Leafs No Longer Keeping Facilities Open in Off Season:

[Stephen]

This is just petty nonsense.

The league will likely waive Nashivilles cap recapture penalty for Weber, a contract blatantly circumventing the cap. Arizona flat out tested predraft posoects in dorect violation of league rules but apparently its the Leafs keeping the lights on over the summer at a runk and gym that required immediate action

When the world returns to normal, the Leafs should simply offer these facilities to all NHLers and AHLers regardless of team affiliation and really show who daddy is.

Though who can really say if all 32 owners will make it out of the Covid shutdown anyway.

 

[Mickey Marner]

To me this has Jeremy Jacobs written all over it. The Bruins players don't stick around in Boston over the summer and Jacobs' arsehole puckers up tighter than a snare drum when it comes to spending.

 

[Stephen]

Have to love the NHL

You can't even open facilities if players want to train and make themselves better in the off-season

What's next? We start chopping off limbs if you want to add something to your offensive arsenal in the off-season as well?

Wouldn't want anybody to gain an advantage through their own hard work and perseverance

The NHL should just develop some minimal standards the used car salesmen owners feel comfortable with.

 

[stickty111]

NHL was becoming a laughing stock and this just pushes them even more in that direction. We can't even use our facilities, just because other teams are upset they are cheap?
How is that the Leafs problem?
This isn't a surprise though. Bettman has always been about making lower market teams like Florida look relevent.

 

[stickty111]

Imagine the NBA telling the Lakers hey your forbidden from using your facilities.
Except they won't because the NBA actually knows the big market teams are the lifeline of the League. Unlike the NHL who wants a team like Arizona to stay healthy at the expense of the biggest market in the league.
Then the NHL cries "why aren't we as popular as the NBA"?

 

[rojac]

Imagine the NBA telling the Lakers hey your forbidden from using your facilities.
Except they won't because the NBA actually knows the big market teams are the lifeline of the League. Unlike the NHL who wants a team like Arizona to stay healthy at the expense of the biggest market in the league.
Then the NHL cries "why aren't we as popular as the NBA"?

I'd honestly be surprised if there weren't similar rules (maybe not the exact same one) in the NBA that limited the advantages of big market teams, but without doing a detailed analysis of the NBA CBA, I can't say for certain.

However, you seem very certain in your statement, so perhaps you point me to something that supports your argument that no such rules exists in the NBA.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Check this shit out

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

The Leafs should just ignore the NHL and do what they want, make them turn it into an issue.

This is completely asinine, and I’m tired of our team and fans being the leagues piggy bank, if you can’t compete without a handout, then maybe you shouldn’t exist.

At the very least if you are getting a handout stop being petty about teams trying to improve.

I hope this blows up in the leagues face, what an absolute joke.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Salary cap and revenue sharing must go. With that however many teams fold fold. The league should be subsidizing Canadian teams than earn in Canadian dollars and pay out in US dollars. Its a competitive disadvantage.
Canadian teams are profitable and pay most of the revenue sharing in case anyone didn’t know that.
So how bad are these Corporate welfare cases that are earning in US dollars and still can’t pay their bills. Is the best hockey league in the world really the place for welfare teams that don’t have fans or revenue! Are the Leafs and Rangers,Philly,Detroit and all other Canadian ( except scuzzy ottawa owners team)teams completely out of their minds.

What would league revenues look like if all Canadian teams and a few of the rich American teams broke away from them. The cup is strictly ownership of Canada to boot. Etc

 

[HolyCrap]

The NHL is so bush league and the sad part is it doesn't even know it.

Bettman's 32 team league has so many window dressing markets that seem to exist only for the league to puff its chest about how big it is, but are only financially viable by being propped up by big markets that gouge its fans. And now those teams are being handcuffed so they can't find innovative ways to reinvest and improve the product because the financial stability of the league is basically tofu.

But yes, can't wait to secure that 90s era US Cable deal and watch my Toronto Maple Leafs take on the Jacksonville Swamp Lizards in the first round of the 2030 Stanley Cup finals.

I wanna super duper like this post. Basically said what I wanted to say but you did it way better.

 

[BertCorbeau]

Check this shit out
View attachment 354345

Certainly puts Stamkos and Kucherov's "discounts" in perspective

 

[rojac]

Salary cap and revenue sharing must go. With that however many teams fold fold. The league should be subsidizing Canadian teams than earn in Canadian dollars and pay out in US dollars. Its a competitive disadvantage.
Canadian teams are profitable and pay most of the revenue sharing in case anyone didn’t know that.
So how bad are these Corporate welfare cases that are earning in US dollars and still can’t pay their bills. Is the best hockey league in the world really the place for welfare teams that don’t have fans or revenue! Are the Leafs and Rangers,Philly,Detroit and all other Canadian ( except scuzzy ottawa owners team)teams completely out of their minds.

What would league revenues look like if all Canadian teams and a few of the rich American teams broke away from them. The cup is strictly ownership of Canada to boot. Etc

Why would the rich teams want to be rid of the cap and revenue sharing? If there was no cap, I can almost guarantee that the top teams would be paying more money in salaries than they are currently paying in salaries and revenue sharing combined. Why would they want to get rid of something that saves them money?

As for the Stanley Cup, an agreement with the Cup trustees in 1947 put it pretty much firmly in the hands of the NHL.

 

[93LEAFS]

It's definitely due to teams frustrated due to how many guys live here year-round (especially Marlies). It is annoying as hell though. Especially considering how many broke franchises we are going have to prop up after this pandemic ends.

