HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
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.

why am i against a cap ?

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-01-2004, 02:50 PM
  #51
YellHockey*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Any particular reason you are being a racist *****? You realize that the word coon in that phrase is a derogatory term for a black person correct (it was coined in the Southern States with that specific meaning).
Do you also realize that coon is also a nickname for a raccoon?

Quote:
Who developed Doug Weight? The magical hockey gnomes?
More like the Rangers.

Quote:
Guerin? No one knew much about him til he was an Oiler... it must have been stick elves.
Or the Devils.

Plenty of people knew about him before he was an Oiler. Don't let your ignorance speak for the masses.

Quote:
Ryan Smyth? Ah, must have been those crazy puck leprechans.
That's one player. But I suspect the Oilers could chalk that one up to nepotism instead of drafting ability.

Quote:
Go on... alrighty...

Guys like Rem Murray,
Mediocre player.

Quote:
Tom Poti,
Average defenceman.

Quote:
Janne Niinimaa,
Developed by the Flyers.

Quote:
Todd Marchant,
Rangers again.

Quote:
Mike Comrie,
That's two.

Quote:
Roman Hamrlik,
Developed by Tampa Bay.

Quote:
just to name a few.
A few? That's all you got and you couldn't even get most of those right.

So a team led by Smyth, Comrie, Poti and Murray is going to lead the Oilers to the Cup if they didn't have to deal some of them away?

Who needs to take their cranial cavity out of their anal one now?

YellHockey* is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 03:05 PM
  #52
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Do you also realize that coon is also a nickname for a raccoon?
The basis for the phrase, was based on the term for a black person. Read up on it.

Quote:
More like the Rangers.
Ah... I see where this is going. Weight played 2 seasons in New York, learned to be a #1 centre, developed his leadership skills in Edmonton. Became a better player in Edmonton.... but was developed by the Rags... nice.

Quote:
Or the Devils.

Plenty of people knew about him before he was an Oiler. Don't let your ignorance speak for the masses.
He became known for being one of the premier power forwards in the NHL because of his time in Edmonton. Though I will concede that he did develop a lot in the New Jersey system.

Quote:
That's one player. But I suspect the Oilers could chalk that one up to nepotism instead of drafting ability.
Well add Arnott to that list as well too then. I'll take Guerin off and Add Arnott... happy now?

Quote:
Mediocre player.
You should ask Nashville fans how they feel about Rem before you let your ignorance speak for the masses.

Quote:
Average defenceman.
Who was viewed highly enough to be traded for Mike York.

Quote:
Developed by the Flyers.
LOL!!! He developed into the defenseman he is today based on 1 1/2 season in Philly? Offensively he was always there, defensively however, he is significantly better, which he developed in Edmonton... once again, Ignorance?

Quote:
Rangers again.
Man... quick learner if he managed to become the player he is today based on 1 NHL game and 8 AHL games in the Rangers system.

Quote:
Developed by Tampa Bay.
Once again, he was a fantastic offensive player for T-Bay, but it was in Edmonton where he became a better defenseman.

Quote:
A few? That's all you got and you couldn't even get most of those right.

So a team led by Smyth, Comrie, Poti and Murray is going to lead the Oilers to the Cup if they didn't have to deal some of them away?

Who needs to take their cranial cavity out of their anal one now?
You... evidently you do not understand the term developed. I didn't say drafted, I said developed, which is completely different. Every single one of those players I mentioned became better players by playing in Edmonton, most of them significantly so.

__________________
TheSpecialist - MacT thinks he was that good of a hockey player when in actuality he was no better then a Louie Debrusk.
dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 03:13 PM
  #53
YellHockey*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
The basis for the phrase, was based on the term for a black person. Read up on it.
Ok. I did. You're still wrong: http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcoonsage.html

Regardless, the term, in the context used, does not have racial implications.

YellHockey* is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 03:38 PM
  #54
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Ok. I did. You're still wrong: http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mcoonsage.html

Regardless, the term, in the context used, does not have racial implications.
http://plateaupress.com.au/wfw/coonage.htm

So that pretty much nullifies that.

And regardless of the context, it was often used as a derogatory comment, especially the coon part. If you like, go up to your average older black person and use that comment to see how they feel about it.

