Why can't Goodenow just understand?

[S.S. Giggy]

Salary Cap = lower ticket prices = more fans = more revenues = more money for the players. Everyone wins! Why can't greedy Bob accept that?

Click to read more...

 

[GKJ]

Salary Cap = lower ticket prices = more fans = more revenues = more money for the players. Everyone wins! Why can't greedy Bob accept that?

You honestly beleive the owners are going to lower ticket prices?


Sadly, you are mistaken. If anything they will raise ticket prices to make up for the loss of games, and then keep them there.

You want more revenues? Add more games. Would you like a 90 game schedule?

 

[Pepper]

You honestly beleive the owners are going to lower ticket prices?
Sadly, you are mistaken. If anything they will raise ticket prices to make up for the loss of games, and then keep them there.

Both of you are mistaken.

Owners will always maximize their revenues, regardless of the situation. If the max revenue comes with average ticket price being at 50$, it's gonna be at 50$ when the CBA ends.

CBA is all about costs, the revenue will stay as it is while the costs will be brought down (assuming there won't be any revenue sharing).

 

[GKJ]

Owners will always maximize their revenues, regardless of the situation. If the max revenue comes with average ticket price being at 50$, it's gonna be at 50$ when the CBA ends.

And obviously there are 20 NHL teams who did not make any money last season, they're all going to raise prices because of the money they're not making right now. And they can come out to the fans with a perfect excuse.


And some people will be stupid enough and say "oh, ok, we'll accept this ticket hike."

 

[hockeytown9321]

Salary Cap = lower ticket prices = more fans = more revenues = more money for the players. Everyone wins! Why can't greedy Bob accept that?

First off, the proposal's the league have given do not indicate a flexibe cap year to year, like the NFL. From what I've seen, they want it at $31 million forever, so salaries could not increase.

Second, the idea the owners would lower ticket prices because of a cap is laughable. Here's some NFL ticket info you, since all the cap lovers love to pretend the NHL is the NFL:

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news?slug=ap-nfltickets&prov=ap&type=lgns


Thirdly, I don't see how a cap means more fans. Is some guy in Miami going to go to a game because the .500 Panthers are going to play the .500 Flames? No way. The league's attendance problems don't have anything to do with any preceived competitive inbalance.

Instead of looking at the NFL's cap, why not look at the AFL's cap? How much has thier cap increased the popularity of Arena Football? How many financially stable teams do they have?

 

[littleHossa]

Both of you are mistaken.

Owners will always maximize their revenues, regardless of the situation. If the max revenue comes with average ticket price being at 50$, it's gonna be at 50$ when the CBA ends.

CBA is all about costs, the revenue will stay as it is while the costs will be brought down (assuming there won't be any revenue sharing).

You're very right, and with most arenas having attendance at 80-100%, we can conclude that ticket prices won't decrease significantly if at all. However with this long lockout and the possible loss of a good number of fans, if the arenas become half empty, I'm telling you that pretty graph for max revenues is going to point to 80% attendance and prices reduced by 30-50%

 

[chriss_co]

Maybe the owners won't cut ticket prices... but until then we can't speculate on what they are going to do...

also.. take a look at the gate revenue thread... there are two interesting teams i saw on there... chicago and the islanders both have very high ticket prices (well avg ticket prices) yet their avg attendance is 13000...... why would owners charge such high ticket prices if noone is going to the game?!?! there is something else driving up ticket prices

also, a salary cap does not mean every team will be equal... does the NFL have every team hovering around .500? no... and id rather have close games every night than consistent blowouts by teams located in larger markets

 

[hockeytown9321]

Maybe the owners won't cut ticket prices... but until then we can't speculate on what they are going to do...

also.. take a look at the gate revenue thread... there are two interesting teams i saw on there... chicago and the islanders both have very high ticket prices (well avg ticket prices) yet their avg attendance is 13000...... why would owners charge such high ticket prices if noone is going to the game?!?! there is something else driving up ticket prices

also, a salary cap does not mean every team will be equal... does the NFL have every team hovering around .500? no... and id rather have close games every night than consistent blowouts by teams located in larger markets

Just FYI, in the 10 years before the cap was put into football, teams finished 7-9, 8-8 or 9-7 33% of the time, about what you'd expect. In the ten years since the cap, that number is 39%.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

and id rather have close games every night than consistent blowouts by teams located in larger markets

well, this lock out has nothing to do with competitive balance. the league is close as it is, more than half the league has reached the final 4 in the last 10 years.

dr

 

[PecaFan]

well, this lock out has nothing to do with competitive balance. the league is close as it is, more than half the league has reached the final 4 in the last 10 years.

