Why shouldnt there be a cap?

[iagreewithidiots]

I cant see why not.

Lets face it you will all be back. The anti cappers like to call the pro cappers lemmings and other such names. Truth is you are all sheep. When the NHL comes back with a cap you will all be there. My biggest fear of anti cappers is that they will trample me on the way to the ticket window. They will be so busy sniffing their foam finger they wont be able to smell the money flying out of their pockets toward the owners.

The owners will make more money. The players will make more under a cap then playing in Europe. And the fans will still spend the bucks to watch. I fail to see why the owners shouldnt have a cap.

My advice to the owners is to sit back and wait. Who cares. The players and fans will be back.

Click to read more...

 

[FLYLine27*]

The players and fans will be back.

Speak for your own team. The Ducks, Canes, and other teams in the US wont have there fans running back. Sure the Die-hearts will come back..but the NHL will loose a lot of casual and average fans.

EDIT- ok I see your a Pens fan...you really think your going to be selling out the Melon areana? Or even getting the places 3/4th full if the lockout goes on more then a year and a half?

 

[Hockey_Nut99]

The only responses you will get is from fans of Philly, Toronto, Detroit, Colorado,etc etc. They will say a cap is going to always break teams up.

 

[BLONG7]

I cant see why not.

Lets face it you will all be back. The anti cappers like to call the pro cappers lemmings and other such names. Truth is you are all sheep. When the NHL comes back with a cap you will all be there. My biggest fear of anti cappers is that they will trample me on the way to the ticket window. They will be so busy sniffing their foam finger they wont be able to smell the money flying out of their pockets toward the owners.

The owners will make more money. The players will make more under a cap then playing in Europe. And the fans will still spend the bucks to watch. I fail to see why the owners shouldnt have a cap.

My advice to the owners is to sit back and wait. Who cares. The players and fans will be back.

The players and their infamous leader say no...and apparantly they have their reasons?

 

[CGG]

The players and their infamous leader say no...and apparantly they have their reasons?

I have no problem with the concept of a cap. It's the way that the owners are trying to go about getting it. If they weren't trying to make every other aspect of the CBA hugely in their favour at the same time, I think the idea of a cap or linkage or whatever you want to call it would be more agreeable to the players.

They're not just saying "accept a cap", it's accept a cap along with:

- Wipe out salary arbitration entirely
- Lower qualifying offers
- Varying rollbacks instead of the player's flat 24% rollback
- No entry level bonuses
- Some sort of meagre revenue sharing that only helps the teams that don't make the playoffs
- Some kind of messed up scheme to take players from high payroll teams and assign them to Nashville

 

[robcav]

Problems with a cap:
1) Teams become more concerned with salary then talent, and try to fit players in to their cap instead of pursuing the best player for their needs.
2) Gets rid of possible dynasties by pricing the successful teams talent higher and forcing that team to trade away players.
3)Does not help the teams that can't make a profit at a low salary floor by raising that floor.
4)Does nothing to address ticket prices only adds more money to the owners pocket.
5)In a league that has made an art form of hiding revenue, what numbers can the players trust.
6)Contributes to roster turnover as players who improve and deserve pay raises can no longer fit under a teams cap.
7)Turns the league into one where a team can be in the Stanley Cup Championship final round one year and not make the playoffs the next. (See the NY Giants)

 

[iagreewithidiots]

Dynasties are dead. Why should anyone care about them anyway? How many teams can afford one?

Protecting dynasties is my favorite reason not to have a cap. Yea lets protect something that only two or three teams can afford. Why should anyone care if their team can never have one?

 

[robcav]

Dynasties give all the other fans a team that they can root against. Like the Oilers, Canadians or the Islanders during their heydeys. A team that all the other fans got pumped up to see.

 

[Hockeyfan02]

IThe anti cappers like to call the pro cappers lemmings and other such names. Truth is you are all sheep.

Ok so you criticize the anti cappers for calling pro cappers names, then you call the anti cappers names. Nice.

 

[vanlady]

Dynasties are dead. Why should anyone care about them anyway? How many teams can afford one?

Protecting dynasties is my favorite reason not to have a cap. Yea lets protect something that only two or three teams can afford. Why should anyone care if their team can never have one?

Because dynasties are the ones driving up the merchandising sales for the league. They are also the ones that the TV executives are really paying for.

 

[SuperUnknown]

Because dynasties are the ones driving up the merchandising sales for the league. They are also the ones that the TV executives are really paying for.

Care to explain then why the NFL sells the most merchandise? They have a hard cap.