Coon has been a derogatory term used for years, and would have it been overly hard to add the ra in front of it?

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 03:41 PM
  #55
rec28
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Vancouver Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,997
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to rec28
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Do you also realize that coon is also a nickname for a raccoon?



More like the Rangers.
WTF?!? Are you on crack? Out of his 825 professional games played, the 119 he played for the Rangers at the very beginning of his career were the most responsible for his development into a Captain/#1 centre? That kind of comment goes beyond idiotic.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Or the Devils.

Plenty of people knew about him before he was an Oiler.
Yep, but he broke out as a premier power forward during his time with Edm.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
That's one player. But I suspect the Oilers could chalk that one up to nepotism instead of drafting ability.
Ah - I see. When it turns out well for them it doesn't count because.... well, just because.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Mediocre player.
Yep - the kind that makes up 75% of the NHL

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Average defenceman.
Quite a trade return for an average Dman.


Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Developed by the Flyers.
Man, are you ever reaching. Same story as Weight. Played a year and a half with another team before breaking out with the Oil. But of course it was that year and a half that was the key.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Rangers again.
Wow - a total of 9 games in the Rag's system. That made all the difference...



Good Lord. Just stop. You're embarassing yourself.




Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
That's two.
See, and Comrie is the one we'd like to *forget*...


Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Developed by Tampa Bay.
Wow - your one and only arguable point. Congrats. Really...



rec28 is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 03:43 PM
  #56
copperandblue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 10,724
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
It was okay when Edmonton was the constant contender - the constant winner - but when Detroit or Colorado or New Jersey does it, they are cheating because they spend the money they earned.
Frankly I am not sure why I am even bothering to reply to this drival but....

I have seen you argue that Detroit's (or Colorado's or Jersey's) prolonged time at or near the top is just part of the natural cycle in the sport that has been around for years and years.

I have seen you argue that you don't want to watch a sport that eliminates the potential for a dynasty (which is fine as a statement by itself but certainly isn't backed up by throwing Detroit, Colorado and Jersey out as examples).

I have also seen you lecture on the "proper" way to build a contender.

With that aside and in response to your observation regarding the whinning coming from Edmonton that is driven by poor sports who miss the glory days and so on....

Have you actually compared the teams in Detroit, Colorado and Jersey (through their entire tenure near the top of the standings) with teams like Edmonton, the Islanders and Canadiens of 25 - 35 years ago? You know the type of dynasties that you would like to see repeat in the future?

Why don't you take a quick peak at the differences and then come back tell us that the NHL in 2004 is simply business as usual... like we all saw 30 years ago.

copperandblue is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 03:50 PM
  #57
YellHockey*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
http://plateaupress.com.au/wfw/coonage.htm

So that pretty much nullifies that.
Yes... because Australians are the experts on North American terms.

Can't you find a North American link to back up your claim?

YellHockey* is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 03:59 PM
  #58
oilers_guy_eddie
Registered User
 
oilers_guy_eddie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Intolerable climate
Country: Norfolk Island
Posts: 10,679
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackRedGold
Yes... because Australians are the experts on North American terms.

Can't you find a North American link to back up your claim?
Yes... stick with that debate, because it's working out a lot better than your theory that Weight and Marchant were developed by the Rangers.

oilers_guy_eddie is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 04:19 PM
  #59
iagreewithidiots
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 1,524
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DementedReality
the issue is if the owners get their cap, its going to come at the cost of a 25 or 26 or at best a 27 year old UFA age. you think if the owners get their homerun (a cap) that the players wont demand a homerun for themselves too ?
For somebody that yaks and yammers so much about the great free market of the NHL I cant understand this stance. You want a free market let the players be free.

iagreewithidiots is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 04:39 PM
  #60
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,938
vCash: 500
Doesn't the NFL just give out huge signing bonuses to get around the cap issue? Do you think the NHL would get the cap if they agreed to not include signing bonuses under the cap?

How about the stupid "capology" the NBA has where teams are trading retired and dead players in 9 player trades just to make it work under the cap. Yeh thats going to be fun.. going to have some cool player recognition.. just like the NBA.. oh wait... they don't.

