TomWaits
Registered User
- Feb 27, 2002
- 1,491
- 0
I have to admit I’m not sure where I heard this original idea but I here is my solution to the labour talks.
When you look at the two sides of the arguments both sides have valid points. The players were not the ones that over paid themselves – it was the owners. On the other hand the owners need to protect themselves for other owners. With 75% of revenue going to salaries it out of whack. I also understand why players would not want to pigeon hole themselves into a salary cap and why the owners need to. Getting rid of Bettman or disbanding the NHL is also not the idea, there is a middle groud solution.
My idea is to combine an open market and a salary cap together.
The main source of revenue for the NHL is the Gate. So the question is who draws the fans through the gate?
Let’s take the Stanley Cup Champions as an example:
How many fans bought tickets to see Jassen Cullimore play? Or players like Tim Taylor, Darryl Sydor or Brad Lukowich? On the other hand how many bums were put in the seats because of Martin St.Louis, Nikolai Khabibulin, Vincent Lecavalier and Brad Richard?
These players are what each team focuses it’s marketing on. These are the players that make the NHL run. Not to diminish the importance of Lukowich and Sydor because I’m sure the superstars on the Lightning will tell you they were keys to them winning the cup.
I propose that the league creates a salary cap for each team and allow 5 players to be exempt for that Cap: similar to the Larry Bird rule in the NBA several years ago. In keeping with the example of Tampa Bay. They would probably set these players as their franchise-Cap exempt players:
Brad Richards
Vincent Lecavalier
Nikolai Khabibulin
Martin St.Louis
Freddy Modin
The ownership in Tampa Bay could pay each of those players what the “market†would dictate for Franchise players. If the Tampa Bay ownership felt that they could only afford two or three of these players the other two would have to be dealt or signed under the Cap. Teams would not have to have 5 Franchise players if they could not afford it or they wanted to leave room to trade for one later. Calgary might be an example of a team that only has one or two designated Franchise players.
Let’s take this scenario to the other end of the payroll scale. It also allows teams like the Rangers, Leafs and Detroit that have deep-pocketed owners the ability to sign high priced players.
The key is going to signing your 5 Franchise players wisely. Take the Rangers if they designated Jagr, Holik, Kovalev, Nedved and Lindros as their Franchise players they would be in serious trouble (as they are, they misspent their money.)
The other 17 players would be paid under the cap. I would suggest a cap somewhere in the 12-14 million dollar range. This would also allow teams who are smart with their money to sign a few mid-range quality players in the million-dollar range.
As for people who think that this would create a tiered system of upper and lower class players you are right but the league has that now. I do not believe that high level players making high level money is what’s wrong with the NHL it is over inflated salaries of the middle and lower range players.
I would also suggest that teams are fined heavily if they go over the cap, and additional cap is allowed if players are lost for the season due to injury.
Hey just my two cents
TomWaits
When you look at the two sides of the arguments both sides have valid points. The players were not the ones that over paid themselves – it was the owners. On the other hand the owners need to protect themselves for other owners. With 75% of revenue going to salaries it out of whack. I also understand why players would not want to pigeon hole themselves into a salary cap and why the owners need to. Getting rid of Bettman or disbanding the NHL is also not the idea, there is a middle groud solution.
My idea is to combine an open market and a salary cap together.
The main source of revenue for the NHL is the Gate. So the question is who draws the fans through the gate?
Let’s take the Stanley Cup Champions as an example:
How many fans bought tickets to see Jassen Cullimore play? Or players like Tim Taylor, Darryl Sydor or Brad Lukowich? On the other hand how many bums were put in the seats because of Martin St.Louis, Nikolai Khabibulin, Vincent Lecavalier and Brad Richard?
These players are what each team focuses it’s marketing on. These are the players that make the NHL run. Not to diminish the importance of Lukowich and Sydor because I’m sure the superstars on the Lightning will tell you they were keys to them winning the cup.
I propose that the league creates a salary cap for each team and allow 5 players to be exempt for that Cap: similar to the Larry Bird rule in the NBA several years ago. In keeping with the example of Tampa Bay. They would probably set these players as their franchise-Cap exempt players:
Brad Richards
Vincent Lecavalier
Nikolai Khabibulin
Martin St.Louis
Freddy Modin
The ownership in Tampa Bay could pay each of those players what the “market†would dictate for Franchise players. If the Tampa Bay ownership felt that they could only afford two or three of these players the other two would have to be dealt or signed under the Cap. Teams would not have to have 5 Franchise players if they could not afford it or they wanted to leave room to trade for one later. Calgary might be an example of a team that only has one or two designated Franchise players.
Let’s take this scenario to the other end of the payroll scale. It also allows teams like the Rangers, Leafs and Detroit that have deep-pocketed owners the ability to sign high priced players.
The key is going to signing your 5 Franchise players wisely. Take the Rangers if they designated Jagr, Holik, Kovalev, Nedved and Lindros as their Franchise players they would be in serious trouble (as they are, they misspent their money.)
The other 17 players would be paid under the cap. I would suggest a cap somewhere in the 12-14 million dollar range. This would also allow teams who are smart with their money to sign a few mid-range quality players in the million-dollar range.
As for people who think that this would create a tiered system of upper and lower class players you are right but the league has that now. I do not believe that high level players making high level money is what’s wrong with the NHL it is over inflated salaries of the middle and lower range players.
I would also suggest that teams are fined heavily if they go over the cap, and additional cap is allowed if players are lost for the season due to injury.
Hey just my two cents
TomWaits