It shows that a cap has no point. Which is making this whole labour situation useless. Why go through this whole process?Digger12 said:
For the Pro-Goodenow's
- Thread starter MHA
- Start date
- Status
Flyguy_1ca said:I see what you mean now. Yeah, makes sense just getting rid of the teams that are constantly at the bottom of the standings because the do basically become farm teams for the other competitive teams.19nazzy said:You keep mentioning this, who would force them to be farm teams? Something I haven't heard?
The old CBA was forcing them to be Farm teams....The oilers amongst other teams (calgary with Iginla was about to happen) get players and once they get good they're traded away because they can no longer afford to keep them. Mike Comrie is an example...Kevin Lowe said the Oilers couldn't afford to pay him what he wanted so off to Philly he went. Essentially making them a feeder team for the rich. They also never land free agents like Jeremy Roenick etc...for the same reason...not enough green backs.
19nazzy said:
Yeah, that's one way of fixing it. The other is to have a CBA that demands teams spend similar.
Digger12
Gold Fever
The Messenger said:
Why stop at 20?
Since you seem to be equating fewer teams = a better product, wouldn't it be even better to purge the next lowest 10, and have a 10 team league full of allstars? Imagine the ratings bonanza! I'm sure the NHLPA wouldn't raise the slightest fuss about losing 33% to 66% of its union dues-paying membership.
Digger12
Gold Fever
19nazzy said:
Because whether you go by the numbers from Forbes or Leavitt, this league is losing money hand over fist and even the elite teams that have shown what you coin the "dedication to winning" (i.e. spend more than their competition) can't draw flies for TV ratings.
Put the Red Wings/Avs matchups on ESPN all you like, the American public has shown it'd rather watch poker, spelling bees and dog shows.
In its current state, the economics of the game are a wreck. Getting rid of 5 or 10 teams is a classic case of treating the symptoms while the disease that's causing the symptoms continues to run wild.
Last edited:
So if the average american will not watch Detroit/Colorado, which I think most of us would agree that, that is some of the best hockey you can watch, why would they want to watch if teams aren't going to have all the star power that Colorado/Detroit have?Digger12 said:
If they weren't watching Colorado/Detroit before, why would they watch it when those teams aren't going to be as exciting as they have been?
19nazzy said:
The reasoning is that more folks will tune in because all Teams will be more or less "equal", with no Team having a clear cut advantage over the other.
It's horsesh*t, as far as I'm concerned.
Fact of the matter is that Phoenix Coyotes FANS tune in to watch Coyotes games BECAUSE they are Coyotes fans. No need to "hook" them in.....they're already watching.
Casual fans don't watch Coyotes games.
Casual fans tune in to watch Power-House Teams like Detroit and Colorado face off.
Take THAT away, and there's no reason for "casual fans" to tune in at ALL.
No offense to Coyotes fans, but I do NOT want 30 teams worth of Phoenix Coyotes hockey.
And neither should anyone else. The "casual fan" especially.
Exisled said:
Well, the problem there is...based on US TV ratings..there's not many casual fans tuning in to watch the Wings and Avs play each other either. The bottom line is in America hockey is a very regional sport. That's just how it is.....perhaps one day that will change. But to use that as a reason to keep teams at an unbalanced financial state doesn't hold much merit I don't think.
Mess
Global Moderator
Yet strangely that is exactly Bettman Plan ..Exisled said:
He believes more fans will watch Detroit without Yzerman and Shanahan and Colorado will be so much better a draw when Colorado picks between Sakic or Forsberg in a cap world.. Then bring Carolina and the ratings will go through the roof because instead of losing by 5 goals Carolina will only lose by 3 ..
Yah right .. great plan ..
Johnnybegood13
Registered User
- Jul 11, 2003
- 8,718
- 982
Someday the Toronto/Colorado/Detroit..etc fans will realize that teams exist outside of their citys that can't afford to try and buy winners.if all goes according to plan they will blame their teams management if their team sucks...instead of the Pejorative Slured excuses i've heard for years.
If anyone doesn't think the NFL system doesn't work for the health of the league needs their heads checked!
If anyone doesn't think the NFL system doesn't work for the health of the league needs their heads checked!
We'll be happy if the Rangers quit raiding our roster and inflating the price on our stars.T@T said:
do you have a link to prove this or are you just making it up....I have not once read where this is true....
