Healy is absolutly the worst Media guy i have seen for biased!

[Chayos]

Geez i was watching todays Sport on TSN and i have to say I cringe anytime Healy talks any ways, but his comment today absolutly floored me!

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/main.asp


To say that teh players would not be interested in a cap based on revenue isn't going to work for the players because the revenues are going to drop isn't something that he should have said. The players are going to be one of the biggest reasons for the backlash and accordingly they should bear their 54% of the blame.

If i choose not to renew by Bell nhl package the major reason would be because the players have pissed me off so bad. I am sure a lot of other fans feel teh same but to have healy say the player effectively want no part of the economic cost of their greed absolutly pisses me off. Man if there was ever a guy who by opening his mouth sabotages the players Healy is it.


All i have to say is If i was running teh NHL PA i would have a gag order on all the players with a fine to go with it just like teh owners. The players and their cronies have done nothing but tarnish their image through out this process and this is just another case of it!

Click to read more...

 

[Russian Fan]

Geez i was watching todays Sport on TSN and i have to say I cringe anytime Healy talks any ways, but his comment today absolutly floored me!

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/main.asp


To say that teh players would not be interested in a cap based on revenue isn't going to work for the players because the revenues are going to drop isn't something that he should have said. The players are going to be one of the biggest reasons for the backlash and accordingly they should bear their 54% of the blame.

If i choose not to renew by Bell nhl package the major reason would be because the players have pissed me off so bad. I am sure a lot of other fans feel teh same but to have healy say the player effectively want no part of the economic cost of their greed absolutly pisses me off. Man if there was ever a guy who by opening his mouth sabotages the players Healy is it.


All i have to say is If i was running teh NHL PA i would have a gag order on all the players with a fine to go with it just like teh owners. The players and their cronies have done nothing but tarnish their image through out this process and this is just another case of it!

Maybe you will jump on me too because because right now, I think the PA is taking a GOOD LOOK at a cap but they won't do it AT ALL COST can you understand that ?

They perfectly know that a cap without a ''meaningful'' revenue sharing plan won't help the small markets teams. It will only get rich team richer in profit$ but it won't adress the ''real'' financial problem of the small teams.

It's funny how things turned around & we see the REAL FACE OF THE OWNERS IN THIS.

For so many months they claim that they do this to save the STATE OF THE GAME which means 30 financially healthy franchises but right now the OWNERS have NO INTENTIONS to commit each other to save the small market.

The PA's is not fool you know, a hard cap can be instaured by the owners but IF it doesn't give any ''meaningful'' amount of money to the poor teams , they still will have a hard time making money (a 20M$ payroll team suddenly have to absolutely get a 32-34M$ payroll).

The PA's can look at having a cap but it need to adress EVERY FRANCHISE to be HEALTHY financially , in order to save the 30 franchises.

Why the PA care about that ? Because if it doesn't adress the situation , team can be contracted meaning they have a cap but some team still struggling financially meaning less job for the PA.

having a 32 to 40M$ hard cap will still give a lot of team having a hard time getting financially healthy & the revenue plan will be the only thing that will help them & if the OWNERS is not committed to that , the PA's won't be committed to a form of COST CERTAINTY.

 

[PecaFan]

I don't like Healy either, but in this case, he's right. I've been saying this same thing for a long time here.

The last ten years have been ones of massive growth in revenues, coming largely from expansion, tons of new buildings, and fantastic tv contracts. But all those things are over and done with, you can't keep doing them forever.

It's because of this massive growth in incoming money that salaries went through the roof. Teams got more money, and plugged it right back into the team in the form of pay raises etc for on ice talent.

And this is the reason that the owners want to tie salaries to revenues. They know the revenues have flatted, and can no longer support the growth in salaries. And the players know it too, which is why they resist linkage.

 

[espo*]

Nick Kypreo's ain't far behind him.It's alway the players with Nick.....he can't seem to ever be objective no matter what aspect of this lock-out they are discussing on hockey central.Sometimes Watters has this look on his face when listening to him that screams "are the players sent from God or something Nick?"

