Complex CBA could turn fans away from the NHL

[SENSible1*]

Hello antilogic. The fact that teams will be more even will mean that teams will play more defensively, leading to worse contests than already existed.

If all teams are equal, it will lead to a 'no mistakes' hockey game which is :

trap, dump, try and draw penalty, dont take chances etc.


To think the opposite will be true is once again counter-intuitive.

How can people be so backwards?

Teams more even = MORE DEFENSE.

Where's the rationality?

Funny, Paul Maurice was on TV on Tuesday stating that he'd be far more willing to play an offensive style if he felt his team had comparable talent to the majority of the opposition.

Shocking to see an NHL coach who is so "antilogical" and diplaying such a "lack of rationality".

 

[Mess]

The NHL/NHLPA would be well advised to keep the CBA as simple as possible. Fans do not want to be lawyers/accountants. If the new CBA is too complex I can see it turning fans off and away from the game. We don't want formula's to figure out our favourite teams roster!!!!

Shoaltes of the G & M said it will be a very complicated agreement, possibly the most complex in sports. IMO the last thing the NHL needs.

He said 36 million hard cap which includes about 5 million per team in player costs and a floor of about 22 million which also includes up to 5 million in player costs so in essence we have a 31 million hard and a 24 soft cap with luxury tax at 100% on spending over 24 and a floor of around 17 million. IMO, too complex. Scrap the floor and KISS.

I guarantee you 100% that neither negotiating party side is putting any thought into your point above.

Fans can make up fantasy lineups, trades and decisions and that doesn't effect what happens in real life.

 

[CarlRacki]

Hello antilogic. The fact that teams will be more even will mean that teams will play more defensively, leading to worse contests than already existed.

If all teams are equal, it will lead to a 'no mistakes' hockey game which is :

trap, dump, try and draw penalty, dont take chances etc.


To think the opposite will be true is once again counter-intuitive.

How can people be so backwards?

Teams more even = MORE DEFENSE.

Where's the rationality?

Good God, do you actually watch hockey? Talk about anti-logic.
The reason bad teams play ultra-defensive hockey is because it's the only way for them to compete with more talented teams. The trap, in a sense, is a great equalizer. Teams trap because of a talent gap, not because of talent equity. Sheesh, do you believe Jacques Lemaire uses the trap in Minnesota because his team is too close in talent to that of Colorado? You make no sense. None. Nil. Zero.
However, with talent spread more evenly, their will be a lesser gap between the haves and have nots, meaning teams will be less reliant on entirely defensive systems to balance the scales.

 

[Traitor8]

wtf is scaredsensfan saying!

i can't believe this guy!

Dude! listen! If my team sucks ass where my payroll is 20 M $ and I can't afford a Kovalev,Jagr..Shanahan..Iginla..Sundin... then I would trap because I know the other team has those quality players and they will score on me if we play "up and down" HOCKEY.

now if I have 2 Kovalev and they have 2 Kovalevs and a solid player then I say ..wait I have a good chance of winning this game and I have a good chance of SCORING if I play in their zone a lot..instead of waiting for them to do a mistake..LET'S ATTACK!

Comparaison:

Habs played the trap against Boston
Habs don't play the trap against Minneaosota..Anahaeim..etc..

 

[Flames Draft Watcher]

Not one person has been able to show that a salary cap system that is coming is better than the previous CBA, and thats what my position is:


THE OLD SYSTEM WAS FAR BETTER FOR FANS THAN THIS SYSTEM WILL BE

Or perhaps you've just failed to see common sense, reason and logic when it's staring you in the face?

Bold and all caps doesn't help get your point across. Another immature tactic like insulting people really.

I could say that you've failed to show how the new system would be worse for fans of teams that aren't large market teams. Cause that would be true from my perspective. I know my team was unable to consistently compete for anything under the old system even if their drafting and trading had been better. It was quite obvious when you took a look at the Flames finances. The Flames did not have the ability to keep a winning team together, just like all smaller markets.

