Ted Saskin has some nerve...salary cap would not rise as revenues rises????

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by shayne, Feb 20, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. shayne

    shayne Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2003
    Messages:
    668
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    ontario
    Home Page:
    so they won't take linkigage but they will accept a high salry cap that gets higher every year as he expects the revenues to increase.

    The PA has got some flipping nerve. They want all the rewards but none of the risks.

    I hope the NHL nevers offers a better deal then the 42.5 million dollar cap.
    I beleive people like Brian Burke when they say that the NHL offered the best deal they could based on the future health of the game not the best short term deal to save a season or whatever.

    Burke was screaming at the TV for the players to realize the clear situation and idiots like healy don't get it. I do get it, i am on the owners side and hope the PA crashes and burns.
     
  2. go_leafs_go02

    go_leafs_go02 Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    7,340
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    London, ON
    Home Page:
    Have a genuine source? (not eklund)
     
  3. Jarqui

    Jarqui Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,860
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    86
    Home Page:
    Look at Goodenow's last letter to Bettman before the season was canceled. clause #7. It was hypocritical.

    And the owners offered a cap that never moves to giggle the NHLPA logic.
     
  4. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    Why the hell would anyone accept a cap without any increase from year to year? The PA would likely take $500k or $1m or whatever year over year, but the owners should be more willing to acccept upward linkage than that since the precise increase would reflect revenues.

    Hyopcritcal? Hardly. If anyone thinks any league's players would or should accept the same cap number over six years, they're insane.
     
  5. NYFAN

    NYFAN Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2004
    Messages:
    361
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Delivery driver
    Location:
    Long Island
    I agree wholeheartedly and have been arguing that fact most of the afternoon!
     
  6. OilerNut*

    OilerNut* Guest

    But don't you agree the cap should go down when league revenues are down and not just stay the same?
     
  7. Isles72

    Isles72 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    3,432
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Location:
    Canada
    ok , fair enough then .

    start the cap at 37 for 0405 and raise it by 1 mil per season for 6 years

    Some people need to believe it when Bettman says that 42.5 is really stretching it
     
  8. ScottyBowman

    ScottyBowman Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Detroit
    Home Page:
    No. Why should it? Its the owners responsibility to get revenue up.
     
  9. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    No. The league wants a salary cap, they get one. The players have no interest in linkage. The point is, due to inflation and growth in resources, the cap level should rise... whether the rise is linked to revenues or not doesn't matter, but given their refrain for the past months, the owners should be more interested in linkage since the rise would be negligent or non-existent if revenues actually did decrease.

    Again, to expect the players to accept the same level of cap for 6-8 years is nonsensical.
     
  10. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    138,010
    Likes Received:
    1,546
    Trophy Points:
    215
    If the owners are so committed to their belief that linkage is the way to go, why don't they put their money where their mouth is and do it. I goes up in basketball and football...every year.


    This works both ways.



    That said, linkage is a joke. Up or down. I would accept linkage if it was to only be done with ticket sales, as my own personal concession.
     
  11. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    Why not start at $42.5 and raise it $1m for 6 years? After all, $42.5m is what the owners can afford NOW.
     
  12. OilerNut*

    OilerNut* Guest

    If it is the owners responsibility to get the revenue up, why should they pay that extra revenue to the players?
     
  13. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    They don't have to. Revenue is a red herring; players would rather have it increased $x each year but because of the owners' fixation, they offered an increase linked to revenues. Either way, the cap has to increase... call it linked to revenues or don't, it doesn't matter.
     
  14. OilerNut*

    OilerNut* Guest

    Why does it have to increase, just because? No one knows at what rate the NHL will grow, so how do you base a % increase for each year?
     
  15. AlexGodynyuk

    AlexGodynyuk Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Wrong, not sure about the NFL, but the NBA has full linkage.
    Last year when they signed a new TV contract with ABC that was backloaded, revenues decreased and the cap went from ~43M to ~40M, it is based on a percentage of basketball income. It just so happens that in competently managed sports, the revenues will tend to rise every year.
     
  16. txomisc

    txomisc Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2002
    Messages:
    8,215
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Occupation:
    self-employed
    Location:
    California
    Home Page:
    Is it 100%? I'd say if the players want to call themselves the product they are pretty responsible for getting revenue growth. So if they are the product, why don't play the game better and increase revenue.
     
  17. ScottyBowman

    ScottyBowman Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2003
    Messages:
    2,361
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Detroit
    Home Page:
    Good luck trying to raise revenue in Chicago or Boston. As soon as a player becomes good and costs more, they ship him out.
     
  18. X8oD

    X8oD Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    7,485
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Occupation:
    *********orial Engineer
    Location:
    612 Warf Ave.
    NFL is linked

    the New TV deal they just signed has prompted rumors that Not this coming season, but the following, the NFL Cap may hit 100 Million Dollars, due to the exorbant amount of money that was brought in from thier new TV Deal.
     
  19. me2

    me2 Calling out the crap

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    32,637
    Likes Received:
    884
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Location:
    Blasting the bull***
    As soon as a player got too overpriced they ship him out. The NHLPA already conceded that the players were overpriced when they offered the 24% rollback!
     
  20. PhillyNucksFan

    PhillyNucksFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,650
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Finance
    Location:
    Philadelphia

    last time I checked, I think it was NHLPA said that, its the players that fan pay for to SEE..

    But corret me if i am wrong, are you implying Players has NOTHING to do with the revenue here???

    If yes, why the hell is players asking for a piece of the pie here?

    what a joke.
     
  21. PhillyNucksFan

    PhillyNucksFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,650
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Finance
    Location:
    Philadelphia

    temporary solution, nothing more.

    Salary will still end up higher, assuming old CBA rules remain relatively the same
     
  22. Chayos

    Chayos Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2003
    Messages:
    3,103
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Saskatchewan
    Home Page:
    Yes but what incentive is there on teh owners part to grow the game if the players cap escalator is going to kill it!
     
  23. Chayos

    Chayos Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2003
    Messages:
    3,103
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Saskatchewan
    Home Page:
    No actually the Fans are paying to see teh brand of eg: Detroit rewings or Toronto mapleleafs. Teh players are paid by the owners of teh Team to play hockey for them. The fans may get entertainment out of the better players but in teh end the NHLpa thinks tehy are bigger than the game and their approval rating are showing what fans think of that!
     
  24. PhillyNucksFan

    PhillyNucksFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,650
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Finance
    Location:
    Philadelphia

    Is this the best argument you can think of by saying the NHL revenues have nothing to do with the players?

    :lol

    The fans are paying the dollars to see the teams only, huh?

    The fans are playing to see the "rivalry" huh?

    I guess you do not follow hockey at all, and I thought i was a casual fan..

    :joker:
     
  25. Seachd

    Seachd Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2002
    Messages:
    19,188
    Likes Received:
    225
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    The Fail
    Home Page:
    Do you actually belive anything you're saying?

    Tell me why the players should expect the cap to go up, if they're not willing to let it go down. Why the hell would the league do that? An equivalent offer from the owners' side would be to cut salaries every year of the agreement.

    How much sense does that make?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"