Fan 590 Reports NHLPA on Conference Call

[nedved93]

I guess you guys don't have any confidence in your scouting skills or coaching skills to want to be able to just try and buy a team.
So here is a big F*CK YOU to you all.

scouting and coaching skills?

ask any large market fan, the majority is perfectly comfortable with a $45 million hard cap, $40 million soft cap with 100% luxury tax, 24% rollback, ELS reforms, sub-100% qualifiers, and two-way/final offer arbitration.

but again, if your club can't play within these rules, then just get out and stop trying to drag the rest of the league to your level.

 

[Greschner4]

I don't this it's fair to say Nasvhille or Columbus are irrelevant. However, I agree with the rest of your post.

The big market teams have to decide if they are willing to accept smaller markets insisting on cost certainty and a cap they can satisfy.

The small market teams stay the course as they did today no matter the anger on either of the other sides.

The NHLPA must continue to refuse everything until the league crashes in on itself.

Two new leagues will no doubt be rivals for certain players and markets. However, just as sure as I am that a big market NHL would/could flourish, I am equally convinced that a league of quality small markets could sustain themselves.

I don't see this as a ridiculous idea, in fact it seems to me this is a logical solution. As for the Stanley Cup, maybe neither league gets it and it retires to the HOF.

Hell, just split into two leagues and promote and relegate like European soccer. It's really the perfect solution. You could even have a third division with some of the AHL cities.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

I guess you guys don't have any confidence in your scouting skills or coaching skills to want to be able to just try and buy a team.
So here is a big F*CK YOU to you all.

I could care less about scouting.

That's not the issue, Oilernut,

The issue is that the Wings can afford to spend $70 million on players and your beloved oilers can barely afford $30 Million.

That is the issue.
It's as much about revenue disparity as it is anything else.

You small market chowderheads were so hung up on a salary cap that you refused to consider a meaningful luxury tax, which would have provided you the money to compete. You constantly pointed to baseball as PROOF that luxury taxes don't work, apparently unable to figure out that luxury taxes have levers that can be moved to achieve a desired effect.

You got what you want.
You ruined hockey.

And now you want UHL scrubs wearing your precious NHL jerseys.

Yet you claim to love your team.
You want Kevin Kerr skating where Wayne Gretzky once skated.

Good for you.

Get used to it.

Because that's all you're gonna have when the dust settles.

 

[MLH]

Aside from misguided Ranger fans who would be in favor of this? The NHL certainly wouldn't and the PA isnt about to watch 500 jobs disappear.

 

[OilerNut*]

Good luck at the Leafs and Rangers making as much money as they were when the league is only 6-8 teams.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Good luck at the Leafs and Rangers making as much money as they were when the league is only 6-8 teams.

Dude, have you been reading what business writers are writing about the NHL?
There ain't going to be an NHL.

 

[CarlRacki]

Hell, just split into two leagues and promote and relegate like European soccer. It's really the perfect solution. You could even have a third division with some of the AHL cities.

Won't happen. Never. Ever. Ever. Owners like Tom Golisano, Peter Karmanos, Eugene Melnyk aren't going to sit by and watch their multi-million dollar investments be relegated to minor league status. You think this lockout is bad? Just wait until the lawsuits, injunctions, restraining orders, etc. this fanciful little plan would inspire. We wouldn't see NHL hockey for five years.

 

[nedved93]

Good luck at the Leafs and Rangers making as much money as they were when the league is only 6-8 teams.

so you contend that only 6 to 8 teams could make money in this environment:

$45 million hard cap, $40 million soft cap with 100% luxury tax, 24% rollback, ELS reforms, sub-100% qualifiers, and two-way/final offer arbitration.

the issue, as Newsguyone correctly noted, is one of revenue DISPARITY! but this is all irrelevant now as the NHL plummets towards $30 million hard cap hell. enjoy watching your glorified version of the AHL, where mediocrity and "parity" reign supreme.

 

[Lowetide]

Hell, just split into two leagues and promote and relegate like European soccer. It's really the perfect solution. You could even have a third division with some of the AHL cities.

I don't see anything terribly wrong with that, although I don't know if some of these big markets would enjoy being relegated.

 

[OilerNut*]

Whats wrong with parity? Heaven forbid that every team has a chance at winning the cup.

 

[CarlRacki]

Dude, have you been reading what business writers are writing about the NHL?
There ain't going to be an NHL.

Dude, if you think a 10-15 team NHL is more valuable than a 30-team NHL, I'd seriously question your knowledge of the business world.

What national network is going to pay spit for a league in no more than eight U.S. markets? What national sponsor is going to cough up significant money for a regional game? What kind of merchandise sales is a 12-team league going to generate? Such a plan would absolutely devastate the league financially.

 

[Kessick]

Fox Sports airs just about every Red WIng game.
What do I care?

You small market whiners want to pull down the big markets.
The big market guys were willing to a luxury tax, and even some sort of salary cap.

But now that I've read the garbage posted by some of you guys, I've given up on you.

You live in a minor league town.
Deal with minor league hockey.

Let the real cities have real hockey.

Wonderfully said.

Big market owners were ready to make huge concessions for these small market teams. Why we must continue to foot the bills for teams that can't put fans in the seats shouldn't be our problem. I watch the Leafs get slammed year after year for this, yet they are always willing and have helped out Canadian teams.