 

[Traitor8]

Lol ask the fans in

Carolina
Pittsburgh
Edmonton
Calgary->DON'T GIVE THE BS that they went to the finals..you know that it was a fluke and chances were they weren't gonna make the playoffs next season(Anaheim anybody?)..let's not forget that Kipper wanted the $$$...

Atlanta
Anaheim
Florida
Phoenix
Buffalo

i'm sure i'm forgetting more here..
and they will tell you how they feel their chances of "winning" in the old CBA was..

edit: buffalo

 

[Schlep Rock]

To be completely honest, even with the UFA age lowered, I think you might see more NHLers in a Tom Brady-like situation.

Tom Brady is likely a Patriot for life unless he regresses in which case the Pats will cut him loose. Brady was drafted and developed by the Pats and he knew his best career and life move was to stay in New England. Would he be such a celeb playing in somewhere like New York?

Under a capped-system the big UFA paydays are pretty limited. Very rarely will a team have enough cap money to get into a significant bidding war over a player. Every team is going to have to limit their free agent bidding and focus a lot on internally developing their players.

If anything, I feel this will strengthen fan's interest. The diehards can name every prospect in the organization, how cool would it be for the casual fan to watch the NHL draft then track some players through the development cycles?

The NFL cap itself didn't ruin fan interest... the non-guaranteed contracts ruined fan interest. A player, no matter how elite, can be cut at a moments notice in the NFL and often fan favorites are given their outright release as they decline in age. It's tough for fans to follow players like this.

The casual fans could care less about bonus structures, entry level systems, or revenue sharing. They will only be worried about losing their fan favorites because of dollars and cents. Movement happens in pro sports but if the NHL teams aren't developing their own talent, there is going to be too much movement in that city and then fans may lose some interest.

 

[Traitor8]

I think even if Bob McKenzie was telling scaredsensfan that he wasn't making any sense..

he would probarbly reply by saying "you don 't know the economics of the game"

LOL

 

[Digger12]

Under a capped-system the big UFA paydays are pretty limited. Very rarely will a team have enough cap money to get into a significant bidding war over a player. Every team is going to have to limit their free agent bidding and focus a lot on internally developing their players.

Which was exactly my point. Thank you for articulating it better than I could.

 

[Tiki]

The NFL cap itself didn't ruin fan interest... the non-guaranteed contracts ruined fan interest. A player, no matter how elite, can be cut at a moments notice in the NFL and often fan favorites are given their outright release as they decline in age. It's tough for fans to follow players like this.

The Funny thing that I see is the oppisite. As a Jets fan, I see some of our fans clamoring to "Get Rid of Curtis Martin. He's old and slow and hindering the offense" , and he was the NFL's leading rusher last season.

Most NFL fans no longer care if the team keeps player x, only what the result is on the field.

 

[Le Golie]

Any 'fan' who is turned off by the complexity of a CBA isn't a real fan. This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard.

First of all, it's only complicated because everything that is even speculated about is being dissected and put under the microscope.

Second of all, when the CBA isn't front page news anymore (like the day after a settlement is announced) nobody is going to care about all the technical stuff anymore, it'll be time to draft, sign players and play the damn game.

 

[ryz]

wtf is scaredsensfan saying!

i can't believe this guy!

Don't worry, you are in the huge majority! As I'm sure you've seen on the boards this guy gets served more often than anyone I've ever ran into on any message board regarding any topic. After you laugh at his posts just ignore him. I think that's what most people do anyway.

 

[Montrealer]

Don't worry, you are in the huge majority! As I'm sure you've seen on the boards this guy gets served more often than anyone I've ever ran into on any message board regarding any topic. After you laugh at his posts just ignore him. I think that's what most people do anyway.

I think ScaredSensFan is just upset that he doesn't know how to change his avatar.

Dude, it's June 2005!

 

[speeds]

One theory is plausible and the other isn't.

but which one? I mean you can't jut pick yours because it's yours.

Guess we'll know by the end of the CBA which one is right, but I know where the smart money is going.

You know where your money is going, you mean.