All I know is that some smart agent is going to find a workaround to get the player the money the owner wants to throw at him so that its not included in the cap. ie) personal services contracts vis-a-vis "Rocket" Ishmael and Bruce McNall.

shakes is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 06:07 PM
  #61
Tom_Benjamin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
And regardless of the context, it was often used as a derogatory comment, especially the coon part. If you like, go up to your average older black person and use that comment to see how they feel about it.
If anyone was honestly offended, I apologise. Around here it is a very common term that has absolutely nothing to do with black people. We also call a spade a spade. Is that okay?

I don't apolgise for calling Oiler fans the biggest whiners in the league. Contraction would be great just to stop the caterwauling. It's embarrasing to the real Canadian hockey fans.

Tom

Tom_Benjamin is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 06:11 PM
  #62
Buffaloed
Administrator
Webmaster
 
Buffaloed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Buffalo, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 24,936
vCash: 1390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Street Hawk
Salary Cap, means DR that in order to a team to sign another player, a very talented one, that they would require having room under the salary cap to fit that player onto their roster. That means, that the Wings, Leafs and Rangers, etc. need to have 5 or 6 million under the cap to sign an Iginla, Lecavalier, Heatley, etc. away from another team. They may be able to do it one year, but really, they can't do it each year and still ice a competitive team.

We've seen, time and time again that 1 great player one your team means squat in the current NHL.

By your logic, the Packers should not have Brett Favre on their team, the Colts should not have Peyton Manning on their team, whom they signed to an extension this past summer because they would have left as free agents to the likes of the Cowboys, Redskins, etc.

Correctomundo, most NFL teams manage to hang onto their core players until they're past their prime. Any NFL GM will acknowledge that teams are built through the draft. The annual NHL holdout saga where there's bitter feelings all around does more damage to the game than UFA.

Buffaloed is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 07:29 PM
  #63
OlliMackBjugStud
Registered User
 
OlliMackBjugStud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dawgbone
Tom Poti ...
Who was viewed highly enough to be traded for Mike York.
.
so whats the problem ? you arent happy trading Tom Poti for Mike York ????

dr

OlliMackBjugStud is online now  
Old
11-01-2004, 07:30 PM
  #64
OlliMackBjugStud
Registered User
 
OlliMackBjugStud's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,671
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iagreewithidiots
For somebody that yaks and yammers so much about the great free market of the NHL I cant understand this stance. You want a free market let the players be free.
who said i wanted a free market ? i said i dont support the owners for many reasons.

dr

OlliMackBjugStud is online now  
Old
11-01-2004, 08:15 PM
  #65
Bring Back Bucky
Registered User
 
Bring Back Bucky's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Delicieux!
Country: Heard and McDonald Islands
Posts: 7,824
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
If anyone was honestly offended, I apologise. Around here it is a very common term that has absolutely nothing to do with black people. We also call a spade a spade. Is that okay?

I don't apolgise for calling Oiler fans the biggest whiners in the league. Contraction would be great just to stop the caterwauling. It's embarrasing to the real Canadian hockey fans.

Tom
You don't have to agree with everything dawgbone says, but that statement is outright inflammatory. It's also offensive to the many Oiler fans who use these boards. It don't look good on ya, bub. Play nice.

Bring Back Bucky is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 09:37 PM
  #66
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,279
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan10
Just three items I need to dispute.

First, drafting isn't fair. All what drafting ensures is that teams that suck crap intentionally get to stock up on top notch talent. There's really no incentive for teams to do better. Don't even get started on the draft lottery, because that's a farce. As far as I'm concerned, every team in the NHL should be able to get a shot at top notch talent
Well, fair depends on how you re looking at it. In the sense you are saying, that all 30 teams dont have a fair shot at Crosby, well you're right. But this is a case where that isnt fair. What is fair, is an uneven playing field. Where the weakest rebuilding teams get the first shot at the top talent. Its also an incentive for team like NYR or Wash to tear down and rebuild. You will have a chance at the young top prospects in the first picks. Which is what you need to build a franchise around. Young stars to grow with.

