HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Lockout VI - Game On! Rejoice! Players to vote Saturday.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-29-2012, 09:13 PM
  #76
Bomber0104
Registered User
 
Bomber0104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodman19 View Post
But what about when the top few teams are so top heavy that they drastically boost costs for the remaining 80%. To many people are looking at the issues as Leaf fans and not Hockey fans.
I don't see how costs would be any higher than any other team across the league. Management, scouting, and certain other overheads and luxuries (buyout provisions) but nowhere near in comparison to the disproportionate lack of revenue that small market teams generate.

Care to elaborate on your position?

Bomber0104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:18 PM
  #77
Woodman19
#TeamBernier
 
Woodman19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
I don't see how costs would be any higher than any other team across the league. Management, scouting, and certain other overheads and luxuries (buyout provisions) but nowhere near in comparison to the disproportionate lack of revenue that small market teams generate.

Care to elaborate on your position?
The cap is based off of the league wide revenues, what is the top 4 teams revenue's as a percentage of total league revenue? (I'm on a cell so can't check). But to exagerate my point, if 9 teams have 100 million revenue and 1 has 600 million all teams will be equally calculated to spend as if they are making 150 million each, while the rich team laughs at that the remaining 9 are 50% over budget. That's how the top heavy teams upset the balance.

Woodman19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:26 PM
  #78
Budsfan
Registered User
 
Budsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
I think Toronto is very different from other markets in that if that they were actually successful, they would be more successful financially than any other team.

San Jose profit [winning Stanley Cup profit] - $5 [$8]

Toronto profit [winning Stanley Cup profit] - $50 [$80]

I don't think so.
Toronto is successful because the fans support them and they have been supporting them, even though we have not won the Stanley Cup since 1967 and haven't been in the play-offs, since the last CBA was signed.

Quote:
If the bottom 10 franchises (who are not profitable, in fact, not making any money at all) were eliminated, this would actually INCREASE the amount of money per franchise (and in turn, per player).

Cut out the bottom feeders and you have a league that is just as profitable and wealthy, and with fewer players.
Exactly and subsequently no need for a lockout and an argument about money, in other words a successful league, also they may be able to have more equal ticket pricing and Toronto fans wouldn't be paying 3 to 4 times more, than they do now, to watch a game, that is played in other NHL cities.

Quote:
30 team league [$300] - 30 players - [$10/player]

20 team league [$250] - 20 players - [$12.5/player]

See?
This is only conjecture because you may have fewer teams but a lot more better players, distributed amongst those fewer teams, those amounts are arbitrary, instead of having 1 or 2 top paid players you may have 3 or 4 and because there is more money to go around from a successful league, this would not be surprising.

Do you see?

Budsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:31 PM
  #79
Bomber0104
Registered User
 
Bomber0104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodman19 View Post
The cap is based off of the league wide revenues, what is the top 4 teams revenue's as a percentage of total league revenue? (I'm on a cell so can't check). But to exagerate my point, if 9 teams have 100 million revenue and 1 has 600 million all teams will be equally calculated to spend as if they are making 150 million each, while the rich team laughs at that the remaining 9 are 50% over budget. That's how the top heavy teams upset the balance.
I still don't understand what you are getting at.

All teams have fixed overhead of running shop.. doesn't matter if you are Toronto or Phoenix...you have an arena to run, staff to pay, travel to expense...what have you. Variable costs, sure, but these are small and have increasing returns to scale especially in advantageous markets.

I need you to really elaborate apparently. Forgive me.

Bomber0104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:35 PM
  #80
beauchamp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Laval, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by beauchamp View Post
Me, me, me generation.

Without the US, hockey would be a very minor sport.
Quote:
Originally Posted by eyeball11 View Post
I'm perfectly fine with that. It's no skin off my posterior if it is a small, regional sport.


Thanks for proving the "Me, me, me generation" part.


beauchamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:38 PM
  #81
Bomber0104
Registered User
 
Bomber0104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budsfan View Post
Toronto is successful because the fans support them and they have been supporting them, even though we have not won the Stanley Cup since 1967 and haven't been in the play-offs, since the last CBA was signed.
You're missing the point here.

I am not disputing the fact Toronto has a mature and saturated market.

I am disputing the fact that San Jose is absolutely miniscule in comparison to Toronto and implementing anti-competitive rules which gives the Sharks benefit to make an extra $3 million if they use these rules to be a successful team (and in turn $1.5 million for the players) and players less economic mobility, doesn't really compare to giving Toronto the advantage of competitive rules which would see them make an extra $30 million dollars if they use these rules to be a successful team (and in turn $15 million for the players) and giving players greater prosperity through economic mobility.

