CBA Talk II: Shut up and give me YOUR money!
View Single Post
12-05-2012, 09:32 PM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Originally Posted by
The way I see it, debating right and wrong in a CBA negotiation is silly. It's just a negotiation.
As far as I'm concerned, the only guiding principle for these current negotiations should be "does it make the league as a whole more competitive?" HRRs have climbed steadily, players salaries have climbed steadily despite being a lower % of HRR than pre cap, a 50% split is just common sense. Screw "concessions" go with common sense and what benefits the league as a whole.
I'm in the camp that believes having a system that allows all 30 teams to be competitive if they have competent management makes the league and the game more enjoyable. A more enjoyable game means more people watch, HRR goes up, everyone wins. Especially--and most importantly--the fans.
If it was up to me, I'd kick all the owners, players and especially lawyers out of the board room and leave it to the GMs and cap gurus to work out a deal that balances big market, small market and players interests.
In the real world, I'm not necessarily pro-union, but I'm strongly pro-labour. This negotiation isn't the real world, all involved will make enough to keep the heat on and fridge filled. Priority should be sharing revenue logically (both between owners/players and owners/owners) and contract rules that allow teams a reasonable opportunity to keep their players, while still giving players reasonable options to maximize their earnings. In short, make it what's best for the game and quit taking us fans for granted.
As for the argument that the "owner's stupidity" got them into this situation with the monster contracts etc, people making this argument realize the only other option would be collusion, right? For at least some owners, winning is the whole point of owning a professional sports team (not all owners, but that doesn't matter). When we're talking competition, organizations in it to win it are going to push the envelope and take advantage of everything the CBA allows. That's why guys like Gilman have jobs.
We've gone through the first era of capped hockey, and some of the holes in the CBA have been exploited. Just as they should be, unless you want owners to make agreements outside the CBA not to make certain types of deals that the CBA allows. As the holes get fixed, there won't be a need for continued roll backs etc because the CBA will be tight enough to control these things.
End of the day, I've barely thought about hockey during this lockout, and that's a bad sign for the NHL. I've been a huge hockey fan my entire life, missed the game during the previous work stoppages...when fans like myself stop caring the NHL/PA needs to take notice.
You used the word logic a few times.
In this, it does not exist.
Logically they wouldn't play ice hockey in Tampa, Nashville, Dallas, Anaheim, sunrise.
Logically they wouldn't force teams to spend money they don't have.
They wouldn't suggest players concede their potential earnings for teams that can't afford it.
Logic was gone a long time ago.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by arsmaster