Will you support an NHL with replacement players?

[John Flyers Fan]

Why not? They are making $45-90k in the AHL, they'd jump in a second to make significantly more than that in the NHL..

Yes, but if they're players that have a very realistic chance to play in the NHL, they have a signed contract and are already members of the NHLPA.

If they crossed they'd be treated as pariah's when the real players did return, and they'd also be helping to severely limit their future earnings.

Of course they would... don't be silly. These aren't guys who have been making lots of money the past few years... for the most part, these guys have no other income, and would have to play hockey..

I'll flat out tell you you're wrong.

#1. Never had money, so continuing to not have it for another year or so is not a big hardship. Playing in the AHL and making $50,000 is more than they've ever made.

#2. Don't want to be seen as SCABS ...

#3. Playing in the AHL and making $50,000 is more than they've ever made.

Which wouldn't be that long. If the NHL dissolved all dealings with the NHLPA, and cut off negotiations permanantly, and then re-started the league with the promise of no further negotiations, you'd see a lot of players move pretty darn quick.

There would be a million and one legal issues that would arise and things would get locked up in thr courts very quickly.

 

[Go Flames Go*]

Dont worry after about a season we will be used to the replacement players, and they will gradually become better then the ones we have today, since they wanna play for the love of the game, and it wont be that bad of trade off, because we all know the NHLPA will fold, Bob Goodenow and Ted Saskin are gonna mow my lawn, while Iggy is still making his 5 million a year, and planning to murder Goodenow and Saskin for making him loose a years worth of salary.

BRING EM ON

 

[thinkwild]

Listening to Saskin, Im not convinced they would be horribly upset at non-member replacement players themselves. I almost feel he would allow them as the degradation in quality is enough to make his point.

I imagine half way through a losing season, GMs will want to ditch the rules and sign one of these guys. The pressure will be strong

 

[djhn579]

Listening to Saskin, Im not convinced they would be horribly upset at non-member replacement players themselves. I almost feel he would allow them as the degradation in quality is enough to make his point.

I imagine half way through a losing season, GMs will want to ditch the rules and sign one of these guys. The pressure will be strong

Replacemant players may not be that impressive the 1st year, but it will bring in income and put more pressure on the players. But the quality of play will improve each year. After ~5 years, I doubt there will be any difference in the quality of hockey as compared to last season. The supposed "ECHL" quality players will be phased out by new draftees, also many of the locked out players will have come back by then.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Replacemant players may not be that impressive the 1st year, but it will bring in income and put more pressure on the players. But the quality of play will improve each year. After ~5 years, I doubt there will be any difference in the quality of hockey as compared to last season. The supposed "ECHL" quality players will be phased out by new draftees, also many of the locked out players will have come back by then.

WTF

After 5 years hockey will be back to the same quality and that's something you'd be happy with ???

 

[djhn579]

WTF

After 5 years hockey will be back to the same quality and that's something you'd be happy with ???

WTF?

Are we going to have a higher quality of hockey in 5 years if the lockout ends without the NHL bringing in Replacements? I doubt it.

If it takes that long, but the NHL still has 30 teams that have an equal chance to be FINANCIALLY competetive (note, I'm not talking about every team having the same chance to win every game...), yes, I would be happy with that.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

WTF?

Are we going to have a higher quality of hockey in 5 years if the lockout ends without the NHL bringing in Replacements? I doubt it.

If it takes that long, but the NHL still has 30 teams that have an equal chance to be FINANCIALLY competetive (note, I'm not talking about every team having the same chance to win every game...), yes, I would be happy with that.

#1. Waiting 5 years is ridiculous .. 5 MONTHS is too long.

#2. No system will allow all 30 clubs to operate on equal financial footing. Unless you're getting into MAJOR revenue sharing, which is something that the owners themselves would have to agree upon (and something that the big market clubs will NEVER EVER go for).

 

[djhn579]

#1. Waiting 5 years is ridiculous .. 5 MONTHS is too long.

#2. No system will allow all 30 clubs to operate on equal financial footing. Unless you're getting into MAJOR revenue sharing, which is something that the owners themselves would have to agree upon (and something that the big market clubs will NEVER EVER go for).

When I was 5 years old, instant gratification was extremely important. I'm a bit older now and I'm willing to wait if I think the end result will be an improvement over the current situation.

Financially competetive, not equal...

 

[thinkwild]

What is the purpose of achieving financial competitiveness if it isnt related to on ice ability.

You still think you need the money first. I dont believe history proves you right. You have identified an easily viewable fact - differences in payroll, have labelled it itself the problem, and thus view everything through that prism as to how to solve it.

I dont think payroll disparity is the cause of an unbalanced league as much as an effect of a healthy one.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

When I was 5 years old, instant gratification was extremely important. I'm a bit older now and I'm willing to wait if I think the end result will be an improvement over the current situation.

Financially competetive, not equal...

They didn't just realize the CBA was going to end a month ago. They knew this was going to happen for two years, and yet that sat on their asses and did nothing about it.

If that isn't reason to be ticked off that the season didn't begin tonight, I don't know what is.