Even in a 36 mil cap is there any way Iginla isn't worth 8 mil a year, to at least one of the 30 teams? You can throw out all the arguments about depth you want, but Iginla plays what, 20 min a game, and drives his team's results. Not to mention any team would probably market around him, theoretically generating some revenue that perhaps 3 players making a combined 8 mil wouldn't?

 

[Ar-too]

Even in a 36 mil cap is there any way Iginla isn't worth 8 mil a year, to at least one of the 30 teams? You can throw out all the arguments about depth you want, but Iginla plays what, 20 min a game, and drives his team's results. Not to mention any team would probably market around him, theoretically generating some revenue that perhaps 3 players making a combined 8 mil wouldn't?

Maybe from an initial business perspective, but is spending nearly 1/3 of your cap space on 1 player going to help you stay competitive? I doubt it.

 

[speeds]

Maybe from an initial business perspective, but is spending nearly 1/3 of your cap space on 1 player going to help you stay competitive? I doubt it.

(1) 8 mil is less than 1/4 of 36 mil

(2) CAL had a 36.5 mil payroll last year, paid Iggy 7.5 (incl signing bonus, I believe, any Flames fans remember the exact details there?) I'm not saying it's necessarily the way to go, but it theoretically can work.

 

[joechip]

You mean the same way NFL fans have fled from professional football because its salary cap?
sorry, but you make absolutely no sense. A cap may install more parity, but it will do nothing to effect the "quality" of the league. The same great players will be playing the same great game, they'll just be dispersed more evenly through the league. If anything, it will enhance the quality of the game because more teams will be more competitive which will mean better contests.

For me, the quality of football has gone down over the past 15 to 20 years because salary cap considerations have created a more homogenized approach to the game. There are few, if any, variations between offensive and defensive systems as a result of the increased player movement. For me, this effect has been dramatic. But, it is also localized to Football, which is a very complicated game, with it's timing and jargon and what not.

Hockey, on the other hand, is, at it's essence a very simple game where fundamental skills and aptitude for the game overshadow team-specific systems. Salary-cap induced player movement should have a much smaller effect (especially given that there is already a tremendous amount of inter-team player movement in the league) on the over all product on the ice.

Scardsensfan, I think, is over-reacting and vastly over-estimating the impact of this on any one team. Moreover, his beloved Sens would have dismantled that team two years ago if the CBA hadn't been expiring. Melnyk only bought the team and infused it with money after getting an assurance from Bettman that there would be a system in place to allow for long-term competitiveness and solvency of the franchise in that market.

The choice between keeping Chara or Redden, Alfredsson or Hossa, would have already happened if not for this CBA war. That's the end of this argument.

Ta,

 

[Jester]

(1) 8 mil is less than 1/4 of 36 mil

(2) CAL had a 36.5 mil payroll last year, paid Iggy 7.5 (incl signing bonus, I believe, any Flames fans remember the exact details there?) I'm not saying it's necessarily the way to go, but it theoretically can work.

this is true, but two counters...

Playoffs are an extremely small sample size. What does that mean? They are a horrible thing to make any sort of judgments about the economic system of the league. They finished 6th in the west... and 12th league wide... which means in the larger sample size, it really didn't work that great.

They also had to let talent leave their team this past offseason due to pay increases they were due... The question remains, would they have been better off keeping some of those players instead of having one guy eating up that much cash?

Note: Iginla is CLEARLY going to be up at the top of the heap in terms of salary, so even in a hard cap world he's not going to fall much from that number.

 

[Jester]

For me, the quality of football has gone down over the past 15 to 20 years because salary cap considerations have created a more homogenized approach to the game. There are few, if any, variations between offensive and defensive systems as a result of the increased player movement. For me, this effect has been dramatic. But, it is also localized to Football, which is a very complicated game, with it's timing and jargon and what not.

i'm not sure what exactly you are talking about... copy-cat mentality is always going to exist in sports and the success that the Niners had in the early 90's spread the West Coast around the league in imitation, as well as through their coaching staff getting jobs... however, there remain numerous different (very different) offenses in the NFL, ranging from the pure West Coasters, to the teams that run the ball 30+ times a game (Pittsburgh), and then the Vertical offenses like the Rams... as well as hybrid offenses that are somewhere in the middle withe pieces of all.

there are so many different kinds of defensive schemes/styles in the league it isn't funny...

