Yes Virgina, NHL'ers will play under a salary cap

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Briannj1970, Feb 12, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Briannj1970

    Briannj1970 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    54
    Either the greatest hypocrisy or a telling sign about which way the the PA is really leaning....

    http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/LondonFreePress/Sports/2005/02/12/928629-sun.html

    If these guys'll play under a $260,000 team salary cap just to play, they won't play under a 42 million one?
     
  2. Injektilo

    Injektilo Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    2,516
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Future Team Guatemala hea
    Location:
    Taiwan
    you don't think this hasn't been discussed before?


    1. They want to keep in shape.
    2. They aren't playing their entire career in the UHL.
    3. The UHL is not the NHL. They don't feel that the UHL owners are trying to screw them over.
     
  3. Briannj1970

    Briannj1970 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    54
    That's not the point. All along the word "philosophical" has been thrown around like a rag doll when it's come to a salary cap. If this was a matter of priniciple (and we might be able to assume that it is since using "philosophical" like that is kind of like saying, "We don't believe in playind under any form of a salary cap"), then stick to your moral guns and don't play under one in any league. You don't believe in it, don't justify it by playing under one. These guys clearly have. Keep in shape some other way, don't keep in shape playing in a league that contains the very thing you're so against.
     
  4. trentmccleary

    trentmccleary Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Messages:
    21,480
    Likes Received:
    139
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    Alfie-Ville
    Home Page:
    Hell, start a revolution in the UHL.
    Fight the power, my oppressed brothers! :nopity:
     
  5. Reilly311

    Reilly311 Guest

    The players are being locked out. They can't play in the NHL. So they play somewhere else for money. It's not that hard to comprehend and we all would probably do the same thing.
     
  6. dunwoody_joe

    dunwoody_joe Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2002
    Messages:
    1,581
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    atlanta
    Home Page:
    Right on!

    Add one more thing, they are scabs. The money they don't need is taken from another player's pocket who does need to play in the UHL.

    I don't like it much and I'll bet that it turns out badly for one of them.
     
  7. Does anyone know if the UHL's salary cap is tied to their revenues at all? I think part of the NHLPA's "philosophical" stance has been to oppose a salary cap that is directly tied to league revenues. I know Roenick came out and said that exact thing a week or so ago when interviewed by ESPN on Sportscenter. And if the players aren't retaining the salaries because they're giving the money to charity, then they are just playing hockey for free like plenty of other people do in rec leagues.
     
  8. Briannj1970

    Briannj1970 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2005
    Messages:
    85
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    54
    Robert Esche was quoted as saying he wouldn't play under a 200 million dollar salary cap. Okay...so let's say the NHL links player salaries to revenues. He won't play under a 200 million dollar cap, but does he think it's okay to have his partners in crime playing in a leauge with an average salary of 500 dollars a week? Who cares if they don't link player salaries to revenue. Just look at the whole picture here. There isn't anything wrong going on with it? If I'm looking at this thing the wrong way, I'd love to know.

    I don't think there's an NHL'er around at this point who would go back to playing for the Stanley Cup for 500 dollars a week...linked revenues or not.
     
  9. ceber

    ceber Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,500
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Wyoming, MN
    If the UHL teams pulled in NHL-level revenues, attendance, and media attention I could understand the argument a little more. It's not about playing under a cap.. it's about playing under a cap in the NHL. I don't understand the big resistance to it myself, but that's the issue.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"