PecaFan said:
Against? I couldn't write a more pro-cap post than that. Let's summarise:
- Caps don't hold player salaries down.
Wrong. What's going to happen when a cap gets imposed? That's right, teams over the cap are going to have to jettison talent in order to get under or face stiff penalites from the league. From there, caps are going to allow owners to dictate what the max is a star player can earn in their market.
PecaFan said:
- Caps prevent the irresponsible trade deadline "buying of players" for Cup runs.
Why is there never a flip side to this. How about the irresponsible trade deadline "selling players" by teams that are eliminated in order to clear salary and make even more revenue.
PecaFan said:
- Caps don't affect league competitive balance.
That one I'll agree with you on. If you have a moron running the team, then even with a salary cap, you still have a moron running the team. However, what a salary cap does is pretty much make the situation there idiot proof and allow said owner to make money while moron is running the show. And if the owner profits from that, then yeah, there is a problem with that because there isn't any incentive to fix what is wrong as long as profit is being generated.
PecaFan said:
- Caps force teams to live long term with the consequences of making poor financial decisions to make a Cup run.
So, if your team has a chance to go for it all, and they have the revenue to do so, then they should be punished for that? Heaven forbid you have an owner who wants to spend because he wants to win. That should be the goal of every owner. And when you hear owners say that their goal is to just make the playoffs and anything after that is a bonus, that's OK? C'mon, out of all the people on this board, you seem to be one of the more sensible people on here, but that statement in itself lends creedence to the fact that it is more important to make as much money as possible than win.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. I don't mind paying higher ticket prices if an owner is showing a commitment to winning, spending to win, and the product is great to watch. Right now, the problem with the NHL is that the product is terrible. Contrary to many people on here, I don't find neutered zone trap hockey fun hockey to watch. I have to admit, the one team who I really hate, the Toronto Maple Leafs, don't play that boring trap hockey. They play entertaining hockey and that's what the league needs....good old fashioned firewagon hockey made famous by the Oilers of the 80s. If anyone thinks that hockey has been as good in the 90s and in the 2000s, you need to watch some ESPN classic. As well, very seldom do you hear owners talking about winning it all. It's all about "well, we're happy to make it into the playoffs" type garbage. Cop out. Gives owners an excuse that if things don't go well, they can always point to the next season as a season of hope. I want my owner to say "we're playing to win it all" or "Stanley Cup or Bust". That's what every owner should be saying. And as I said, I don't mind paying extra if I see that my owner is allowing for the GM to add good quality players to the team. I do have a hard time though watching complete salary dumps by teams or teams that trade away talent so they can intentionally lose and rebuild.
And that will always be the one thing about a salary cap that will always bug me. There is no motivation to win. There is nothing. As long as you make money, which is what the salary cap in the NHL is all about, then you can continue to run your franchise into the ground. It's funny you NEVER hear that addressed at all. There's no incentive to win because you'll make money no matter what. And if anyone can live with that level of complacency, then the league is going to suck even more.
The league doesn't need a salary cap. What it needs is someone who knows HOW to marke the game. And that's the problem. Bettman doesn't have a clue how to market it. I've read how he's generated all kinds of revenue for the league, but at one time, this league had a chance to take over basketball, but Bettman blew it by going on strike when interest was at its highest. And since then, the game has gone downhill steady. Why is there no finger pointing at the owners for that? We all hear about how the PLAYERS have ruined the game, but where is the owners in all this mess?