NHL Lockout
- Thread starter onthebottom
- Start date
I guess it depends on how long the players can hold out...and how long the owners can go with no revenue....
And why is that?Kathleen said:
Supposedly these teams will lose LESS money by not having to pay the players than if the league was in operation. The league claims teams are more likely to fold if they continue playing under the current structure.
be prepared for a long lockout. and when its all said and done there will be fewer teams. which is a good thing.
Eliminate a team from each division. And then reconfigure them where necessary.
There is always the NFL, NBA, and yes the AHL!!
There is always the NFL, NBA, and yes the AHL!!
I think it will last only a few months.By December players have to realize they are losing money and could put there sport in jeopardy,in parts of the U.S.Fan base might erode,so i say hockey first or secnd week of Jan.
I say set up an international league like we just saw in world cup. Let players play for different countries, and let them play by international rules without the red line. It doesn't take much longer to fly to europe from Toronto as it does to California.
Not to mention MLB - some good wildcard races left and then the World Series.the_big_E said:
OTB
Health Plan Deal vs. NHL Lockout ... the biggest difference is that the government, believe it or not, actually had the people who pay their salaries, the Canadian people, best interests at heart. It's too bad NHL players and owners won't follow suit. 
Wait until the league folds and they're all making CFL money in rinky-dink leagues all over the world ... serves them right!
Wait until the league folds and they're all making CFL money in rinky-dink leagues all over the world ... serves them right!I think they should have a set up like European soccer, where you have a premier league, or first division with all the rich teams that can afford to play and showcase the best talent in the world. And the last 4 teams in the first division each season goes down to the loser division, and the top 4 teams in the loser division can move up to the first league.
This way all the loser teams can get out of the way, stop watering down the talent and stop bitching and complaining that they have no money to pay the players, and the fans can see a better calibre of hockey.
This way all the loser teams can get out of the way, stop watering down the talent and stop bitching and complaining that they have no money to pay the players, and the fans can see a better calibre of hockey.
I don't think the solution is fewer teams. More teams equals more television and more gate. The NHL needs both.
Two things that would help the league are: 1) an end to salary arbitration, and 2) a shorter roster per team.
In particular, I'd like to see teams limited to dressing 3 lines. Not only would that bring payrolls down, it would also open up play, as, in my opinion, the main reason for the predominance of the trap in the NHL is the existence of the 4th line.
The lockout will last a whole season. The owners have prepared for it by creating a lockout fund (some owners will make more money during the lockout than they would have during the season). The better players will be playing elsewhere, like Europe, and will commit to those teams for the season.
Next year, if the players don't cave, someone will start a new professional league which will not have a union and will have revenue sharing and a salary cap.
If the players were smart, they'd cave in and settle now, and rely on the uncanny ability of owners to somehow screw things up, causing player salaries to rise again.
Two things that would help the league are: 1) an end to salary arbitration, and 2) a shorter roster per team.
In particular, I'd like to see teams limited to dressing 3 lines. Not only would that bring payrolls down, it would also open up play, as, in my opinion, the main reason for the predominance of the trap in the NHL is the existence of the 4th line.
The lockout will last a whole season. The owners have prepared for it by creating a lockout fund (some owners will make more money during the lockout than they would have during the season). The better players will be playing elsewhere, like Europe, and will commit to those teams for the season.
Next year, if the players don't cave, someone will start a new professional league which will not have a union and will have revenue sharing and a salary cap.
If the players were smart, they'd cave in and settle now, and rely on the uncanny ability of owners to somehow screw things up, causing player salaries to rise again.
More teams has lead to the player pool being weaker, which makes the product weaker. Fewer, more talented teams would be beneficial IMO.
Absolutely. The league blew it the 90's by trying to expand so fast, and now it's coming back to bite them. At the time, they said it would help to give better exposure for the game. I'm sorry, but increasing exposure of a diluted product ain't gonna work.the_big_E said:
the_big_E said:
Right on!
I don't think the players yet realize that public support is firmly behind the owners on this one.
