The Iconoclast said:Definitely sounds like "the crack" that Flyline14 and Unlce Al have been looking for. :lol
FLYLine4LIFE said:
What I found funny is the Owner of the team MOST LIKELY(Top 3) to go under with no hockey is saying that.
slats432 said:
Newsguyone said:That will cost you $1 Million.
the canes arent in trouble at all. they are still averaging over 15,000 a year to see a losing team. i think karmanos is lying thru his teeth when he says they are losing as much as they are....and im with the owners. he has said that they will lose less money if they dont play at all. if petes telling the truth, how can this team survive WITH a cap? if they cant make money with a 35 mill payroll as is, how will they survive with one later? thats why i think he is lying about losing so many millions each year. they have a sweet arena deal and a local tv deal. karmanos is just a hardliner who will say anything he can to get a cap....which im fine with. i cant stand the guy, but i really cant stand the people who actually think this franchise is in trouble, and about to fail any minute. carolina will do fine in a hard cap world, and pete knows it. any talk of carolinas impending doom is ridiculous, or in most cases, wishful thinking. pete wouldnt be so content with sitting out two years if his team was about to go under. if carolina is really in trouble like every southern team basher thinks, why isnt pete here one of the "cracks" in the wall?FLYLine4LIFE said:
What I found funny is the Owner of the team MOST LIKELY(Top 3) to go under with no hockey is saying that.
bleedgreen said:the canes arent in trouble at all. they are still averaging over 15,000 a year to see a losing team. i think karmanos is lying thru his teeth when he says they are losing as much as they are....and im with the owners. he has said that they will lose less money if they dont play at all. if petes telling the truth, how can this team survive WITH a cap? if they cant make money with a 35 mill payroll as is, how will they survive with one later? thats why i think he is lying about being in that much trouble. they have a sweet arena deal and a local tv deal. karmanos is just a hardliner who will say anything he can to get a cap....which im fine with. i cant stand the guy, but i really cant stand the people who actually think this franchise is in trouble, and about to fail any minute. carolina will do fine in a hard cap world, and pete knows it. any talk of carolinas impending doom is ridiculous, or in most cases, wishful thinking. pete wouldnt be so content with sitting out two years if his team was about to go under. if carolina is really in trouble like every southern team basher thinks, why isnt pete here one of the "cracks" in the wall?
Is that your opinion or should I have someone from the NHLPA call you and explain how you didn't understand the question?Newsguyone said:That will cost you $1 Million.
slats432 said:Is that your opinion or should I have someone from the NHLPA call you and explain how you didn't understand the question?
i dont feel sorry for them at all. i just want a hockey world where the talk all year isnt if buffalo and ottawa will survive another year, or pitts, does carolina have enough fans, can edm continue..blah blah blah. whether you side with either side it doesnt matter, the apocolypse has come. nothing will be the same from this point on like it or not. the owners have the right to make this sport have a shape similar to all the other sports. i think some form of cap is inevitable, though i would prefer a strict luxury tax myself - i understand that a tax might not work. i like davey and goliath in sports, and with a cap...it wont happen as much. but id rather a cap world than the one weve been headed for the last 10 years.ScottyBowman said:Whenever a rich person is complaing about money, don't believe them. They want you to feel sorry for them and it looks like its working judging by the amount of people who feel sorry for the owners.
X8oD said:Could you imagine how much he would be crying if Detroit DIDNT match, and he was stuck paying that Deal?
Excelllent. I am though getting tired of the politics, the B.S.Newsguyone said:Nah, the NHLPA will just send some goons to rough up my family when I talk out of turn.
gasp! what if the canes had been a better team. just crazy talk.PecaFan said:We'll never know, but things may have worked out amazingly well for Carolina had Detroit not matched. Fedorov would have been on his side, instead of Detroit when they met in the '02 Cup Final, for instance.
Maybe they have a Cup, and several years of sustained playoff presence, instead of just one year Cinderella, and missing the playoffs the rest of the time.
