Hate to say it, but a lockout *could* benefit Carolina more than most teams.
Quite the opposite this time.
Skinner will no longer be on his ELC
Faulk will have only one year left on his
Semin will become a free agent again with nothing to go off of to re-sign him
We'll lose a prime year for the Staals, Pitkanen, and Ward
basically the only positive is cutting a bit of the dead weight off the roster that will be off the roster after next season to begin with.
At this point, I'm actually pulling for the players so hard, that I hope they force this thing past the Winter Classic and through another full season. I'd be willing to give up another full season (or more) just to see the owners lose badly this time around. It's one thing to want to "partner" with the players to "grow the sport" and it's quite another to be greedy a$$hats.
I want hockey, and nothing could pass that, but I totally understand where you're coming from. Especially if the eventual agreement would mean the bigger market teams losing some revenue to guys like us.
Cons: Lose a season of hockey
Pros: Players win, revenue sharing gives us more to throw at FAs
I'd still rather have hockey. But the player's playing hardball and winning would be the next best thing, IMO.
The NHL should do like the NFL does and include a bunch of really nasty poison pills in their CBA that would take effect if//when it expires, thus making it *VERY* undesirable for either side to let it expire.
I believe two of the more nasty ones in the NFL's are the dissolution of the Salary Cap which would piss off the owners, and 25% less football revenue (57% to 32%) going to the players, which would piss off the PA.
I just think that the landscape has changed since the last lockout and the league may never recover if it comes to pass. The lost season is still fresh enough on people's mind that it will be salt in the wound to do it again. There are lots of other entertainment options between cable, satellite, internet, etc. to fill the void for the casual or occasional fan (you know, the ones that the league needs to capture to grow the game). The league is growing interest more and more through the Winter Classic and the NBC deal and now would be the worst time to go backwards.
Both sides need to figure out what will work and then work out a deal. The owners need to get off their high horse and stop with the "we are ready to lock out on Sept. 15".
At this point I am not going to curl up in a fetal position over what happens. I have two grandsons ( a Peewee and a Mite) I plan to watch more of their hockey.
And probably spend that NHL money on them.
Why wouldn't the owners agree to play 1 more year under the current CBA while they continue to negotiate a new CBA? Is it really going to kill them to do 1 more year under this CBA. The CBA where the owners, after losing a full season, got what they wanted.
I am seriously going to be pissed off if there is a lock out. And I will request a refund on my season tickets. Unlike in 2004 where I kept the money in the account and allowed PK to collect interest off it. Not this time. Give me my money cause I sure as hell can use it on something else.
Why wouldn't the owners agree to play 1 more year under the current CBA while they continue to negotiate a new CBA? Is it really going to kill them to do 1 more year under this CBA. The CBA where the owners, after losing a full season, got what they wanted.
I want hockey, and nothing could pass that, but I totally understand where you're coming from. Especially if the eventual agreement would mean the bigger market teams losing some revenue to guys like us.
Cons: Lose a season of hockey
Pros: Players win, revenue sharing gives us more to throw at FAs
I'd still rather have hockey. But the player's playing hardball and winning would be the next best thing, IMO.
I can't in good conscience say that the top teams should throw more money down when a team like the NHL-owned Coyotes exist. I just find it highly hypocritical to say the top should give away money to make everyone compete when teams at the bottom exist that are not seeking to maximize their own revenue.
Why wouldn't the owners agree to play 1 more year under the current CBA while they continue to negotiate a new CBA? Is it really going to kill them to do 1 more year under this CBA. The CBA where the owners, after losing a full season, got what they wanted.
The owners want as much leverage as possible, part of which is the impending doom that is the lockout.
I just think that the landscape has changed since the last lockout and the league may never recover if it comes to pass. The lost season is still fresh enough on people's mind that it will be salt in the wound to do it again. There are lots of other entertainment options between cable, satellite, internet, etc. to fill the void for the casual or occasional fan (you know, the ones that the league needs to capture to grow the game). The league is growing interest more and more through the Winter Classic and the NBC deal and now would be the worst time to go backwards.
Both sides need to figure out what will work and then work out a deal. The owners need to get off their high horse and stop with the "we are ready to lock out on Sept. 15".
On the other hand, fans are becoming more accepting of the labor realities in pro sports.
I remember when MLB players went on strike and people flipped the hell out. Fans took it really personally that the World Series wouldn't be played on a voluntary basis. Stadiums were empty for a long time after that, and I'm not sure the fans would have come back en masse if not for the Ripken/McGwire/Sosa golden years.
Same thing on a smaller scale when the NHL locked out in 2005. People were ready to string Bettman from the nearest tree. There was a genuine sense of outrage, and it hurt the league badly, but the fans came back within about 3 years.
NBA lockout... not really a big deal this time around.
This NHL lockout... does anyone seem to be REALLY freaking out? Not like 2005. There's a sense of "here we go again" annoyance, but a lot of the interest is focused on the labor drama and trying to predict when it'll break through. There isn't a tangible sense of outrage and protest this time around. And I think the NHL is banking on the resiliency of the fanbase as they make plans for the next 3-6 months.
This NHL lockout... does anyone seem to be REALLY freaking out? Not like 2005. There's a sense of "here we go again" annoyance, but a lot of the interest is focused on the labor drama and trying to predict when it'll break through. There isn't a tangible sense of outrage and protest this time around. And I think the NHL is banking on the resiliency of the fanbase as they make plans for the next 3-6 months.
I don't take this game as personal as some seem to so I don't really get worked up about a lockout or strike, as it's simply a form of entertainment for me. Same goes for any sport so if there is hockey and it is enjoyable, then I'll watch it and go to games. While I don't want a lockout, it really won't change my opinion much of owners/players. If there is no hockey, I'll spend my money on going to concerts, eating out more, going to college games, etc...which is the same thing I do when there is no hockey from May - October. When hockey comes back, I'll start watching again.
My quality of life wasn't any worse in 2004 when there was no NHL hockey and won't be any worse if there is a lockout this year.
I don't take this game as personal as some seem to so I don't really get worked up about a lockout or strike, as it's simply a form of entertainment for me. Same goes for any sport so if there is hockey and it is enjoyable, then I'll watch it and go to games. While I don't want a lockout, it really won't change my opinion much of owners/players. If there is no hockey, I'll spend my money on going to concerts, eating out more, going to college games, etc...which is the same thing I do when there is no hockey from May - October. When hockey comes back, I'll start watching again.
My quality of life wasn't any worse in 2004 when there was no NHL hockey and won't be any worse if there is a lockout this year.
That's pretty much where I am as well. And I think it says something that people like us, who are probably in the upper 0.01% of the population in terms of hockey fandom, are "meh" toward the prospect of having to wait for the season to start.
Part of it might also be the fact that the season is 20 games too long, but still. If hardcore fans don't get worked up about it, I can't see there really being that much negative fallout when all is said and done, at least unless it stretches out past Christmas, which is not likely to happen.
I know for myself and my intrests, a lockout would be really annoying and probably push me closer to the NBA if lasts a whole season. While I can't go to games, I look forward to Hockey each night and last season was what I'd call rebirth as a hockey fan... even when the Canes sucked and Sharks failed, I still had a great time watching all the games.
Its not life and death but its something that I look forward that I'll be missing.