Quote:
Exactly and subsequently no need for a lockout and an argument about money, in other words a successful league, also they may be able to have more equal ticket pricing and Toronto fans wouldn't be paying 3 to 4 times more, than they do now, to watch a game, that is played in other NHL cities.
A lockout is always about the division of money. These players put their lives on the line for a reason at the end of the day. For entertainment. Toronto fans are going to pay whatever Tanenbaum and Rogers/Bell charges (many times more than San Jose fans). This is called competition, and it's result should be in a superior product compared to the people who pay a fraction for the same (and often times SUPERIOR) product.


Last edited by Bomber0104: 12-29-2012 at 09:44 PM.
Bomber0104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:38 PM
  #82
Woodman19
#TeamBernier
 
Woodman19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
I still don't understand what you are getting at.

All teams have fixed overhead of running shop.. doesn't matter if you are Toronto or Phoenix...you have an arena to run, staff to pay, travel to expense...what have you. Variable costs, sure, but these are small and have increasing returns to scale especially in advantageous markets.

I need you to really elaborate apparently. Forgive me.
The biggest expense is players salaries and they are dictated by the league revenue as a whole, where the overwhelming top heavy teams skew salaries up that puts huge prussure on the small market teams.

Woodman19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:41 PM
  #83
MapleLeafsFan4Ever
Go Leafs Go
 
MapleLeafsFan4Ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,275
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurt View Post
There would have to be an accepted offer by January 11th, correct?
Pierre LeBrun also said if a new CBA was agreed on before Janurary 11th the season could start earlier then what was propsed and if that happens it means adding a few more games to the schedule, so we would see more then 48 if that was to happen.

MapleLeafsFan4Ever is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:41 PM
  #84
beauchamp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Laval, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurt View Post
True but that's just the risk associated with their job just like any other job has risks associated with it.

I'll be watching hockey games. I enjoy watching NHL hockey. I don't plan on denying myself the pleasure of viewing games if they're on.
Exactly.

We huff and we puff about boycotting the games, the sponsors etc. but we all know deep down that we'll be watching and we'll even "get into it", to use someone else's terms.

beauchamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:50 PM
  #85
Bomber0104
Registered User
 
Bomber0104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodman19 View Post
The biggest expense is players salaries and they are dictated by the league revenue as a whole, where the overwhelming top heavy teams skew salaries up that puts huge prussure on the small market teams.
I know for certain there would be less variability between years if we simply eradicated the stragglers.

Strongest survive...live and let die.

I don't believe in this "we're all in this together" attitude so prevalent in sports these days. You are not. You are supposed to be COMPETING against each other.

Is it all just a facade in the end?!

Bomber0104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:57 PM
  #86
Woodman19
#TeamBernier
 
Woodman19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
I know for certain there would be less variability between years if we simply eradicated the stragglers.

Strongest survive...live and let die.

I don't believe in this "we're all in this together" attitude so prevalent in sports these days. You are not. You are supposed to be COMPETING against each other.

Is it all just a facade in the end?!
If its the strong survive you are looking at a 4 team league long term. At least in terms of competitiveness which like I originally said is the leaf fan view of things to want.

Woodman19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 09:58 PM
  #87
Bomber0104
Registered User
 
Bomber0104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodman19 View Post
If its the strong survive you are looking at a 4 team league long term.
Plenty of markets in Canada and North Eastern/Central America that can support a full stadium.

Winner or loser.

I admit, and this may sound crazy, that I almost believe the NHL has given Toronto instruction to deliberately keep their team out of playoffs and contention to make way for smaller market teams.

Crazy I know but this is how anti-competitive I believe the NHL is.

Bomber0104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 10:03 PM
  #88
Woodman19
#TeamBernier
 
Woodman19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 13,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
Plenty of markets in Canada and North Eastern/Central America that can support a full stadium.

Winner or loser.

I admit, and this may sound crazy, that I almost believe the NHL has given Toronto instruction to deliberately keep their team out of playoffs and contention to make way for smaller market teams.

Crazy I know but this is how anti-competitive I believe the NHL is.
Filling a stadium and filling a stadium at leaf prices are two different things, also I doubt Halifax TV rights compare to toronto.

Woodman19 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 10:07 PM
  #89
Bomber0104
Registered User
 
Bomber0104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodman19 View Post
Filling a stadium and filling a stadium at leaf prices are two different things, also I doubt Halifax TV rights compare to toronto.
Well Quebec City , and at least one in Southern Ontario are plenty viable.

Studies have shown Ontario could handle a few more actually quite easily.

I think getting a fan in a lower bowl seat is worth more than a fan in his couch watching cable no?

Bomber0104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 10:07 PM
  #90
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 56,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodman19 View Post
But what about when the top few teams are so top heavy that they drastically boost costs for the remaining 80%. To many people are looking at the issues as Leaf fans and not Hockey fans.
We must keep in mind the NHL is a brand which is different than being hockey.

