HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Lockout V: Take the Long Way Home

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-18-2012, 12:54 PM
  #251
manisback121
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 3,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
It is also interesting that all these people hate that the players hired Fehr but don't have anything to say about the owners hiring Bettman. Who has been involved in the last 3 lockouts?
Past performance is indicative of conduct, but not dispositive on the situation. Fehr was also involved in MLB and spearheaded a strike.

Are you going to say a doctor who committed malpractice at hospital X amd is now implicated in malpractice at hospital Y has clean hands?

The wall street ceo who previously threw his co. Into bankruptcy by pissing off his employees has clean hands merely because he is at company Y?

manisback121 is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 12:58 PM
  #252
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: If an NHL owner is relying on his/her/their franchise as a primary source of income, they should NOT be in the business world. Any "losses" that franchise incurs shouldn't be a detriment to that owner/group. Losses that the players incur, on the other hand, are a detriment to that player's livelihood, and will more than likely never be recouped.

Disagee 100%.

What is so "wrong" with a business owner altering how his business operates so that he can make a profit? Especially if his employees average $2.4m??

Who are hockey fans to say to a business owner: "you should be able to take a loss - no matter how big it is. You shouldn't expect to make money from your hockey team investment"

How many pro-player posters here actually own a business? What would you do if you were losing money? Keep doing business as usual...?

And losses to the players?? They are cutting their own throats by chosing to earn 0 dollars in NHL salary for a season, when an average career is 5 years. Not very smart business planning to say the least.

Butch 19 is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 12:58 PM
  #253
du5566*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 2,471
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
It is also interesting that all these people hate that the players hired Fehr but don't have anything to say about the owners hiring Bettman. Who has been involved in the last 3 lockouts?
A simple google search of Fehr and his dealings with the MLB union will explain why people didn't like the players choosing Fehr. His presence pretty much gaurenteed a work stoppage and a lengthy one at that. He believes in them and they have worked well for him in the past. Again though the NHL is not the MLB. It doesn't have uncapped salaries and unlimited revenue potential.

du5566* is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 01:07 PM
  #254
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 10,089
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Really? Go look at what Bettman had on the table in September and what was put on the table in October and November. Even Bettman thought the September 15 deadline was BS.
Yes really. No doubt. Why? because even before locking the doors the league knew what it would and wouldn't give up. That won't have changed except for the worse now that revenues are being missed and damage to the game is being done.

Quote:
Escrow protection. Escrow cap. The NBA has an escrow cap. It comes out of the PLAYERS share.
What Fehr proposed doesn't come out of the players share. It is a way to limit how much money they pay into escrow. If enough money hasn't been paid into escrow to cover the difference between 50% and what they actually made do you think the players are going to say "oh sorry about that, let me write you a cheque to make up the difference." not going to happen, instead it will allow the players to take home more than 50%. Not to mention that an artificially high cap will draw money paid to the players up (cap is a magnet) and that coupled with escrow will all but guarantee more than 50%. Not to mention the other ways of trying to do an end run around the intent of the system such as mid-level exemptions etc. If the PA wants to propose a different way to ensure 50% no more no less then do so. They haven't. 30 cancelled games and they haven't done that with Fehr in the room (they did with just players and owners in the room). With Fehr they have said 50% plus this plus that plus this other thing....

Bob MacKenzie on the radio today said exactly that. What the PA is calling 50% isn't really 50% at all not even close.

he also went into the different philosophies. The PA is stuck in the mode of comparing what they are offered to what was in the last CBA. The league is essentially making a budget like any business would...with no real concern on what came before. And honestly, this is a business negotiation and the players need to start leaving the emotions out of things and realize that this is new negotiation and based on the financials they need to make a deal they feel is fair. next time will be the same thing. If there are 24 healthy teams next time then they will likely get a better deal because there is no business advantage to the owners to shut down. The fact the NHL hasn't gone hat in hand to the PA after losing 30+ regular season games tells you that there are not 8 teams upset with what is going on. That should be reinforcement on what the players witnessed when talking to the moderates to get a deal done. Finally agree to full linkage and see what falls out of that (of course they did so until they let Fehr back in the room).

Quote:
The NHL had compliance buyouts in the 2005. Was that a scheme too? The NBA has 1 amnesty buyout per team.
Yes it was a scheme. But one agreed to by the clubs because ultimately they wouldn't be paying the 75% they were paying. This time around they have decided they don't want that esepcially not since they have increased pensions, increased revenue sharing and agreed to some degree of "make whole". The PA ran the well of goodwill dry and they ran it dry a hell of a lot sooner then they would have with a leader like Kelly at the helm. The PA likes to whine and cry about how they are treated and how the NHL does this and does that but turfs the leader that was actually helping change that. They are reaping what they sowed and will never ever recover the money they've lost.

