View Single Post
12-09-2012, 06:00 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,216
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by uiCk View Post
Your argument relies solely on what your perception is of the players worth; as in that their worth is capped, and all extra revenue growth is solely due to owners spending more capital. Which is obviously false.
100% incorrect. My argument is about what is fair between the owners who pay for everything related to hockey, and the players who people want to watch play. Both sides need the other, more or less, equally. People pay to see great players in their favoured teams' jerseys, and the owners pay everything necessary to bring in those players and make the experience at the arena as good as possible.

By the way, the players' worth is not "capped" beyond what the NHL makes. There is a salary cap in place, but as long as revenues grow, so do salaries. Significantly. Now, the owners DO pay to "sell" their team, and certain teams are far more marketable than others, no matter which players are on the team (Leafs and Habs, for example). So, owners are quite necessary to the entire process. As are the players. Ultimately, though, the owners are MORE necessary. In any case, giving both sides a 50/50 split is fair since both sides are necessary for the league to grow and develop.

Drydenwasthebest is offline