That's a lovely sounding stat, but it's completely worthless. "Final 4" sounds so important, yet it only means you've won two playoff rounds. *Halfway* to the Cup. Getting halfway to the Cup once in 10 years is "competitive"? Hardly.

The actual number of final four appearances:
Col 6 (two Cups)
Det 5 (three Cups)
NJD 4 (three Cups)
Phi 4
Dal 3 (one Cup)

Buf 2
Pit 2
Tor 2

Ana 1
Cgy 1
Car 1
Chi 1
Fla 1
Min 1
NYR 1
Ott 1
Stl 1
SJS 1
Tam 1 (one Cup)
Wsh 1

Atl 0
Bos 0
CBJ 0
Edm 0
LAK 0
Mtl 0
Nsh 0
NYI 0
Phx 0
Van 0

I defy anyone to look at that list and say this league is "balanced" and has parity the last 10 years. That's a league *dominated* by five teams, with a couple also rans.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

That's a lovely sounding stat, but it's completely worthless. "Final 4" sounds so important, yet it only means you've won two playoff rounds. *Halfway* to the Cup. Getting halfway to the Cup once in 10 years is "competitive"? Hardly.

The actual number of final four appearances:
Col 6 (two Cups)
Det 5 (three Cups)
NJD 4 (three Cups)
Phi 4
Dal 3 (one Cup)

Buf 2
Pit 2
Tor 2

Ana 1
Cgy 1
Car 1
Chi 1
Fla 1
Min 1
NYR 1
Ott 1
Stl 1
SJS 1
Tam 1 (one Cup)
Wsh 1

Atl 0
Bos 0
CBJ 0
Edm 0
LAK 0
Mtl 0
Nsh 0
NYI 0
Phx 0
Van 0

I defy anyone to look at that list and say this league is "balanced" and has parity the last 10 years. That's a league *dominated* by five teams, with a couple also rans.

DET, COL, NJD, DAL, CGY, BUF, WSH, ANA, TPY, FLA, CAR, VAN, and NYR have all made the finals since 1994. Thats almost half the league.

Too me, if you combine these two lists, it means every team has a chance. Well DOH of course some teams have more chances, would you prefer a league where in 15 years, each team makes the finals once ?

The league is fair.

DR

 

[shveik]

Before the current CBA, the league was periodically dominated by Montreal, Philly, Isles, Oilers. You get the picture, the domination has nothing to do with the salary. Under current CBA, most of the teams you mentioned had their payrolls baloon *after* they have won their Cups, simply because the players have shown their worth, and the teams had the money to pay them accordingly.

It all comes down to good management. New Jersey was successful on a budget for a long time, and piling up the payroll did not help the Rangers or the Blues one iota.

 

[PecaFan]

DET, COL, NJD, DAL, CGY, BUF, WSH, ANA, TPY, FLA, CAR, VAN, and NYR have all made the finals since 1994. Thats almost half the league.

Too me, if you combine these two lists, it means every team has a chance. Well DOH of course some teams have more chances, would you prefer a league where in 15 years, each team makes the finals once ?

Van and NYR were in the last CBA, and outside the 10 year range you set. So now you've got 11 teams out of 30, just over 30%, nowhere near the "half the league" you're trying to paint. Just keep going back and back, you can probably get that number up to 90%.

And note that 5 teams are in the "1" final four appearance list, in 10 years making the finals once in a Cinderella run. Basically, for 75% of the league, the best they can hope for is a single run to the final four every 10 years.

And that's with almost zero chance of actually winning the thing.

 

[me2]

And obviously there are 20 NHL teams who did not make any money last season, they're all going to raise prices because of the money they're not making right now. And they can come out to the fans with a perfect excuse.


And some people will be stupid enough and say "oh, ok, we'll accept this ticket hike."

(http://www.teammarketing.com/)

NEW YORK RANGERS 00-01 $65.82 -> 03-04 $44.58
DALLAS 00-01 $56.43 -> 03-04 $38.34


They may go up, they may go down, they may not. Teams have shown a desire in the past to lower prices.

