View Single Post
Old
12-29-2012, 06:27 PM
  #67
Budsfan
Registered User
 
Budsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,220
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
I can separate further though.

There are:



1. Owners of wealthy franchises that make profit

2. Owners of poor franchises that don't make profit

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3. Players who make a good income (long-term contracts)

4. Players who don't make a [relative] good income (short-term contracts)





The Leafs owners are in Camp #1 who are after Camp #3.

The NHLPA is dominated by players in Camp #3.

Who should we be siding with based on this....
Again the fans.

Any owner that has a team, has the money to blow and just to say they own an NHL franchise, in other words a millionaire and some of them want corporate welfare, to continue that illusion and paid for by the fans.

The players want more than the owners when it comes to so call profit sharing, which is also paid for by the fans, I guess one couldn't call it corporate welfare but it does smack of greed.

I realize that hockey players, have a short career time, to make the money they are earning but lets face it, some of the players should be playing in the AHL, at quite a reduced salary but they earn NHL money and want to hold fans hostage for more.

The Solution is 10 less teams and 1/3 less players, then maybe there would be enough money to go around and Leaf fans in particular could watch a game at a reasonable price.

Budsfan is online now   Reply With Quote