The NHL loses markets, Leafs likely get a bigger share of existing deals, if these markets aren't holding there weight in contributing to the TV deal.

 

[93LEAFS]

The Leafs should just ignore the NHL and do what they want, make them turn it into an issue.

This is completely asinine, and I’m tired of our team and fans being the leagues piggy bank, if you can’t compete without a handout, then maybe you shouldn’t exist.

At the very least if you are getting a handout stop being petty about teams trying to improve.

I hope this blows up in the leagues face, what an absolute joke.

They'll fine us and take draft picks.

It sucks. We aren't one of the 24 teams Bettman builds his power around.

 

[93LEAFS]

Why would the rich teams want to be rid of the cap and revenue sharing? If there was no cap, I can almost guarantee that the top teams would be paying more money in salaries than they are currently paying in salaries and revenue sharing combined. Why would they want to get rid of something that saves them money?

As for the Stanley Cup, an agreement with the Cup trustees in 1947 put it pretty much firmly in the hands of the NHL.

How does revenue sharing save them money? It costs them money. The cap does though.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

How does revenue sharing save them money? It costs them money. The cap does though.

They’re saying the cap keeps salaries lower then the money they would spend with out it. Basically arguing that without revenue sharing there would be no cap and vice versa.

Not entirely sure I agree, but I think the cap is the right choice. I just want want taxes to be a factor and what Toronto spends on its players and facilities should just be Toronto’s business. Profitable well run team should be able to invest in their players.

 

[93LEAFS]

They’re saying the cap keeps salaries lower then the money they would spend with out it. Basically arguing that without revenue sharing there would be no cap and vice versa.

Not entirely sure I agree, but I think the cap is the right choice. I just want want taxes to be a factor and what Toronto spends on its players and facilities should just be Toronto’s business. Profitable well run team should be able to invest in their players.

The cap saves them money. Revenue-sharing with other teams doesn't save them money, it quite clearly costs the haves of the league a fair amount of money. They aren't completely connected. The cap being derived by a percentage of HR revenue does. I thought we are talking about revenue-sharing between teams. They are two separate features of the CBA's since 2005.

 

[rojac]

How does revenue sharing save them money? It costs them money. The cap does though.

Take the Leafs current payroll (under the cap) and add the amount that they pay in revenue sharing. I believe that total is less than what the Leafs payroll would be if there was n cap.

 

[Stephen]

I'm pretty sure the whole point of this HRR split between players and owners and cap parity world was built to ensure a level of franchise health while the NHL pursued that NFL style cable contract and the hockey world could live happily ever after.

But 15 years on, it just seems like a bit of a Ponzi Scheme where the big market crowds pay through the nose to attend NHL games while having their teams financial advantage neutered so a whole host of other cities can enjoy NHL hockey at discount rates.

And at this stage in the game, is cable television still going to be the big fish? What about in 2030? Is US Cable TV even going to be there given how people are ditching cable subscription in droves and the Sportsnet deal was such an overpay?

Seems like the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow was just tapping into the GTA revenue stream. Over and over and over.

 

[Wafflewhipper]

Why would the rich teams want to be rid of the cap and revenue sharing? If there was no cap, I can almost guarantee that the top teams would be paying more money in salaries than they are currently paying in salaries and revenue sharing combined. Why would they want to get rid of something that saves them money?

As for the Stanley Cup, an agreement with the Cup trustees in 1947 put it pretty much firmly in the hands of the NHL.

It really is not very clear according to this McLeans article. The league settled because there is legal grounds out there that weren’t good for them. If there was a chance for the Nhl to gain full control they wouldn’t have settled out of court with some beer leaguer’s. Beer leaguers with big balls.
The Cup is ours: a manifesto - Macleans.ca

 

[93LEAFS]

Take the Leafs current payroll (under the cap) and add the amount that they pay in revenue sharing. I believe that total is less than what the Leafs payroll would be if there was n cap.

Except they aren't directly connected. They are two separate parts of a CBA

 

[Wafflewhipper]

I'm pretty sure the whole point of this HRR split between players and owners and cap parity world was built to ensure a level of franchise health while the NHL pursued that NFL style cable contract and the hockey world could live happily ever after.

But 15 years on, it just seems like a bit of a Ponzi Scheme where the big market crowds pay through the nose to attend NHL games while having their teams financial advantage neutered so a whole host of other cities can enjoy NHL hockey at discount rates.

And at this stage in the game, is cable television still going to be the big fish? What about in 2030? Is US Cable TV even going to be there given how people are ditching cable subscription in droves and the Sportsnet deal was such an overpay?

Seems like the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow was just tapping into the GTA revenue stream. Over and over and over.

Well thought out and hits the nail right on the head. Fully agree. These expansion team’s were always pre conceived in the Nhl’s decision to go to states with lower taxes. Even moved teams were set up like that.

 

[Go4soda]

I would’ve liked to see mlse fight this one in court. They always seem to take the high road in instances like this where the league settles matters with lesser teams at their expense. These facilities are owned and operated by the team’s parent company, and I don’t see how the nhl has any grounds to impose such a restriction on their use. It transcends the bubble that is the nhl and it’s regulations. It’s just basic property law.

 

[leaffaninvancouver]

One thing I will say that surprises me, is the amount of universal outrage. Even people who don’t like the Leafs think this is grade A bullshiat.

 

[Polk High]

If you can't offer your players year round practice and training facilities you really have no business in professional sports...