Thread: I'm dying
View Single Post
Old
10-19-2012, 12:31 AM
  #36
bluesman11
Robert Johnson
 
bluesman11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 681
vCash: 0
[QUOTE=Alklha;55100077]You are right, and if the League isn't willing to guarantee the players current contracts, then I don't think they understand the ill-will another lost season will cause. I don't live in North America, so they don't get much money from me anyway, but I'll be going to a lot more KHL matches this season if the NHL doesn't come back, and it might result in that continuing.

The tough thing is that the Blues might be one of the toughest hit. Yes, the team is improving, but locking out and raising ticket prices? That will be a tough sell in the short term.




It is totally cheating the system, but if the 5% variance and retirees caphits continuing to count rules were implemented then that solves it. Let's say you give a 13 year, $97.5m contract the lowest you could pay in any single year would be $5.5m and the average would be $7.5m over the 13 years. Also, the rule about retiring would mean that the $7.5m caphit would still apply if the player retired for the final 3 or 4 years of the deal.

So if a team and player want to commit long term so the team gets a discount and the player gets the security then I don't see the issue. They aren't going to be able to avoid the caphit at the end of the career, and there will still be significant money to pay on the contract, so it will be tough to move if the player is dead weight.

Maybe the long term deal rule is to try and add some excitement to FA?[/QUOTE]


I think that is exactly what they're saying, this will create parity and it will be better for the teams that don't usually compete. It gives their fan base a belief they have a chance, which makes the league stronger.

And the reason this will work better in the NHL than any other league in the US is because hockey is truly a global sport played at a very high level on two continents. Meaning there’s a larger pool of talent.

It's amazing they have gotten the 8 to 10 teams that want to keep their financial advantage to agree to these terms. I think they’re starting to get it!

But I also believe you’re correct with your assessment this is a cap within a cap, but it’s needed.

But with that being said I’m still not sure the players are willing to give this up.


Last edited by bluesman11: 10-19-2012 at 12:44 AM.
bluesman11 is offline   Reply With Quote