Lockout Discussion Thread 4.0
View Single Post
12-09-2012, 05:39 PM
Join Date: May 2004
Originally Posted by
You are wasting your breath. DAChampion typically resorts to personal attacks once he can no longer hold to his argument. More and more people are starting to realize that Fehr is screwing the players, the owners, and the fans with his BS. DAChampion seems to have decided that the owners are wrong simply because they have more money than the players. Everything done to show him that the owners are not actually in the wrong falls on deaf ears. However, once his actual arguments get picked apart, he resorts to personal attacks knowing that it will get some people emotionally involved in a petty "flame war" rather than continue showing how his actual arguments are toothless.
I am "envious" of the players getting to play a game I would love to be able to play for money. I would love to play hockey for my beloved Habs. I would also love to play football for my beloved Cowboys. However, that is as far as it goes. I do not begrudge the players who make the salaries they make playing professional sports. I love what I do, and make a decent enough living to care for my family very well, especially since I am quite smart with my money. I am on the owners' side not out of "envy" for the players, but because I believe that the owners deserve 50% of the HRR, just like I believe the players deserve 50% of the HRR. I also think that a 10 year CBA and a 5 year limit on contracts helps to maintain some sort of competitive balance in the league. I prefer the parity we have in Hockey to the garbage we see in Baseball. I want all NHL fans to have a team with a chance at succeeding and doing well, not just my beloved Habs, the Leafs, and the Rangers. I do not want to see the NHL become the next MLB where the richest teams can win far more often than not, and the little teams are basically feeder teams for the stronger ones. I saw what that did to my Expos and do not want other fans to go through the same thing. Finally, I also refuse to agree that the players are the only ones "giving" in this process. When you consider all of the perks the players are given by the owners that are not part of the players' salaries, it is offensive to hear anyone on the players' side claim they get nothing.
The owners ensure that their players fly FIRST CLASS, not COACH. The owners put the players in very expensive rooms, get them great food, the best trainers, etc... SOME people want to dismiss that, take it for granted, but they need to realize that it all COSTS LOTS OF MONEY! Where does that money come from? Not the payers, that is for certain. The players "get" almost everything they could desire and more.
So, I am not with the owners because I am "envious" of the players. I am with the owners because I think they hold the moral high ground in this particular instance. When the players were getting peanuts and not being as well cared for as they are today, I was in agreement with the players. The pendulum has swung the other way, too far, and so I am with the owners.
I hope people like DAChampion can finally stop insulting people to obfuscate their lack of an argument, and we can all finally stick to the facts of the debate.
I'm not denying the fact that these are luxuries, but I kind of see flying first class, and having expensive rooms as giving the players the best chance at being well rested from the exhaustion of travelling. It's not like the players won't perform if they fly coach, but if the teams that pay for those luxury do it to give their team an advantage, I think you can categorize it as an expense to give your team an edge to win. I haven't done any studies on the matter but I know that flying coach for a 5hr flight (Vancouver to Montreal) is not comfortable and somewhat cramping. But alright for other shorter flights maybe it's not as big of an effect, however I just see those expenses as giving your franchise the best chance to arrive to the game in the most restful way possible.
Also lets just throw some numbers out there as rough: say it's $3000 per ticket for first class, and lets say 32 players travel, if we then consider 41 games on the road that is ~4mil in travel expenses a season.
Lets say hotels cost $500 a night, 2 players per room, for 2 nights on average per away game so that's 16 rooms for 41 games that's ~$0.6mil
So on the points you're contending it is not inconceivable that it's costing $5mil per team in travel and accommodation expenses, so that's $150mil for the whole league.
So of $1.65billion that's ~ 10% of the owners share put into the players to try and give them the best chance at competing for away games. From a team by team basis, is it not worth it to try and give your team the best chance of winning?
I mean, I think you could try and leave it up to the players to get their own way to the game, but as I mentioned in a previous post I think that would lead to more chaos then solve anything.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Reiher