Don't get me wrong, if I had a second favourite team, it would be the Oilers. I wouldn't want them to fold ever... but it's frustrating when they begin to whine and cry poor.

 

[nedved93]

Whats wrong with parity? Heaven forbid that every team has a chance at winning the cup.

because its utopian and unrealistic. one day fans complain that a group of teams has more financial resources than the next, and hence there should be "parity". the next day, one group of teams has more managerial and player development skill, and hence, there should be "parity" to legislate these advantages out of the game.

if you want to make this a healthier league, you begin by incentivizing a "build-from-within" philosophy, rather than mandate it artificially.

 

[CarlRacki]

the next day, one group of teams has more managerial and player development skill, and hence, there should be "parity" to legislate these advantages out of the game.

if you want to make this a healthier league, you begin by incentivizing a "build-from-within" philosophy, rather than mandate it artificially.

And how exactly is this done, oh master of the straw man?

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Whats wrong with parity? Heaven forbid that every team has a chance at winning the cup.

Why should their be exact parity?
If Detroit charges so much more for tickets, why shouldn't the fans get something for it?
If they're willing to pay top dollar, why should they have to watch garbage because fans in Edmonton can't supply their owners with enough money to compete?

Fans should get what they pay for.

 

[nedved93]

And how exactly is this done, oh master of the straw man?

the wit is overwhelming.

well, i've always wondered why no one has ever brought up the notion of a free agency salary cap? or perhaps a luxury tax based system (stringent, perhaps even with draft picks involved as penalties for breaching certain payroll thresholds) with exemptions for drafted players?

 

[X0ssbar]

I'm sorry, I'm not buying the statement that this deal is seperated by 2.5 million assuming section 7 has been dropped. There has to be more to this fiasco than what has been made public.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Dude, if you think a 10-15 team NHL is more valuable than a 30-team NHL, I'd seriously question your knowledge of the business world.

What national network is going to pay spit for a league in no more than eight U.S. markets? What national sponsor is going to cough up significant money for a regional game? What kind of merchandise sales is a 12-team league going to generate? Such a plan would absolutely devastate the league financially.

I didn't cancel the season.
I didn't hint at room for a deal and then snuff it out again.

I didn't anger my best publicity tool (EPSN) and my corporate sponsors.

The NHL is devestating itself.

When the dust settles, franchise values are toast.
There may be no tv revenue and sponsorship money.
There weak franchises are going to wither and die.

Up until now, I wanted a deal done.
But if they're going to drag this into next season, I'm done. A lot of fans feel the same way.
The NHL is offing itself.

It has only itself to blame when the franchises start folding.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

I'm sorry, I'm not buying the statement that this deal is seperated by 2.5 million assuming section 7 has been dropped. There has to be more to this fiasco than what has been made public.

I tend to agree.

Everyone is ripping Goodenow for losing control of the union.

But it looks like Bettman majorly misread his board of governors.
Many of them, it appears, want nothing more than the bust the union.

 

[MLH]

Why should their be exact parity?
If Detroit charges so much more for tickets, why shouldn't the fans get something for it?
If they're willing to pay top dollar, why should they have to watch garbage because fans in Edmonton can't supply their owners with enough money to compete?

Fans should get what they pay for.

Because it's cyclical. They can charge higher prices because they win. They can win because the buy the good players. They can buy the good players because they charge higher prices.

 

[X0ssbar]

I tend to agree.

Everyone is ripping Goodenow for losing control of the union.

But it looks like Bettman majorly misread his board of governors.
Many of them, it appears, want nothing more than the bust the union.

I have to admit that for the first time today I am starting to question the owner's motives. I also don't think their are clear cut sides anymore. Both Goodenow and Bettman are losing control.

 

[HabsRenegade]

So, what happens now?

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Because it's cyclical. They can charge higher prices because they win. They can win because the buy the good players. They can buy the good players because they charge higher prices.

Look at the Wings. There wasn't a worse team in the league for 30 years.
They've had a good 15 year run.
But now they're old and busted.
Now they have to rebuild. It was clear to all wings fans that the glory days were over. Signing players isn't sustainable. It helps keep a good team good. But it doesn't make a bad team good.


Regardless.
What in the hell is the big difference between $42,5 and $45 Million.

So the Wings and say 5 teams use that extra $2,5 million.
That's $12.5 Million.
Divided by 700 players.
Why in the world would the league imply it would move up and then do an about face?
Why?
Unless it was never their intention to sign a deal, then there is no reason.

 

[Lowetide]

So, what happens now?

NHLPA continues to say no to everything, small markets hang on for dear life but stand their ground, big markets grind their teeth into a fine white powder.

 

[CarlRacki]

I didn't cancel the season.
I didn't hint at room for a deal and then snuff it out again.

I didn't anger my best publicity tool (EPSN) and my corporate sponsors.

The NHL is devestating itself.

When the dust settles, franchise values are toast.
There may be no tv revenue and sponsorship money.
There weak franchises are going to wither and die.

Up until now, I wanted a deal done.
But if they're going to drag this into next season, I'm done. A lot of fans feel the same way.
The NHL is offing itself.

It has only itself to blame when the franchises start folding.

That's all well and good, but what does it have to do with the concept of a two-tiered or large-market only NHL?