For guys like Dagenais cap or no cap makes no difference. He'll still be a low paid nhler. Whats good about a cap is that players will have to earn the big bucks i insist on the word EARN.
What is the NHLPA thinking?
- Thread starter Chelios
- Start date
- Status
Digger12
Gold Fever
thinkwild said:
If he's changed his mind about a cap, why did he refuse to answer 3 separate questions about whether or not he still would play under one?
On some things he may have changed his mind, but IMO this isn't one of them.
Lots of fire and brimstone from this meeting as was expected, we'll see how it goes when the euphoria dies down and the reality of another pay period going by the wayside sinks in.
IMO Goodenow's meeting with the agents will be much more interesting. They're not in it for the agents that come after them, they're into the MONEY their clients bring in. And unlike the majority of players, they know how to crunch numbers.
Will they quite happily sit for 2 years while their clients lose money that they will never be able to recoup? I guess we'll find out.
I dont think the main problem in this CBA is that players arent earning their contracts. That may be a problem for some of the teams that tried to buy a cup, but its not really a systemic problem with the CBA. A cap is not going to stop teams signing players to contracts and then finding they didnt get the success with those players they thought. They will still be stuck with them.
Digger12 said:
I dont think the players are as ill informed as you suggest. But the agents would seem to be in a tough spot. THey will want to advise their clients for what is in their personal best interest. Which for some will be different from the collectives interest.
Even though Dagenais now likely understands the consequences of the cap, and what the issues are and the perspective they are seen in, when push comes to shove, his personal situation if replacements players are used will be difficult still. He will be in a very difficult spot with tough no-win choices. But the majority of players cant sacrifice their wishes to meet his needs, sympathetic as they may be.
Jag68Sid87
Sullivan gots to go!
The players are NOT the product, and that's the beauty of the NFL. The NFL is about the Raiders, the Chiefs, the Rams, the Colts, the Dolphins, the Giants, the Bears. It doesn't even matter what city name you place in front of it. The team nickname is the recognition factor above all.
And I don't think the players are the product in the NHL, either. At least, not in some parts of the league and, if done right, not anywhere. Say you were to put replacement players in the NHL. It's Saturday night, 7pm ET and the Maple Leafs are playing in Montreal against the Canadiens? Does anybody REALLY care who is on the ice for each club? Hell, some of the best regular-season games between the two teams over the years were when at least one of them stank. Same can be said of the Islanders-Rangers match-up and others.
Oh sure, a Carolina-Calgary game is a tough sell but it's a tough sell in the current climate even with the NHL regulars.
As for the thinking that there is no more greatness in the NFL, well that's a bunch of bull. As has already been pointed out above, the Patriots are close to reaching dynasty status in the league. In fact, NO team in major North American pro sports has been as successful as New England lately, not even the Yankees with their luxury-tax induced roster. Plus, there are also individual stars born every week, guys like Ben Roethlisberger and Byron Leftwich and Andre Johnson, etc. AND, unlike Major League Baseball, the stars of the NFL aren't limited to just 2 franchises!
Quotes from Pro Football Weekly are nice, but I think a quote from the NFLPA head is more important...and if Troy Vincent says the cap works for the players that's good enough for me. As if the players don't benefit from a league-wide successful NFL. Come on now!
And I don't think the players are the product in the NHL, either. At least, not in some parts of the league and, if done right, not anywhere. Say you were to put replacement players in the NHL. It's Saturday night, 7pm ET and the Maple Leafs are playing in Montreal against the Canadiens? Does anybody REALLY care who is on the ice for each club? Hell, some of the best regular-season games between the two teams over the years were when at least one of them stank. Same can be said of the Islanders-Rangers match-up and others.
Oh sure, a Carolina-Calgary game is a tough sell but it's a tough sell in the current climate even with the NHL regulars.
As for the thinking that there is no more greatness in the NFL, well that's a bunch of bull. As has already been pointed out above, the Patriots are close to reaching dynasty status in the league. In fact, NO team in major North American pro sports has been as successful as New England lately, not even the Yankees with their luxury-tax induced roster. Plus, there are also individual stars born every week, guys like Ben Roethlisberger and Byron Leftwich and Andre Johnson, etc. AND, unlike Major League Baseball, the stars of the NFL aren't limited to just 2 franchises!
Quotes from Pro Football Weekly are nice, but I think a quote from the NFLPA head is more important...and if Troy Vincent says the cap works for the players that's good enough for me. As if the players don't benefit from a league-wide successful NFL. Come on now!
Does anyone really care who is on the ice?? Well we obviously see things quite differently then. I think you will one day change your perpective on this. I think your anger is clouding your better judgement. These fans saying they will enjoy watching replacements will buy tickets once or twice out of spite, but will quickly regret that. I cant see how real fans can say that but thats just me.
Vincent is an exec on his union. Im sure he is defensive about criticisms of it. He seems to suggest no one is unhappy, but that is clearly not true.
Vincent is an exec on his union. Im sure he is defensive about criticisms of it. He seems to suggest no one is unhappy, but that is clearly not true.
NFL is profitable because it is football and America. NFL was very popular before the cap. The cap has not generated the popularity for the NFL. The NFL would be popular no matter what. You are confusing their popularity and profitability with the nature of the system. But they were just as popular if not more without it. THeir next TV deal is predicted to be lower too.
