View Single Post
Old
11-14-2012, 06:53 PM
  #9
sjaustin77
Registered User
 
sjaustin77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally posted by Kaoz
The owners made concessions just as the players did during the last lockout that have led us to this point. The main one being a cap tied to league revenues. Had they of gotten what they really wanted, a hard cap, we likely wouldn't be having this discussion right now. We'd also likely have missed out on a lot more hockey then we actually did as the players would have taken much longer to concede then they did. Sadly though, players like Sid Crosby would have had to settle for 7million per year instead of 10mill per. Heinous, I know.

The owners aren't "crying poor mouth" (I've never actually heard that term before so I assume meaning whining about not making enough money?). 18 teams lost money last year and not just southern market teams. Teams like Pittsburgh, NY Islanders, Buffalo, Jersey, Washington are bleeding money and other teams such as our very own Boston Bruins were awfully close to losing money (in fact likely did after you figure in other financial factors). This isn't a Southern Market problem, this is an NHL problem.

Teams can't find owners willing to spend 150+ mill on a team just so they can have the right to bleed millions of dollars in cash a season. Player costs are the reason that's happening.
As to the bolded - Are you sure about that? Do you want to bring some facts to back that up? You know that there are things that are excluded from HRR right? Most owners make more than what they show on the bottom line - not less. Anyone here ever show more money on tax returns so they can pay more in taxes? Didn't think so.

Yes the owners are crying poor - have you paid attention to any of this. If they weren't then we would have a season. Only 9 teams lost money in both cash and franchise value last year and that is because they overspend their budget. How is that the players fault again?

A hard cap was on the table and the owners rejected it. You are right, it would have been a better deal for the owners than what they got. They were stupid for not agreeing to one and losing a season last time. They are stupid for not agreeing to the PA's 50/50 and make whole offer this time as well. The difference in offers is very little right now and the players want more revenue sharing. If this is for the good of the game then the players offer is better.

Only 6 teams lost money over the last CBA. Only the Coyotes, Islanders, and Blue Jackets any significant amount. That is at 54-57% for the players, overspending budgets, cap circumventing contracts and general mismanagement of their teams. The Coyotes could have been moved and their problems go well beyond paying 57% to the players, the Islanders are moving to Brooklyn, and the Blue Jackets have been horribly mismanaged. They spent as much over the cap floor this year as they lost and still couldn't make the playoffs.

Teams can always find a buyer if they are even somewhat well run and don't have major debt issues. The owners are the cause of any of their problems. Under the players proposal there are only 3 teams in their current condition I wouldn't want to own. Phoenix because they have been run into the ground. Dallas and New Jersey because they have debt greater than the teams value. I would much rather own any other NHL team than be a player. You will make more without any health risk, having to keep yourself in shape, etc.

It amazes me that people want to take from the players to guarantee profitability for billionaire owners because they can't run their business right. This is the players livelihood. This is a side business for many owners. It is obvious that some either don't care or don't know how to make a profit. If you want to take all risk out of owning a franchise, take from the owners not the players.

The CBA needs some tweaking not a major overhaul of everything the owners want. Change the front loaded contracts, more cost control on the 2nd contracts, more revenue sharing, move 1 or 2 teams.

sjaustin77 is offline