I'd like to see us go back to a 18 team league. Let the good players play and fans will flock to the arena. If things continued as they were, no fan wants to pay $300.00 to go to a game and see two teams play the trap. Boring!!!
I see the oners going for a year and claim in court that the union has not bargined in good faith and they ask for permission to impose their own 'new system' in place with fewer teams.
BTW, I called the Sens today and asked for my money back. The staff we sorry to hear I cancelled my tickets but understood that I would prefer to hold on to my cash instead of letting someone else hold on to it for an extended period of time.
Furthermore, more teams doesnt lead to more TV deals because the NHL deal is substantially lower than what the other major sports get. ABC picks up like 5 weekend games near the end of the season, and ESPN2 airs other games? Thats not a sweet deal.
both sides are to blame. the players, to a man, are grossly overpaid, but, then again, the owners are the ones who constantly pay them those outrageous salaries. i liken the situation of teams like the rangers, red wings, flyers, and leafs, when the unrestricted free agency period starts every july, like dropping a kid into a candy store. they just cannot help themselves. even when a big name, with his accompanying big salary, is on the trade market, again, you get owners falling all over themselves to get them.
the current system, the one just expiring, does work. could it be tweaked some more, yes, but, does it have the infra-structure to work for the owners, sure does! a little self-control and some common sense, and the owners would not have gotten themselves in such a hole. and before you go blaming the players for it all, think about it, if you were a player, would you take 1 million, when you could ask for and probably get 3 million? sure you would. dumb, dumb, dumb, all the way around.
as for other particulars, sure, some teams will fold if hockey is not back by january. we dont have to name them, we all know who they are, but, obviously franchises are being held out there as pawns in a very high stakes game. it would be better for us fans, if there were 5 or 6 less teams, as you would get rid of some of the minor league players who should not be in the pro league to begin with. the players and goodenow are smart enough to realize this, but, i guess they really are looking out for the "brothership", NOT! jobs will be lost.
dont underestimate us either, the fans. sure, as kathleen pointed out, teams with loyal fan bases, like detroit, TO, montreal, etc;...will suffer some degree of fan anger, but not in the attendance. other teams may never recover though. i fear for teams in anaheim, columbus, washington, florida and a few others. look how long it has taken major league baseball to get it's fanbase back to what it used to be, after it's last strike.
i just hope that if they do stay out for any length of time, that at least when it is all said and done, something tangible gets accomplished! because i really dont give a fuck how these greedy pricks divide their millions and millions, as long as somehow, us fans get a break with ticket prices. and, we get a better on-ice product! ahhhhh, it is nice to dream though....
Plyrs99
here are some examples, of players who are on stupid deals. i dont know exact figures, but, you'll get it...
bobby holik and darius kasparaitis, two years ago, signed by the new york rangers.
dallas give bill guerin a huge free agent deal, now can't deal him away because of it.
look at our leafs, what the heck was robert reichel given $3 mill a year for? and tie domi, bless the man, but $2 mill a year for what he does?
what were the wings doing throwing good money away for againg and fading brett hull and brendan shanahan? look at what the pair got this past off-season. hull took a pretty good pay cut to sign with the coyotes, and shanny did the same to stay with the wings. at least the owners showed a little sense with this pair, this time around.
hmmmmm, mad mike milbury, enjoying your long, mega-dollars signing of alexei yashin? think he earns his money, HAHAHAHA!!!
sticking with the red wings, signing domenic hasek, to a huge deal, to come aboard, while paying mega bucks to an overrated cujo? great biz savvy!
but you want to look at one contract that really started the escalation of salaries....blame our hockey cousins down the road, the senators, and rod bryden. their ridiculous deal with alexander daigle, really set off the problem we now see today.
i could go on and on through every team, with dumb contracts, but, that's all for now.
the current system, the one just expiring, does work. could it be tweaked some more, yes, but, does it have the infra-structure to work for the owners, sure does! a little self-control and some common sense, and the owners would not have gotten themselves in such a hole. and before you go blaming the players for it all, think about it, if you were a player, would you take 1 million, when you could ask for and probably get 3 million? sure you would. dumb, dumb, dumb, all the way around.
