f1nn
Registered User
Post here what you think would be a fair CBA that would fix atleast some of the NHL's problems and still keeps players atleast moderately happy
So the desire is too make hockey profitable for owners who run their business poorly. Why should hockey owners enjoy such an exemption from the market realities that other businesses must operate under?vadardog said:With linkage, players get more money if hockey is popular (so its better than a cap), owners don't go broke if hockey becomes less popular than lawn bowling (so its better than a cap).
Weary said:So the desire is too make hockey profitable for owners who run their business poorly. Why should hockey owners enjoy such an exemption from the market realities that other businesses must operate under?
vadardog said:Because it will ruin hockey if rich teams buy all the players, where have you been for the last 10 years. In reality this is the owners fault. Their egos are getting in the way of good buisiness decisions. If they were smart they would amalgamate all 30 teams and then apply a 25 million dollar salary cap to each branch (team) of their company. Thats not collusion. With a 25 million cap for each team at least 90% of the best players in the world would still play in the NHL because the market reality is that nobody else offers salaries that good.
The Messenger said:I think the biggest mistake that the NHL is making is that they want too much all at once .. We have all heard the Baby steps theory before .. I support Domi gouging theory to a point .. That the owners are letting the last CBA cloud its judgment in this one as they want to recover from all mistakes over night .. This takes time and patience and needs to be done in steps. .
The NHL should have taken a deal that had a the 24% rollback and a hard cap with as you say luxury tax (which generates forced Revenue Sharing) .. Penalties start and $40 Mil and increase in levels up to the Max of 50 mil Hard Cap ..
This allows the market Salaries and players to adjust better going into a future system then trying to take players used to making $6-8 mil and suddenly like a huge shock make them accept $3-4 mil for the Stars to fit under a cap or your career is over.
With the appropriate drag on salaries with the systemic issues addressed of the CBA you are educating the young Stars of tomorrow Nash, Crosby, Heatley, etc that the days of $8 million dollar Salaries are a thing of the past .. We all know you can't miss what you never had, but the opposite forcing today's Stars to take 50% pay cuts or else is a tough transition for anyone ..
Also a Hard Cap floor is just as important IMO .. You have to force owners to spend their money to a minimum level .. That figure should be around $30 mil when the league has recovered. .This Washington selling off all its stars is an embarrassment to the league and so are 18 and 20 mil payroll teams.. There will be lots of UFA out there each year and with the big market teams Capped out lots of choices for other teams with room to add vets to make the team competitive for fans even while the rebuild with youth that takes place.
This next CBA will truly give these recent expansion teams to test their true success and financial viability in the NHL .. If after the 5 years teams are still losing money at the 30 mil range then you have to pull the plug on the experiment once and for all...
Linkage should be the goal of the next CBA .. It has trust issues and those can be addressed over the life of this CBA .. Put things in place to capture the data and test the accuracy of it, even involve a 3rd party to build trust and the partnership of tomorrow. .. Then if the Owners can prove that the reporting and numbers are accurate you have overcome a big hurdle, and simply turn on the switch in the next CBA that links the HARD CAP ceiling to a percentage of tested and proven revenue in the future when the Game is at its top in growth and recovery.
It also allows a smooth transition into linkage as hopefully with no lockout and 5 or 6 years on this CBA to restore the 2.1 bil industry then you have actual figures to make the Cap numbers not pure guesses ..
The Messenger said:I think the biggest mistake that the NHL is making is that they want too much all at once .. We have all heard the Baby steps theory before .. I support Domi gouging theory to a point .. That the owners are letting the last CBA cloud its judgment in this one as they want to recover from all mistakes over night .. This takes time and patience and needs to be done in steps. .
The NHL should have taken a deal that had a the 24% rollback and a hard cap with as you say luxury tax (which generates forced Revenue Sharing) .. Penalties start and $40 Mil and increase in levels up to the Max of 50 mil Hard Cap ..
.
garry1221 said:let's say team a has one allstar... say iginla, would he settle for 1.25 here when he could go oversea and make 2 or more mil?
PecaFan said:Frankly, I could care less. I *want* players out of the league who care more about money than hoisting the Cup.
I know for a fact that some players already feel this way. You can tell by their reactions to missing the playoffs, etc. They don't really care they missed, because it's unpaid time in their minds.
This would make a lovely litmus test.
Newsguyone said:Spoken like a guy who's never worked for a living.
People go to work. They get paid.
That's how it works in real life.
I like the Yzermans of the world. The guys who play for pride.
But these guys also deserve their money.
Maybe I've been blessed. But I've watched just about every Detroit game for the last decade, and I can't think of any guys who were "in it just for the money."
And given the way Illitch liberally spends his dough, you'd think we'd have seen more than our fair share.
You anti-player people need to get your heads on straight. A vast majority of the NHLers are good, hard working players.
But that isn't good enough, I guess.
Newsguyone said:Spoken like a guy who's never worked for a living.
People go to work. They get paid.
That's how it works in real life.
I like the Yzermans of the world. The guys who play for pride.
