View Single Post
11-11-2012, 09:14 AM
Bruin fan since 1975
Alberta_OReilly_Fan's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Edmonton Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,931
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by JMiller View Post
Theres just too much "stuff" in your posts- be easier to discuss in this format if yout kept posts to an idea or two.

As it is, I can't tell if you'd rather more limits on management or no limits on management by having no union (like boxing).
guilty as charged... i have the damnest time not getting over passionate in my posts and sticking to conciese points.

im not against unions in general. i just dont think they've done alot in recent times in the world of sports to help out. I think that the non-unionized sports get paid just as much if not more. Maybe third liners are very protected by the unions but is that a good thing?

i dont see unions stepping up to stop the small market teams from folding/moving. The unions are too focused on the immediate short term payoff. I fear for the health of sports in general as we move into the next generation.

it seems things like the X games and what not is where the kids these days are spending their own enthusism. The team sports that you and i grew up with are being priced out of the market for the kids today to be able to enjoy. And i blame the third liners being overpaid as the main reason ticket prices cant be kept in line.

ultimately we will always afford to see a tom cruise movie even if he is being paid 20 million... we will always make sure we attend a bruce springsteen or a u2 concert even if they are getting their 20 mill a year too.

its the issue where we dont get bang for our buck that ultimately turns the fans off and is why some movies lose 100 million dollars and why 60-70% of all tv series get cancled early in the first season... and why only the smallest percentage of books become best sellers.

if mediocre entertainers are protected by a union... theres a problem that arises and we see it now in the NHL

Alberta_OReilly_Fan is offline