FlyersFan10 said:
However, 160% of nothing is still nothing. Let's face it.
I sure wish I lived in your world where $2.1B is nothing.
Bettman could have hit a homerun with regards to the NHL when the New York Rangers won the Stanley Cup. Instead, he decided to focus on labor strife and lock the players out. That seems to be Gary's solution for everything. If the players union doesn't agree with him, lock them out. So, yes, the man is a moron in that sense.
You clearly no nothing about unions. That is exactly what employers do when they want a better deal from their employees. They lock them out.
Oh, and BTW, attendance increased after the 1994 lockout, so it must not have had that bad of an effect on things.
Instead of $60 million, he could have played it smart and paralayed that into maybe $200 to $300 million. Yep, that's a dumb@ss in my books.
I really should stop here but this is so fun that I'll keep going. How can you not realize how absurd your comment is? There was
ZERO chance that Bettman could have gotten $200M from their national TV deal. Even DementedReality and TomBenjamin would tell you that... and they're as pro-NHLPA as it gets.
On the contrary, blame does fix problems. It identifies who the guilty culprit is with regards to circumventing rules that were put in place. Nobody wants to be a goat and the fact that there would be a blackeye on the franchise would put it under intense scrutiny to be fiscally responsible. But you're right though. Identifying a team that isn't fiscally responsible and blowing it for other teams isn't the right thing to do.
Nobody curcumvented any rules. The problem was the rules themselves, not someone not following the rules.
Considering that this is what, year two of the luxury taxes. It's going to take time to correct. And fact of the matter is that teams are paring payroll. For instance, when you consider that Atlanta was one of the teams with a payroll of something like 75 million and Schuerholz was informed that another 12 million was being cut from the payroll, yeah it's starting to work.
The luxury tax threshold his over $110M. Atlanta cutting payroll had nothing to do with the tax.
The only reason the Yankees and Red Sox end up with larger than life payrolls is because of the separate TV deals they negotiated. For instance, the Yankees have a TV deal with NBC that pays them almost $1 Billion per year.
LOL. No they don't. NBC didn't televise a single baseball game all season.
With regards to the other teams in the playoffs, they are all examples of ownership that has spent money wisely, made smart trades, and drafted wise. Hey, I have no problems with franchises that run sufficiently.
In other words, you have no problems with teams that successfully buy their way into the playoffs.
I don't think players should be capped because the NHL has expanded into markets where hockey cannot be successful.
Hockey can't be successful in the markets they've expanded to? PROVE IT.
I feel no pity or sympathy for owners. The players plan is a significant plan. Fact of the matter is that the players plan has a drag on salaries, has a revenue sharing plan to help out smaller markets, and also has an entry level cap. More than fair.
Are you really buying what the NHLPA is feeding you? Why don't you actually do a little research on your own before you blindly believe what they say. It's nothing more than PR. The NHLPA's plan would have VERY LITTLE effect on anything.
The owners only have a salary cap. No revenue sharing. So, until there is full revenue sharing amongst owners, then no, a salary cap will never work and players will never accept a cap.
How is it that you sit here and pretend to know about this situation but at the same time are completely clueless when it comes to the owners prosposals? ALL SIX of the owners proposals had revenue sharing included. EVERY ONE OF THEM.
As for a cap, you're right in the sense that the players probably won't accept one. But your are HORRIBLY HORRIBLY HORRIBLY wrong in saying that it won't work. A cap in the NHL would fix nearly every single financial problem with the league.
Contrary to popular belief, hockey is still a market in which the majority of a team's revenue is generated through ticket sales.
Contrary to popular belief? Who in the hell thinks otherwise? What an odd coment.
Don't kid yourself, the NHLPA realizes this and also realizes that ticket prices are too high and payrolls have gone completely absurd. The fact of the matter is that their plan offers a chance to get savings started immediately and to help contribute to the teams in small markets.
The NHLPA thinks ticket prices are too high? Really? When did they say this? The NHLPA wants as much money as possible coming from the fans. They don't give a rats ass about the fans as long as they're getting their paychecks.
Oh, and once again... the owners' proposals included revenue sharing that would have helped small market teams.
Hey, I'll say it once and I'll say it again. If the NHL Owners were serious about getting a season started, they could be using Gretzky and Lemieux in the negotiations. The fact that they aren't using the two most powerful people in hockey (not to mention have credibility with Bob Goodenow and the NHLPA) to help negotiate a solution speaks in volumes. Fact of the matter is that Bettman has not extended his hand in a partnership with the NHLPA. He has been confrontational and aggressive in his approach.
The players don't give a rats ass what Gretzky or Lemieux say. Both of them are owners are are much more interested in their teams best interest than the players and the players know this.
