-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The NHL Lockout
- Thread starter explodet
- Start date
- Status
Spectral Glider
Member
Malakhov said:
As he states in the article, he's not an NHL fan. He's a hockey fan.
Sir Willoughby
Member
I don't believe we're getting all the facts from either side. The owners are saying" they want to much", the players are saying "they want to much", and they're both saying "they won't negotiate".
Malakhov said:
uhm, i attented over 20 AHL(you know, the league that supplements the NHL?) games this last year. hockey is an awesome sport to watch in person, however, it doesn't translate so well through the TV. the sport is in shambles, and it doesn't take a genius to figure it out or even notice.
who knows, this may be the best thing to ever happen to the sport, but i think it's time you take off the rose colored glasses.
try to be a little less condescending, too.
Malakhov said:
thanks for the pretension and condescending tone. first, "you're not a sports fan," then "you don't even watch hockey, " then "you know gretkzy was traded -- and now he's retired," then "well, if you didn't enjoy the season, then you're not really a fan." completely disregarding the FACT that i never slighted the level of play, didn't mention last season's play, and even told you i attended 20 AHL games.
how many games did you attend? if less than me, you're not really a fan.
Malakhov, you just don't get it, do you?
It doesn't matter that this season was exciting. It doesn't matter that this season saw a drop in salary levels. What matters is that business-wise, over the past few seasons, the NHL has dug themselves into this hole.
I've been following hockey since the 70's, and I agree that the players are overpaid. I think that the NHL needs to do something to survive, and if a salary cap is what it's going to take, then so be it.
It doesn't matter that this season was exciting. It doesn't matter that this season saw a drop in salary levels. What matters is that business-wise, over the past few seasons, the NHL has dug themselves into this hole.
I've been following hockey since the 70's, and I agree that the players are overpaid. I think that the NHL needs to do something to survive, and if a salary cap is what it's going to take, then so be it.
shoplifter
Member
Spike said:
The salary cap is the about the only way small market teams are going to be competitive from now on. Unless you've got super diehard fans, you HAVE to be competitive to make a profit, so that's the only way to keep teams like Buffalo afloat.
For some reason here in Columbus, we're nuts about hockey and we actually make a profit. I'd suspect that part of it is that we don't have an outlandish salary payout, but with as many sellouts as we have we could likely afford to sign some more high dollar players if we wanted to.
I'm sure some of it is still the relative newness of the team, but we get over 14k to each Crew game too, and often outsell Jackets games with crowds in the 20k range. I suppose we're just really loyal fans here, something other teams dont' have the luxury of.
Fuck.
Fuck 'em both.
Fuck the greedy NHLPA, who'll hang onto any excuse rather than to take a pay cut.
Fuck the owners, who put in a half-assed effort into trying to get this setttled.
Pathetic.
I can't believe they let it come to this - they knew the deadline was coming yet only met every few months. Why they didn't meet more to save the season, to save their fans' interested, I don't know.
Fuck 'em both.
Fuck the greedy NHLPA, who'll hang onto any excuse rather than to take a pay cut.
Fuck the owners, who put in a half-assed effort into trying to get this setttled.
Pathetic.
I can't believe they let it come to this - they knew the deadline was coming yet only met every few months. Why they didn't meet more to save the season, to save their fans' interested, I don't know.
HalfPastNoon said:
Which AHL team do you follow? I much rather go to an NHL game, but since they decided that they could make more money in Pheonix, I'm stuck with an AHL team that I really don't give a fuck about, the AHL is just so far below the NHL it's not even funny. I went to both world cup games in Montreal and was just amazed how awesome it was, then i saw one of the Moose players on the Slovakian defence corps and laughed.
Gorgie said:
That resolves none of the problems with the league as it stands. The key problem is that a few markets have massive earnings potential where others do not. Winnipeg loved hockey, they don't have a team any more. Calgary fans showed their love for hockey these playoffs, and the playoffs helped them post their first profit in years. Edmonton loves hockey and they struggle to put a competitive team on the rink, too.
Detroit, Philly, New York... these are all markets that can afford to ice $60M teams. Most NHL markets can't. How is it good for the league when a handful of teams can pay so much....
-SB
SystemShark
Member
theo said:my NHL season will live on in the form of:
Too bad it's using last years schedule. ESPN 2K4-X2
Flames signed Phaneuf today, along with Anders Eriksson. Yay for no hockey!