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

EVERYONE says the players are greedy, but how about the large market teams refusing to share their regular season revenue with smaller markets? Isnt that a little.........greedy? Especially if it would help keep the NHL a healthy league for all teams. Why wont the NHL do meaningful revenue sharing?

 

[mooseOAK*]

Healey and Kypreos are there to show the players' side, Watters and Burke the owners. It is "entertainment" value, inasmuch as this can be called entertaining.

 

[Fish]

Well not everyone thinks it's the players...Mike Brophy of the Hockey News sides with the players, while Larry Brooks of the NY Post is rabidly anti-owner. It just depends who you get see most...

There appears to be little support amongst owners for revenue sharing because of the cases of Chicago and a lesser extent Boston. These two teams have looked at making a profit first and spending second, which irks some of the other big market owners who don't want to be subsidizing their businesses. Bottom line, (as it is with many of these issues), it's a case of owners not trusting each other.

 

[OilerFan4Life]

I sometimes think that TSN pays him to be so pro player cause no one can be that much of a one sided jackass.

 

[BLONG7]

I sometimes think that TSN pays him to be so pro player cause no one can be that much of a one sided jackass.

Kinda like the Leafs and Domi...

 

[OilerFan4Life]

Kinda like the Leafs and Domi...

Hey hey no reason to get "leaf nation" pissed off. Last time that happened I believe there was some sort of death threat made to an oiler fan.

Leaf fans

 

[espo*]

Healey and Kypreos are there to show the players' side, Watters and Burke the owners. It is "entertainment" value, inasmuch as this can be called entertaining.

yeah but Watters and Burke are not adverse to saying when they can't understand what the owners are trying to do with some of their behaviour.They will question them and i've seen them do it on several occasions.I can't say the same for ole Nick........the players are always in the right with him.Big difference.

 

[vanlady]

Well not everyone thinks it's the players...Mike Brophy of the Hockey News sides with the players, while Larry Brooks of the NY Post is rabidly anti-owner. It just depends who you get see most...

There appears to be little support amongst owners for revenue sharing because of the cases of Chicago and a lesser extent Boston. These two teams have looked at making a profit first and spending second, which irks some of the other big market owners who don't want to be subsidizing their businesses. Bottom line, (as it is with many of these issues), it's a case of owners not trusting each other.

And the players should?

 

[CarlRacki]

Why the PA care about that ? Because if it doesn't adress the situation , team can be contracted meaning they have a cap but some team still struggling financially meaning less job for the PA.

having a 32 to 40M$ hard cap will still give a lot of team having a hard time getting financially healthy & the revenue plan will be the only thing that will help them & if the OWNERS is not committed to that , the PA's won't be committed to a form of COST CERTAINTY.

Again, this (false) notion that smaller-market teams will be screwed by a salary floor is addressed in part 8 the owners' CBA proposal from December.

8. Revenue Sharing. In connection with our new economic system, as we have previously explained to you, we intend to implement meaningful revenue sharing by and between the Clubs. As you know, we previously provided you with an extensive description of concepts for enhanced revenue sharing -- including over 30 different models of potential revenue sharing scenarios. We reiterate our willingness to implement, in conjunction with a new economic system, an enhanced revenue sharing program that will allow the new system to operate as intended. Under our proposed approach, all 30 of our Clubs (assuming an appropriate level of business performance within their respective markets), would be provided the ability to spend within the prescribed payroll range.

There's your revenue sharing. What more needs to be said?

 

[Street Hawk]

Back to the original point.

Again, this (false) notion that smaller-market teams will be screwed by a salary floor is addressed in part 8 the owners' CBA proposal from December.

8. Revenue Sharing. In connection with our new economic system, as we have previously explained to you, we intend to implement meaningful revenue sharing by and between the Clubs. As you know, we previously provided you with an extensive description of concepts for enhanced revenue sharing -- including over 30 different models of potential revenue sharing scenarios. We reiterate our willingness to implement, in conjunction with a new economic system, an enhanced revenue sharing program that will allow the new system to operate as intended. Under our proposed approach, all 30 of our Clubs (assuming an appropriate level of business performance within their respective markets), would be provided the ability to spend within the prescribed payroll range.