So in the sense that a fair system i one where teams cycle from rebuilding through greatness and back, this is fair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan10
With regards to drafting and trades, there are other ways to build teams. You mentioned buying talent. Not always the option. There are free agents. Undrafted junior, college, European, but there are always other options. You don't just have to draft, trade or buy to build a team. It takes a lot more than that.
Yes you get free agent walk ons, certain college loopholes whichcan be fixed, etc, so its true, its not just drafting but however you get young prospects and develop them or trade for them or sign them as walk ons or late picks from Europe, whatever. But these are generally not the high priced UFAs, they are young relatively cheaper players to build with. THat you will develop into a contender before they become expensive UFAs at which time you must be winning to keep them.


Im trying to make the distinction that UFAs can co-exist and Edmonton neednt fear its strategy of developing is unfairly disadvantaged in doing what it needs to do regardless of what rich teams want to do with their UFAs.

thinkwild is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 10:37 PM
  #67
FlyersFan10*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,349
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild
Well, fair depends on how you re looking at it. In the sense you are saying, that all 30 teams dont have a fair shot at Crosby, well you're right. But this is a case where that isnt fair. What is fair, is an uneven playing field. Where the weakest rebuilding teams get the first shot at the top talent. Its also an incentive for team like NYR or Wash to tear down and rebuild. You will have a chance at the young top prospects in the first picks. Which is what you need to build a franchise around. Young stars to grow with.

So in the sense that a fair system i one where teams cycle from rebuilding through greatness and back, this is fair.
False. What the draft does is reward bad teams for making bad choices. If the Washington Capitals and New York Rangers are ripping things apart because they've made bad choices over the years, then no, they don't deserve any shot at getting a Crosby. You're telling me that if a team messes up and continues to mess up for years and then finally decides "oh wait, we made a bad decision, we better tear down and rebuild" is acceptable? I don't think so. Hey, if that were the case, Detroit, Toronto, Philadelphia, Ottawa, Vancouver, New York I, Dallas, etc....should have done the same thing. They didn't though and they sucked it up and still put together awesome teams. How? Through smart asset management. Why shouldn't these teams be rewarded? Why should these teams have no chance at getting a player like Crosby, Brule, etc.......? Because they know how to put together a good team. Please. Oh, and then on top of it, we're asking these teams who generate revenue ON THEIR OWN to chip in and help out other teams that can't generate the revenue they make.



Quote:
Originally Posted by thinkwild
Yes you get free agent walk ons, certain college loopholes whichcan be fixed, etc, so its true, its not just drafting but however you get young prospects and develop them or trade for them or sign them as walk ons or late picks from Europe, whatever. But these are generally not the high priced UFAs, they are young relatively cheaper players to build with. THat you will develop into a contender before they become expensive UFAs at which time you must be winning to keep them.


Im trying to make the distinction that UFAs can co-exist and Edmonton neednt fear its strategy of developing is unfairly disadvantaged in doing what it needs to do regardless of what rich teams want to do with their UFAs.
With regards to the Edmontons, the Calgarys, the Ottawas, the Vancouvers, the Montreals, the Tampa Bays, the Phoenixs, etc.....I'll be honest, I have no pity for any of those teams. Let's spell it out. Edmonton had been mismanaged for years by Peter Pocklington. Pocklington sold assets from his team to finance his other business and political ventures. The league under then president John Zeigler could have done something, but failed to. When Pocklington sold the team, he sold the team to oil barons. That's right oil barons, worth billions. Rather than use the team as a tax write off to start in order to get out of debt, they tried a business approach on paying off the debt load year by year. If they would have bitten the bullet and paid everything up front, Edmonton would have generated revenue again. Of course, the other issue with Edmonton was that Glen Sather began to lose it as a talent evaluator. Poor draft choices came back to haunt him. Enter Kevin Lowe. Kevin Lowe has done a magnificent job in Edmonton and he should be held up highly for that. However, the oil baron owners have failed him. And having 13 owners to report to is rediculous. That to me is the ultimate sign of mismanagement. If you need 13 owners to run an organization, you're in a lot of trouble.

As for Calgary, the same can be said. Poor trading, poor drafting, poor management choices. Not spending money wisely, playing in an older facility, and once again, oil baron managers that don't have a clue doesn't help matters any.

