CBA Talk II: Shut up and give me YOUR money!
View Single Post
11-23-2012, 04:00 PM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Originally Posted by
Hard line that Bettman is taking now is because of the markets in the US that can't support hockey on their own revenue streams, along with Jacobs and the Bruins.
Remember, for the owners to ratify a new CBA, they need 75% of them to agree to it, so they need 23 owners to say Yes to a new CBA or only 7 to say no.
Given that teams like Anaheim, Phoenix, Florida, Carolina, Nashville, Columbus, etc. would need to have the perfect CBA to compete on a yearly basis, they would be the ones who are holding out for the best deal. Because, if they sign a deal where they can't compete and thus draw fans, they are done as well.
It's the NHL's fault for having teams located in these markets, but unless there are cities to take them, Markham/Hamilton, Quebec, Seattle, are there really 6 other markets that can support an NHL team? Those would be 3.
I think the point is, the NHL made their beds in those poor markets and instead of laying in them, they want the players to fix their mistakes.
Seems pretty ridiculous....NHL can go on about players' wages being their biggest expense, they are also their biggest bread winner.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by arsmaster