Small market team happy with CBA....

[Realm]

Here is a good article on the Oilers being happy with the new deal, also states they will open the season at home vrs Colorado on Oct. 5th. When they going to announce this schedule to the public??

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Edmonton/2005/07/18/1136795-sun.html

Click to read more...

 

[Ismellofhockey]

Imagine that, a small market that's actually happy about this CBA... that's unpossible!

To all the doom and gloom posters saying this CBA is a big market win, it's a win for everybody, everybody gets an equal opportunity.

 

[Pepper]

Wait, just when Garrioch, Strachan and Brooks have told us that this CBA is bad for small markets, now somebody dares to claim that the new CBA is actually good for them?? Oh the humanity!

 

[Digger12]

Speaking as an Oiler fan, I'm going to take what Nichols said with a bit of a grain of salt until I see words turn into action when it comes to competing for the '7.8 million dollar player'.

Since we're on the verge of a whirlwind ticket drive, it would be bad business for him to be anything other than positive at this point.

Having said that, I firmly believe him when he says this deal will secure the future of the Oilers in Edmonton.

 

[Turco Chips]

Here is a good article on the Oilers being happy with the new deal, also states they will open the season at home vrs Colorado on Oct. 5th. When they going to announce this schedule to the public??

http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/Edmonton/2005/07/18/1136795-sun.html

I'm sure they'll announce the schedules after the PA and the owners ratify the CBA.


TC

 

[ti-vite]

Moderators,

Too much optimism, please transfer to anti-rant thread.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Count this Pens fan as very happy, if most of the details that have leaked out regarding the new CBA turn out to be so. It is a better agreement that I had any right to hope for when this lockout began and will I think be a role model. It is a more workable model for a sport to thrive under, in my opinion, than any other model out there including the lauded NFL.

 

[Jobu]

Count this Pens fan as very happy, if most of the details that have leaked out regarding the new CBA turn out to be so. It is a better agreement that I had any right to hope for when this lockout began and will I think be a role model. It is a more workable model for a sport to thrive under, in my opinion, than any other model out there including the lauded NFL.

I guarantee all fans of all teams are going to be singing a different tune when all of their players are jumping ship even earlier than the Doug Weights of years past.

While a salary cap may make things more competitive, it surely isn't a fan's best friend in terms of player identity and all the rest.

And BTW, if you expect Edmonton or Pittsburgh to spend anywhere near $39m, well, sorry to be the bearer of bad news: not happening.

In other words, they are still not going to be very competitive in the FA market, at least not for top-notch talent.

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Wait, just when Garrioch, Strachan and Brooks have told us that this CBA is bad for small markets, now somebody dares to claim that the new CBA is actually good for them?? Oh the humanity!

Strachan hates Alberta, always has, maybe even when he worked here.

He blamed the lockout on Calgary and Edmonton. Not a hinting, outright blame.

I guarantee all fans of all teams are going to be singing a different tune when all of their players are jumping ship even earlier than the Doug Weights of years past.

While a salary cap may make things more competitive, it surely isn't a fan's best friend in terms of player identity and all the rest.

Yes, as the NFL has proven with its sharply declining ratings and loss of fan loyalty. Oh wait...

And BTW, if you expect Edmonton or Pittsburgh to spend anywhere near $39m, well, sorry to be the bearer of bad news: not happening.

In other words, they are still not going to be very competitive in the FA market, at least not for top-notch talent.

There's more talent available than cap space on the higher spenders. So much for yet another one of your "theories".

Just swallow your sour grapes and move on. This is a GREAT CBA, compared to the old one, for small market teams.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

I guarantee all fans of all teams are going to be singing a different tune when all of their players are jumping ship even earlier than the Doug Weights of years past.

While a salary cap may make things more competitive, it surely isn't a fan's best friend in terms of player identity and all the rest.

And BTW, if you expect Edmonton or Pittsburgh to spend anywhere near $39m, well, sorry to be the bearer of bad news: not happening.

In other words, they are still not going to be very competitive in the FA market, at least not for top-notch talent.

a) like we have never seen players go before . . . Jagr, Straka, Naslund, etc., etc, you could fill an all star team with those we have had to let go. The difference is that we can be buyers too now. I am supposed to feel anything but ecstatic about that?

b) Who said $39 million. I will take $30 or $31 million spending next year as has been promised by the Pens. If you think that spending will not occur and that your big market team will sign every name FA and the other teams can squable over the left overs, you are deluding yourself. The party is over boys. No longer can you oink at the feeding trough and squeeze everyone else out. You will sign your share, but you will have competition and company at the trough from now on. Better get used to it.

 

[AM]

Lol!

I guarantee all fans of all teams are going to be singing a different tune when all of their players are jumping ship even earlier than the Doug Weights of years past.

While a salary cap may make things more competitive, it surely isn't a fan's best friend in terms of player identity and all the rest.

And BTW, if you expect Edmonton or Pittsburgh to spend anywhere near $39m, well, sorry to be the bearer of bad news: not happening.

In other words, they are still not going to be very competitive in the FA market, at least not for top-notch talent.

They are going to be alot more competative then they were before.

Lets put a number to it:

45/4 = <11x more competative.

11x more competative sounds good to me!

 

[Montrealer]

They are going to be alot more competative then they were before.

Lets put a number to it:

45/4 = <11x more competative.

11x more competative sounds good to me!

I can predict with 78% certainty that the on-ice product will be 23% more exciting with highs into the low 80s and lows falling into the high 60s. Tuesday's forecast is thundershowers early, with clearing in the afternoon.

 

[Timmy]

I can predict with 78% certainty that the on-ice product will be 23% more exciting with highs into the low 80s and lows falling into the high 60s. Tuesday's forecast is thundershowers early, with clearing in the afternoon.

Unfortunately, it's not the heat.

It's the stupidity.

 

[zeke]

It's absolutely hilarious that some have tried to say that a salary cap is bad for small markets.

 

[Takeo]

And BTW, if you expect Edmonton or Pittsburgh to spend anywhere near $39m, well, sorry to be the bearer of bad news: not happening.

In other words, they are still not going to be very competitive in the FA market, at least not for top-notch talent.

The point is that big markets now have a limit on their spending. The playing field certainly isn't even, but the polar ends are closer. This is about competition not equality.

 

[grego]

There are only about 6 to 10 large market teams that will spend to the top of the cap. And small market teams are supposed to be worried that they will be able to sign up and have all that cap space to take every good free agent from the other 20 teams every year.

Even if that amounts to each small team losing a free agent to a large on a year that is 2 or 3 new players for the big market teams to gain. Where is this mythical amount of cap space going to come from for large market teams.

They could go in one year and get a few free agents from other teams, but then they will either be forced to let their veterans go, or else they won't be able to get new players every year.

It will be a much better deal for small market teams, because they will not lose players every year ( as occured under the old CBA ), in return we may even be able to pick up a few FA on the market to solidify our teams

 

[zeke]

The other point is this - we're not likely to see many teams spending only the minimum payroll.

When they had to compete with $80 million dollar payroll teams, it made little sense for a team like Nashville or Pittsburgh to spend $25-30 million...because they wouldn't be competitive anyways...they might as well just spend $20.

Now, though, if they are properly managed, they can up their spending to the $30 million range and know that they can COMPETE with that payroll.

 

[MarkZackKarl]

It's absolutely hilarious that some have tried to say that a salary cap is bad for small markets.

Actually, most people are pointing to the lower UFA age as the main component of the CBA that is bad for the small markets.

Having UFA players being those in their prime nowadays is really bad for smaller and mid sized markets.

Its pretty obvious. Better luck next time, zekie-boy.

 

[GSC2k2*]

Actually, most people are pointing to the lower UFA age as the main component of the CBA that is bad for the small markets.

Having UFA players being those in their prime nowadays is really bad for smaller and mid sized markets.

Its pretty obvious. Better luck next time, zekie-boy.

I think at this point in time, it may be wise to go with the insanity defence, SSF.

 

[Timmy]

Its pretty obvious. Better luck next time, zekie-boy.

Until big market teams get to have more than 23 players on their roster, it's not obvious to me. The UFAs still need to play somewhere, and the smaller market teams will probably be in better shape, cap-wise, to re-sign their own boys.

Yours is a nice condescending approach to an unproven and untested theory that most owners, GMs, and insiders think is helpful for small and mid-markets, though.


Canucks in 2004!

 

[zeke]

He scaredy, your Sens will finally be able to spend as much as any other team in the league!

If only you had this new CBA 3-4 years ago.....you might have been able to have that excelelnt young core, keep Yashin, and add the best UFA goalie on the market to your team!

too bad you were stuck under the old CBA, where your small-to-mid payroll team could never afford to add the inevitable missing pieces it so dearly needed.

Now they'll have a whole poopload of UFAs to select from, which they can afford!

You should be ecstatic!

 

[jfont]

a) like we have never seen players go before . . . Jagr, Straka, Naslund, etc., etc, you could fill an all star team with those we have had to let go. The difference is that we can be buyers too now. I am supposed to feel anything but ecstatic about that?

b) Who said $39 million. I will take $30 or $31 million spending next year as has been promised by the Pens. If you think that spending will not occur and that your big market team will sign every name FA and the other teams can squable over the left overs, you are deluding yourself. The party is over boys. No longer can you oink at the feeding trough and squeeze everyone else out. You will sign your share, but you will have competition and company at the trough from now on. Better get used to it.

its not like you can't compete in the small markets...last i heard, the last 2 stanley cup champs are from a "small market" area...

 

[Jaded-Fan]

its not like you can't compete in the small markets...last i heard, the last 2 stanley cup champs are from a "small market" area...

How does this address what I said? Does that fact make it less of a good thing that we (and all teams in the league) can now be buyers as well as losing players? Does that fact make it less of a good thing that every single big name player does not have to sign with 3, 4 or 5 teams?

 

[OilKiller]

Actually, most people are pointing to the lower UFA age as the main component of the CBA that is bad for the small markets.

Having UFA players being those in their prime nowadays is really bad for smaller and mid sized markets.

Its pretty obvious. Better luck next time, zekie-boy.

The problem with your theory is there are only 30 teams and only so much cap space to go around. While some "in their prime" players may use the new UFA to their advantage to go to a larger market, it will be a simple case of one prime player out, another prime player in for small to mid market teams. They have to play somewhere and there just is no way they can ALL be stockpiled in markets like TO, Detroit and Colorado any longer.

Nice try though. This CBA works for small to mid market teams the same way it works for large market teams.

 

[iagreewithidiots]

Actually, most people are pointing to the lower UFA age as the main component of the CBA that is bad for the small markets.

Having UFA players being those in their prime nowadays is really bad for smaller and mid sized markets.

Its pretty obvious. Better luck next time, zekie-boy.

Arent you the same guy that yaked and yaked, mostly nonsensically, about how terrible a salary cap would be for bigger markets. How unfair it was. Now you want to change your tune.