There is a lot of hockey that is not NHL related, so to say Leafs fan versus Hockey fan is missing the point about hockey branding.

As a hockey fan I'll turn on the tube to watch any level of hockey.

As a Leafs fan with regards to the NHL brand, I could care less if there were 21 or 30 teams in the NHL brand as long as the Leafs are there I'll watch it. I'd watch the NHL brand with 12 teams if the Leafs were part of it.

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bA3LN_8hjM8.

Vaive and Ludzik on collapse, and Phaneuf.
ULF_55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 10:18 PM
  #91
Budsfan
Registered User
 
Budsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
You're missing the point here.

I am not disputing the fact Toronto has a mature and saturated market.

I am disputing the fact that San Jose is absolutely miniscule in comparison to Toronto and implementing anti-competitive rules which gives the Sharks benefit to make an extra $3 million if they use these rules to be a successful team (and in turn $1.5 million for the players) and players less economic mobility, doesn't really compare to giving Toronto the advantage of competitive rules which would see them make an extra $30 million dollars (and in turn $15 million for the players) and giving players greater prosperity through economic mobility.
Toronto is sold out for each and every game and extra revenue will again, come only from the fans of the Leafs, in the way of higher prices but if you eliminate 10 teams and 1/3 of the players, those teams now not recieving profit sharing would maybe get a share and God forbid we make the play-offs, more money will be generated in Toronto and distributed to the teams in a smaller league.

I don't think Toronto, will ever become the Yankees of Hockey and dominate the league, by having the most money to spend and I also think there will always be a Cap, it may increase more because teams are more successful, thus helping players get more money by way of a higher Cap.

Quote:
A lockout is always about the division of money. These players put their lives on the line for a reason at the end of the day. For entertainment. Toronto fans are going to pay whatever Tanenbaum and Rogers/Bell charges (many times more than San Jose fans). This is called competition, and it's result should be in a superior product compared to the people who pay a fraction for the same product.
Players do not put their lives on the line, they are not soldiers, they do however play a violent sport and they are very well paid for it but that is their choice, they could do any number of things that are not as violent however they would have to take a pretty fair salary cut.

Is San Jose that depressed and they have that much less money, to watch what Toronto fans are charged to watch a game, or is it possible, they couldn't care less about hockey and would sooner be out playing Golf.

Budsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 10:29 PM
  #92
Bomber0104
Registered User
 
Bomber0104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budsfan View Post
Toronto is sold out for each and every game and extra revenue will again, come only from the fans of the Leafs, in the way of higher prices but if you eliminate 10 teams and 1/3 of the players, those teams now not recieving profit sharing would maybe get a share and God forbid we make the play-offs, more money will be generated in Toronto and distributed to the teams in a smaller league.
I understand but wouldn't players want rules to provide teams like Toronto the ability to get into the playoffs...the ability to use the money they charge outrageous prices to do some good above and beyond what other teams' fans do???

Picture this.

I am a season ticket holder in front row seats in the Air Canada Centre in Toronto watching the Leafs get blown out each and every year for $120,000 since the lockout.

On the other hand, that same season ticket holder in San Jose is sitting in that exact same front row seat, watching a superior product being San Jose making the playoffs every year, and paying a mere $25,000 over the same time period since the lockout.

You're talking about the fans losing?

What fans?

It's clearly us fans up north!

It's clearly us faithful Leafs fans watching our team suffer year in and out under these anti-competitive rules the NHL designs to prop up their teams down south!

It's to spread their product!

And it hurts us fans up here, it's hurts the players unilaterally, and it hurts a select few successful franchises assuming there are no kickbacks from the NHL (like regional monopoly protection...hit the road Balsillie!).

Bomber0104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 10:49 PM
  #93
Bomber0104
Registered User
 
Bomber0104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,594
vCash: 500
Balsillie (proud, successful Canadian CEO and marketeer) being denied twice by the NHL were the worst things that could have happened to the NHL over the past few years.

Donald Fehr knows ALLLLLL about William "Boots" Del Biaggio III (check him out if you haven't heard Leafs fans) and the kinds of SCUM the slimy corrupt NHL is willing to take on as a partner just to keep a failing team south.

Believe me...

Bomber0104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-29-2012, 11:18 PM
  #94
Budsfan
Registered User
 
Budsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,197
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
I understand but wouldn't players want rules to provide teams like Toronto the ability to get into the playoffs...the ability to use the money they charge outrageous prices to do some good above and beyond what other teams' fans do???

Picture this.

I am a season ticket holder in front row seats in the Air Canada Centre in Toronto watching the Leafs get blown out each and every year for $120,000 since the lockout.