Hockey_Nut99 said:Copied this from a poster at TSN.CA
"How many times will a business lose all of it's stockholders if it doesn't buy that ferrari it can't afford? In the NHL, when you DON'T spend the money, the fans complain, they want the talent. Not only do the fans complain, YOUR TEAM LOSES TALENT if you're not willing to pay for it!! Do you have any concept of how teams make it to the Stanley Cup? Do you think the team that picks up a bunch of guys off of the street is going to have a shot against Colorado? What games have YOU been watching? This is a business where players don't stay on a team to win, they stay on the team that pays them the most. THEY ARE IN IT FOR THE MONEY AND THAT'S ALL.
SCENARIO: Under that system, and their current CBA, a team that WISELY spends its money drafts a new kid. He gets phenomenal, and a real fan favorite. New York catches wind of this kid and wants him bad. They offer him $6 million because they want the cup, and they can afford it. What does the almighty GONHLPA propose as a solution to the "wisely-spending" team that's about to lose their star player to a higher bidder.....
Let's consider the options:
1) You let him go. You can't afford this ferrari, so you start with a brand new Ford Pinto, great call pal, you just lost all your fans, and surprise surprise, you didn't make the playoffs AGAIN for some astounding reason....maybe you're not willing to pay for any talent, so you'll never compete. Congrats, you now have to sell your team, real smart.
2) You cave and pay the guy an equivalent salary. Great move, now your team salary just went up by $4 million, or you have to dump $4 million worth of talent to another team. Great, now you lost two talented guys to keep one REALLY talented guy, but at least you're in the running for the playoffs, and your fans are still pretty happy. GUESS WHAT? Now that you've agreed to pay this guy this much, EVERY OTHER PLAYER in the league that thinks they're close in talent files for arbitration because they think that THEY are also worth 6 million. You just increased every teams ticket prices by 17%, way to go.
3) You call up New York, you say, come on guys, we should agree not to pay these guys so much, he's asking for too much. Sure he's done great for us, and we really want to keep him. We're going to pay him no matter what so can you please lower your offer so that we can keep him? Not only is this option completely ridiculous and never going to happen, IT'S ALSO COMPLETELY ILLEGAL, and is called collusion. Owners can NOT set a bar on offers it's simply not allowed. All owners are allowed to offer whatever they can afford, and some teams can afford to offer more than others, that's why player salaries have escalated 240% in 10 years.
4) You offer him less money. AWWW, too bad, he took the offer in New York (and your fans leave again), looks like you're a real smart guy. Maybe you should REALLY consider consequences before you make comparisons like Ferraris and hockey players."
Newsguyone said:That will cost you $1 Million.
Ottawa didn't keep Yashin until he was 31, nor did Edmonton keep Comrie until he was 31 just to cite a few recent examples. There is nothing stopping a player from holding out, and no team is dumb enough to let a talent rot for years and years.John Flyers Fan said:Problem is that using your car scenario the New York Rangers can't offer him that $6 million until he has 100,000 miles on him and is in need of new shocks and breaks.
You have a player until he's 31 no ifs, and or butts about it.
Because a cap would lower salaries in a big way. No more $10 mil or probably even $5 mil contracts means everyone starts making less. And since stacked teams will need to get rid of some stars it's quite possible Carolina could grab a couple and might start selling out some games with a decent on-ice product.bleedgreen said:he has said that they will lose less money if they dont play at all. if petes telling the truth, how can this team survive WITH a cap?
John Flyers Fan said:Problem is that using your car scenario the New York Rangers can't offer him that $6 million until he has 100,000 miles on him and is in need of new shocks and breaks.
You have a player until he's 31 no ifs, and or butts about it.
mackdogs said:Ottawa didn't keep Yashin until he was 31, nor did Edmonton keep Comrie until he was 31 just to cite a few recent examples. There is nothing stopping a player from holding out, and no team is dumb enough to let a talent rot for years and years.
Newsguyone said:That will cost you $1 Million.
John Flyers Fan said:... how 'bout Edmonton .. Comrie or Woywitka, Schremp and a 2005 3rd rounder
I won't comment on Ottawa but since I am an Edmonton fan I would gladly have taken a full year of mini-Mike. It's widely believed amongst us fans that he would have helped us make the playoffs (remember we barely missed). The Schremp discussions have been great but playoff talk is a lot more fun.John Flyers Fan said:...and how did that work out for Ottawa ??? ... think they'd prefer to have Yahsin back for Spezza & Chara
... how 'bout Edmonton .. Comrie or Woywitka, Schremp and a 2005 3rd rounder