Alucard said:
Number one, they do a little more then hit a rubber disc with a stick. Sometimes they take that rubber disc in the face. As JR can attest, it's not a pretty sight. Number two, I'm sure they all said they'd play for free once upon a time. But this is real life, not some childhood or crack-induced fantasy. When you become a professional in ANY field, you want to get paid what you think you're worth. That's a universal fact, unless you want to be a fucking slave.
Malakhov said:
Typical arrogant, myopic, Canadian hockey fan mentality.
There are many including myself who believe the hockey played in the NHL has been complete and utter shit. That's why nobody in the US is watching anymore. Simple cause and effect. I don't expect to see the no defense play of the 80's, but the stuff I saw in the early 90's was fantastic stuff. Not anymore. It's clutch and grab city now, coupled with the players being far too big for the NHL ice surface, so time and space is pretty much gone.
Pochacco said:
Exactly...fuck 'em both up the ass.
Eminem said:
WTF...it's that low?
The NHL owners have to be some of the biggest fucktards on the face of the earth. They had a CBA that basically locks a player in from the time they're drafted at 18, till the age of 31. Yeah, they become restricted free agents in their mid-20's, but how often does another team land a player in that circumstance? It's almost taboo.
So what have these fucktard owners done? They've basically bid against themselves. Giving players ridiculous salary increases for no good reason, when they could've just has easily told that player to sit his ass out until they're ready to sign on their terms.
This is a league that says the expired CBA was broken, was unworkable, was bleeding the league, and has almost brought it to ruin. Yeah, it's a deal so bad they reupped it three times in a ten year span. A CBA so bad, they've introduced nine expansion teams (most of the markets never seeing a hockey puck in their lives mind you) in a thirteen year span. Logical, these people are not.
This doesn't even get into the fact that the game has gone to complete shit where clutch and grab has enabled teams with no talent to compete with teams loaded with talent, the new arenas have all been built without using a bigger ice surface or flexible boards like the old Boston Garden or The Aud, the players refuse to wear visors despite the number of eye injuries that have occurred the last few years, and now we've even got players going in and out of the court system (though based on the other leagues, this might help the NHL :lol). Oh yeah, the attendance is a joke, ticket prices are a bigger joke, and the TV contract is about as "lucrative" as Arena fucking Football.
And now they believe that they can have a two year work stoppage, then come back with 30 teams and be healthy once a new "economic order" has been established? You've gotta be kidding me. It took almost a decade for people to get back into baseball across America, and they actually gave a shit about that sport before the '94 World Series got wiped. If they're out for a year in the southern US states, they can forget about doing any meaningful business there ever again, unless they plan to reduce ticket prices by 70%. Personally I'm not convinced owners will reduce ticket prices by much, if at all. They sure as hell won't in Toronto.
This shit is all on the owners. All of it. Which means 100% revenue sharing should be mandatory in any deal that they strike. That's a hell of a lot more important and meaningful then a salary cap, provided of course the owners actually reinvest that money into their teams instead of stuffing it into their jeans like the Brewers have done in baseball. There's a misconception that the NFL is where it is today because of the salary cap. I disagree...it's the revenue sharing that's made that league what it is today and allowed for small market teams to be competitive. The salary cap simply curbs the growth of expenses.
And yet I haven't heard much said about revenue sharing on the part of owners. If the league is in so much trouble, the owners should be looking to help themselves before they ask the players to do so. And if the owners aren't showing the willingess to help themselves, why the fuck would the players do that job for them? More to the point, how are they supposed to take these owners seriously when even in the last two summers where the owners finally made the CBA work for them, they still gave out a handful of ridiculously expensive contracts to players. I mean, 9 mill for Pronger? 8 mill for Belfour? Are you kidding me?
With all that said, the players need to get their heads out of their asses and look at the real world. They've been disgustingly overpaid for over a decade now, and they've gotta curtail it in a far more drastic way then a 5% rollback. I certainly don't blame them for not trusting the owners in terms of what they have to say, but simple facts (the pathetic TV deal and ratings) and their own eyes (some buildings in the US are lucky to have 5,000 fans at a game, in spite of the false attendance numbers teams love to throw out) and realize the NHL isn't even close to being part of the big four anymore (NASCAR's in there now, second to the NFL), and thusly can't be expected to be paid as such. And if this season gets wiped, the interest in the game in the States will drop through the floor, and they'll really be fucked.