Look, we can go on and on, but while all the blame is placed on players and how players need to make the sacrifice, why does nothing ever get mentioned about the bad mismanagement of some teams and owners who just don't have a clue. That is what bugs me about all of this. Yeah, players need to be more accomodating. However, when you have owners who aren't willing to budge, why should the players negotiate.

FlyersFan10* is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 10:44 PM
  #68
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,279
vCash: 500
Well I agree, but I dont see where you're going with this draft thing. You dont even want the rebuilding teams to have a shot at the good new players? The teams buying all the players should be sacrificing their picks. In fact, I think even better than a luxury tax, is a draft pick tax. You lose 1 draft pick for every so much you go over the threshold. Contending teams need and can afford UFA help now. Rebuilding teams need and can afford to develop players. Together the system is fair even though they arent equal.

thinkwild is offline  
Old
11-01-2004, 11:28 PM
  #69
kruezer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 6,273
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan10
As for Calgary, the same can be said. Poor trading, poor drafting, poor management choices. Not spending money wisely, playing in an older facility, and once again, oil baron managers that don't have a clue doesn't help matters any.
In all fairness, Harley Hotchkiss is the Chairman of the Board of Governors for the NHL, I don't think he'd get that position by not having a clue about the NHL fiscally.

kruezer is offline  
Old
11-02-2004, 12:08 AM
  #70
Street Hawk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,596
vCash: 500
No..

Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes
Doesn't the NFL just give out huge signing bonuses to get around the cap issue? Do you think the NHL would get the cap if they agreed to not include signing bonuses under the cap?
The signing bonus money you speak of is spread over the life on the contract. So, if you sign a guy to a 5 year 30 million dollar deal, and put 10 million of that as a signing bonus, and the deal is simply structured as 4 million per season over the 5 years, your CAP Charge per year is still only 6 million dollars, not 14 million in year 1 and 4 million in years 2 - 5.

There is a penalty in that if the team cuts the player after year 3, then the remaining 4 million dollars of Signing Bonus money is charged to the team in Year 4, even when the player is no longer on the team. So, if a player under performs, the team can save the remaining 8 million in salary, so in essence the deal was 22 million over 3 years, so the player got 7.33 million per year.

Works like a credit card in the NFL, sooner or later you have to pay it off.

Street Hawk is offline  
Old
11-02-2004, 12:09 AM
  #71
J-D
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: the dizzle!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DementedReality
here is why i am against a cap and why all you cappers are going to regret "winning" the cap battle.

first, i dont care how much or little the players make. 100k is an awesome salary for a year, never mind the double that or 10x that. thats not hte issue.

the issue is if the owners get their cap, its going to come at the cost of a 25 or 26 or at best a 27 year old UFA age. you think if the owners get their homerun (a cap) that the players wont demand a homerun for themselves too ?

so, prepare yourself for a new NHL where players can leave your team once they hit their prime and there is nothing you can do about it and you wont have ANYTHING to show for it. nothing, zero, zilch.

dr
So what. Team loyalty as we understand it is a thing of the past.

J-D is offline  
Old
11-02-2004, 09:16 PM
  #72
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by DementedReality
so whats the problem ? you arent happy trading Tom Poti for Mike York ????

dr
You should really pay attention, so you don't look like a twit.

Go back and read the context it was written in and why it was written, and you will see your question has no relevence.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-02-2004, 09:29 PM
  #73
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom_Benjamin
If anyone was honestly offended, I apologise. Around here it is a very common term that has absolutely nothing to do with black people. We also call a spade a spade. Is that okay?
No, it's cool... just recalled a bad experience with a friend a long time ago involving the use of that word, and I always hate when I hear it (it's never, in my life, been used as a non-negative term).

Quote:
I don't apolgise for calling Oiler fans the biggest whiners in the league. Contraction would be great just to stop the caterwauling. It's embarrasing to the real Canadian hockey fans.

Tom
Don't you think it would be the same thing in any Canadian city if their team was in jeopardy? Oiler Hockey fans are as real as they come. Even when Pocklington was doing everything he could to destroy the fans faith in the team, they were still drawing better than a lot of the markets now! The team has won 2 playoffs series in 12 years, yet they sellout their building almost every night.

