Next September...CAP @ ???

[kremlin]

Assuming there's no hockey this season, which is a fairly save assumption in my book, the PA & NHL will probably start talking again in September. The NHL is currently suggesting a hard cap of around US$ 35-39 million. However, no hockey for a full season has severe consequences for the total revenues of the league when it starts again; less fans, less merchandise sales, less sponsorship money, etc. In short, the product (NHL) loses some of its value; the pie is getting smaller.

I don't think the NHL will ever agree on any deal without a cap, so at what figure will they pin it down next September? US$ 25-29 million?

I think the PA is not doing a good job for its members, as I would be seriously pissed off if my union would cost me a full season of salary, just to see my potential earnings the next season at 50% of what I usually get.

Click to read more...

 

[robcav]

I believe the players will never accept a cap and it will all end up in court. Impasse-implementation-replacement players-strike-decertification.

 

[kremlin]

I believe the players will never accept a cap and it will all end up in court. Impasse-implementation-replacement players-strike-decertification.

If it ends up in court, it will get even uglier than it already is and I think the players & owners will have a significantly reduced fan base to return to.

 

[BLONG7]

If it ends up in court, it will get even uglier than it already is and I think the players & owners will have a significantly reduced fan base to return to.

Neither side gets this at all...they have the Al Davis theory going"just win baby"!!!

 

[eye]

The owners decided a long time ago that they were going to take back their business from the players and the NHLPA that had gotten to big for their own good. They gave the NHLPA ample warning and invited them to discuss important issues for the good of the game for years now to which the NHLPA declined while they continued to exploit the old agreement.

Turn about is fair play. Simple as that. Players are employees and they may think they are the product as well but what would a game be with NHL players playing in an arena with NO FANS. Fans are as much the product as the players are and MOST OF US and I believe MOST OF THE PLAYERS want hockey even if it means trying out a cost linkage system to get us there. Many have been asked, many player reps have been asked, Goodenow and Saskin have been asked and NOBODY can explain or justify why players are unwilling to work under a cost certainty system. Not one of them. Tie Dumi had to be the worst after blasting Mcguire for only repeating that he had heard from a player that 70% of NHL players would be willing to work under a cap. The NHLPA is run by players that can afford to sit out or even retire. They bully the others into doing what they think is best for them and not what is best for hockey.

 

[KingsFan7824]

Salary cap, salary floor, and revenue sharing. That's what has to happen. If they lose this season, they're killing themselves.

A salary cap so that the NHL doesn't see $10 million per year contracts when the league can't support it. Nobody watches hockey. Yet the players get paid like people give a damn. When the NHL becomes more popular, and gets a real TV contract, then the salary can go up. Is that saving the owners from themselves? Yes. The few owners that can pay that amount ruin the game. We're seeing that today.

A salary floor so that the owners can't just pocket the extra money. They have to spend up to at least a certain amount under the salary cap.

Revenue sharing because the Rangers aren't trying to put the Oilers out of business.

Free market capitalism doesn't work in pro sports. It just doesn't. Unless we're going to have the New York Hockey League, with 30 teams inside the city of NY.

We're not talking about Soviet communism here. The best players will still make millions. The other players, at minimum, will still make hundreds of thousands of dollars. We're not talking totalitarianism. These players will still be able to live their life of luxury. They'll still be treated like kings when they step foot in a city.

That's not to say the players should have no say. They should have more than a voice in how the game should be played on the ice.

I still think they'll have some kind of season. I have to. If they don't, they're going to completely kill the league.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Salary cap, salary floor, and revenue sharing. That's what has to happen. If they lose this season, they're killing themselves.

A salary cap so that the NHL doesn't see $10 million per year contracts when the league can't support it. Nobody watches hockey. Yet the players get paid like people give a damn. When the NHL becomes more popular, and gets a real TV contract, then the salary can go up. Is that saving the owners from themselves? Yes. The few owners that can pay that amount ruin the game. We're seeing that today.

A salary floor so that the owners can't just pocket the extra money. They have to spend up to at least a certain amount under the salary cap.

Revenue sharing because the Rangers aren't trying to put the Oilers out of business.

Free market capitalism doesn't work in pro sports. It just doesn't. Unless we're going to have the New York Hockey League, with 30 teams inside the city of NY.

We're not talking about Soviet communism here. The best players will still make millions. The other players, at minimum, will still make hundreds of thousands of dollars. We're not talking totalitarianism. These players will still be able to live their life of luxury. They'll still be treated like kings when they step foot in a city.

That's not to say the players should have no say. They should have more than a voice in how the game should be played on the ice.

I still think they'll have some kind of season. I have to. If they don't, they're going to completely kill the league.

Great post!

 

[CarlRacki]

If it ends up in court, it will get even uglier than it already is and I think the players & owners will have a significantly reduced fan base to return to.

Good point. The more and longer they fight over the pie, the smaller the pie gets.