But these guys also deserve their money.
Maybe I've been blessed. But I've watched just about every Detroit game for the last decade, and I can't think of any guys who were "in it just for the money."
And given the way Illitch liberally spends his dough, you'd think we'd have seen more than our fair share.
You anti-player people need to get your heads on straight. A vast majority of the NHLers are good, hard working players.
But that isn't good enough, I guess.
ADDED:
For what it's worth, I also find it hilarious that people want NHLers to forgo money and play for the love of the cup.
Many of these same people attack the owners who pay extra (ie, forgo money) and play for the cup.
e-townchamps said:spoken like a true professional sports player.
I highly doubt they "deserve" their million dollar paycheques for playing a game while doctors save lives and get paid significantly less...
I remeber Greztky saying "everything I got in my life is from playing hockey". Maybe these players should wake up realize that they owe the game more than the game owes them.
e-townchamps said:I highly doubt they "deserve" their million dollar paycheques for playing a game while doctors save lives and get paid significantly less...
Newsguyone said:Spoken like a guy who's never worked for a living.
Weary said:So the desire is too make hockey profitable for owners who run their business poorly. Why should hockey owners enjoy such an exemption from the market realities that other businesses must operate under?
The Messenger said:I think the biggest mistake that the NHL is making is that they want too much all at once .. We have all heard the Baby steps theory before .. I support Domi gouging theory to a point .. That the owners are letting the last CBA cloud its judgment in this one as they want to recover from all mistakes over night .. This takes time and patience and needs to be done in steps. .
The NHL should have taken a deal that had a the 24% rollback and a hard cap with as you say luxury tax (which generates forced Revenue Sharing) .. Penalties start and $40 Mil and increase in levels up to the Max of 50 mil Hard Cap .. [/qote]
I wasn't a fan of the 24% roll back. I am not a player supporter but I dont agree with them being forced to give back money they earned and negotiated for. Even if it was negotiated in a bad CBA. I dont think that they should be making more money than the NHL can afford either. Players shouldbe paid with NHL earned money not money that comes from the owenrs oqwn pocket or other businesses.
I do like the idea of penalties. Even better when draft picks are thrown in aswell.
This allows the market Salaries and players to adjust better going into a future system then trying to take players used to making $6-8 mil and suddenly like a huge shock make them accept $3-4 mil for the Stars to fit under a cap or your career is over.
Again I dont really care if the players have a hard time adjusting to a new system. Either which way they are still be payed a boat load of money to play hockey.
I do agree taht penalties would create some kind of drag on salaries which for an industry that is claiming to be going broke. Not sure if it is a fsat enough solution to save all the teams. I can see some saying survival of the fittest. But that doesnt entail more revenue in the long run. A healthy 30 team league is much better and more profitable than a healthy 24 team league. At least you would think.
With the appropriate drag on salaries with the systemic issues addressed of the CBA you are educating the young Stars of tomorrow Nash, Crosby, Heatley, etc that the days of $8 million dollar Salaries are a thing of the past .. We all know you can't miss what you never had, but the opposite forcing today's Stars to take 50% pay cuts or else is a tough transition for anyone ..
I agree that it should be alot easier for the younger guys to adjust and not be as bitter as some guys who have just hit the big dollar age brackett only to find out theres a new CBA and they wont make that money they have been looking frward to for years.
Also a Hard Cap floor is just as important IMO .. You have to force owners to spend their money to a minimum level .. That figure should be around $30 mil when the league has recovered. .This Washington selling off all its stars is an embarrassment to the league and so are 18 and 20 mil payroll teams.. There will be lots of UFA out there each year and with the big market teams Capped out lots of choices for other teams with room to add vets to make the team competitive for fans even while the rebuild with youth that takes place.
I agree that a floor is a good idea. Its also imo fair for both parties. What the numbers are I dont know. There should be a floor so that every team spends a certain amount and just doesn't decide to get cheap with players. Which should benefit the players. But having a floor could help the owners aswell. Theres most likely gonna be some kind of reveneu sharing in order to help struggling teams get to what ever floor number they decide on. Then even if the teams getting help still lose money the Owners can all decide wether that team should be relocated, sold or just folded. Its a good way to make sure that poor teams dont drag the overall value of the league down. A healthy league benefits all parties involved.
This next CBA will truly give these recent expansion teams to test their true success and financial viability in the NHL .. If after the 5 years teams are still losing money at the 30 mil range then you have to pull the plug on the experiment once and for all...
I completely agree. I dont think any team should just be given a free ticket to opperate. They should be forced to prove that they can be successfull or at least stay afloat financially or be relocated, sold or folded up. Why keep a franchise in a market that simply cant or wont support a NHL team? It just hurts the players earning power and teh value of NHL franchises which Owners dont like either.
