2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part V: The "Back to square one" Edition
View Single Post
10-19-2012, 01:04 PM
Join Date: Oct 2012
Originally Posted by
How about we redistribute it between the players instead?
Tell Ryan Suter to cut a check to Stu Bickel for 40% of his paycheck.
No? Think he's not gonna want to do that?
Didn't think so.
There are three teams making great piles of cash.
The rest are making little or none.
But it is no more fair to ask the Rangers, Leafs and Habs to cover the rest of the league than it is to ask Suter and Parise to cover the rest of the players.
We should reach a point where the majority of teams are profitable on their own. Not sure why that is a difficult concept.
Reducing player salaries is how the NHL owners get their house in order. That is their biggest cost by far.
Like I said, it is more than fair to say that once the majority of teams are profitable, there can be revenue sharing to cover the minority of teams who aren't.
It is patently UNFAIR, though, to tell the Rangers to support the losses of the entire rest of the league. That is not a healthy situation.
I disagree. This is an owner issue.
There are two teams that are making up the bulk of the league losses. Phoenix and Columbus. Its not as if its drastic widespread decline.
Fact is, the NHL needs to re-vamp its own revenue sharing, which is probably the worst of all NA sports leagues. The NFL divvies up from broadcast revenue and 40% at the gates. The NHL makes less than half of what the NFL does, but to cover up losses?
Last edited by AceintheSpace*: 10-19-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by AceintheSpace*