 

[JFPIV]

Come on Sundance, the fact that the new CBA may be complex is not the reason that fans are going to turn away from hockey.

"The fall's gonna kill ya!"

 

[CarlRacki]

The NFL cap itself didn't ruin fan interest... the non-guaranteed contracts ruined fan interest. A player, no matter how elite, can be cut at a moments notice in the NFL and often fan favorites are given their outright release as they decline in age. It's tough for fans to follow players like this.

Just curious ... but on what basis are you claiming NFL fan interest has been ruined? Attendance was at an all-time high last year.

 

[Montrealer]

Just curious ... but on what basis are you claiming NFL fan interest has been ruined? Attendance was at an all-time high last year.

Maybe it's the pitiful US$2,400,000 companies were paying for 30 second commercials during the Super Bowl.

Or maybe the gajillions that the NFL gets in TV rights fees.

 

[Schlep Rock]

Just curious ... but on what basis are you claiming NFL fan interest has been ruined? Attendance was at an all-time high last year.

Ok, maybe not ruined by definitely decreased.

The next NFL TV deal will likely be lower and already they are juggling stations and featured games in an attempt to re-energize the viewership.

You cannot talk about the Super Bowl as the NFL having fan support. My mother and all her friends don't watch one NFL game all year but they have a yearly party to watch the game. The SB is a holiday in the US (and some places worldwide)... the NFL losing fan support won't necessarily result in a drop of SB advertising costs.

Already the NFL commissioner & union head are exchanging words in the media with their impending CBA negotiations (either 2007 or 2008). I feel the NHL might have set a bad trend... it looks like the NBA is next.

Anyway... the way I look at the NFL "losing" fan interest is like a billionaire losing a million dollars... not really anything at the end of the day.

 

[kdb209]

Originally Posted by CarlRacki
Just curious ... but on what basis are you claiming NFL fan interest has been ruined? Attendance was at an all-time high last year.

Ok, maybe not ruined by definitely decreased.

The next NFL TV deal will likely be lower and already they are juggling stations and featured games in an attempt to re-energize the viewership.


Already the NFL commissioner & union head are exchanging words in the media with their impending CBA negotiations (either 2007 or 2008). I feel the NHL might have set a bad trend... it looks like the NBA is next.

Actually, the NFL just inked new deals starting in 2006 with a significant increase in $$$s.

CBS and FOX keep there Sunday Afternoon games for a combined $1.33B per year ($8B / 6 yrs) vs $1.05B ($8.4B / 8 yrs).

Disney is moving MNF from ABC to ESPN for $1.1B per year ($8.8B / 8 yrs) , double the old $550M ($4.4B / 8 yrs).

NBC is picking up the Sunday Night package for $650M ($4B / 6 yrs) vs the old deal on ESPN $600M ($4.8B / 8 yrs).

Yes, there may be labor trouble in the NFL, but they are a byproduct of its success - the players want to increase the scope of defined football revenues, including stadium naming rights and stadium sponsorship/advertising deals.

 

[Schlep Rock]

Actually, the NFL just inked new deals starting in 2006 with a significant increase in $$$s.

CBS and FOX keep there Sunday Afternoon games for a combined $1.33B per year ($8B / 6 yrs) vs $1.05B ($8.4B / 8 yrs).

Disney is moving MNF from ABC to ESPN for $1.1B per year ($8.8B / 8 yrs) , double the old $550M ($4.4B / 8 yrs).

NBC is picking up the Sunday Night package for $650M ($4B / 6 yrs) vs the old deal on ESPN $600M ($4.8B / 8 yrs).

Yes, there may be labor trouble in the NFL, but they are a byproduct of its success - the players want to increase the scope of defined football revenues, including stadium naming rights and stadium sponsorship/advertising deals.

Wasn't aware of the figures of the new deals so I stand corrected.

However I'll remain with the opinion NFL fan interest is down but again nothing significant.