View Single Post
11-30-2012, 08:15 PM
Registered User
Roulin's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,113
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Plenty of people have done quite the good job at refuting what you are trying to state, you just don't believe it. Big difference. The players do not take any financial risk in running an NHL team. They should not have a financial worry in the world once they sign their GUARANTEED contracts. The owners take all of the financial risk related to running an NHL team. The Coyotes losing money is a perfect example. Every single Coyotes player received his pay throughout the entire time that the owner was losing money. That is what people are talking about when discussing the financial risks associated with running an NHL team. Every single player injured while playing for the Coyotes received, ahd is still getting, his salary EVEN DURING THE LOCKOUT while the owners get nothing. The financial risks at the NHL level are all on the owners. You want people to ignore that fact just because the NHL has grown over the last few years and is doing financially well.
The Coyotes losing money is nothing close to a "perfect example" of any owner risk that needs to be mitigated. It's actually closer to an argument for the sport changing the way it does business. The Yotes should be in Ontario, resulting in higher revenues for everyone involved. With the possible side benefit of competition driving down ticket prices in Toronto.

The reason Moyes lost money in Phoenix is the rest of the BOG blocking his sale - nothing to do with guaranteed contracts to players. IMO the post-Moyes Coyotes, the Wang Islanders and the Koules/Barrie era Lightning are examples of "financial risk" appropriately applied.

Roulin is offline