 

[me2]

DET, COL, NJD, DAL, CGY, BUF, WSH, ANA, TPY, FLA, CAR, VAN, and NYR have all made the finals since 1994. Thats almost half the league.

Too me, if you combine these two lists, it means every team has a chance. Well DOH of course some teams have more chances, would you prefer a league where in 15 years, each team makes the finals once ?

The league is fair.

DR

"Fair" would involve winning it more than 1 or 2 times in 10 times for below average salary teams. "Have a chance" should mean more than "have a chance to come 2nd and disappear".

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

VAN .. NYR ..outside the 10 year range you set..

i can count, can you ?

2004 - 1994 = 10

dr

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

"Fair" would involve winning it more than 1 or 2 times in 10 times for below average salary teams. "Have a chance" should mean more than "have a chance to come 2nd and disappear".

only 1 team can win it. would you prefer a league where in in 15 seasons, each teams reachs the final once ?

dr

 

[H/H]

The league will never be "balanced" no matter how you look at it. If some team is really good, some team must be on the other end of the scale. It's just the nature of things, no salary cap or any rule will change that.

 

[Papadice]

i can count, can you ?

2004 - 1994 = 10

dr

Actually DR, no you can't :lol

Count with me...

1 - 1994
2 - 1995
3 - 1996
4 - 1997
5 - 1998
6 - 1999
7 - 2000
8 - 2001
9 - 2002
10 - 2003
11 - 2004

You have to count both 1994 and 2004... That's 11 years...

 

[Russian Fan]

That's a lovely sounding stat, but it's completely worthless. "Final 4" sounds so important, yet it only means you've won two playoff rounds. *Halfway* to the Cup. Getting halfway to the Cup once in 10 years is "competitive"? Hardly.

The actual number of final four appearances:
Col 6 (two Cups)
Det 5 (three Cups)
NJD 4 (three Cups)
Phi 4
Dal 3 (one Cup)

Buf 2
Pit 2
Tor 2

Ana 1
Cgy 1
Car 1
Chi 1
Fla 1
Min 1
NYR 1
Ott 1
Stl 1
SJS 1
Tam 1 (one Cup)
Wsh 1

Atl 0
Bos 0
CBJ 0
Edm 0
LAK 0
Mtl 0
Nsh 0
NYI 0
Phx 0
Van 0

I defy anyone to look at that list and say this league is "balanced" and has parity the last 10 years. That's a league *dominated* by five teams, with a couple also rans.

It's funny that you declare this not ''BALANCE'' when everyone claims the NFL is the BEST LEAGUE for balance & here are the final 4 appearance in the last 10 years

Pittsburgh 4
Philadelphia 3
New England 3 (2003,2001)
Green Bay 3 (1996)
Dallas 2 (1995)
San Francisco 2 (1994)
St-Louis 2 (1999)
Tampa Bay 2 (2002)
Oakland 2
Tennessee 2
Minnesota 2
Carolina 2
Jacksonville 2
Indianapolis 2
Baltimore 1 (2000)
Denver 1 (1998,1997)
NYGiants 1
Atlanta 1
NYJets 1
San Diego 1

20 NFL teams out of 30/32 made it to the FINAL FOUR
vs
20 NHL teams out of 30 made it to the FINAL FOUR

what does that tell you ? that's it's not a cap that gives you the competitive balance you wish for.

In the NFL here are those who didn't make it once in the final four in the last 10 years :

Arizona - They stink since ....forever
Buffalo - They had their glory just before that decade
Chicago - They had 1 good year in the last 10.
Cincinnati - They stink since ....forever
Detroit - They stink since ....forever
Kansas City - good team, never came to the final four
Miami - had good teams but never touch the final four.
New Orleans - Bad luck ?
Seattle - Just start to become something after more than a decade of suckiness
Washington - Tough management ?

In the NHL here are those who didn't make it once in the final four in the last 10 years :
Atlanta - EXPANSION TEAM
Boston - BAD MANAGEMENT & PROFITABILITY was a priority.
Columbus - EXPANSION TEAM
Edmonton - BAD MANAGEMENT !
Los Angeles - Since 1993 nothing came close.
Montréal - BAD MANAGEMENT !
Nashville - EXPANSION TEAM
NYIslanders - BAD MANAGEMENT !
Phoenix - BAD MANAGEMENT !
Vancouver - Just start to click for the last 2-3 years.

