Fans support Owners vs. Players because................

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by eye, Oct 14, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
View Users: View Users
  1. eye

    eye Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    around the 49th para
    Home Page:
    I think the bottom line is that fans support owners in all polls taken by increasing %'s because the owners at least come across as taking a stand for the good of the game and to keep rediculous ticket and associated costs down while the players only argument is that they won't work under a cap system with very little justification other than greed. Owners have acknowledged the mistakes they made out of being too competitive to satisfy their fans in the past so let's move forward. I really believe that if you would have asked every player in the NHL before they actually made the NHL how they felt about playing in a league that had a salary cap system and an average 1.3 million dollar wage level where they are treated like kings and icons that every player to a man would say and vote yes. What has changed? Greed and Goodenow. The players are losing the PR battle big time and their stubborn stance is going to cost many players their high paying hobbies.
     
  2. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Yes more fans are on the owners side.

    Why ???

    Fans are believing the BS that the owners are shoveling.

    The NHPA isn't trying to sugar coat anything, just coming out with what/how they feel. Not as concerned with winning the PR battle.
     
  3. dawgbone

    dawgbone Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Grow up... that's a pretty ignorant and generic comment you just made.

    Do you think I support the owners because I bought into the BS they are shovelling?

    Guess what? I didn't.

    I've been waiting for this day for years, because my small market team has continually lost it's top scorers for years. My small market team has also been limiting it's finaincial loses as much as possible, while at the same time keeping fairly low ticket prices.

    Why do I support the owners?

    Because I've watched the economics of this game continually gut my team. I've watched as every single contract around the NHL has a direct impact on what my team will be able to do in the off-season.

    So maybe, just maybe, not all of us are as dumb as you think. Some of us have been hoping for something like this for years, because we've seen the drawbacks to the current system, and we'd rather go through a winter without hockey to help prevent what we've seen over the past 6 or 7 years from continueing every year.
     
  4. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Your reason is valid if you're a fan of the Oilers, Flames, etc.

    Fans of the small-market teams should in theory be behind Bettman 100%.


    It is not valid however if you're a fan of the Leafs, Flyers, Avs, Red Wings etc.

    If you'e a fan of one of those teams, and are "rooting" for the Owners in to get your ticket prices lowered .... you're in never never land.
     
  5. Your weird. You should suppourt the cap, because its coming, and because now finally Philly wont just buy players, and still loose, but actually be on a even playing field, and create a good team so they can actually challenge for a title.

    We didn't even want Philly against the 03/04 cup champ Flames, because we knew it would end in 4 with the Flames winning, because Philly just cant compete with the current system.

    The Flyers want a cap so stop taking the greedy players side.
     
  6. chara

    chara Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    894
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    because the NHLPA's position is starting to sound like a broken record: NO SALARY CAP. Instead, they should start looking at solutions with a cap where they get some solid concessions.
     
  7. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    We've now resorted to my teams better than yours ??? Nice argument.

    For the record I'm not for either side, and my proposed solution would help the Flames in a big way, while hurting the Flyers.
     
  8. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:

    And the owners refuse to look at things such as a luxury tax system. Both sides are being very stubborn ... and that's why we don't have hockey.
     
  9. The owners are open to talk about a cap system, its the players being dumb, and Goodenow is the worst leader, when its all set and done, he will be shot by one fo the lower food chain players.

    The NHL has said no Luxury tax it wont work, so now the NHLPA needs to work under a cap system, and help the NHL come up with a nice solution to this.
     
  10. dawgbone

    dawgbone Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    True... fans of the Flyers, Leafs, Rangers, Wings probably aren't too happy... unless of course you feel like a team like Calgary or Edmonton should stay in the league and you want them in there.

    There are many fans who enjoy 2 or 3 teams (with one team that is a huge favorite). If one of those teams happens to be a small market team, then you may be more willing to side with the owners.

    If I was a diehard Philly fan, living in Philly, I'd probably hate the lockout... but I'm an Oilers fan in Toronto, and as it stands, I can make an 8 hour drive from where I live and see my team play in one of 10 different NHL cities.... 7 of which I can get and afford tickets in.

    If you are a Wings fan in Edmonton, wouldn't you pull for the Oilers to stick around so you can watch your wings live? Or a Rangers fan in Ottawa?

    There are lucky fans in 30 different cities who can see their team live at least once every 2 years. There are a lot of us who pull for teams in smaller and medium markets. Sure, you have 6 or 7 large markets, but it's everyone else that has been affected the past 6 or 7 years, because the big boys have been able to live within their means, while everyone else struggles. The majority of hockey fans need a CBA to keep their team viable, which is why a majority of hockey fans are pulling for the owners.

    We don't need a new CBA because Clarke and Snider are running their team into the ground... we need a new CBA because Clarke and Snider run a team with more revenues than most teams in the NHL, and spend a lot on salaries that other teams have to try to be comparable to in order to maintain a competetive team.
     
