Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Regency, Mar 4, 2005.
Interesting, if true, but very vague. I would like to get further details on this.
I don't know Steve Simmons, is he a credible journalist or a mouthpiece with an agenda?
The Leafs have continually thumbed their nose at the NHL and tried to undermine their baragining position. They went out and comitted over $40 million on payroll for this year (with stil other players to sign) when the league was saying that they wanted a $33 million salary cap.
The Leafs are the one team that is losing big time from the lockout. With a new CBA containing a low salary cap, they won't be able to go out and cover their mismanagement by simply buying players as they have done over the last 5 years. Its is hardly surprising that they are whining the loudest.
The Leafs are quickly discovering that they have exactly the same vote as Nashville.
Looks good on them for their stupidity leading into the lockout.
I think their only stupidity is on the GM side, who bring in overpaid players on their last legs, hoping to get one last wind out of them before they collapse
I guess that does count as stupidity though
Gee I don't know.
How about adding to your payroll when you know you are well past the cap the league is trying to implement?
Do the names Belfour, Roberts, Berg and Nieuwendyk ring a bell?
I think he is referring to their contract status... they are one of the few teams that had a lot of money committed to players... after being told about the potential for a lockout for years... when the NHL comes back the Leafs may be one of the teams that has to "shed" salaries.
God forbid they try to compete and win a cup rather than whine like the oilers and flames. Sounds like you have Leaf envy.
Right, but how has that affected them to this date? Maybe I missed something but which of these players they signed are they paying today?
So who had the better cup run again?
I don't envy stupidity.
They engaged in activity that was the polar opposite of the direction the league was heading.
They further this stupidity by undermining the league during the lockout.
They can't feign surprize when they get slapped back to reality.
They have tried to undermine the leagues stance so they won't have to face the consequences of their stupidity when a cap is put in place.
They paid Belfour for most of the season.
I'd surely like to know who those "other big markets" are that criticized him.
You have to take Simmons with a Mack truck load of salt. He's been 180 degrees wrong many, many times going for the sensational, tabloid stuff.
I suspect that there is some merit to the story in that differences of opinion were expressed and the Leafs were one of the bigger financial losers with the cancellation. But I really doubt that it was as big a deal as Simmons makes it out to be.
The Leafs make out like bandits financially with a cap and limited revenue sharing and a more stable business which would see their valuation sky rocket. The Teachers Pension (majority owner) would love that too.
I'm sure Ed "the strangler" Snider might have a few choice words for anyone he sees as helping Goodenow.
so whats the problem then ? clearly CGY isnt disadvantaged vs TOR.
sheesh .... which is it ?
Taking a guess
Hawks and Bruins would be the obvious vocal choices.
Detroit has been backing the smaller franchises.
According to Burke there were two big market clubs vs rest. Looks like Bettman's "8 man gang" is closer to a "28 man gang". So who is siding with TO? Habs (owner needs money)? Rags? Stars? Flyers? Avs? Van?
Flyers, Habs or Rags would be my picks.
Its not the flyers for sure, theyve been preparing for the cap for a while, why else let your $5m top goalscorer leave after last season?
The Flyers are 100% behind a cap.
As much as I would like to believe this story, I have a real hard time believing anything Steve Simmons has to say.
The Flyers have been preparing for the cap?
You can eliminate 2 of those. The Habs are not a big market. They have a huge fanbase but some of the highest building and land taxes in the NHL. President Pierre Boivin came out publicly after the season was canceled saying the 42.5M figure was a stretch for them and he certainly wasn't happy about it. They were hoping the number would top at about 40M. The Habs will have lost 20M in operation costs this year because of this lockout, so they are one of the teams who lose less by playing, but they still lose money under the previous CBA regardless.
Also, considering Ed Snyder's passionate rants against Goodenow and the PA, it certainly doesn't look like the Flyers are siding with TO either.
The only 2 big markets out there that I think might be completely opposed to Bettman's demands are Toronto and NYR. I could see Detroit, NJ, Colorado, Dallas and Philly on the fence (meaning either way, we don't care) and the rest firmly behind Bettman (some with a harder position than others of course).
Well, ummm, which team has turned a profit running their business for the last few years?
They played by the rules set-forth in the old CBA and managed to be profitable.
You ask me, the stupid teams were the ones spending money that they didn't have and losing money every year (or banking on a playoff run to the finals in order to be profitable).
but they had no right to expect hockey to be played this year.
Like I have been saying all along: This lockout is for a select few. As it drags on we will discover that its really for about 10 owners, and it's sad that out of those 10 "organizations", 6 or 7 shouldn't be hockey teams in the first place. But they are thanks to all of you pro-owners' golden boy: Gary Bettman. Unanimous my ASS