Boy, isn't this a fine thread? A whole bunch of Goodenow fanboys sitting around stroking each other's equipment. Congratulating each other on the strength and power of their own arguments. "Excellent post!" "Oh, no, your post is far more excellent!"
Making up stuff like Massager's contention that Bain would shut down 6-8 teams.
LMAO!
Making up stuff like Massager's contention that Bain would shut down 6-8 teams.
LMAO!
19nazzy said:
first- Colorado, Detroit and Toronto (used these three teams because you used them later in the thread) do not really have strong management. Is it hard to sign their star/good players and then add players like Hasek or trade for a Rob Blake.
anyone can do that
lets take the Penguins and pretend they had Detroit money
so the Pens would have starting in 97 and later
Francis, Lemeiux, Jagr, Kovy, Straka, Lang, Boughner, Kasper, Glen Murray, Patrick Lalime,
now lets imagine the Pens had the money to add to that line-up
lets say Rob Blake or Schneider or Cujo or hasek....or any other FA or player traded
see, what you don't understand is because money played such a huge role in the operations of 15-20 teams, only 5-8 teams were competing for all star UFA's and those players your team aquired in trades
also teams like the Oilers, Penguins and Flames get less value for their star players
look at the Jagr deal, Kovy went for way less than he is worth..Lang walked because the second round pick was better than anything anyone offered up because theyt knew the Pens could not afford to keep them....so why pay the high price
the league is slanted towards those teams you mentioned...your blind to it because your a fan of the team
The Messenger said:
worst post of the year.
Basically you want only big-market rich teams to do well and the others to serve as a feeding ground for them. I'm a little shocked
txomisc
Registered User
Exisled said:
Do you live in an actual city. There is a direct correlation between team success and ratings. When the team does well or has an opportunity to do well people will gladly follow it.
Fans want to see good games between top teams. Just because there is competitive balance doesn't mean that the standings will be completely the same.
In football people enjoy watching Minnesota and Indy and neither are big market teams.
Sorry for proving you wrong.
txomisc
Registered User
Geez dude, talk about ridiculous statements. Find me the quote from Bettman that says "I think Colorado will be a better draw when they pick between Sakic and Forsberg...blah blah blah" I'll be waiting.The Messenger said:
Messenger, you seriously need to reel yourself in. Many of your posts are filled with completely insane conclusions that one can only hope you are coming to only in attempt to stir things up. I have to believe even many of your propa buddies get a wtf look on their face after reading some of this stuff.
edit: I was so stupified i spelled Sakic wrong
txomisc said:
don't worry about it, messenger is embarassing himself. I don't think he actually believes what he is writing, he just wants to argue.
txomisc
Registered User
Messenger is good for at least 1-2 ridiculous off the wall statements every day. He is also prone to being proved wrong and denying denying denying. Perhaps he needs an intervention. All the loved ones need to keep him away from his computer or awhile.MHA said:
Can you provide a quote where Goodenow states competative balance is a bad thing?MHA said:
In fact, if I can remember, there are probably numerous quotes out there where he or Saskin has said competative balance is a good thing. So that part of your question doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
What's wrong with a salary cap in Goodenow's eyes? His job is to get as much money as possible for the players, pretty simple. A salary cap denies him the ability to do that in certain markets. Althought a cap could be good for hockey, Goodenow also has a job to do. He has to worry about the state of the game, but he also has to worry about how much money he's putting into his players pockets because otherwise he's out of a job. It would be nice to have a union that will do anything and take any amount of money as long as it's good for hockey...unfortunetly that's not how this country works.
Exisled said:
As long as the NHL is still the top paying league in the world, they will still attract the top talent. Simply because the top teams won't be able to hoard the most expensive talent anymore does not mean that powerhouse teams won't emerge; simply that they will be based on managements brains and not their bank accounts.
IMO that is a huge improvement for the fans in the VAST majority of markets.
Big market fans will simply have to wrap their heads around the fact that they'll have to use something other than their wallets to compete.
The Messenger said:
If you honestly believe the NHL is looking for 30 .500 teams then you haven't been paying very good attention to these CBA negotiations.
The Messenger said:
This is Bettman's plan? Funny. Not only have I never heard Bettman utter anything close to this, but your logic makes absolutely no sense at all.
The holes in your logic are pointed out in YOUR POST on the last page where you pointed out that there will ALWAYS be teams that are better than others. According to YOU, even with a cap, there will ALWAYS be elite teams and those are the teams that will get coverage on ESPN or whatever network the league ends up on.
- Status