What's your definition of financially competitive ???

 

[djhn579]

They didn't just realize the CBA was going to end a month ago. They knew this was going to happen for two years, and yet that sat on their asses and did nothing about it.

If that isn't reason to be ticked off that the season didn't begin tonight, I don't know what is.


What's your definition of financially competitive ???

The NHL has been trying to get the NHLPA to start negotiations for the past two years. It's the NHLPA that has been refusing to negotiate. Who are you saying I should be ticked off at?

Umm.. fiancial competetive I think would mean that every team has similar financial restrictions. Kind of the same idea as every player has the same restriction on the curve on his stick, or all goaltenders have the same restrictions on the size of their pads, or each team has the same restriction on the number of players on the ice...

 

[djhn579]

What is the purpose of achieving financial competitiveness if it isnt related to on ice ability.

You still think you need the money first. I dont believe history proves you right. You have identified an easily viewable fact - differences in payroll, have labelled it itself the problem, and thus view everything through that prism as to how to solve it.

I dont think payroll disparity is the cause of an unbalanced league as much as an effect of a healthy one.

Okay... We have had this discussion before on numerous other threads...

 

[John Flyers Fan]

The NHL has been trying to get the NHLPA to start negotiations for the past two years. It's the NHLPA that has been refusing to negotiate. Who are you saying I should be ticked off at?

Both the owners and the players. Don't fool yourself into beliveing that the owners are negotiating, they put their proposal out and it was a take it or leave it offer.

Umm.. fiancial competetive I think would mean that every team has similar financial restrictions. Kind of the same idea as every player has the same restriction on the curve on his stick, or all goaltenders have the same restrictions on the size of their pads, or each team has the same restriction on the number of players on the ice...

What kind of financial restrictions ???

Cap on revenues ??

Cap on spending ??

Revenue sharing ???

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

If the league declares an impasse and the players go on strike and the NHL brings in replacement players (as has been said will happen in some recent articles) will you still spend your entertainment dollars on an NHL with replacement players?

Absolutely not.

 

[Jeffrey]

Yes! no doubt about that bring in the scab !! NOW!

 

[SPARTAKUS*]

I'm sorry but the NHLPA has to face the fact! There will be a salary cap system in the NHL period. The problem is that the NHLPA has always came up on top in these situations before. Not this time, the owners will preveil and I guarantee that if there is implementation the union will fold within six months. The NHLPA only cares about the stars players they don't gave a crap about bottom half players. The players think that the owners will cave in like they always done in the past. They are sadly mistaken not this time...to be continued

 

[QQQ]

Will be watching Jr. hockey instead

Sorry no replacement players at current ticket prices for me. I'll pay $18.00 for WHL games where rookies get paid the princely sum of $40.00 gross a week and net $36.00. A 72 game regular season and 14 hour long bus trips between games. "Go DUB Go". NHLPA if they make it that far have paid their dues.

 

[eye]

Yes I would support replacement players because as soon as they open the gates most current NHL players will cross the line. It might make for some very interesting rosters throughout the league. I want to support players that are not too greedy and think of the fans.

 

[MarkZackKarl]

and for some Pejorative Slured reason you think the NHL owners are looking out for our best interests? They are trying to find ways to be more profitable.

Stop being stupid.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

and for some Pejorative Slured reason you think the NHL owners are looking out for our best interests? They are trying to find ways to be more profitable.

Stop being stupid.

Well Said. Owners are looking out for their own bank accounts, all this "for the good of the game/fans/etc., etc." is just PR to get the fans on their side.

Apparently most have fallen for it hook, line and sinker.

 

[dawgbone]

Can you provide me a quote where the NHL has said anything other than they are trying to make money from this new CBA?

You'd have to be at the ultimate end of the stupid scale to even remotely think that this isn't about money.

When have the ownership group ever said anything other than this being about money? Stop putting words in their mouths, they never did.

They've said they felt bad because the fans are missing out on watching their favorite teams, but at the same time they've acknowledged it was something they needed to do.

It's all about money, it always has been, and they've maintained that it is this whole time. I'm sick of you player-following sheep making this garbage up that the owners are doing this for the fans, or are doing it to lower ticket prices, then trashing it... because it isn't what they are saying.

They are tired of losing money, that is why there is a lockout. That is the entire reason, and the reason they have been giving ever since the lockout talk started 2 years ago.

So stop making stuff up... they aren't doing it to lower prices, they are doing it to control costs.

Sure, in some ways, it helps the fans in certain cities, but in the end, it is about money, and it's the position the owners have taken the whole time.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Can you provide me a quote where the NHL has said anything other than they are trying to make money from this new CBA?
.

http://www.nhl.com/fancentral/livechat/transcripts/bettman101304.html

Gary Bettman

Before we can open our arenas, we need to fix the economic system under which our sport operates. We'll be back as soon as the players' Union is prepared to talk to us about a partnership that allows us to offer all NHL fans affordable tickets prices and 30 stable and competitive franchises.

He mentions ticket prices every single time. Yes, he talks about other things, but Bettman never fails to mention fan ticket prices.

