FlyersFan10 said:
I'm pro union, but I have to admit, Bettman made several good arguments today. I don't like the man at all, but he came across as being sincere, armed with facts, and backed up his statements. Bettman did give legitimate reasons why a 45 or 49 million cap wouldn't work. There are still teams that would never be able to reach that number simply because they don't generate that kind of revenue and that revenue sharing wouldn't even help.
I'm not saying that Bettman didn't have a good press conference, all I am saying is that he didn't give me good enough reasons for the $45 or $49 caps being too high. Even in his letter last night to the PA, I didn't agree with either of the points he brought up against those higher caps. And there are still teams that would never be able to reach that number? Well that's the point. The cap isn't a target for every team to spend to, especially when it's not linked to revenues. I don't want most teams to spend $45 million and I agree some can't, but that's not what the cap is trying to achieve anyway. What it is trying to achieve is to stop the big spenders from driving the market thus making the $35 million that Edmonton can spend worth a lot more as far as value and talent.
[/QUOTE]And you just answered your own question. The reason why the NFL can have the large salary caps is because they generate 2.5 times the revenue the NHL does. The NFL has salaries proportionate to the revenue they generate. That's the problem with the NHL. The salaries aren't proportionate to the revenue they generate. That's the reality of it all. The NHL extended themselves when they went to the $42.5 million offer.[/QUOTE]
You missed my point. Bettman used the comparison to support his claim that the cap would act as a "magnet". He said look at the NFL, they have a $80 million or so cap and all the teams are within like $5 million. My point is that the NHL isn't in the same situation because as you said, not every team would be able to spend to $45 million. Where as in the NFL teams have so much money that every team spend to the cap because the cap is too low really, and teams have so much money that they spend right to the cap.
The size of the salary cap $$ wise means nothing. The two leagues aren't comparable in that way simply because in the NFL most teams have the same revenues and with their revenue sharing every team is almost equal, or at least in the same area. That's not the case with the NHL.
[/QUOTE]Yet another point where I disagree. It's both Bettman's and Goodenow's job to ensure that there is a healthy league. Goodenow has done nothing for the lower end players. It's been the higher end players who have benefitted the most from him. And when you consider that the higher end players make up the MINORITY of the union, then something is incredibly wrong. When you have Iginla, Roenick, Recchi, Tkachuk and Esche all working behind the scenes to get a deal done, you know that there is something wrong with the union. We've witnessed over the past week the official split of the union. It would not surprise me if within the next few months that we see a full blowout between the players and several players break ranks with the union.[/QUOTE]
I never said anything about Goodenow, all I said is that Bettman is more responsible for the health of the league and the sport therefore the responsibility to make that last offer, to try and bridge the cap the last time, falls on Bettman. In the end Bettman is the one who has the power to cancel the season or two make a deal, Goodenow does not have that power.
But anyway, I agree Goodenow hasn't been very good. It seems to me that if the players had a vote right now, to fire Goodenow, that a huge majority would want to get different leadership in there. Now I am not saying that the new leadership would make a deal right away, I think in the end Goodenow negotiated enough and conceeded enough that a deal was possible, but I just think that someone new could give a different perspective to these talks. I don't see Bettman and Goodenow working together to get a deal done, ever.