There's your revenue sharing. What more needs to be said?

The originator of this thread makes a very valid point. I for one have always been of the belief that if there was a lockout, the Owners would have to stick to their guns and get some form of Cost Certainty, because any work stoppage would anger fans and cause a backlash, meaning a decrease in Revenue, which the owners would need to pass along to the Players.

The PA, at some point should have done this: OK, Gary, if we do accept a Linkage between Player Costs and Revenue, this is what we want to see from the league before any such agreement is accepted:

1) An Independent Audit of all 30 teams (costs to be paid for by both sides) to get the real numbers
2) Provide the NHL with some parameters of a type of Revenue Sharing Plan. In order for teams to participate, they need to sell X number of season ticket, luxury boxes, rink advertising, etc.

IMO, the PA miscalculated the Owners determination to get Cost Certainty. The Average NHL salary was 1.8 million, and multiplied by 700 players, 1.26 Billion Dollars. How much money have players earned this season? (Let's take out the money they get for their lockout pay). 400 guys are in Europe and I'd say about another 50 or so are in the minors. At best the average salary for these 450 guys is about 150K. So, a best case scenario is that they've earned at most 70 million.

Can the PA keep this up for another season?

And for the Owners, they should have done the above as well. Make the hard cap offer and show them your Revenue Sharing Plan. Also, the League should have shown the players the costs, outside of player salaries, like marketing, rent, transportation, hotel, equipment, front office, etc. that go into running a pro hockey team. The players would then have some understanding as to the 54% number the owners have offered.

As for Healy and Kypreos, yeah, can't stand either of them. It took JD on Sportsnet to say that Bob needs to start reigning in his guys after McCabe blasted Gary after he got CUT/DROPPED/DUMP by his Swedish Club. Only then, did Kypreos agree, cause a former player in JD said something like that. Healy, always says, it's refreshing to hear someone speak his mind without fear of a fine. Yeah, Glen, name calling is so Refreshing....

 

[kerrly]

Hey hey no reason to get "leaf nation" pissed off. Last time that happened I believe there was some sort of death threat made to an oiler fan.

Leaf fans

Yeah I was the one who got a death threat. I was actually worried for about 2 seconds. Just let Leaf nation be.

 

[rwilson99]

Well not everyone thinks it's the players...Mike Brophy of the Hockey News sides with the players, while Larry Brooks of the NY Post is rabidly anti-owner. It just depends who you get see most...

There appears to be little support amongst owners for revenue sharing because of the cases of Chicago and a lesser extent Boston. These two teams have looked at making a profit first and spending second, which irks some of the other big market owners who don't want to be subsidizing their businesses. Bottom line, (as it is with many of these issues), it's a case of owners not trusting each other.

Screw Chicago and Boston. The NHLPA should agree to 58% of revenues with cost certainty, just throw in a 70-30 split of gate reciepts.

The deal is sitting there if the PA just reads between the lines.

Betmann needs 8 to block a deal, but only 16 teams to approve one.

 

[OilerFan4Life]

Yeah I was the one who got a death threat. I was actually worried for about 2 seconds. Just let Leaf nation be.

yeesh...and I though only Oakland Raider fans could have it in them to do something like that.

 

[likea]

Screw Chicago and Boston. The NHLPA should agree to 58% of revenues with cost certainty, just throw in a 70-30 split of gate reciepts.

The deal is sitting there if the PA just reads between the lines.

Betmann needs 8 to block a deal, but only 16 teams to approve one.

do your math again...

 

[Leaf Army]

Healy is absolutly the worst Media guy i have seen for biased!

When will people realize that's what TSN wants him to do. His job is to represent the players viewpoint.

It's not that hard to figure out.

TSN
Healy- Players
Burke- Owners
McKenzie- Moderate

Sportsnet
Kypreos- Players
Watters- Owners
Stellick- Moderate

 

[Fish]

And the players should?

Not sure what your point is here...

This has always been about owners wanting to restrict owners...it just so happens that the players disagree with the way the owners want to do it and the owners need the players approval to go forward.