Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by s7ark, Sep 24, 2004.
Great article from the Edmonton Sun (www.canoe.ca)
Calgary Sun>Edmonton Sun
Great article though **** the players and there mommas.
Great article! Thank you!
Athletes are like stock options! Which means they are wasting assets with a finite life. They are about to lose 1 year off that life. One year that they cannot get back and are unlikely to every replace the lost earnings.
Clubs' life expectancy is infinite (in theory) and they do not suffer nearly as much as do the athletes. The present athletes' replacements are tuning up right now.
Everybody suffers some with this lockout but nobody more than the present players--especially the average player!
See ya next year, maybe!
In this article are the loss of NHL teams. Saskin himself questioned the effects of a lockout of marginal US teams. Here's his quote:
"The impact of this owners lockout on U.S. markets is going to be devastating," Saskin said. "The apparent indifference in certain U.S. markets speaks volumes as to how they're going to respond to a prolonged period without NHL hockey."
So, if the PA knows this and these owners are forced to dump their teams, there isn't going to be a guy in Cleveland, Houston, Portland, etc. that is going to take on an NHL team when interest hits an all time low, the games aren't exciting to get the fans back, no guaranteed TV money, competition from the big 3 sports, and college BB and FB. Sure, in stocks, you buy low and sell high, but if the stock is not going to go up for over a decade are you going to buy it? Hell no....
The writer hit it right on, the ones that will suffer the most are the 3rd and 4th liners. Either through a loss of NHL teams, possibly a reduction in roster sizes, or young talent ready to move up into the pros. So, hopefully they'll start to crack or follow their leaders and wind up out of the NHL due to contraction.
Many of these questions are why I don't see the NHLPA holding up. It's too easy for the people who get paid the big bucks to sit out, but for the younger players who have played 2-3 years in the NHL and can't go to the AHL or juniors, and aren't on the level to get a cushy contract in Europe, they have to sit by while everyone else makes the decisions.
212 players are set to make the league average or more "next season". 348 players are set to make less than the league average "next season". That's 62% of the league that probably wouldn't be affected by increases in salaries and would be happy to make their million or so a year. That means that 38% is really acting as the majority, and as many of the cushy European contracts expire and you see the money makers coming home to no work, they'll buckle. It could very well cost the players, owners, and worst of all the fans the entire season.
Instead of spending $897 million a year on players as the NHL is proposing, the NHLPA wants $1.242 billion to be spent on players instead.
More money is to be lost by the players who make the big bucks too. If the NHL wins and cuts salaries by 28% like they are proposing, your average $1 million salaries player becomes a $0.7 million player. BUT your $6 million player becomes a $4.3 million player, a much steeper drop off.
It's clear the money makers are in control of this one.
Maybe a few 10 hour bus rides will wake some of these players up. I think it's dispicable that players who claim to be in support of each other are signing by the dozens to play elsewhere. Having been a minor leaguer it's disgusting that lower level players are getting bumped out of their paying jobs by players that have enough money to sit tight and let their idiot boss take them down the garden path.
I agree with what you said in your post...the problem is that THOSE players you mentioned are also the ones who would be MOST SCREWED by a salary cap. I just posted a thread to try to inform the uninformed of that [not saying you're one of them Coyote...just trying to emphasize the point ]. Even though I completely agree with everyone that SOMETHING has to change. The problem is that A SALARY CAP IS NOT THE ANSWER...
Well that was my point, the money makers have the most to lose if there is a cap. The cap doesn't hurt the little guy nearly as much as the superstar, nor does the lockout. That's why I say the puck is definitely in the money makers zone.
Not really, the superstars will always get the money the market called for even with a cap. Many fans claim the success-story of the NHL Cap when in fact it's not a success story. GM's, Owners & players altogether complain with the lack of possibility a team is having because they can't get anymore depth so when the 1st injury comes in, unless you call him a SEASON INJURY which mean he can't play the rest of the season, if your tight with the cap, you're dead meat.
why NHLPA won't agree to a cap ? It's because it put the ''workers'' (3rd-4th line & #5-6-7 D) & Veterans in limbo fo being replace by borderline AHLer that most teams won't have the choice to put them in because the CAP can't get you a Cliff Ronning, Rob Dimaio. On the long run, 3rd-4th line specialist will also be in a lot of pressure to be replace.
That's what the cap is all about & you won't see any OWNER complaining by piling millions & millions of $$$ in their pockets.
Why shouldn't they be allowed to? Right now the players are making more then the owners. Don't you think the owners should make more than the players?
It's not as simple as you claim it to be.
My opinion is that for most owner & I'm not talking about the rich big spenders, a hockey franchise is not their bread & butter.
They had a team for the prestige of having one. If you ask me my opinion, I never believe the owners are in this battle for the love of the game, they are there because they like to win PERIOD.
I told this about for the thousand times at least, there's 2 sides to every story & you can't expect the other side to clean up your house becuase you said so. You can ask the players for help but you can't expect them to do all the work for you.
Well, I won't waste my time writing 2 pages again, you have your view & it's fine & in some ways I understand it. You want hockey & you want your team to be in it.
Separate names with a comma.