  11. mcphee

    mcphee Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Messages:
    19,101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    I think fans are on the ownership side for a few reasons. The players are less visible and are financially more removed from the fans than ever before. It is harder to be on their side. The Yashin's of the league, unfairly, give a lot of players a bad name. Also, the team emblem or the franchise is permanent, the players are temporary. I saw a young Bobby Hull and now the final days of his son,thier teams go on after they're gone and there are new players to cheer for. Fans, I think, like the permanent symbol, which they identify as ownership. Then again, I could be full of crap.
     
  12. dawgbone

    dawgbone Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The reason they are being stubborn is because neither side wants to "lose".

    The league doesn't want to give up their salary cap demands, because then they feel the players will view them as weak. Same thing vice versa for the players.

    Both sides are posturing, and until they stop trying to screw each other over (or worry about the other side screwing them over), and come together on a deal that benefits everyone, we aren't going to see much.

    The problem is both sides are worried about giving the first major concession. They need to sit down, without actual negotiations, and figure out where the league is, and what it needs.

    Without throwing words out like we want a cap, we want this.... it should be, what does the NHL (the league and players) need, and why do they need it.

    The NHL needs some sort of cost control - that's been agreed upon. Why do they need cost control? Well because of the revenue disparity throughout the league. The goal is to have 30 healthy franchises, with employment for 700+ players.

    The NHL needs some sort of revenue sharing - that's also been agreed upon. They need it, again, because of the revenue disparity. The Cost control methods alone are not a complete way of addressing that disparity.

    The NHL needs a working 2-way arbitration system - that's also been agreed upon. The players need a way to ensure they are being paid fairly, and the owners need a way to ensure they are paying a fair amount for a player.

    The nhl needs changes to the entry level system - yet another thing that's been agreed to. Players just entering the NHL should not be making the money they do.

    These are all things both sides have agreed to. It's now a matter of hammering out the details.

    The PA has to go in with the thinking that they aren't giving stuff up everytime the league gets something they are pushing for. The league has to go in with the thinking that the past is the past, it makes no sense to hold a grudge from the past 7 years or so.

    That isn't happening now... it won't be happening for a while. Not until the casualties mount so to speak. There won't be a fair deal if one side cracks... both sides need some casualties for real negotiations to set in.
     
  13. BLONG7

    BLONG7 Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Messages:
    20,792
    Likes Received:
    2,537
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    Home Page:
    Right on... a real fan cheers for the TEAM and the logo on the front of the shirt is far more important than the name on the back! The players should be looking at some sort of cap with the owners looking at revenue sharing and then go from there, maybe lower the age for free agency to 28-29? Just negotiate boys!!! :banghead:
     
  14. mcphee

    mcphee Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2003
    Messages:
    19,101
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    You know Blong, I have no doubt that at some point a type of cap/luxury tax will be adopted allowing both sides to claim victory.
     
  15. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:

    Agreed on all above points.

    One of the biggest is the revenue sharing question; although, I believe that that is something that needs to be settled among the owners .. with little or no NHLPA involvement.

    As a business owner myself, I can clearly understand the position of owners like Ed Snider (who built his organization from scratch, and made Philadelphia a successful hockey market) or Mike Illitch (who took over the Red Wings while they were in terrible shape and returned them to their former glory).

    I also understand the position of fans in Edmonton who keep seeing their best players leave year after year. Theere is no easy solution, but this should have been settled by now.
     
  16. mr gib

    mr gib Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2004
    Messages:
    5,853
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    rock and roller
    Location:
    vancouver
    Home Page:
    the owners will never agree to revenue sharing - remember there's a bunch that hate each other -
    i agree with the cap/revenue sharing concept - i don't think the owners can keep it together though - a few will always bend the rules to get the players they want -
     
  17. thinkwild

    thinkwild Veni Vidi Toga

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    8,906
    Likes Received:
    178
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Location:
    Ottawa
    Im pretty sure our owner in Ottawa and Floridas owner have been combatants in legal battles through their other businesses. I can imagine it being a hard pill for Melnyk to swallow if Ottawa had to send him money. Or wait, Ottawa is one of the smallest of small markets on its way to Portland. We will of course be receiving money?

    One of the reasons I think the makority of fans support the owners is because they look at the problem through their perspective. Which is quite natural. How can anyone not get by on $1.3mil is the question. Isnt that enough?

    When Microsoft scoops up small companies for hundreds of millions, why hundreds of millions for a small start up company. Surely a million dollars is enough to live on? I think its a different battle. You cant look at a number like $1.3mil and compare it the guys struggling by on $85,000 in construction. Only a few people at lunch watch them for one. But fair has to be defined in given they generate $2.x Billion dollars, what is fair.

