Jaded-Fan said:
Ann Arbor is near Detroit, right?
Can you not see that fans from areas that have seen their baseball team start every spring with no chance of winning, this year or any year to come, so their fears for hockey are not hypothetical but based on experience; who have seen their hockey team bleed big name players to teams like yours, who fear their hockey team, absent some major changes . . . major . . will become yet another team not worth rooting for anymore. Can you not see why we support the owners' position to the ends and back again if it believably shows the probability of returning hockey to competitive balance where what you put on the ice depends on management instead of $$$'s?
Then again if you indeed are from Detroit I am guessing you knew all of this . . . you merely did not care.
Yes, I like the Wings. And sure, I enjoyed the fruits of Illitch's willingness to spend.
Detroit couldn't have won it's last cup without Illitch's resources (the first two cups were pure drafting and team management)
In fact, Detroit really didn't go out and start raiding the FA market until the moron from Carolina went out and ushered in the new era with his ridiculous offer to Fedorov.
Anyway, I've seen it from both sides of the fences. I watched the expos (my favourite baseball team) get turned into a minor league team.
But let's not forget that the expos put themselves in a lot of the trouble they were in. One, the blackballed Rodney Scott, a good ballplayer. Then they dumped Gary Carter. Then they played hardball with Raines and Dawson. Dawson left.
At that point, I realized there was no longer any point in routing for the expos. And so did a lot of other fans.
The fans realized the expos were a minor league team and stopped going to games.
Things got worse when the owners were found guily of collusion and salaries went through the roof. Then the Canadian dollar became next to worthless.
Boom.
A decent MLB franchise was torn to sheds.
See, I can understand the issues when they're presented by the Calgarys and Edmontons of the world.
I can't understand guys like Jacobs and Wirtz, notorious skinflints who've done their best turn their proud Original Six franchises into laughing stocks.
I can't understand why owners move or start teams in Carolina/Florida/Nashville and then wonder why they can't make the revenues to compete with established hockey markets.
I can't understand why they should feel entitled to compete with Detroit.
I went through years of misery as a Detroit fan. It hardly seemed fair to me that Edmonton had all those players and Detroit had Yzerman and a cast of goons.
But that's life.
I'm concerned about the state of hockey in Calgary and Edmonton, and Montreal. I couldn't care less about Nashville/Carolina/Florida.
Why should I? People don't seem to care down there?
Are hockey players making too much? Yeah. So are movie actors and CEOs, if you ask me.
I'm told that we need a $32-35 Million salary cap for the good of the game.
That's a damned lie.
How can Detroit be successful? There is no reason that other NHL cities can't compete with Detroit.
Detroit has a lousy Arena, by NHL standards. The Metro Detroit area is large. And hockey has roots in the area.
But you tell me, why can't Boston and Chicago find a way to run their teams effectively? They have everything Detroit has, and better arena's.
As for the hockey roots thing, it's going to take years for hockey to take hold in places like Nashville and Carolina ... if it ever takes hold.
Those owners, I assume, knew that going in. So why is the league catering to the LOWEST COMMON DEMONINATOR?
My concern remains with the Canadian teams. Places that love hockey but simply can't compete because they don't get the big corporate sponsorships available to some US markets and because of the weakness of the Canadian dollar, and mostly, because Canadian governments are less likely to finance a billionaire's play toy.
Which is why I favor a luxury tax. A strict luxury tax.
A strict luxury tax does two things:
1) It brings salaries down
(No one has yet to explain why a strict luxury tax won't take salaries down)
2) It spreads revenues to teams that need it.
(No one has yet explained how a salary cap will keep Nashville from losing money)
This way, the solution involves sacrifices by both the players and the owners. And just a little bit of sacrifice from the owners would have gotten this done.
But see, the Illitch's of the world are just as greedy as the Wirtz's of the world.
In their mind, they don't see a need to share revenue with the smaller clubs.
Instead, the greedy NHL owners want the players to make the entire sacrifice.
That's not partnership, Jaded.
That's bullying.
If the owners don't want to help each other fix the game, then why the hell should I support their lockout, which might just strangle the entire league?