The NBA and NHL are different leagues, with different needs that will require different solutions.

tantalum is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 01:10 PM
  #255
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,232
vCash: 500
^^^ Well said Tantalum.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCrazed101 View Post
I'm assuming the PA fund works much like EI. You pay into EI and if the need arises, you get paid during unemployment with money that you contributed to the system.
I agree. But I just find it funny that someone is saying how well they can cope... and yet they're collecting strike pay (or whatever you want to call it) from the union.

Quote:
Originally Posted by du5566 View Post
And what if your unionized job was one of a kind. That's the other thing here the players would take more than a 12% cut if the league was to dissolve and they had to play in Europe. Most people faced with that reality would take the offer.

It is fairly unique. If I couldn't do it with this company, I'd have to move. Either to Alaska, or to Vancouver/Toronto. There's maybe 6-7 employer's in Canada with whom I could get employment doing the same thing I do now.

__________________
"Itís not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, itís as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Riptide is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 01:15 PM
  #256
RedMenace
Zero ***** Given
 
RedMenace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Under the Bridge
Posts: 4,243
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
Disagee 100%.

What is so "wrong" with a business owner altering how his business operates so that he can make a profit? Especially if his employees average $2.4m??
There's nothing wrong with altering the way a business operates, but where do you cut costs? Do you look for ways to streamline your operations? Do you reduce the number of employees? Reduce their wages? Both?

How many bridges do you burn so that you can make money? Do you simply say "**** the employees; without me they have nothing," and hope another crop just comes in to fill their shoes at a reduced cost? How long until the cycle repeats itself and you have to do it again? How long before nobody wants to come work for you?

Quote:
Who are hockey fans to say to a business owner: "you should be able to take a loss - no matter how big it is. You shouldn't expect to make money from your hockey team investment"

How many pro-player posters here actually own a business? What would you do if you were losing money? Keep doing business as usual...?
Perhaps I worded that (and have previously) incorrectly. At what point as a business owner do you decide to stop taking losses? If you're losing millions of dollars every year for several years, why are you doing it? I never once said "you shouldn't be able to make money from your hockey team investment," but at some point you have to quit trying to force it to be profitable. You have to cut your losses eventually, whether that's moving the franchise, selling to someone else with deeper pockets, or just folding it entirely.

However, you SHOULD be able to take a loss, and a repeated ones if you're making an unsure investment. If 15 or 18 or however many franchises are proven to "lose" money, should you not be expecting that sort of thing coming in? As I've said before, why would you shoot yourself in the foot, then complain you shot yourself in the foot?

Quote:
And losses to the players?? They are cutting their own throats by chosing to earn 0 dollars in NHL salary for a season, when an average career is 5 years. Not very smart business planning to say the least.
They aren't choosing to earn nothing; the NHL enacted this lockout. Granted they've protracted the lockout and subsequent earning of $0, but like I said earlier, they're doing it out of principle at this point.

RedMenace is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 01:18 PM
  #257
Stewie Griffin
Moderator
Benevolent Overlord
 
Stewie Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 6,685
vCash: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
If you don't relocate the teams that are dragging the whole thing down then the players will never be able to concede enough. Of course either way, the owners will never stop asking for more and they will never stop locking out players to get more.
Problem is you run out of viable markets, and need willing buyers to take that risk. You also need someone with around $150+ million to buy the franchise, $150+ million relocation fee, and ~$300 million to build an arena (or convince taxpayers to do it). Not a lot of people out there with half a billion burning a hole in their pockets... Not so easy to accomplish.

From a completely unscientific perspective, I looked at the lowest attendance (as percentage of filled seats according to ESPN) as well as the Forbes #'s for Franchise Values and Operating Losses and made a list of ten teams for each of those criteria. The teams common to all three of these lists are:

Phoenix
Columbus
NY Islanders
Carolina
Anaheim
Tampa Bay

Phoenix/Arizona might improve if they ever get through their saga - questions being "how much?" and "is it enough". The NHL has too much time/effort/money invested here to simply walk away via relocation.

Columbus Badly managed - used to draw fairly significant crowds. My guess is they're facing the same problem teams like Calgary faced during the "young guns" era - perpetual rebuilding with no end in sight, and fans get tired of that after a few years.

Islanders situation should improve with their new digs.

Carolina / Anaheim / Tampa Bay - just suffer from being in non-traditional hockey markets, but winning teams have historically drawn fans.