The thing that's most annoying is that these idiots have had three years to sort this shit out, and they've let it drag onto this point for no good reason. The players and owners are far more interested in winning (or more to the point, not losing) then helping a sick game get healthy again. It's simply pathetic.
dem
Member
The union is already starting to break
http://tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=98883
John Madden-
"It all comes down to what's fair," Madden told the Star-Ledger. "The only problem I'm having with things is believing whose numbers are right and whose numbers are wrong. Those are the big issues. And if it needs to have a cap, give it a cap, you know?"
http://tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=98883
John Madden-
"It all comes down to what's fair," Madden told the Star-Ledger. "The only problem I'm having with things is believing whose numbers are right and whose numbers are wrong. Those are the big issues. And if it needs to have a cap, give it a cap, you know?"
I don't disagree with the value of revenue sharing, but I did want to pipe in and say that I think the NFL's success comes down to the fact that they've found the perfect cocktail of good revenue sharing (partly thanks to great TV revenue), as well as the cap, which is one part of an overall CBA that both players and owners are generally happy with.
The NFL is really the standard, but other leagues will have trouble replicating its success.
-SB
SickBoy said:
The cap didn't come till years later though. 100% Revenue sharing means it makes no difference that the Giants and Jets can afford to charge far more money for tickets then the Packers, or that the Raiders will always sell more merchandise then the Cardinals...everyone in the league benefits from the success of others. Putting your money where your mouth is, that's a real showing of solidarity...not some stupid voting session while sitting behind Lil' Boy Bettman in a New York auditorium.
And don't let the rhetoric fool you...the NFL players probably aren't happy with the cap, and they sure as hell aren't happy with the non-guaranteed contracts. But I'm sure they love the bonus money, as well as the fact that it doesn't matter where you play, every team has the ability to sign talent and be competitive. So playing in New York has no bigger advantage then playing in Green Bay.
Overall the NFL has a pretty good model, but it'll take years for the NHL to get there unless they break the union. Though if you ask me, that's what they're trying to do...nothing else makes sense.
Malakhov
Banned
Wow.. that's awesome.Malakhov said:
Shinobi said:
The cap has been there during these last several years that the NFL has enjoyed strong growth while other leagues are languishing and scratching their heads as to how to grow their audience.
What the cap has done is given teams better opportunities to compete. That's what's happened to dynasties like Dallas and San Francisco -- and that's in part where the parity that's made the league so much more interesting has come from.
The Boys and Niners used to be a like flame to a moth for players who wanted a championship. And why not? Players could make the same, or at least similar money to what they would elsewhere and be on a perennial contender. Players still move for championships, but they're hardly guaranteed and they're actually making a sacrifice to do so. See guys like Tom Brady, who have taken restructuring to help the team.
Competitiveness can only help a league, and the NFL cap has helped create a more competitive environment.
-SB
IAWNIKEMalakhov said:
it's not only the cap but the revenue sharing in which the NFL has grown.
I say every player has a salary of $500,000 with bonuses which would go in effect after certain goals.
hit so many assists? points? goals? shots? PP goals? SH goals? help in 40 wins? win rounds of playoffs? win the cup?
it should be tiered that it is possible to get upwards of $6 million a season, but you'd have to be better than gretzky to do it.
I say every player has a salary of $500,000 with bonuses which would go in effect after certain goals.
hit so many assists? points? goals? shots? PP goals? SH goals? help in 40 wins? win rounds of playoffs? win the cup?
it should be tiered that it is possible to get upwards of $6 million a season, but you'd have to be better than gretzky to do it.
SickBoy said:
Competitiveness is a crock as far as I'm concerned. Nobody remembers the Broncos or Ravens championship teams, but everyone remembers the Steelers, the Dolphins, both Cowboys dynasties, the Niners and Redskins. All this stuff about competitiveness being the driving force behind the NFL's popularity is results-based thinking that is based on zero fact. Here's a fact for you...the NBA's two most popular swings in terms of TV ratings and overall popularity was during the Bulls' two championship runs in the 90's. When MJ retired the first time, interest dropped. When he returned, interest picked up. When he retired the second time, interest dropped. It flies in the face of this silly "oh, no one like's dynasties" notion.
The NFL was big in the 70's, far bigger in the 80's, and even more so in the early 90's. It's popularity has never ceased to grow. And much of that has been due to baseball's popularity going on a steady decline during that same stretch of time, likely due to all the work stoppages. Though you'll also note that between 1977 and 1995, there was no team that could be called a legitimate dynasty with the possible exception of the Blue Jays (and being a Canadian team, no one down south was gonna care about them).
Hell, look at what people are saying heading into this year...the Pats are the clear favourite to win repeat as champs. Yet people are interested anyway. You gonna tell me if the Pats win the next couple of Superbowls (giving them four in five years), that interest in the league is going to drop? Not gonna happen.