Now what are the difference between the NFL or the NHL? NOTHING !!!! They are both COMPETITIVE & saying otherwise is pure blindness.

 

[hunter1909*]

ok morons...im going to make this real simple even for you...

unless the oilers can compete with the devs avs and old wings...

i hope they blow up rexall place and disband the franchise...

id rather turn to another sport...rather than watch my team tread water forever...

i wouldnt be shocked if 10 fleeble nhl teams go bust...why shouldnt they they have no fan base its just a hoax 30 team league...

i blame janet gretzky for this mess

: p

 

[Bob Clarke Fan Club]

ok morons...im going to make this real simple even for you...

unless the oilers can compete with the devs avs and old wings...

i hope they blow up rexall place and disband the franchise...

id rather turn to another sport...rather than watch my team tread water forever...

i wouldnt be shocked if 10 fleeble nhl teams go bust...why shouldnt they they have no fan base its just a hoax 30 team league...

i blame janet gretzky for this mess

: p

Oh man...that's so politically incorrect....I love it I knew someone would blame Yoko before this was all over.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

That's a lovely sounding stat, but it's completely worthless. "Final 4" sounds so important, yet it only means you've won two playoff rounds. .

i dont get this ... Final Four after almost 100 games and out of a field of 30 and you say its nothing ? its a hell of an achievment in the NHL. Again, what do you think would be fair ? One cup win per team every 30 years ? 30 different finalists every 15 years ? Im simplying pointing out that more than half the league was within striking distance of the holy grail in the last 10 years. What is it you think would be a fair representation ?

 

[Bruwinz37]

It's funny that you declare this not ''BALANCE'' when everyone claims the NFL is the BEST LEAGUE for balance & here are the final 4 appearance in the last 10 years

Pittsburgh 4
Philadelphia 3
New England 3 (2003,2001)
Green Bay 3 (1996)
Dallas 2 (1995)
San Francisco 2 (1994)
St-Louis 2 (1999)
Tampa Bay 2 (2002)
Oakland 2
Tennessee 2
Minnesota 2
Carolina 2
Jacksonville 2
Indianapolis 2
Baltimore 1 (2000)
Denver 1 (1998,1997)
NYGiants 1
Atlanta 1
NYJets 1
San Diego 1

20 NFL teams out of 30/32 made it to the FINAL FOUR
vs
20 NHL teams out of 30 made it to the FINAL FOUR

what does that tell you ? that's it's not a cap that gives you the competitive balance you wish for.

In the NFL here are those who didn't make it once in the final four in the last 10 years :

Arizona - They stink since ....forever
Buffalo - They had their glory just before that decade
Chicago - They had 1 good year in the last 10.
Cincinnati - They stink since ....forever
Detroit - They stink since ....forever
Kansas City - good team, never came to the final four
Miami - had good teams but never touch the final four.
New Orleans - Bad luck ?
Seattle - Just start to become something after more than a decade of suckiness
Washington - Tough management ?

In the NHL here are those who didn't make it once in the final four in the last 10 years :
Atlanta - EXPANSION TEAM
Boston - BAD MANAGEMENT & PROFITABILITY was a priority.
Columbus - EXPANSION TEAM
Edmonton - BAD MANAGEMENT !
Los Angeles - Since 1993 nothing came close.
Montréal - BAD MANAGEMENT !
Nashville - EXPANSION TEAM
NYIslanders - BAD MANAGEMENT !
Phoenix - BAD MANAGEMENT !
Vancouver - Just start to click for the last 2-3 years.

Now what are the difference between the NFL or the NHL? NOTHING !!!! They are both COMPETITIVE & saying otherwise is pure blindness.

The one thing this post tells me is that you dont really have much of a clue about the NFL. Your post MIGHT have some validity if the same amount of teams made the playoffs in both leagues. Since they dont it is far more impressive that the NFL has had the same amount of teams reach the "final four" as the NHL in terms of parity.

Now take your pick: A) you dont really know what you are talking about or B) your last name is Goodenow.

 

[ceber]

Salary Cap = lower ticket prices = more fans = more revenues = more money for the players. Everyone wins! Why can't greedy Bob accept that?

I don't think Bob's necessarily greedy. It's just not easy to convince him to yield much (and really, isn't that how he's supposed to be?):

http://www.startribune.com/stories/1330/5007859.html