Its certainly not wonderful to me. You missed many of professor Ross's points which are key to why fans are hurt. You are missing the fact that any current small market today, could become the big evil spending Colorado of tomorrow.
Feel free to point out any I missed. I thought I grabbed pretty much every one. There was lots of stuff on trust etc, but that wasn't related to the cap.
Personally, I don't believe that that every club in the league can become a high spending team. There's far too much dependence on local market for that to happen. But even if that is the case, then a cap simply means that everyone plays by the same rules. That's no unfair to anyone. Your premise seems to be "folks shouldn't want a cap, because *their team* might be the one getting all the unfair advantages in the future".
And to say it has nothing to do with parity, well at least we are in agreement there. But clearly fans are being encouraged to believe that. Look how many shout that here. Even you are implying that the result will be more even.
Nope, I'm not implying that at all. I'm saying *opportunities* are even with a cap. I believe that with money removed from the equation, then the best managed teams will be the most successful. Right now, many teams are able to outspend their mistakes, under a cap that would be eliminated.
I think changes in NHL parity are completely unpredictable. It might be higher, but could just as easily be lower. It's tough to draw comparisons from football on that, because the sports aren't comparable in terms of drafting, farm teams, roster sizes, etc.
I bumped this thread because it was getting frustrating reading so many comments saying give me one good reason why the players wont accept a cap. Many have given their reasons thoroughly. The arguments obviously are still not accepted, but you cant say you dont understand why some of us say it.
America is not a great country because everyone is equal - its a great country because everyone has equal opportunity to become great.
I dont see why Tampa Bay, Nashville, Anaheim cant develop an organization like Colorado and match its revenue and spending if it could match their success. At the very least, a hard cap should not be set at what Nashville is capable of spending now or while in rookie rebuild mode like Washington, but what it could spend if its drafting and development succeeded and they sustained the success of multiple deep playoff runs. Otherwise you penalize their ability to become and remain great. TO lose this ability because you have a fear of fans thinking they had no chance with their team like Cincinatti Bengals is a huge sacrifice
You must allow for revenue disparity because there will be top teams and bottom teams with a corresponding talent disparity. To suggest the difference should be one $3mil player either way allows for no rebuilding or greatness, but constant sameness.