Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: The 2 sides get together Dec 9...

  1. #1
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    397
    Most of the players spoken to here are very optimistic.
    At least that's what they're saying.

    Doug S.

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,530
    Newsflash from America-

    NO ONE GIVES A SH!T. If it was questionable whether the NHL was a major sport in the US, there's no longer any question-IT'S NOT. I hope both sides are happy-they've made their sport irrelevant. We can live without the NHL, so all those boring Nashville/Columbus/Atlanta/Anaheim/Carolina games can get played UP NORTH. Take all the rest of it too. Watch out for the traps. Personally, I'm done with it, and I played ice and roller hockey and had Rangers season tickets for a long time. And most American hockey fans aren't coming back either.

    "Cost certainty" my ass. Someone has to explain why an otherwise smart businessman(Jim Dolan, of course, is excepted-he's dumber than a doorknob to begin with) turns into a moron with his checkbook when he buys a sports franchise.

  3. #3
    Not sure what to make of this; not sure if I even care.

    Like I said, before my Whalers left CT, I was a rabid hockey fan. But hey, our former Gov' Weicker was basically payed off to sell the team to an outsider (state took control of the team in 94), despite the fact Connecticut groups offered more more $$$ to the state for the team....Former Gov' Weicker is now on the Carolina owners payroll :wacko:

    Weicker should be in jail; Bettman should hang his head in shame for allowing it.

    Point? Bettman and NHL owners are backwards and corrupt. They could care less about fans, now fans are fighting back--take you're garbage product and your million dollar babies playing a kids game and get the F' out of our cities and lives Angry

    The game is boring and too defensive; too many teams and cities don't belong in the league and are boring too watch and follow; tickets are way too high....

    Players are getting a reality check. Yea, the NHL stars may sit next to Roger Clemens, Troy Aikman or Mike Piazza at card shows or on TV shows, but most fans rank them with Arena Football League stars-- Aaron Garcia, New York Dragons QB anyone?

    Too bad the owners and players have never figured out that the few hockey fans they had where precious and to be valued....

    I would wish the NHL the best of luck, but in reality, I just don't care much anymore---Bettman made that happen.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    4,530
    I just don't care much anymore---Bettman made that happen.
    The NHL under bettman got fat, drunk and happy on the fools' gold of expansion fees without seeing that the integrity and quality of the game were being compromised. I grew up watching either hard and tough playoff hockey or run&gun Oiler-type style. Now, most all the teams employ a basic trap or lock. And they've done nothing-not taking out the red line, not calling clutch&grab stuff tight-to make the game more watchable. So you get 5 on 5 bore-athons. Suprisngly, the Finals last year actually featured teams who played good bsck and forth hard-nosed hockey. But Bettman didn't promote that in his headlong rush for "cost certainty".

    Above all, comparing the NHL to the NFL economically is a joke. The televison situations have no point of comparison. The NFL could play their games without an audience in an empty stadium and still make money. The NHL is almost totally depedent on local cable and gate. Share the money, allow teams like last years' finalists to take old talent and trade it for younger guys and draft picks made sense(St.Louis,Ignila) .

    And the NFL is totally transparent with their income. No NFL team is part of a part or wholly-owned cable company(like many NHL teams like the Flyers, Thrashers, Rangers and Bruins all are). So the NHL owners are in fact hidng revenue in their balance sheets of their cable companies. As well as other fiscal games with arena revenues.

    Above all, if one of these teams isn't a solid cash flow proposition, FOLD ALREADY AND STOP WHINING! No one promised any NHL owner a lifetime of solvency. If it doesn't work, don't throw money down the rat hole. And that by itself will act as the oldest drag on salaries possible-supply&demand.

    Just look-they stupidly quit Connectcut(again, a solid affluent market that supports mens and womens college hoops-a comparable proposition-as well as anyone)Quebec and Winnipeg. No one has a problem with Colorado, San Jose and Minnesota. But when you get past that, having 2 or even even 1 team in LA is a demographic joke; Phoenix, Carolina, Atlanta and Columbus will never be better than those abandoned markets, Nashville only marginally so; and Buffalo, Pittsburgh and the Islanders aren't even solvent as it is.

    This strike will kill this league. They won't get a tv contrct in the US. The games won't come close to sellouts. And teams not part of a wholly-owned cable company will get chump change for local cable.

    It's easy to call the players greedy. But I don't think the owners understand just how bad they're depreciated their product by design.

    A pox on both houses!

  5. #5
    I'm not sure the players are greedy, but as you pointed out, the lack of TV money has brought about some major problems. Bettman was supposed to be the one to make TV money appear out of nowhere, but it just never happened.

    About a week before the Whalers announced they were moving, I'll never forget, they traded for a scrub, 5th to 7th defenseman, named Gerald Diduck--former Islander. Diduck, nick-named the "human pylon", due to opponents ease of getting past him, was making over a million per season. That was for a average defenseman in 1997 :blink:

    I've got no problem with players in any sport making as much as they can. But knowing the situation the NHL was in, I realized it was just matter of time before the whole economic structure would collapse under the weight of paying scrubs like Diduck that much cash.

    Sure, they could move teams around, increase expansion fees, ect....But at the end of the day, the TV and media revenue streams just were not there....The longer this strikes goes, and the more fan erosion, the worse it will get for players.

    The NHL obsolutely over-expanded. They should've stopped at 26 teams, but felt with an extra influx of Euro's they had the talent available. That was flawed thinking. What ensued, was teams where playing too many minor league caliber players and those players where basically forced to "clutch and grab", just to compete.

    I think a huge problem the league faces, is a few teams can take in a lot of money for tickets, while most can't...A ticket that can sell for $100 at MSG or Chicago, can't fetch more than $45 in most markets.

    P.S: Anaheim is a joke. 2 teams in LA is beyond stupid....NHL has to scuttle either the Ducks or Kings at some point. Let's hope it's not both :wacko:

  6. #6
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    8,682
    This lockout is only a taste of the disaster that is the NHL at this time. The league is in serious trouble. I'm a life long Red Wings fan, I've seen 3 cups in 7 years and you know what, I COULD GIVE 2 ****S RIGHT NOW.

    Both sides can kiss my ass. The players salaries are ridiculous, the lack of talent is ridiculous and the new style of play is pathetic. The owners could care 2 ****s less about the game, all they want is to repair their bottom line.


    F Em Both

  7. #7
    All League
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holmdel
    Posts
    2,851
    The players will have to agree to some type of salary cap and they seem totally against it. If by some miracle they come to an understanding hockey still needs the overexpansion and shaky franchises problems to be addressed.
    Bettman is not going to have the guts to make the hard choices that would come with that.

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    8,682
    Originally posted by faba@Dec 8 2004, 11:02 AM
    The players will have to agree to some type of salary cap and they seem totally against it. If by some miracle they come to an understanding hockey still needs the overexpansion and shaky franchises problems to be addressed.
    Bettman is not going to have the guts to make the hard choices that would come with that.
    I'm against the salary cap. I enjoy having an owner (MIke Illitch) that's willing to spend his own $$$, buy the neccessary talent to win repeated cups, and still make a profit.

    The Salary Cap will do nothing but 'rescue' those owners that refuse to spend money on their teams

  9. #9
    All League
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holmdel
    Posts
    2,851
    I think the NHL should go with some version of the luxury tax-so teams like the Rangers, Red Wings, Avalanche that have put out lots of money in salaries will be held accountable for their payroll.
    This would have hurt my Rangers making bad acquisitions in the past but it puts a sense of wise and prudent spending in the picture like all businesses , franchises and for that matter the federal government should do.

  10. #10
    I've been a big time fan of the Rangers for 36 years or so. I thought I would miss the game this season. Well, here it is, some 10 weeks into the season, and I have'nt even noticed that Hockey is gone.

    That should tell the Owners and Bettman something. I shelled out my $100 per for several games each season. No more. I see that I don't need it.

    Football is different. A few weeks ago, when the Jets were on Monday night, I was going crazy on Sunday without them. So I see that I would miss the NFL if the went on strike again. But the NHL. Screw them. :[img]http://www.jetsinsider.com/forums/html/emoticons/mad.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='mad.gif' />

  11. #11
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Somerset, NJ
    Posts
    1,573
    The players are throwing a huge amount of $ back at the owners here taking a 24% cut and adding a luxury tax. It looks like the players are trying to separate the owners and they just might. How can some of these cash-strapped owners turn their back on this amount of cash? However its a band-aid situation. The luxury tax situation is not working in baseball and will not work in hockey. On the other hand, some of these players may not want to come back taking a 24% cut and may opt to continue to play in Europe/Russia. If I was a young player, I would be pretty pissed at my union with this latest proposal.

    I think the owners will counter with a reduction of the 24% cut for 2004/5, but will come back with a salary cap going forward scrapping the luxury tax. If no progress is made from these latest negotiations, the owners need to scrap this season and start the process of arranging next season with player from the minors/AHL and union bailouts.

    We will all miss this game Feb-May.

  12. #12
    All League
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Holmdel
    Posts
    2,851
    FRom what I read about the union proposal this is at least a legitimate effort to save the NHL owners money-unfortunately it will help only in the short term- so the owners will not probably go with it. They want the certainty of a salary cap
    Also what is happening with all types of unions now- new employees will get much less than the current players were able to-that is a fact of life

  13. #13
    Originally posted by The Gun Of Bavaria@Dec 8 2004, 03:21 PM
    I'm against the salary cap. I enjoy having an owner (MIke Illitch) that's willing to spend his own $$$, buy the neccessary talent to win repeated cups, and still make a profit.

    The Salary Cap will do nothing but 'rescue' those owners that refuse to spend money on their teams
    You should kiss his feet.

    Boston's owner Jeremy Jacobs is the polar opposite. He spends just enough money to put a mediocre product on the ice and make a profit by keeping 14K-17K in the seats every night.

    My only question is why wait a week for another meeting. I understand a day so the owners can digest the players offer, but a week?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us