Legolas
Registered User
I think the only real link between player salaries and ticket prices is that as player salaries went up, and the media and fans became more educated about these price increases, the owners used the increase in salaries as sufficient grounds to increase ticket prices. In effect, the owners took advantage to a certain degree of the fact the public already knew there were higher salaries and therefore accepting higher ticket prices was easier for the public to swallow. If I told you over and over again that my entire payroll went up 30% over one offseason and I said I was raising ticket prices by an extra 15% to compensate, you'd probably believe me, even if in reality, the old ticket prices were perfectly capable of absorbing the cost increase. The one questioner last night who told Goodenow that if player salaries dropped by 50% there would be some drop in ticket prices was being far too idyllic and naive if you ask me.
I didn't think Goodenow presented himself very well last night, but this is what I don't enjoy about these "public" question period shows:
1. Mansbridge asks very basic questions that are mainly designed to make Goodenow either look stupid or keep the issues narrowly defined. I'm not expecting a complicated intricate debate, but questions like "Is there going to be hockey this year?" aren't particularly helpful. They're the equivalent of asking an athlete "How important are these next few games?" Does the answer really matter? Particularly when you can almost predict verbatim what Goodenow will say.
2. The rants. I know we're frustrated and angry and we want to take it out on Bettman and Goodenow, but I can't stand these people who ask a question, get the answer, and then spend the follow-up criticizing the answer or ranting on why the players/owners are stupid. Mansbridge was brilliant when he told one fan "Is there an actual question in there or was that just a statement?"
3. Goodenow's expressions - he's way too calm. I know that he can't just start screaming and getting all emotional, but a different facial expression than the pensive stare would be nice.
I think Mansbridge was right in that the public relations tide and the public opinion is slanted heavily against the players, and I think the NHLPA knows it, and I think they understand that this is going to be much tougher than '94. Rather than attack the owners position, Goodenow tried to simplify everything down to "We want to play, we're just locked out" statements which backfired on him, particularly when there's this kid out West who says he'd play hockey for free. How classic would it be if they had some other kid saying he'd own a hockey team even if he never made money?
The sad part is that you could almost see Goodenow answering these questions and thinking to himself that he honestly doesn't care about what public opinion is because he knows the owners will cave and that's all that matters. It's this kind of arrogance on both sides that will probably keep us without NHL hockey until January at the earliest, and I fear much longer.
I didn't think Goodenow presented himself very well last night, but this is what I don't enjoy about these "public" question period shows:
1. Mansbridge asks very basic questions that are mainly designed to make Goodenow either look stupid or keep the issues narrowly defined. I'm not expecting a complicated intricate debate, but questions like "Is there going to be hockey this year?" aren't particularly helpful. They're the equivalent of asking an athlete "How important are these next few games?" Does the answer really matter? Particularly when you can almost predict verbatim what Goodenow will say.
2. The rants. I know we're frustrated and angry and we want to take it out on Bettman and Goodenow, but I can't stand these people who ask a question, get the answer, and then spend the follow-up criticizing the answer or ranting on why the players/owners are stupid. Mansbridge was brilliant when he told one fan "Is there an actual question in there or was that just a statement?"
3. Goodenow's expressions - he's way too calm. I know that he can't just start screaming and getting all emotional, but a different facial expression than the pensive stare would be nice.
I think Mansbridge was right in that the public relations tide and the public opinion is slanted heavily against the players, and I think the NHLPA knows it, and I think they understand that this is going to be much tougher than '94. Rather than attack the owners position, Goodenow tried to simplify everything down to "We want to play, we're just locked out" statements which backfired on him, particularly when there's this kid out West who says he'd play hockey for free. How classic would it be if they had some other kid saying he'd own a hockey team even if he never made money?
The sad part is that you could almost see Goodenow answering these questions and thinking to himself that he honestly doesn't care about what public opinion is because he knows the owners will cave and that's all that matters. It's this kind of arrogance on both sides that will probably keep us without NHL hockey until January at the earliest, and I fear much longer.