I did not say the cap had anything to do with popularity.You presented an argument that the cap worked against the NFL, turned it into mediocrity. It has never been healthier and is competitive. That is not a bad business to be in.thinkwild said:
thinkwild said:
Predictions are a funny thing... and as long as the networks can charge $3mil for a 30 second commercial during the superbowl (roughly $400 million from commercials alone during the course of the game), it will remain a multi-billion $ deal.
thinkwild said:
So let me get this straight - The NHLPA is a very informed union, where the heads look out for every player to form a deal that will not only benefit the union, but the league, and the game.
The NFLPA is full of idiots who don't know what they are doing, and are lying because they don't want to look like morons for making a bad deal.
That's some pretty sad justification.
Jag68Sid87
Sullivan gots to go!
thinkwild said:
Well, if the choice is:
A) shell out $75-100 to watch a trap-infested NHL, where the star players max out at 40 goals and 90 points because of the lack of flow and offensive enforcement in the league, and where many of the stars are also out of the lineup because of countless injuries--because the league fails to crack down on the perpetrators,
OR
B) spend $35-40 to watch no-names play their hearts out for the jersey I grew up adoring...
I think it's a no-brainer. If the owners keep the same ticket prices and replace the players with no-names, then they haven't learned a thing in this entire process. However, for less money, I'm sure I'm not alone in being at least curious to see how an NHL littered with replacement players would look like.
Oh, and let's not forget that some of these replacement players would be those Europeans who were booted out of elite leagues overseas because the locked-out NHLers are acting like replacement players themselves. So, guys like Corey Hirsch would be replacement players. Not exactly a Hall-of-Famer but also not a scene out "Slap Shot" either.
So, to answer your question...in today's NHL, I really don't care about who's wearing the uniform. If this was NHL hockey when I grew up (late 70s-early 80s), then that's a different matter altogether. I used to think the players made the league, but the trap, defensive hockey, size of the players, size of goaltending equipment and general coaching tactics everywhere changed all that.
xtremeleafan
Registered User
- Aug 7, 2004
- 23
- 0
Gary Bettman Salary Cap Opinion
Just to stir things up a bit I'll copy a unauthorized quote from the "Hockey News" issue for Nov 9 2004 of a comment by Gary Bettman in 1998. "The collective (Bargaining) agreement allows a team to spend whatever it can afford to spend...If anybody is spending more than what they can afford,they shouldn't be complaining about the CBA." Interesting, wouldn't you say ?
Just to stir things up a bit I'll copy a unauthorized quote from the "Hockey News" issue for Nov 9 2004 of a comment by Gary Bettman in 1998. "The collective (Bargaining) agreement allows a team to spend whatever it can afford to spend...If anybody is spending more than what they can afford,they shouldn't be complaining about the CBA." Interesting, wouldn't you say ?
Last edited:
gary69
Registered User
xtremeleafan said:
Well, in case you didn't know this is all about money, owners feel that they can squeeze more profits out of the this. Generally, a 5% profit of revenues a year is considered acceptable, 10% good. Alas, if NHL is 2 billion industry with 30 franchises, owners should be happy with making 3,33 mil per team. That's not so hard to achieve, if you get more revenues or can't pay less for other workers than hockey players, how hard it is just not to pay for that arrogant 2nd liner what he asks for and tell him to go ask Rangers for that kind of money.
This mess is all because of owners, maybe NHL should institute a cap ruling that an individual franchise can't spend more than their individual franchise's revenues are (or whatever the owner want's to spend on his hobby).
I just wish that they would stop complaining, each team would stick to their budget, spend whatever they think they can afford, and START PLAYING the best hockey in the world!
An owner of a $100mil franchise making as much as Holik is making good money, especially if the franchise value is also rising.
Clearly I am not saying that. Each union is looking out for its best interests. The reason a cap works in the NFL and the union wants it is because it allows them to share in the windfall tv contract and revenue sharing. The NFL isnt succesful and not whining because of the cap, its because of the extraordinary revenue sharing. Thats what makes it succesful. But even still, the cap, as outlined by many of these links, is causing problems in the eyes of fans, media, and people in the NFL. If they NFLs next tv cotnract is dropped in half, and the tv money no longer covers payroll, will everything be so rosy?
dawgbone said:
Clearly I am not saying that. Each union is looking out for its best interests. The reason a cap works in the NFL and the union wants it is because it allows them to share in the windfall tv contract and revenue sharing. The NFL isnt succesful and not whining because of the cap, its because of the extraordinary revenue sharing. Thats what makes it succesful. But even still, the cap, as outlined by many of these links, is causing problems in the eyes of fans, media, and people in the NFL. If they NFLs next tv cotnract is dropped in half, and the tv money no longer covers payroll, will everything be so rosy?
I'd say that is a very interesting quote indeed. I didnt realize that I agreed with Bettman so much.xtremeleafan said:
xtremeleafan said:
Those are sarcastic comments directed at owners who didn't let Bettman finish his job in 94-95 when he wanted a salary cap. They shouldn't complain about the CBA that they persuaded Bettman to accept. From day one, he has always been pro-salary cap
Bettman was hired by the owners to do what his mentor, NBA commish David Stern, did for the NBA --- break the union and bring in a salary cap and expand the league.
To those who think Bettman has done a lousy job, he's only doing what the owners have expected of him. That they didn't have the stomachs for it in 1994, is their fault and not his.
- Status
