/50.

I could be wrong, but I believe the owners are trying to change the definition of what constitutes hockey revenue, while at the same time trying to make the split 43/46 - 57/54 in favor of the owners. And that's where the problem lies. In the owners new proposed definition of what constitutes "hockey revenue", the current 57/43 split in favor of the players is actually closer to 50/50.

So if they changed the definition AND asked players to take less than the current 57/43 split, it would no longer be technically 50/50. It WOULD be 50/50 of the newly defined definition of revenue, but in terms of what's considered revenue currently, a 50/50 split would favor the owners greatly.

Best analogy I can give (and I probably shouldn't, given how poorly these typically turn out) is if we had 50 apples that we split 57/43. Let's say 25 red, 20 are green, and 5 are yellow. In the current split, I'd get 30 apples and you'd get 20 apples, regardless of color.

Then we decide on a new deal to split the apples, 50/50. However, while at the same time we're working out this 50/50 deal, you decide that under a new definition, only green apples can be called "apples". Thus, we split the 20 green apples 50/50, while you keep the 30 remaining ones, giving a split closer to 20/80 rather than 50/50.

Basically, to get a 50/50 split, there needs to be a concession of one or the other on the owners side. They can either keep what constitutes revenue at it's current definition and get a 50/50 split, or they can change what constitutes revenue and accept the current 57/43 split. However, since the owners have the leverage, chances are they're going to be able to change the revenue definition and get a 50/50 split, leaving to some seriously unhappy players.

Blueline Bomber is online now   Reply With Quote