Linkage should be the goal of the next CBA .. It has trust issues and those can be addressed over the life of this CBA .. Put things in place to capture the data and test the accuracy of it, even involve a 3rd party to build trust and the partnership of tomorrow. .. Then if the Owners can prove that the reporting and numbers are accurate you have overcome a big hurdle, and simply turn on the switch in the next CBA that links the HARD CAP ceiling to a percentage of tested and proven revenue in the future when the Game is at its top in growth and recovery
I think there are different ways to get around what triggers salary cap raises. It doesn't always have to be around the year end revenue. There could be triggers that only apply to the first year of the CBA. Maybe a trigger regarding season tickets sold and oter type sponsorship money's. If these things sell almost as well as they did before the lockout then that could be a trigger right off the bat to increase salary cap or linkage or whatever to go to a higher level. Either way there is alot of flexibility in how to accomplish this aspect of the cba.
I definatly think there should be some kind of third party that goes over the finances of the NHL so that the players can feel good about getting there fair share. That way theres less chance of some kind of dirty book keeping by an owner. This would also protect the Owners from such accusations. I dont care at the moment what side is against this it just needs to get done in order to move forward imho.
I think with a third party there doesn't have to be any transition from a hard cap world to a linkage world. But I dont really care about that as long as a deal gets done that ensures small market teams have a fair shot at the players available. Oh and can stay afloat in the NHL if they do things right. This woudl be good if it can be done without taking advantage of the players ability to earn a living or the Owners ability to make some kind of profit. Balance would be nice.
Now we just have to get that moron Campbell out of his position and put someone in there who can improve the on ice product. The league is losing integritty with the way officiating and suspensions are done. How the heck are you supposed to know whats what anymore. Not very proffesional or unbiased imo.
This stuff needs to be cleaned up big time!
Thanks for the offer to educate, but your statement is off base. The whole idea behind supply-demand theory is that they reach equalibrium at some point. There is no requirement for cost constraints. They do not slow market conditions, they fully stop them by enacting artificial prices.DuklaNation said:Just to educate, when demand exceeds supply, price inflation occurs. In order to slow market conditions, cost constraints must be in put in place.
Weary said:Thanks for the offer to educate, but your statement is off base. The whole idea behind supply-demand theory is that they reach equalibrium at some point. There is no requirement for cost constraints. They do not slow market conditions, they fully stop them by enacting artificial prices.
Markets are normally self-correcting. The market for NHL players is no exception. The problem is, some owners do not want to do business in the same market as other owners. And that's the heart of the NHL's economic woes.
PecaFan said:Spoken like someone who values money over everything else.
In my lifetime, I've turned down numerous jobs that paid better than I was currently making. Sometimes, it was out of sense of loyalty to my current employer. He took a risk hiring me when I didn't have much experience to my name, that deserved to be rewarded. Sometimes it was for family, I'd rather make less and stay closer to my family than be stuck thousands of miles away. And before I retired, I valued my freedom so that I could travel with my wife, so I ran my own businesses, again making less than I could have had I worked for someone else.
Not that you'll understand any of this. You'll just say "You FOOL! You could have made more $15K more working somewhere else!"
PecaFan said:Spoken like someone who values money over everything else.
In my lifetime, I've turned down numerous jobs that paid better than I was currently making. Sometimes, it was out of sense of loyalty to my current employer. He took a risk hiring me when I didn't have much experience to my name, that deserved to be rewarded. Sometimes it was for family, I'd rather make less and stay closer to my family than be stuck thousands of miles away. And before I retired, I valued my freedom so that I could travel with my wife, so I ran my own businesses, again making less than I could have had I worked for someone else.
Not that you'll understand any of this. You'll just say "You FOOL! You could have made more $15K more working somewhere else!"
Newsguyone said:You don't know jack about me.
I've made several of the same decisions my life.
My monetary needs are modest. In fact, I think the money in pro-sports is completely obscene.
But I can't change that. So I'm asking myself who is right. Or less wrong.
Well, let's see.
The owners aren't going to voluntarily cap ticket prices, revenues or profits, are they?
So why should the players accept a cap on salaries.
This is my beef.
If the owners were willing to make four promises, I'd join their side:
1. We will cap ticket prices for the duration of the contract.
2. We will cap profits. Excess profits will go into a fund run by the NHL and the PA and will be used market the game of hockey or build the sport in Canada and the US.
3. As well as a salary cap, there will also be significant revenue sharing.
4. We will attempt to bring hockey back to Winnipeg and we will explore hockey in Quebec City.
If the NHL was concerned with "saving the game", they're list of demands would include these kinds of items.
But they;re not concerned with saving the game. Not at all. I've watched these bumbling jack****** almost ruin the game over the last decade. From its finances, to the ridiculous franchise locations, to the on-ice product.
Say what you want about the greedy players. The owners are just as greedy, and they are the ones who've steered this league into a ditch.
Yet, they don't feel like any of the onus is on them when it comes to fixing this thing.
Newsguyone said:1. We will cap ticket prices for the duration of the contract.
2. We will cap profits. Excess profits will go into a fund run by the NHL and the PA and will be used market the game of hockey or build the sport in Canada and the US.
3. As well as a salary cap, there will also be significant revenue sharing.
4. We will attempt to bring hockey back to Winnipeg and we will explore hockey in Quebec City.