View Single Post
Old
11-11-2012, 11:03 PM
  #46
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
The median isn't about the split of revenue, but the growth. The biggest issue the NHL has isn't that they're giving 57% to the players (although that certainly doesn't help things), but that Toronto's revenue has grown something like 40+% in 7 years, while other teams have only grown 20%. And that team A's 20% is only 15m, while team B's 40% is 80m. Using the median slows this aspect down. The NHL could give 55% of the median to the PA, and with some RS would still be healthier in 10 years than it has been in the last 5 years of this deal.

But instead Toronto's growth which is at an unequal rate to team B (both in % and $) is royally screwing with almost every other team in the league. And as has been shown multiple times, it doesn't matter who team B is, using average revenue always has a loser... even in a 3 team league of Toronto, New York Rangers and Montreal. Eventually whomever is on the bottom will have issues turning a profit.
As you know, since we've talked about before, the league's solution is to let Toronto keep even more of that money, asking the players to accept what the weakest can afford. In a way, this seems like the least fair solution to all sides.

To the point here though, as others have stated, a limit on the variance from year to year obviates the need for a term cap.

Fugu is offline