2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part V: The "Back to square one" Edition
View Single Post
10-20-2012, 01:40 AM
Join Date: Jul 2005
Originally Posted by
Dude, it's the same system, different numbers. A new system is no cap (ceiling or floor), luxury tax, the MLS style of league autonomy.
The bottom teams simply cannot fund the cap floor. Lower percentages only delay the inevitable. These teams will lose money before the next CBA expires.
Insanity is doing the same thing wrong even when you know it's wrong.
I'm confused as to how this is the case.
The cap is set at a percentage of revenue. If you set the salary cap at 99% of revenue, every team in the league will lose money because they only have 1% of the money coming in remaining to pay the rest of their costs.
If you set set the cap at 1% of revenue, the players will get so little money that as long as the NHL revenues are enough to cover it's other costs (stadiums, ticket sale staff, concession employees, marketing, etc), every team will make lots of money.
In theory if NHL revenues never go down from this point (and it's fairly safe to say that they should continue to go up based on inflation alone, not that I'm predicting growth that we've seen the last 6 years to continue or anything), then there should be a percent you can set the cap at where every team makes money.
Right? Am I missing something? The league just has to determine what that percentage should be.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by mschmidt64