as for other particulars, sure, some teams will fold if hockey is not back by january. we dont have to name them, we all know who they are, but, obviously franchises are being held out there as pawns in a very high stakes game. it would be better for us fans, if there were 5 or 6 less teams, as you would get rid of some of the minor league players who should not be in the pro league to begin with. the players and goodenow are smart enough to realize this, but, i guess they really are looking out for the "brothership", NOT! jobs will be lost.
dont underestimate us either, the fans. sure, as kathleen pointed out, teams with loyal fan bases, like detroit, TO, montreal, etc;...will suffer some degree of fan anger, but not in the attendance. other teams may never recover though. i fear for teams in anaheim, columbus, washington, florida and a few others. look how long it has taken major league baseball to get it's fanbase back to what it used to be, after it's last strike.
i just hope that if they do stay out for any length of time, that at least when it is all said and done, something tangible gets accomplished! because i really dont give a fuck how these greedy pricks divide their millions and millions, as long as somehow, us fans get a break with ticket prices. and, we get a better on-ice product! ahhhhh, it is nice to dream though....
Plyrs99
here are some examples, of players who are on stupid deals. i dont know exact figures, but, you'll get it...
bobby holik and darius kasparaitis, two years ago, signed by the new york rangers.
dallas give bill guerin a huge free agent deal, now can't deal him away because of it.
look at our leafs, what the heck was robert reichel given $3 mill a year for? and tie domi, bless the man, but $2 mill a year for what he does?
what were the wings doing throwing good money away for againg and fading brett hull and brendan shanahan? look at what the pair got this past off-season. hull took a pretty good pay cut to sign with the coyotes, and shanny did the same to stay with the wings. at least the owners showed a little sense with this pair, this time around.
hmmmmm, mad mike milbury, enjoying your long, mega-dollars signing of alexei yashin? think he earns his money, HAHAHAHA!!!
sticking with the red wings, signing domenic hasek, to a huge deal, to come aboard, while paying mega bucks to an overrated cujo? great biz savvy!
but you want to look at one contract that really started the escalation of salaries....blame our hockey cousins down the road, the senators, and rod bryden. their ridiculous deal with alexander daigle, really set off the problem we now see today.
i could go on and on through every team, with dumb contracts, but, that's all for now.
I think blaming the owners for the mess the league is in is a little simplistic. In some markets to get fans into a building marquee players are needed probably more so than a good team. Also in a market where the team is on the upswing there is great pressure to keep the core together and build on the momentum. In both examples when a key player ups his ante to continue playing for a team the ownership is caught in a tough spot. Pay him and be raked for dishing too much money (plus side is the team remains intact) or not pay him and hear it from the fans that you are a cheap S.O.B. (Boston Bruins of years past) that doesn't give a shit about the fans. Therefore you can't just blame the owner. In this fraternity of 30 owners all you need is 2 or 3 owners acting out of step with the rest. You may have 28 owners looking at budgets but it doesn't take much to throw that principle out the windo as you have a couple of owners only in this for their own ego and love the attention they get in the press from signing big name players to big contracts. This puts pressure on other owners as their fans read the papers and think to themselves "why is my owner so cheap and doesn't spend the money?'.
The Devils this summer went to arbitration and lost with Scott Neidermieyer. Here the owner was trying to cut costs but some outside authority basically said "fuck you pay the man". The system needs an overhaul.
plyrs99 some of your examples have symplistic conclusions to how the actual situations transpired. Hasek came out of retirement, RED wings already signed Joseph, and were obliged to honour the contract they had with Hasek from seasons past. Hasek screwed them over on that.
The Devils this summer went to arbitration and lost with Scott Neidermieyer. Here the owner was trying to cut costs but some outside authority basically said "fuck you pay the man". The system needs an overhaul.
plyrs99 some of your examples have symplistic conclusions to how the actual situations transpired. Hasek came out of retirement, RED wings already signed Joseph, and were obliged to honour the contract they had with Hasek from seasons past. Hasek screwed them over on that.