So either:
1- There can be dynasties even with a cap
2- You don't need dynasties to sell a lot of merchandise

Either way, it defeats your argument...

 

[Wetcoaster]

I cant see why not.

No??? How about this:
http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=125120&page=2
Look at post #30

 

[Wetcoaster]

The only responses you will get is from fans of Philly, Toronto, Detroit, Colorado,etc etc. They will say a cap is going to always break teams up.

I am not a fan of a high revenue nor large market team and I disagree with a salary cap for a myriad of reasons because I am a HOCKEY FAN:

http://www.hfboards.com/showthread.php?t=125120&page=2
See post #30

 

[vanlady]

Care to explain then why the NFL sells the most merchandise? They have a hard cap.

So either:
1- There can be dynasties even with a cap
2- You don't need dynasties to sell a lot of merchandise

Either way, it defeats your argument...

I suggest you check which teams sell the most merchandise. The Patriots and Eagles are at the top of the list. HMMM how many times in the last 4 years have these 2 teams been to the conference finals what 8.

 

[SuperUnknown]

I suggest you check which teams sell the most merchandise. The Patriots and Eagles are at the top of the list. HMMM how many times in the last 4 years have these 2 teams been to the conference finals what 8.

Okay, so there can be dynasties in a capped system... Then what's the problem with selling merchandise again? Or was your point... pointless?

 

[no13matssundin]

The only responses you will get is from fans of Philly, Toronto, Detroit, Colorado,etc etc. They will say a cap is going to always break teams up.

Hey Hey, Im a die-hard, bleed-blue-and-white Leaf fan... and I want cost certainty. Will it tear up the team? Sure, theres a real chance that most of the high priced players will get relocated, but if it means that the NHL is around for another 80 years, creates more parity and grows the sport... im all for it.

Why?

Because, it will hurt at first, but im confident that my team, along with others that take a short term hit, will flourish in the long run under that new system.

 

[CarlRacki]

I suggest you check which teams sell the most merchandise. The Patriots and Eagles are at the top of the list. HMMM how many times in the last 4 years have these 2 teams been to the conference finals what 8.

I suggest you check the merchandise sales before suggesting someone else do it.
The Oakland Raiders are #1 in merchandise sales. New England is second, Philly is fifth. Of course, the Pats receive a huge boost from their local fans buying up all the "Super Bowl" memorabilia.

This, of course, exhibits the schizophrenic nature of the anti-cap contingent. On the one had, they claim it will kill dynasties (even though the NHL hasn't had one in 20 years). Then - on the same thread - they point out New England and Philly as dynasties in a capped NFL.
But heck, why bother with consistency?

 

[vanlady]

I suggest you check the merchandise sales before suggesting someone else do it.
The Oakland Raiders are #1 in merchandise sales. New England is second, Philly is fifth. Of course, the Pats receive a huge boost from their local fans buying up all the "Super Bowl" memorabilia.

This, of course, exhibits the schizophrenic nature of the anti-cap contingent. On the one had, they claim it will kill dynasties (even though the NHL hasn't had one in 20 years). Then - on the same thread - they point out New England and Philly as dynasties in a capped NFL.
But heck, why bother with consistency?

I have never said there will be no more dynasties, as a matter of fact the NFL is the poorest example of competative balance in pro sport.

 

[CarlRacki]

I have never said there will be no more dynasties, as a matter of fact the NFL is the poorest example of competative balance in pro sport.

Nope. From a previous post of mine:

In baseball, eight teams make the playoffs each year. That obviously would mean 80 playoff slots over the past 10 years. In the last decade, 20 of those 80 slots have been held by just two teams, the Yankees and the Braves. Read that slowly - a full quarter of all the playoff spots have belonged to two teams. Another 21 slots have been filled by just four teams (Boston, Seattle, Cleveland and Houston). So, in other words, over the past decade six teams out of 30 have had a hold on more than half the league's playoff spots. In the meantime, 11 teams - more than a third of the league - have made one or fewer playoff appearances in the past decade. Eight teams have not made a single playoff appearance. This is balance?

On the other hand, in the NFL all but two teams have appeared in the playoffs since 1995. One of those teams, Houston, is an expansion club not in existence for seven of those years and really should not count for this comparison. So, that's one out of 31 that hasn't made the playoffs. Of the 32 teams, 23 have made three or more playoff appearances. 17 of them have made four or more. While the fact more spots are available somewhat contributes to this, it certainly doesn't explain it all. Simply put, there is more balance in the NFL.

If you'd like me to run similar comparisons with the NBA or NHL, I shall. I'm pretty confident neither will be more competitive than football and probably both more competitive than baseball.