The one common denominator is that increased revenue sharing among the teams (and the reduced players' share of HRR) will help all of these teams.


Last edited by Stewie Griffin: 12-18-2012 at 04:47 PM. Reason: missing words lol
Stewie Griffin is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 01:21 PM
  #258
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,232
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stewie Griffin View Post
Problem is you run out of viable markets, and need willing buyers to take that risk. You also need someone with around $150+ million to buy the franchise, $150+ million relocation fee, and ~$300 million to build an arena (or convince taxpayers to do it). Not a lot of people out there with half a billion burning a hole in their pockets... Not so easy to accomplish.
And in addition to someone needing to pony up the money, there also needs to be somewhere that they believe will have a better draw than their current location. Now there's a couple spots in Canada... but after that you start to run out of viable locations... and run out pretty quickly.

Riptide is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 01:22 PM
  #259
etherialone
dialed in your mom
 
etherialone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Ether
Country: United Nations
Posts: 12,990
vCash: 500
Interesting.

I am very interested to see how the Isles do in their building/location. I think that they will do great but haven't anything to base that one other than wanting to see them succeed.

I am hoping that one of the other teams end up in Quebec but really only one seems possible (Pho).

But that being said I guess relocation could help. Seattle, Quebec, Portland Ore and Wiscon could all possibly do well as NHL cities.

etherialone is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 01:40 PM
  #260
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 8,653
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
How many bridges do you burn so that you can make money? Do you simply say "**** the employees; without me they have nothing," and hope another crop just comes in to fill their shoes at a reduced cost? How long until the cycle repeats itself and you have to do it again? How long before nobody wants to come work for you?



Perhaps I worded that (and have previously) incorrectly. At what point as a business owner do you decide to stop taking losses? If you're losing millions of dollars every year for several years, why are you doing it? I never once said "you shouldn't be able to make money from your hockey team investment," but at some point you have to quit trying to force it to be profitable. You have to cut your losses eventually, whether that's moving the franchise, selling to someone else with deeper pockets, or just folding it entirely.


They aren't choosing to earn nothing; the NHL enacted this lockout. Granted they've protracted the lockout and subsequent earning of $0, but like I said earlier, they're doing it out of principle at this point.
Yes, **** the employees, to the tune of $2.4m a year... fine hyperbole there.

So, "the NHL enacted this lockout?" You don't say? Yes, they did it in a vacuum, and for no reason at all.

And after all your "hockey team investment, at some point ... force it to be profitable" talk; at the end of the day, the employees still get 2.4m - maybe it goes down to $2.35m. Does that mean nothing?! really??

And yes, the NHLPA is definitely choosing to make $0. If they want to make some big money, just sign the CBA, it's pretty simple. How tough can it be? They're not working in a coal mine or a factory.


Last edited by Butch 19: 12-18-2012 at 03:23 PM. Reason: typo
Butch 19 is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 01:40 PM
  #261
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,508
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tonellisghost View Post
Interesting.

I am very interested to see how the Isles do in their building/location. I think that they will do great but haven't anything to base that one other than wanting to see them succeed.

I am hoping that one of the other teams end up in Quebec but really only one seems possible (Pho).

But that being said I guess relocation could help. Seattle, Quebec, Portland Ore and Wiscon could all possibly do well as NHL cities.
Here is a point that seems to evade many people, and I was educated on it as well so it's not coming directly from me... Regardless of whether certain weak economic franchises are contracted or relocated to potentially stronger markets (assuming enough stronger markets exist or are available to replace all the supposed currently weak markets), the potential positive result of that is that the revenue average would increase. Fine, sounds good. But wait! Go back and look at the total list of all NHL teams and see just how many are on the bubble, just making it by with minimal minus numbers or minimal plus numbers. Now, conditions change and the Revenues average goes higher, thus allowing player salaries to go higher. What's likely to happen to various of those teams which are currently on the economic bubble? Now all those economically weaker teams that were either contracted or relocated have been replaced by another group of teams struggling to stay alive.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 01:52 PM
  #262
etherialone
dialed in your mom
 
etherialone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: The Ether
Country: United Nations
Posts: 12,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Here is a point that seems to evade many people, and I was educated on it as well so it's not coming directly from me... Regardless of whether certain weak economic franchises are contracted or relocated to potentially stronger markets (assuming enough stronger markets exist or are available to replace all the supposed currently weak markets), the potential positive result of that is that the revenue average would increase. Fine, sounds good. But wait! Go back and look at the total list of all NHL teams and see just how many are on the bubble, just making it by with minimal minus numbers or minimal plus numbers. Now, conditions change and the Revenues average goes higher, thus allowing player salaries to go higher. What's likely to happen to various of those teams which are currently on the economic bubble? Now all those economically weaker teams that were either contracted or relocated have been replaced by another group of teams struggling to stay alive.
Thanks for that, it is an interesting supposition.