On the other hand, that same season ticket holder in San Jose is sitting in that exact same front row seat, watching a superior product being San Jose making the playoffs every year, and paying a mere $25,000 over the same time period since the lockout.

You're talking about the fans losing?

What fans?

It's clearly us fans up north!

It's clearly us faithful Leafs fans watching our team suffer year in and out under these anti-competitive rules the NHL designs to prop up their teams down south!

It's to spread their product!

And it hurts us fans up here, it's hurts the players unilaterally, and it hurts a select few successful franchises assuming there are no kickbacks from the NHL (like regional monopoly protection...hit the road Balsillie!).
This argument started because I stated that I supported the fans and you supported the players not the owners, if you cut 10 teams and 1/3 of the players you would definitely get a better product on the ice and if there is less revenue sharing, amongst the more successful 20 teams that are left, perhaps and I have underlined perhaps, the fans in Toronto would get a break purchasing tickets and not pay the outrageous prices they now do.

I remember the 6 team league, very well and most of those teams were sold out and didn't look for a handout and I tried not miss a game back then, just as I do now but I could afford a ticket back then and saw many games at the Gardens, going to the ACC now is a treat because prices are so high, one has to consider taking out a small loan to go.

Bettman took teams from Canada and put them in places Like Pheonix and other places for expansion to a bigger audience and the NHLPA said not a word about the extra players being hired and getting more money for playing in places where the players out numbered the fans and they aren't now, they want the "Status Quo" and as long as this continues the real fans in Toronto will keep getting the shaft, while some of the fans south of the border, will pay a fraction of what we do, to watch the same product.

In any case I've stated my position on this Lockout and really there very little else to say.

Budsfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 12:45 AM
  #95
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystifo View Post
I don't know how I feel about a shortened season. I have this feeling the minute the lockout is over Toronto makes a trade for Lou and suddenly we are going to go from a team looking to rebuild to a team trying to make the playoffs (again.) I kind of rather just lose the season and take my chances at ping pong lottery.
Why when the odds are better we get a earlier pick with a shortened season.

When we are still a goalie and a #1C away from contending, I think we end up with a Higher pick playing this season than relying on 6% in a lottery we all know Bettman will rig for Columbus who is the new US market in need of revitalization.

charliolemieux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 12:50 AM
  #96
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bomber0104 View Post
Balsillie (proud, successful Canadian CEO and marketeer) being denied twice by the NHL were the worst things that could have happened to the NHL over the past few years.

Donald Fehr knows ALLLLLL about William "Boots" Del Biaggio III (check him out if you haven't heard Leafs fans) and the kinds of SCUM the slimy corrupt NHL is willing to take on as a partner just to keep a failing team south.

Believe me...
Balsillie pissed Bettman off, and imo Gary made it his personal mission to keep Balsillie out of the NHL as a matter of principle.

charliolemieux is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 12:50 AM
  #97
beauchamp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Laval, Qc
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,134
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budsfan View Post
(...)
I remember the 6 team league, very well and most of those teams were sold out and didn't look for a handout (...)
You might want to take a look back at history...

Even Montreal almost went under.

beauchamp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:02 AM
  #98
Bomber0104
Registered User
 
Bomber0104's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,594
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Balsillie pissed Bettman off, and imo Gary made it his personal mission to keep Balsillie out of the NHL as a matter of principle.
Nope...not in my opinion anyway.

In my opinion..Balsillie interfered with the NHL's handshake agreement with Toronto and Buffalo that prevents competition.

In other words, more anti-competitive activity from the NHL.

Believe me this kind of stuff is not unnoticed by the NHLPA when they are developing anti-trust lawsuits.

Bomber0104 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:06 AM
  #99
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 56,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
Balsillie pissed Bettman off, and imo Gary made it his personal mission to keep Balsillie out of the NHL as a matter of principle.
Bettman is in another lock-out.

Apparently, the owners have told him to do his job and get an agreement.

I would think some powerful owners are interested in a league that doesn't resort to lock-outs and lost seasons every time they have to negotiate with the product.

ULF_55 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-30-2012, 01:10 AM
  #100
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,570
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodman19 View Post
The biggest expense is players salaries and they are dictated by the league revenue as a whole, where the overwhelming top heavy teams skew salaries up that puts huge prussure on the small market teams.
As it should be.

I have no problem with the big teams helping out the little guys a bit, but if you can't generate enough revenue to ice a competetive team then too *** bad.

It makes me sick to see 30M dollars a year go down the drain in Phoenix when Quebec, Hamilton, Seattle, and other markets would lose less money or even potentially earn a profit.


It is the teams like PHX and FLA that are the main reason why we are having this lockout.

charliolemieux is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 12:16 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.