Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
TonySCV said:All the people who went to bed already are gonna be in for a SURPRISE in the morning!
I was shocked as hell. Heck i spit coffee thru my nose when i saw the NHLPA would agree to a cap.
TonySCV said:All the people who went to bed already are gonna be in for a SURPRISE in the morning!
Bruwinz37 said:I have been saying for weeks it would be a cap without linkage between 42-45m. For those of you who dont think this will help small market teams I think you have to consider the big picture. This will help them remain competitive in free agency and would allow them to keep their home grown talent. Having teams not being to outspend them by 10s of millions of dollars would maintain a competitive environment for all.
As far as all the other issues I would think that many of them have already been decided on. Arbitration and entry level deals have been a part of negotiations all along and have probably been agreed upon.
Thats what you losers get for going to bed. Work? School? Locked out in their own right by me.JWI19 said:I was shocked as hell. Heck i spit coffee thru my nose when i saw the NHLPA would agree to a cap.
likea said:Roenicks group put pressure on Goodenow that wan't there then.....
Roenicks group was talking 42 million...Goodenow says well if we are going to be forced to get a cap lets start high and gte as much as we can...and they did
mudcrutch79 said:This isn't the point of what we're discussing here, but there are public sources who refute your postion that this is quite enough. Forbes methodology involves guessing from the outside, without any access to the books-even the NHL says that they're wrong. There is not enough info out there.
mudcrutch79 said:I guess that's for others to judge. I've tried to square the NHL's actions with their claims, and I can't. My conclusion is that the numbers are wrong, or that there are other beneficial to which we're not privy. Not every team is going to make the playoffs, and no rational owner would proceed with a business plan that requires a playoff run to turn a profit..
mudcrutch79 said:What conflicting claims? The PA basically says that they don't know/care what the NHL's financial position is. They noted that Forbes contradicts the NHL's position, which was stupid of them to do, but there it is. The NHL is the one who have claimed massive losses, the PA says they don't know and don't care. You might not like the PA's position, but there's more evidence to back it up.
mudcrutch79 said:That can't be right, but it really doesn't matter. You're saying that a plan requiring an appearance in Rd. 2 is acceptable now? So to hell with the 22 teams that don't make it that far?
mudcrutch79 said:Sure, except what the NHL has proposed is a salary range, where the Oilers would, according to their numbers, be making no money, barring a playoff run. You don't seem to understand how the NHL's proposal would work.
mudcrutch79 said:Do these people market themselves as laborlawyers? I figure your average Masters degree knows that it's "labour lawyers". Provide a link, or let it go.
Bruwinz37 said:I have been saying for weeks it would be a cap without linkage between 42-45m. For those of you who dont think this will help small market teams I think you have to consider the big picture. This will help them remain competitive in free agency and would allow them to keep their home grown talent. Having teams not being to outspend them by 10s of millions of dollars would maintain a competitive environment for all.
As far as all the other issues I would think that many of them have already been decided on. Arbitration and entry level deals have been a part of negotiations all along and have probably been agreed upon.
it's a tunnel, damn it! Run the other way!Masao said:It's the subway train heading straight at us! Jump!
Pepper said:How much credibility you give to sources who only refute Levitt's audit without giving any examples of why they were wrong? How much credibility do you give to people who have not even SEEN the actual NHL numbers unlike Levitt??
Oooh, spelling smack! A sure sign that I have you cornered. Grow up.
mudcrutch79 said:I'm done with you. I think you're lying about having a masters (or so biased that you are ignoring something you learned), because I can't believe someone with a masters in a commerce related field doesn't understand the difference between an audit and a report.
mudcrutch79 said:Forbes is Forbes-their numbers contradict the information that the NHL provided the PA.
mudcrutch79 said:Nope, just pointing out that educated people tend to spell things properly.
mudcrutch79 said:They value having others understand their point.
mudcrutch79 said:I'd expect most people who aren't lying about having a masters to understand that. Of course, I'd expect most people with advanced education to know that labourlawyer is multiple words.