Not necessarily true but certainly possible. You have to also consider that some of the teams that would be relocating are teams that are leaving markets that have failed once before (Atlanta has failed twice now for various reasons) and also that some teams may have been placed without enough forethought.

Take Pho for example, they have supported various minor league teams but did they prove themselves capable of continual support for an NHL franchise prior to the Jets relocation? I don't know.

I mean some markets fail and sometimes a better fit opens up but in the end what you are saying is a possible outcome even if it happens in part.

Food for thought certainly.

etherialone is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:11 PM
  #263
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in The Flood
 
Ragamuffin Gunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 15,443
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
The owners locking out the players yet again will crush revenue. As a result the players will be taking a smaller percentage of a much smaller pot. By the time the league recovers what they lost many players will be at the end of their careers not to mention that is when the next lockout will be scheduled.
You're making a great argument for why the players should have negotiated off the Oct proposal and saved a full season.

Not only are the players forfeiting over 600M in salary they're also killing HRR.

Ragamuffin Gunner is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:31 PM
  #264
Capsized
Parity is a Disease
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Perhaps because we can look at how things are better now than they were when he took over?
I would argue purely based on my opinion that the product isn't as good and we have had 2 lost seasons and are working it toward 2.5 or more. We have teams that cannot and will not sustain themselves and the teams that can are being reduced to mediocre in order to support them. We have quality franchises that draft well losing their players once they develop because they can't keep them under the cap. I don't believe things are better. On the contrary.

Capsized is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:33 PM
  #265
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,280
vCash: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stewie Griffin View Post
From a completely unscientific perspective, I looked at the lowest attendance (as percentage of filled seats according to ESPN) as well as the Forbes #'s for Franchise Values and Operating Losses and made a list of ten teams for each of those criteria. These teams are:

Phoenix
Columbus
NY Islanders
Carolina
Anaheim
Tampa Bay
Ya' know, I never got the hang of "modern math," but that doesn't look like a list of 10 teams to me...

The attendance percentage is interesting. Tampa Bay ranks 21st in the league, but it should be noted that even after the horror inflicted upon us by Barrie/Koules, last year that 21st place was 96.2% of capacity. Not too shabby for a team in recovery mode. (If you go by average attendance we were 13th.)

If anyone's interested, the teams below Tampa Bay are New Jersey (87.4), Florida (86.6), Anaheim (86.4), Colorado (86.1), Carolina (85.9), Islanders (81.3), Columbus (80.8), Dallas (76.8) and Phoenix (72.5).

ESPN Attendance Stats

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:35 PM
  #266
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
You're making a great argument for why the players should have negotiated off the Oct proposal and saved a full season.

Not only are the players forfeiting over 600M in salary they're also killing HRR.
That's why they can't reach a deal. The owners are talking money.

The players are talking concessions, hurt feelings, emotions.

Lacaar is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:37 PM
  #267
Iggy77
Registered User
 
Iggy77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ragamuffin Gunner View Post
You're making a great argument for why the players should have negotiated off the Oct proposal and saved a full season.

Not only are the players forfeiting over 600M in salary they're also killing HRR.
They think they can get a good deal with a guaranteed share/escrow cap in place and have the NHL take most of the financial damage from the lockout.

This is the revenge/payback for the last lockout which I think is a key goal for them to discourage future lockouts. If the NHL suffers massive financial damage from the lockout (and it will) and the players can walk away relatively unscathed, the NHL will be far more reluctant to lock them out again in the future giving the players more leverage in future negotiations (such as removing the cap).

Fehr is following the MLB playbook. Damage the league/owners pocketybooks enough to discourage them for taking a hardline stance vs. the players in the future. Obviously he cannot sue for collusion or go on strike here so this is all he has right now.

Iggy77 is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:37 PM
  #268
Nanuk23
Registered User
 
Nanuk23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 382
vCash: 500
Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Steve Fehr reached out to Bill Daly today. Short phone call. But still nothing scheduled in terms of resuming bargaining talks

Nanuk23 is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:42 PM
  #269
Capsized
Parity is a Disease
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stewie Griffin View Post
Problem is you run out of viable markets, and need willing buyers to take that risk. You also need someone with around $150+ million to buy the franchise, $150+ million relocation fee, and ~$300 million to build an arena (or convince taxpayers to do it). Not a lot of people out there with half a billion burning a hole in their pockets... Not so easy to accomplish.

From a completely unscientific perspective, I looked at the lowest attendance (as percentage of filled seats according to ESPN) as well as the Forbes #'s for Franchise Values and Operating Losses and made a list of ten teams for each of those criteria. These teams are:

Phoenix
Columbus
NY Islanders
Carolina
Anaheim
Tampa Bay

Phoenix/Arizona might improve if they ever get through their saga - questions being "how much?" and "is it enough". The NHL has too much time/effort/money invested here to simply walk away via relocation.

Columbus Badly managed - used to draw fairly significant crowds. My guess is they're facing the same problem teams like Calgary faced during the "young guns" era - perpetual rebuilding with no end in sight, and fans get tired of that after a few years.

Islanders situation should improve with their new digs.

Carolina / Anaheim / Tampa Bay - just suffer from being in non-traditional hockey markets, but winning teams have historically drawn fans.

The one common denominator is that increased revenue sharing among the teams (and the reduced players' share of HRR) will help all of these teams.
Apparently the "risk" is to the players. If teams lose money the owners just lockout and demand more from the players in a never ending cycle.

It seems to me that the salary cap has resulted in every team being in constant rebuild. They draft players, develop them, lose them to the cap, repeat...

Capsized is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:46 PM
  #270
Capsized
Parity is a Disease
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iggy77 View Post
They think they can get a good deal with a guaranteed share/escrow cap in place and have the NHL take most of the financial damage from the lockout.

This is the revenge/payback for the last lockout which I think is a key goal for them to discourage future lockouts. If the NHL suffers massive financial damage from the lockout (and it will) and the players can walk away relatively unscathed, the NHL will be far more reluctant to lock them out again in the future giving the players more leverage in future negotiations (such as removing the cap).

Fehr is following the MLB playbook. Damage the league/owners pocketybooks enough to discourage them for taking a hardline stance vs. the players in the future. Obviously he cannot sue for collusion or go on strike here so this is all he has right now.
Exactly what I have been saying. If this lockout doesn't cause the owners some pain they will just do it again. After all they are unwilling to fix the actual problems of failing markets. They will come back to the players again for more concessions. It will never stop until the players play for free.

Capsized is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:52 PM
  #271
SaintPatrick33
Conn Smythe Winner
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,035
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
I would argue purely based on my opinion that the product isn't as good
Yeah, because hockey like totally sucked in the '80s when teams weren't throwing butt-loads of money at free agents to buy themselves a Cup

SaintPatrick33 is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:53 PM
  #272
Soundwave
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanuk23 View Post
Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Steve Fehr reached out to Bill Daly today. Short phone call. But still nothing scheduled in terms of resuming bargaining talks
Well good thing it's still the middle of October. Still plenty of time to get the season going by US Thanksgiving, no need to rus --

Oh ... yeah. Right.

Soundwave is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:57 PM
  #273
Capsized
Parity is a Disease
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaintPatrick33 View Post
Yeah, because hockey like totally sucked in the '80s when teams weren't throwing butt-loads of money at free agents to buy themselves a Cup
This just sounds like sour grapes because the team you support fails to market its product and therefore fails to succeed. Don't worry though, the whole league will get as bad as it has to in order to make sure even the crappy franchises get their turn at a Cup. 3 cheers for supporting failure! Hip, hip hooray!!!

Capsized is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:58 PM
  #274
Soundwave
Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,076
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by schminksbro View Post
Apparently the "risk" is to the players. If teams lose money the owners just lockout and demand more from the players in a never ending cycle.

It seems to me that the salary cap has resulted in every team being in constant rebuild. They draft players, develop them, lose them to the cap, repeat...
That's actually more what it was like before the lock out when teams like the Oilers would have to give up their best players like Weight, Cujo, Guerin, etc. and Calgary was in the same spot with losing Fleury and then almost losing Iginla too.

Teams like Pittsburgh, Washington, Vancouver, Boston, even Chicago have been able to retain most of their core talent nowadays. Calgary has retained their core (for better or worse). You can't keep everyone but you can generally keep the main pieces.

Soundwave is offline  
Old
12-18-2012, 02:59 PM
  #275
Nanuk23
Registered User
 
Nanuk23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 382
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundwave View Post
Well good thing it's still the middle of October. Still plenty of time to get the season going by US Thanksgiving, no need to rus --

Oh ... yeah. Right.
I know what you mean lol. I am a bit surprised it was Fehr that reached out to Daley. I though they would at least wait till the results of the vote are known. . Then again maybe the vote has been completed . Wonder what the results were ?

Nanuk23 is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:28 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.