I'll say it again...100% revenue sharing is the ultimate key. If you don't have revenue sharing, you'll still have teams that'll spend more then others as long as you have ways to beat the cap. The NFL has that with the bonuses. The NBA has that with the Larry Bird rule, plus it's not a hard cap but a luxury tax system, enabling someone like the Knicks to go 40 mill over the "limit". If you have 100% revenue sharing though, it won't matter if there's a cap or not, cause teams can only spend their share of the revenue pie (unless an owner wants to inject his own money or money from another business into the team, something I'm sure some rules could limit). That way it isn't possible for a New York to spend 30 mill more then a Calgary.
All a cap does is set the limit for salaries, which to be fair will help...but there's no way the NHL can get the sort of hard ass cap they want at 31 mill, and knowing them they'd make the bonus thing from the NFL illegal as well. With 100% revenue sharing, competitive balance (which I call forced mediocrity) is assured.
Malakhov said:
Well, the Swedish Hockey League, with the highest division called 'Elitserien', starts on monday.
Here's a neat list of confirmed NHL players, and possible Swedish players not yet signed. Unfortunately the list doesn't mention anything about possible NHL players who aren't Swedish, just those who already have agreed to play.
Brynäs:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Marcus Ragnarsson, Fredrik Modin
Djurgården:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Mats Sundin (after X-mas), Marcus Nilson, Daniel Tjärnqvist, Nils Ekman, Jimmie Ölvestad, Marcus Ragnarsson
Frölunda:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Per-Johan Axelsson, Daniel Alfredsson, Christian Bäckman, Samuel Påhlsson
Färjestad:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Christian Berglund
HV 71:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: none
Linköping:
Signed NHL players: Henrik Tallinder, b, Buffalo, Kristian Huselius, f, Florida, Brendan Morrison, f, Vancouver, Mike Knuble, f, Philadelphia
Possible NHL Swedes: none
Luleå:
Signed NHL players: Niclas Wallin, Carolina
Possible NHL Swedes: Mattias Öhlund, Tomas Holmström
Malmö Redhawks:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Kim Johnsson
Modo:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Peter Forsberg, Markus Näslund, Henrik Sedin, Daniel Sedin, Niklas Sundström, Mattias Timander, Pierre Hedin, Mattias Weinhandl, Samuel Påhlsson
Mora:
Signed NHL players: Shawn Horcoff, f, Edmonton, Daniel Cleary, f, Phoenix
Possible NHL Swedes: Christian Berglund
Södertälje SK:
Signed NHL players: Niclas Hävelid, b, Atlanta, Dick Tärnström, b, Pittsburgh
Possible NHL Swedes: none
Timrå IK:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Henrik Zetterberg, Fredrik Modin
Here's a neat list of confirmed NHL players, and possible Swedish players not yet signed. Unfortunately the list doesn't mention anything about possible NHL players who aren't Swedish, just those who already have agreed to play.
Brynäs:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Marcus Ragnarsson, Fredrik Modin
Djurgården:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Mats Sundin (after X-mas), Marcus Nilson, Daniel Tjärnqvist, Nils Ekman, Jimmie Ölvestad, Marcus Ragnarsson
Frölunda:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Per-Johan Axelsson, Daniel Alfredsson, Christian Bäckman, Samuel Påhlsson
Färjestad:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Christian Berglund
HV 71:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: none
Linköping:
Signed NHL players: Henrik Tallinder, b, Buffalo, Kristian Huselius, f, Florida, Brendan Morrison, f, Vancouver, Mike Knuble, f, Philadelphia
Possible NHL Swedes: none
Luleå:
Signed NHL players: Niclas Wallin, Carolina
Possible NHL Swedes: Mattias Öhlund, Tomas Holmström
Malmö Redhawks:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Kim Johnsson
Modo:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Peter Forsberg, Markus Näslund, Henrik Sedin, Daniel Sedin, Niklas Sundström, Mattias Timander, Pierre Hedin, Mattias Weinhandl, Samuel Påhlsson
Mora:
Signed NHL players: Shawn Horcoff, f, Edmonton, Daniel Cleary, f, Phoenix
Possible NHL Swedes: Christian Berglund
Södertälje SK:
Signed NHL players: Niclas Hävelid, b, Atlanta, Dick Tärnström, b, Pittsburgh
Possible NHL Swedes: none
Timrå IK:
Signed NHL players: none
Possible NHL Swedes: Henrik Zetterberg, Fredrik Modin
Didn't see this posted before.
