Jobu
Registered User
Crazy Lunatic said:If thats really what players wanted, how can you get any more fair than being allocated a percentage of revenue? I mean, honestly. Make the intellectual argument against it. If players beleive they are 68% responcible for NHL revenue, then they should ask for a fixed cap at 68% of revenues. There is nothing fair about the Rangers, Avalanche and Leafs driving up slaries to ridiculous and unsustainable levels. To suggest the NHLPA only wants what is fair is disingenuous to say the least. I don't completely blame them for wanting the gravy train to keep on rolling. I *can* blame them for choosing to ride that train right over the cliff.
Because aside from the fact that revenues ought not to be the only variable involved, and that it gives rise to a whole host of perverse incentives and obligations, the owners are not prepared to include in revenue all sources of hockey-related revenue and capital gains that can be attributed to players. To claim that owners are being altruistic is wanting to "share" a "fair" percentage of revenues is not accurate at all; they want to artificially guarantee profits and protect themselves from themselves.