brooks is so blatantly pro player - i dont see how this exposes anything other than whose side he's on
Put aside for the moment that Bettman either forgot, didn't realize, or simply dishonorably chose to ignore the fact that all NHL contracts do not expire at the end of this season in forecasting an across-the-board 12-percent increase in payrolls for next year in order to substantiate his claims of inevitable and wildly inflated losses under the PA's 24-Percent Solution.
But even more startling is the commissioner's projection of mere 3-percent annual growth in revenue for the league in each of the next three seasons under his watch — only 3 percent!
Lexicon Devil said:In all fairness, Bettmann's 3% projection of revenues isn't too bad.
In fact, it's probably way too high. After the moron is done diluting the game in the name of parity (read, $$$$), he'll be lucky if revenues aren't falling in the double digits.
But wait! The shootout will save everything!
PecaFan said:Triumphant? Hardly. Filled with the same rhetoric and errors.
He still doesn't get the math, the NHL is not assuming all contracts will increase by 12%. Just the average. It was higher than that in the first part of the old CBA, a little less than that recently, but overall, the number is accurate.
Lexicon Devil said:In all fairness, Bettmann's 3% projection of revenues isn't too bad.
Actually, Bettman is doing exactly what the owners want him to do.Bicycle Repairman said:
Lexicon Devil said:How about the fact that Bettman is clearly overestimating salary inflation and underestimating league revenue growth?
Regardless of the writer, you really can't argue with these facts.
Seems like Bettman would predict 12% salary growth regardless of what the PA proposed.
Bicycle Repairman said:
John Flyers Fan said:NHL revenue's have grown an average of just under 9% a year over the last 5 seasons.
CarlRacki said:Fine, then let the owners tie salaries to revenues. If revenues continue to grow 9 percent each year, then so will salaries. Problem is, players want salaries to grow regardless of revenues. Can you think of another private enterprise in which that exists?
Pepper said:Someone should change the title of this thread to "Triumph The Insulting Comic Brooks Journo"
Nobody's taking Brooks seriously, never has been and never will. He's a joke of tragic proportions, spinning his NHLPA PR-propaganda further and further.
mudcrutch79 said:Everyone remember during the last CBA, when contracts expired every summer, and there was 12% growth in salaries annually? Oh, that's right, it happened without having every contract expire ever year.
There's an obvious argument to made here suggesting that salaries won't grow 12% annually-NHL revenues likely won't continue to expand at the rate that they did in the '90s.
The PA is counting on the salaries inflation outstripping revenue inflation or they'd have no problem negotiating the 2% difference inherent in each's intial offer and setting a link between both. Quibble over the numbers until your heart is content, but the simple fact remains, the PA is counting on the inflationary pressures inherent in their flawed system to carve out an unfair peice of the pie.BlackRedGold said:The problem is that the NHL is basing its assumptions on what salaries will do on what happened during the previous CBA while not doing the same for its revenues. If, as the NHLPA believes and rightfully so, that as revenues rise so do salaries then Bettman's projections are either incompetent or dishonest.
What is truly laughable is that anyone could be proud of having Brooks, Stachan, Healy and Kyperos as the spokespeople. Especially on a day when Brooks and Strachan both write petulant, "I'm not getting what I want so fire that meany Bettman" rants.It is laughable how anyone who doesn't write the same stupid column that regurgitates Bettman's half-truths and lies, is someone an NHLPA lackey. If that were the case, I wonder why all the Bettman apple-polishers have to attack the author instead of his argument.
Brooks makes no worhtwhile argument in his rant. He simply stamps his feet and pouts. In doing so, he is a perfect spokesperson for the PA.Brooks makes a well reasoned argument in his column, something 90% of hockey writers are unable to do.
its beyond lackey. have you ever read brooks before? no one who has followed what this guy writes would put their name next to an endorsement of him. ive read the post every day for years, and as far as a lockout article its "second verse, same as the first". im not for bettman, im not even sure im for the owners....but reading the propaganda this guy dishes out actually bothers to me the point i almost feel obligated to be opposed to him. this is the guy who for two years had the rangers mere minutes away from acquiring any top player available.....for petr nedved. tkachuk available? we here at the post hear from "good sources" a nedved for tkachuk swap is imminent. primeau available? we here at the post.....BlackRedGold said:.
It is laughable how anyone who doesn't write the same stupid column that regurgitates Bettman's half-truths and lies, is someone an NHLPA lackey. If that were the case, I wonder why all the Bettman apple-polishers have to attack the author instead of his argument.
Brooks makes a well reasoned argument in his column, something 90% of hockey writers are unable to do.
bleedgreen said:but reading the propaganda this guy dishes out actually bothers to me the point i almost feel obligated to be opposed to him. this is the guy who for two years had the rangers mere minutes away from acquiring any top player available.....for petr nedved. tkachuk available? we here at the post hear from "good sources" a nedved for tkachuk swap is imminent. primeau available? we here at the post.....
Hockey_Nut99 said:They realize now that because of their competitive nature, they cannot continue on this way and outbid eachother everytime it comes to player salaries.