"Friday night in Barrie, a short drive north of Toronto, the Original Stars Hockey League will launch an ambitious six-team, 20-game, barn-storming endeavor of four-on-four play with a game between Detroit and Toronto."
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?id=1883584
"Friday night in Barrie, a short drive north of Toronto, the Original Stars Hockey League will launch an ambitious six-team, 20-game, barn-storming endeavor of four-on-four play with a game between Detroit and Toronto."
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?id=1883584
Well, Shinobi, if you don't think (I'm not sure if you're saying it or not...) a competitive league/cap makes the NFL more interesting and watchable -- which I think only helps attract fans -- I'm not going to change your mind. But the NFL's doing a lot of things right, and it's hard to fault the business model of North America's most successful pro sports league.
However, I do have to take issue with this. Every dollar a team spends on a player in the NFL is figured into the cap. Signing and other bonus money is wrapped into the cap. The only thing that doesn't have cap implications are huge "$100 million" contracts that have backloaded salary the players will never see, because the contracts won't last seven, ten, or how many ever years.
As for full-on revenue sharing, I think that's fine -- whatever levels the playing field. "Forced mediocrity" is important. See how amped Calgary was this playoffs? That's cause they've hungered for a good team since almost 1989, thanks to what I like to call "forced craptacularity."
-SB
Shinobi said:
However, I do have to take issue with this. Every dollar a team spends on a player in the NFL is figured into the cap. Signing and other bonus money is wrapped into the cap. The only thing that doesn't have cap implications are huge "$100 million" contracts that have backloaded salary the players will never see, because the contracts won't last seven, ten, or how many ever years.
As for full-on revenue sharing, I think that's fine -- whatever levels the playing field. "Forced mediocrity" is important. See how amped Calgary was this playoffs? That's cause they've hungered for a good team since almost 1989, thanks to what I like to call "forced craptacularity."
-SB
SickBoy said:Well, Shinobi, if you don't think (I'm not sure if you're saying it or not...) a competitive league/cap makes the NFL more interesting and watchable -- which I think only helps attract fans -- I'm not going to change your mind. But the NFL's doing a lot of things right, and it's hard to fault the business model of North America's most successful pro sports league.
However, I do have to take issue with this. Every dollar a team spends on a player in the NFL is figured into the cap. Signing and other bonus money is wrapped into the cap. The only thing that doesn't have cap implications are huge "$100 million" contracts that have backloaded salary the players will never see, because the contracts won't last seven, ten, or how many ever years.
As for full-on revenue sharing, I think that's fine -- whatever levels the playing field. "Forced mediocrity" is important. See how amped Calgary was this playoffs? That's cause they've hungered for a good team since almost 1989, thanks to what I like to call "forced craptacularity."
-SB
I don't know...to me the cap is a moot point if all revenues are shared. Unless teams are willing to lose money, in which case that's their own damned fault.
It has to be said that the cap does work well in the NFL, but there's a reason for that...contracts aren't guaranteed. That reason alone is why the NFL teams can't possibly fuck things up on the management side, cause any bad contract they do sign, they can just tear it up anyway.
A cap system isn't nearly as good as many profess it to be. Having a fixed cap in a league where contracts are guaranteed does nothing to ensure competitive balance, and it certainly doesn't help teams that are loaded with bad contracts, which owners have a twenty year history of issuing. Quite the opposite...one just has to look at the NBA and see the mountains of bad contracts that are virtually untradable, because they take up so much space within the caps of those teams. It can take three or four years for a team to clear out of several bad contracts, either by letting them run out, or buy trading the players with a year left so the other team has cap space in a year, while taking lesser talent in return. In the mean time, that team will suck for three or four years. You think that's competitive balance? Heh, you're welcome to it.
Now if you have non-guaranteed contracts included, then shit like that is easier to manage. But if you think players are going to give that luxury up willingly, you're out of your tree. The NFL is the exception in that regard, not the rule...and they only got that cause they broke the union in half. Kinda like what the NHL is trying to do now. Will it work? Beats me. But someone's gotta fold.
BTW, glad you brought up the Flames...how is it that them, T Bay, Minny and the Ducks last year, and the Devils with three cups in a decade have been able to be competitive, despite the system being oh so unfair? Doesn't that prove that the system isn't that bad in terms of providing competitive balance? No one can convince me that it's going to be anymore assured with a cap in place. Particularly when the Rangers have already missed the last 65 playoffs. :lol
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked