"Someone should tell those owners that MLB doesn't even have a salary cap! Scare those owners straight."
I will never understand the rush of people to side with billionaires over millionaires.
There's WAY too big of a disparity between the rich teams and poor teams. Without a cap, the rich teams can simply spend ridiculous amounts of money that the poor teams can't afford.
If they players don't want a salary cap, the league would have to cut out well near 10 poor teams.
But, you see, it's the NHLPA that won't allow that (because it's a dramatic loss of overall jobs for their union).
You see? The owners are looking for solutions that would make everything much more fair for all parties.
While the players only care about themselves.
I'll tell you this... absolutely NO players are losing money working for the nhl. Can't say the same for the owners. Changes need to be made.
There's WAY too big of a disparity between the rich teams and poor teams. Without a cap, the rich teams can simply spend ridiculous amounts of money that the poor teams can't afford.
If they players don't want a salary cap, the league would have to cut out well near 10 poor teams.
But, you see, it's the NHLPA that won't allow that (because it's a dramatic loss of overall jobs for their union).
You see? The owners are looking for solutions that would make everything much more fair for all parties.
While the players only care about themselves.
I'll tell you this... absolutely NO players are losing money working for the nhl. Can't say the same for the owners. Changes need to be made.
Hilarious.
The Weasel got exactly what he wanted last time we had a lockout. Now that it's failed, that's still the players' fault?
Who made the Wild shell out 200 million last month again?
What do you think should be done about the numerous teams that lose millions and millions of dollars each year?
For one, I think that teams should probably not do things like spend 200 million on players not even a year after complaining bitterly that spending is out of control.
Perhaps it's time to hire Vince McMahon to work in the business office. Anyone remember the WWF puttinmg our wrestling albums, Saturday morning cartoons etc etc.
Perhaps the NHL needs to look at more than Jersey sales for increasing revenue and exposure.
Let me guess, you still think the USSR exists and you leave out milk and cookies for Santa Claus?
If you dont believe that to be true for players in the KHL and what it entails, then you really have no clue. There was an article on Jagr before he came back to the NHL talking about these exact points. Guess you want to argue with him?
Bettman is a disaster for this league. Every time they are poised to break out to the next level of popularity, a threat of a lockout occurs. 1994 after the Rangers cup was really hurtful for the NHL. Now the LA Kings win, after recent Boston and Chicago cups, and we are looking at a lockout. Very greedy and moronic owners, coupled with a commissioner who has no vision means another potential lost year
I'm not a fan of Bettman, but you couldnt be more wrong if you tried. Like him or not, he has grown the business exponentially. That is a fact. The revenues are there, and are growing, but there seems to be challenges in certain areas to control costs, meanwhile the profits to others are extremely healthy. There is something wrong when a company can grow as the NHL has, and still has challenges with cost control and maintianing and growing a healthy profit margin for all involved.
And to be fair, you're damn right you should take the risk when you are venturing into markets that ARE not viable for hockey.
And who is offering the contracts to these players? Is the CBA supposed to have a stupidity clause in there to prevent GMs from sabotaging themselves?
Yes, players will lose percentage of the revenue that much is certain. But current and prospective owners and their accompanying GMs have to be held accountable too.
True, but it's also a red herring.
Players get 57%.
Whether one player gets 20% of the cap and the 22 others get 3.6% each or whether the 23 gets 4.35% each, it's the same total at the bottom of the page.
That was a valid argument during the last negotiations.
As representative for major league baseball in the past I wouldn't be surprised is Donald Fehr counter proposal had a lot of similarities to baseball CBA even to the point of trying to switch the hard cap to a luxuary tax system suggestion.
__________________
Signature: There is no greater demonstration of Fan patience then to suggest to "Play the Kids " and be willing to accept the consequences of those actions..
That was the weighted system the league used in the 2005 draft following the lockout. The odds aren't even that good. 2 teams with 3 balls didn't even stay in the top 10 of the draft.
What do you think should be done about the numerous teams that lose millions and millions of dollars each year?
Let em die.
There is no organization that is held back more by this economic structure than the Maple Leafs. Sure money didn't buy us a Cup in the Quinn years, after the explosion of free agency, but it almost did. We were getting there.
And then Gary Bettman and his band of useless, leech franchises came along and told us "you can't spend money". Maple Leaf fans get screwed by this model (the one that GB only wants to strenghten) more than any other party involved. Instead of our hard earned money going to our team signing Ilya Kovalchuk, or Shea Weber, or *insert current UFA darling here*, and us getting some return on this financial and emotional investment we make, instead our money goes to help Nashville tread water, or Phoenix to sink a little more slowly.
Frankly I am not heavily invested either way. This coming season was going to be another write off for this team anyway. But I support the players 100% in any efforts they make to combat the arbitrary and anti-competitive salary cap.
For one, I think that teams should probably not do things like spend 200 million on players not even a year after complaining bitterly that spending is out of control.
Open you eyes, there are 30 owners and just because some do whatever they want doesn't mean the group as a whole agrees.
In fact the majority of teams will not offer those types of deals and with good reason.
Accept less,contain spending, or 6 teams get axed. Screw payments,you cant make money? Adios. The choice is easy less money or less players.No one cares if Phoneix folds.No one!
That was the weighted system the league used in the 2005 draft following the lockout. The odds aren't even that good. 2 teams with 3 balls didn't even stay in the top 10 of the draft.
There is no organization that is held back more by this economic structure than the Maple Leafs. Sure money didn't buy us a Cup in the Quinn years, after the explosion of free agency, but it almost did. We were getting there.
And then Gary Bettman and his band of useless, leech franchises came along and told us "you can't spend money". Maple Leaf fans get screwed by this model (the one that GB only wants to strenghten) more than any other party involved. Instead of our hard earned money going to our team signing Ilya Kovalchuk, or Shea Weber, or *insert current UFA darling here*, and us getting some return on this financial and emotional investment we make, instead our money goes to help Nashville tread water, or Phoenix to sink a little more slowly.
Frankly I am not heavily invested either way. This coming season was going to be another write off for this team anyway. But I support the players 100% in any efforts they make to combat the arbitrary and anti-competitive salary cap.
B) stop paying out $90 000 000 on a $70 000 000 cap.
C) Learn how to partner with the NHLPA so you can increase revenue.
D) stop putting teams in terrible markets.
E)make teams pay increased revenue sharing when they send guys like Souray, Redden, Finger to the AHL (thereby a penalty for screwing up)
A) I wonder what would happen if it was proposed that some players make negative 1 million dollars per year, but it will be "revenue shared" by the rich players to compensate them.
Really... I wonder what the players reaction would be to that proposal.
B) Well, it's only the rich teams that have all the money in the world that would do that. It's the poor teams (that the nhlpa would NEVER allow to get rid of) that are in the financial troubles.
C) Isn't that PRECISELY what's happening?
D) Teams are certainly in bad markets. That was clearly a mistake. If only the NHLPA would give the nhl a chance to rectify the situation.
But... nope. The nhlpa is far too greedy. Getting rid of those franchises would be less jobs for the nhlpa. So they won't allow it.
E) Uh... Ok. I agree with that point I guess. But that solves 0.01 percent of the overall problem. This particular argument is as productive as saying "cut the zamboni driver's salary by 0.5%".
The players can either give up a little money now or sit out the season and give up a few jobs later by way of disappearing franchises in disinterested post lockout markets. There are far less relocation options than there are struggling franchises.
The players need to temper their greed and make smart decisions.