TonySCV said:What if it's $46MM with a stiff luxury tax starting at $36MM? - a soft cap and hard cap hybrid system? Wouldn't that also be a compromise? So little of the details are known to just blindly say that $46MM is too high. If there are enough punitive penalties and taxes in place (a payroll tax range, limits on per player spending, arbitration restrictions, etc.), it could be attractive. Heck a $50MM cap could be made attractive if the right level of restrictions are put in place.
- T
Wetcoaster said:The interesting thing is how the NHL offer seems to cut off the small amrket teams at the knees - supposedly Bettman's biggest boosters.
The NHL gives up linkage and sets the bar at $40 million with no revenue sharing or luxury tax and no salry rollback. How does that help Edmonton for example? They have a team payroll of 33 Million and claim that they cannot make go of it while selling out and maxing out all their revenue streams. Or these teams (2003-04 salaries):
Calgary Flames $ 36,402,575
Carolina Hurricanes $ 35,908,738
San Jose Sharks $ 34,455,000
Tampa Bay Lightning $ 34,065,379
Columbus Blue Jackets $ 34,000,000
Edmonton Oilers $ 33,375,000
Buffalo Sabres $ 32,954,250
Atlanta Thrashers $ 28,547,500
Florida Panthers $ 26,127,500
Pittsburgh Penguins $ 23,400,000
Nashville Predators $ 21,932,500
If most of these teams were losing money as claimed at those salary levels how does the NHL plan help them? I left the Wild and Blackhawks out ($27 million and $31 million respectively) because they are making money and do not have the market problems of those other teams.
The NHLPA clocks in with a 24% rollback on all contracts, a 52 million unlinked team cap maximum with significant luxury tax rates and revenue sharing. With that the small market teams have a chance to compete. Is that not what Bettman wants when he repeats a healthy 30 team league where all teams can compete for the Stanley Cup?
I am wondering if those small market teams that bought into Bettman's refrain of cost certainty and were backing him solidly, now are wondering what was the number of the truck that hit them. Without the $31 million cap and cost certainty by tying salaries to revenues, they are in serious trouble if the figures claimed by the NHL and Levitt are correct. Perhaps they never were.
We should see reactions of the teams to the proposal now the gag order has been lifted. If the small markets do not squawk then obviously the problems were not as serious as being protrayed.
Newsguyone said:Bettman did a great job demonizing the players during the CBA. He won the battle of public opinion by making the players look greedy and the owners look like honorable men.
But look at these boards and talk to people. Some of these fans really dislike the players now.
Hockey has work to do.
Newsguyone said:Bettman did a great job demonizing the players during the CBA. He won the battle of public opinion by making the players look greedy and the owners look like honorable men.
But look at these boards and talk to people. Some of these fans really dislike the players now.
Hockey has work to do.
John Flyers Fan said:The reason above is why Bob McKenzie spoke about Bettman possibly losing his job even if the owners "win" this CBA. So much bad blood towards Bettman, that it could be very difficult for him to lead the NHL after the lockout.
chiavsfan said:You mean....GIT R' DONE!!!
It's funny how when each side comes off its stance you suddenly have a negotiation. Everything before today was pure BS and posturing. Makes you wonder what the hell they were waiting for????GregStack said:That works for me too...No...wait...let's negotiate this...
Get R' Done? Is that good for both sides here?
(if only Gary and Bob had of tried this approach of "negotiating" earlier)
shnagle said:It's funny how when each side comes off its stance you suddenly have a negotiation. Everything before today was pure BS and posturing. Makes you wonder what the hell they were waiting for???
shnagle said:It's funny how when each side comes off its stance you suddenly have a negotiation. Everything before today was pure BS and posturing. Makes you wonder what the hell they were waiting for????
Greschner4 said:It helps them because their $30 something million is now competing against $52 million (or lower), not $75 million.
This should be obvious.