    The other reason is the small market theory. It pains me that some fans wanting to prevent their struggles until they become good, think making everyone mediocre is a fair solution. I think the case has been made very well, and should be saleable if they tried.
     
  18. djhn579

    djhn579 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tonawanda, NY
    Gord Miller: Bill, you've talked a lot about the need for cost certainty in the National Hockey League, and there's another side to this problem that your solution doesn't really address and the players actually do and that's the revenue disparity between the really rich teams and the poor ones. How do you plan to address that disparity and how does cost certainty do that?



    Bill Daly: Well, we've said all along that to the extent this league needs enhanced revenue sharing to help support the revenue-challenged clubs to afford league competitive payrolls, that we're fully prepared to do that in a meaningful way, in the context of a partnership system with the Players Association. So that's not an issue with our ownership.

    http://tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=101548
     
  19. Jag68Sid87

    Jag68Sid87 Nothing Else Maattas

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2003
    Messages:
    34,307
    Likes Received:
    220
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    Montreal, QC
    On the first point, it's in fact because the PLAYERS themselves make constant references to assembly-line workers that fans get turned off, not the other way around.

    On the second point, I don't think fans want Philly and Toronto to struggle per se, but they would like to see their GM struggle with certain issues like, for instance: "Hmmm, Amonte or LeClair, which one shall I keep and which one shall I part with. I know I can't keep both." Or, "Hmmm, Nolan or Nieuwendyk..."

    It would be nice if each and every GM would have a level playing field, so that we could actually figure out who is the best talent evaluator and who's merely lucky to have Mr. Moneybags backing up his mistakes.

    Forcing the Detroit's and Philadelphia's of the world to actually make tough decisions on player personnel cannot be a bad thing for the overall good of the game. Heck, it would probably even be good for Detroit and Philadelphia, because it would force them to look a little more closely at what they have in their system, instead of constantly rummaging through the FA market like a band of wild dogs in a restaurant alley.

    And who knows, perhaps if these teams got a little younger from time to time, they'd have even more success.
     
  20. mr gib

    mr gib Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2004
    Messages:
    5,853
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    rock and roller
    Location:
    vancouver
    Home Page:
    he can blab all he wants - it hasn't happened yet -
     
  21. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Yep because the Flyers have all of one UFA on their entire team.
     
  22. djhn579

    djhn579 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tonawanda, NY
    steelworker_canada
    How does a salary cap help teams that were already below say 31 million in payroll and claiming to be losing 10's of millions of dollars now? (Carolina as an example) Won't the richer teams end up supplementing his losses with their profits?

    Gary Bettman
    We believe that meaningful revenue sharing among the teams will be a component of a new economic partnership. Please keep in mind that if all teams are playing on a more level playing surface then the fans in every market will have a more competitive team to support.

    http://www.nhl.com/fancentral/livechat/transcripts/bettman101304.html
     
  23. thinkwild

    thinkwild Veni Vidi Toga

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2003
    Messages:
    8,906
    Likes Received:
    178
    Trophy Points:
    156
    Location:
    Ottawa
    I agree, comments like Mcabes arent really helpful. I can see what he is saying and even agree with him when I see it from his perspective, but its not going to win any friends or influence people. They cant compare themselves to anyone else. It is quite different and has to be judged in its context. The pettiness fans feel towards their making this money is really something else too though.

    Actually I quite like seeing them stuck with the decision of, how am I going to build a successfull team now that after trying to buy the best players and outbid half a dozen teams for them has backfired.

    We do have that. Buying does talentless teams no good. Talented teams have the ability to buy.

    There will always be half the league that is losing by not making the playoffs, and a portion of them that are at the bottom. They dont need a level playing field. They need an uneven playing feild that allows them to properly develop cheaply until they have a team they can compete with again.

    Well I agree completely. It is in their best interests to get younger and cheaper. The system provides incentive for it.
     
  24. Jag68Sid87

    Jag68Sid87 Nothing Else Maattas

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2003
    Messages:
    34,307
    Likes Received:
    220
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Location:
    Montreal, QC
    Ok, well we're getting into semantics now I see, but just to call you on your point:

    Obviously, you are referring to Roenick, but you are not counting the 2 latest additions (Knuble and Stevenson). Plus, several players were acquired by the Flyers only because they could afford the player and the previous club could not, or chose not to pay him anymore (i.e. Tony Amonte).

    So, whether they don't jump at every chance to sign a UFA, they are part of the "haves", not the "have nots"
     
  25. mr gib

    mr gib Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2004
    Messages:
    5,853
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    rock and roller
    Location:
    vancouver
    Home Page:
    if the players accept a cap - we will expand revenue sharing - its typical owner rhetoric - probably the ultimate solution though - which circles back to determining league revenue - which is the major
    issue with the players - the owners are cooking the books in their favour -
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"