Jaded-Fan
Registered User
Thunderstruck said:The major difference is that this proposal contains a hard cap at $50 M not allowing for the unlimited spending favoured by the Yankees.
If the only way most teams can make money is (currently) a cap somewhere under $40 million, then I still say that allowing an uneven playing field of about 40% higher aggregate salaries for some teams should not be allowed as the league as a whole benefits when there is a fairly even playing field. Look at football:
1) All is dependent on draft and FA signings, so there is excitement during the season AND the off-season in every city as your team management makes moves, not dink moves, but real ones with important players. I have seen big names leave the Steelers almost every year, but new big names come into their own or be brought in. It is an exciting thing to watch, and that generates interest.
2) Percieved thumbs on the scales against your team have to weigh on the popularity of the sport.
3) It makes championships mean much more as you actually did not have a leg up
4) I would bet that the sport would grow, it happened in football, it happened in basketball, get the house in proverbial order and it would happen in hockey, increasing ironically salaries for everyone.