You should take that into consideration... Oiler fans love their Oilers, and to think that almost any fan in any Canadian city wouldn't whine when something drastically effects their team in a negative way, you are sadly mistaken!

Senator fans whine like hell everytime they lose to the leafs, coming up with excuse after excuse.

Leaf fans whine like hell anytime their team doesn't sign every free agent available.

Oiler fans are more prevelant now because these are the issues now... if it was free agent season, leaf fans would be front and centre *****ing about JFJ not signing which ever 31 year old who scored 30 goals last season. If it was playoff season, Sens fans would be whining about losing to the Leafs.

It's what hockey fans do... when your team is doing good you cheer and you boast... when they aren't doing good, you complain!

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-02-2004, 09:42 PM
  #74
dawgbone
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,104
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to dawgbone Send a message via MSN to dawgbone
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan10
With regards to the Edmontons, the Calgarys, the Ottawas, the Vancouvers, the Montreals, the Tampa Bays, the Phoenixs, etc.....I'll be honest, I have no pity for any of those teams. Let's spell it out. Edmonton had been mismanaged for years by Peter Pocklington. Pocklington sold assets from his team to finance his other business and political ventures. The league under then president John Zeigler could have done something, but failed to. When Pocklington sold the team, he sold the team to oil barons. That's right oil barons, worth billions. Rather than use the team as a tax write off to start in order to get out of debt, they tried a business approach on paying off the debt load year by year. If they would have bitten the bullet and paid everything up front, Edmonton would have generated revenue again. Of course, the other issue with Edmonton was that Glen Sather began to lose it as a talent evaluator. Poor draft choices came back to haunt him. Enter Kevin Lowe. Kevin Lowe has done a magnificent job in Edmonton and he should be held up highly for that. However, the oil baron owners have failed him. And having 13 owners to report to is rediculous. That to me is the ultimate sign of mismanagement. If you need 13 owners to run an organization, you're in a lot of trouble.
You really shouldn't talk about stuff you know little to nothing about.

A). Glen Sather's job wasn't to evaluate talent. It's the job of the scouting department. Drafting was because of Barry Fraser (who should have been let go)... If Sather had lost it as a talent evaluater, that's suprising, considering he got players like Weight for Tikkanen, Marchant for Mac-T, Hamrlik for Bonsignore and Marchment, and a plethora of others. As badly as the Oilers drafted, Sather built them again into a young competetive team that went on to beat Dallas and Colorado in 2 playoffs series.

B). The EIG is made up of 37 owners, not 13. And not many of them are "Oil Barons".

http://www.oilersheritage.com/legacy...wners_EIG.html

None of the owners are guys like Wirtz, Illitch, etc... Billionaires with money to kick around. Each of them are multi millionaires who have made a very careful business decision... but not a single one of them had the financial ability to purchase the team on their own.

As for biting the bullet and paying everything up front, the Pocklington fiasco (which you brought up, oddly enough), should have been evidence enough that using outside business ventures to fund your hockey team (or vice versa) isn't a smart decision unless you are a guy like Illitch, or someone of that nature.

There are 37 owners because there isn't one owner who could take the risk solely... at least not one in Edmonton.

dawgbone is offline  
Old
11-02-2004, 11:02 PM
  #75
jcpenny
Registered User
 
jcpenny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Montréal
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,878
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DementedReality

id rather a team can make its own decisions for its own reasons and not be bound by some artificial financial rule. especially when i also believe the CAP is doing nothing to solve the leagues finance troubles.

dr
This is exactly what Trevor Linden and Vincent Damphousse said during interviews and quite frankly (sorry for my comments) it is pretty Stupid. So you get teams like pittsburgh, carolina or EDM that make their own reasonable decisions and they will not give the big bucks. We all know that players will ask for more and look elsewhere and a owner in New york or Colorado who has the budget will not care about how much he gives. This solves nothing.

In that system players should be more reasonable in their demands- That will never happen

In that system every owners even if they have the money should spend too much money- That will never happen and if that happens we'll have a huge disparity in the league.

We need a cap to restrain owners and players. We will be able to keep our players. The lesser guys would be the ones leaving. If we still keep the restricted free agent rule that we have players will have to be reasonable. We need a cap.

jcpenny 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 04:16 PM.

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.