It's not an accident, it's a clear PR move, that is absolutely working, but is also a flat out lie.

 

[dawgbone]

Yes, but if they're players that have a very realistic chance to play in the NHL, they have a signed contract and are already members of the NHLPA.

If they crossed they'd be treated as pariah's when the real players did return, and they'd also be helping to severely limit their future earnings.

So they are pariah's... personally, if I am a fringe player, I don't give a rats butt about whether Chris Pronger is pissed at me for crossing the picket lines. His lifestyle isn't the one in jeopardy, mine is.

As for severely limiting their future earnings, I don't see how.

I'll flat out tell you you're wrong.

#1. Never had money, so continuing to not have it for another year or so is not a big hardship. Playing in the AHL and making $50,000 is more than they've ever made.

So you're telling me, as an 18 or 19 year old, who's grown up on a farm in the middle of Saskatchewan his whole life, will pass up on a chance to play in the NHL for significantly more money than in the AHL, simply because $50,000 is more than they've ever made?

Or how about the guy, who wants to do something special for his family who spent the last 14 or so years driving him to 5:00 am practices, like say pay off their mortgage?

Anyone would pick the NHL over the AHL... these are peoples lives we are talking about here. It's how they make their living. It's different for guys who make $7mil/season... they are fine. Career AHLers, and guys just starting don't have the same luxury.

#2. Don't want to be seen as SCABS ...

How many drafted players play more than 4 or 5 NHL seasons? Maybe 10%? Those aren't good odds, so I think you'd see alot of drafted players, especially North American kids eagerly sign a contract in the NHL.

I'm sorry, but if anyone in the PA is going to call me a scab because I chose money, it would be pretty damn hypocritical of them.

#3. Playing in the AHL and making $50,000 is more than they've ever made.

You mentioned that already.

There would be a million and one legal issues that would arise and things would get locked up in thr courts very quickly.

Maybe, but there are a million and one lawyers who would be working on it day and night to get it done.

And who's got more money? Billionaire owners, or millionaire hockey players?

 

[dawgbone]

http://www.nhl.com/fancentral/livechat/transcripts/bettman101304.html

Gary Bettman

Before we can open our arenas, we need to fix the economic system under which our sport operates. We'll be back as soon as the players' Union is prepared to talk to us about a partnership that allows us to offer all NHL fans affordable tickets prices and 30 stable and competitive franchises.

He mentions ticket prices every single time. Yes, he talks about other things, but Bettman never fails to mention fan ticket prices.

It's not an accident, it's a clear PR move, that is absolutely working, but is also a flat out lie.

Really?

Are ticket prices not affordable right now? Are they not set in all markets to maximize revenues, and at the same time allow as many fans as possible to come to games?

Who complains about ticket prices?

Fans in Toronto, New York, etc... where the ticket prices are high because they will sellout the building even if the tickets cost $300 each?

Fans in Edmonton and Calgary don't complain about ticket prices. Ottawa fans don't complain about ticket prices.

It cost me the same amount to drive from Toronto to Philly, buy 2 tickets to a Flyers game, stay in a hotel room, and eat as it did for me to buy 2 tickets in Toronto.

But that's not the league's fault. The leafs are maximizing their revenues. They'll sellout no matter how high their ticket prices are, so they set them as high as they can.

The problem is, with escalating salaries, ticket prices must also go up. Ticket prices have been going up almost as fast as player salaries, because the salary increase has demanded a price increase on tickets because this is a gate driven league. The idea is to not have to inflate ticket prices, because salaries won't grow faster than revenues. If salaries are in check with revenues, ticket prices don't need to grow nearly as fast as they have been.

Fans don't go to games in certain areas because of high ticket prices... they don't go because either they aren't hockey fans, or the team has done something they don't like (i.e. Wirtz blacking out home games, pissing of Hawks fans). It's not prices. Fans still pack the buildings in cities with the highest ticket prices.

It's common sense.

Ticket prices aren't going to go down... the players would lose it. This agreement won't lower ticket prices, but it will prevent ticket prices from rising as fast as they have been.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Really?

Are ticket prices not affordable right now? Are they not set in all markets to maximize revenues, and at the same time allow as many fans as possible to come to games?

Ticket prices aren't going to go down... the players would lose it. This agreement won't lower ticket prices, but it will prevent ticket prices from rising as fast as they have been.

Bingo.

Ticket prices are set to MAXIMIZE revenues. Based all upon supply and demand. If the Calgary Flames ownership thought they could sell-out the building while charging what the Rangers or Red Wings charge they would do it in a second.

This agreement will not slow down or decrease the price of tickets.

If the Flames become a great hockey team for the next 5-6 years, demand for tickets will increase, allowing ownership to raise ticket prices.

If the Flames go back to missing the playoffs on an annual basis, ownership would know that if they raised ticket prices they'd have empty seats and less revenue.

===========================================

Bettman like to try and paint a picture that hey if the players weren't so greedy, and would agree to a $31 million hard cap, ticket prices will drop.

Revenue from ticket prices is a hige revenue stream, but the prices are set by the market, and have absoltely nothing to do with what team payroll is.