NHL Lockout
- Thread starter onthebottom
- Start date
Sorry Cdn-Guy....Cnd-Guy said:Belak $1 million
Domi $1.9
McCabe $4.5
Roberts $ 3.75
Nieuwendyk $3.0
Berg $1.4
But given the proper amount of ice time by Quinn Domi is worth the money and McCabe is a top four defenceman on any other team in the NHL.
I agree with your other selections....
That's the problem!! Paying 4 defencemen at 4.5 each is 18 million leaving you still 3 d-man short (one in the press box to jump in for injuries). Add the forwards and a goalie. Add it all up and you have a problem.spiff said:McCabe is a top four defenceman on any other team in the NHL.
Let's be clear. The NHL is no longer (if it ever was) part of the 4 major sports. It has a TV deal which pays them zero guaranteed revenue. The gates are bo where near the lowest of baseball, basketball, or football. The NHL is only close to the NBA because they play out of the same arenas but total gate is lower. Therefore the players and owners have to get their mindset changed and alter their expectations.
The owners have screwed themselves with arbitration. The owners have always had the option to walk away from a deal but have apart from once or twice agreed to the arbitrator and paid up. Why haven't more walked away?
Even shortening the bench won't help as this only takes away the lowest paid player.
This lockout will be long, my guess is January 2006, when they return to the NHL minus 4-5 teams.
In the meantime head to your local hockey rink and watch the 9-10 year olds playing hockey because it's FUN!
SQ
The owners have screwed themselves with arbitration. The owners have always had the option to walk away from a deal but have apart from once or twice agreed to the arbitrator and paid up. Why haven't more walked away?
Even shortening the bench won't help as this only takes away the lowest paid player.
This lockout will be long, my guess is January 2006, when they return to the NHL minus 4-5 teams.
In the meantime head to your local hockey rink and watch the 9-10 year olds playing hockey because it's FUN!
SQ
Many have blamed Bettman for introducing his NBA concept to the NHL - massive expansion, depend on TV contracts, etc. The league fell for it, and I think it failed.Asterix said: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.
Something isn't clear to me. It seems that many players are/will play elsewhere during the lockout.
What happens if the player gets injured? Are owners required to pay a player (once lockout ends or next season) if they are injured due to euro league play or other? I assume that owners' can "accept" player injury from all-star game, olympics, etc, but not this.
What happens if the player gets injured? Are owners required to pay a player (once lockout ends or next season) if they are injured due to euro league play or other? I assume that owners' can "accept" player injury from all-star game, olympics, etc, but not this.
It definitely failed - market shares and grassroot interest is not present in the US....
Kids there would rather - play football, basketball, baseball than hockey....I've always said that hockey is a fringe sport in the US. NASCAR, Golf, March Madness and College football are all bigger than hockey in total revenue. Shit even the World Poker Tour gets a better tv deal than hockey.
Most Americans could give a rats ass about hockey...and if this strike persists, I'm guessing some Canadians might lose interest. But not Leaf fans....but thats another ball of wax.
Plus the players better get supplemental insurance - why should the owners be liable for a injured product? You get hurt - the existing contract should be null and void - besides dont most contracts have a "jughead"clause?
Kids there would rather - play football, basketball, baseball than hockey....I've always said that hockey is a fringe sport in the US. NASCAR, Golf, March Madness and College football are all bigger than hockey in total revenue. Shit even the World Poker Tour gets a better tv deal than hockey.
Most Americans could give a rats ass about hockey...and if this strike persists, I'm guessing some Canadians might lose interest. But not Leaf fans....but thats another ball of wax.
Plus the players better get supplemental insurance - why should the owners be liable for a injured product? You get hurt - the existing contract should be null and void - besides dont most contracts have a "jughead"clause?
superquad1968 said:Let's be clear. The NHL is no longer (if it ever was) part of the 4 major sports. It has a TV deal which pays them zero guaranteed revenue.
The Top four american sporting events are NFL, MLB, NBA and NASCAR. The NHL isn't really even on the radar screen IMHO!
deffance
The NHL is so different than all other pro sports leagues. It needs the hudge US market to survive and they dont even like the sport.
Like it or not this Lockout is going to improve the sport.
The one area that needs change is the way the game is played its so boring at times when they play that deffenceive
I look forward all week for HNIC on Sat and seeing SP`s later on.
I guess I`ll have to see two.
The NHL is so different than all other pro sports leagues. It needs the hudge US market to survive and they dont even like the sport.
Like it or not this Lockout is going to improve the sport.
The one area that needs change is the way the game is played its so boring at times when they play that deffenceive
I look forward all week for HNIC on Sat and seeing SP`s later on.
I guess I`ll have to see two.
Re: deffance
And the other sports don't need the US market?blow said:The NHL is so different than all other pro sports leagues. It needs the hudge US market to survive
I was just driving home and heard on the radio that Espn had higher ratings for a poker competition from Las Vegas than they did for the NHL playoffs.
The NHL should just come to their senses and realize that outside of 3 or 4 cities, nobody in the states really cares about hockey. It will NEVER catch on south of the border, and the big argument for all this expansion which has drastically watered down the talent level, is so they can get a TV contract in the states. I think the only way the NHL can ever get good ratings in the states, is if the players have a televised poker tournament in Las Vegas....
The NHL should just come to their senses and realize that outside of 3 or 4 cities, nobody in the states really cares about hockey. It will NEVER catch on south of the border, and the big argument for all this expansion which has drastically watered down the talent level, is so they can get a TV contract in the states. I think the only way the NHL can ever get good ratings in the states, is if the players have a televised poker tournament in Las Vegas....
I agree with Argocock but I would say there is 10 cities that could support hockey in the US. NHL really screwed up with all that expansion, they should of left it at 21 teams or just put teams in Canadian cities. Who cares if there are many small market teams as long as people sell out the rinks.
Funny that we are already seeing a number of players talking about excepting a realistic salary cap (their words not mine). I think they realize that the hockey world in general is supportive of a cap and fans want to see this as a way of keeping hockey ticket prices under control. In the business world, if your not making a profit, you might just as well shutdown.
So I am wondering what a realistic salary cap would be? I figure it's probably going to be somewhere in the neighbourhood of $40 to $45 million instead of around $31 million. Your thoughts?
So I am wondering what a realistic salary cap would be? I figure it's probably going to be somewhere in the neighbourhood of $40 to $45 million instead of around $31 million. Your thoughts?
So far I think only Madden of the Devils has talked about accepting a cap, but if the owners hang tough more players will follow suit.scubadoo said:Funny that we are already seeing a number of players talking about excepting a realistic salary cap (their words not mine).
So I am wondering what a realistic salary cap would be? I figure it's probably going to be somewhere in the neighbourhood of $40 to $45 million instead of around $31 million. Your thoughts?
The owners prime earning years will last until they die because they are businessmen. The players' prime earning years are generally linked to their age which only lasts so long. Each year they lose is much more of a loss to them than it is to the owners.
I agree that the cap level will have to be negotiated. The other factor is semantics. The agreement will have to be worded such that it doesn't "appear" to be a cap so that Goodenow can maintain his honourby putting a spin on it. After all, he's drawn the line in the sand saying that they'll NEVER accept ANY cap.
Madden doesnt care...he recently signed a 4 year/20mil deal. Do you think he would have the same stance if that contract wasnt signed?
Re: Hockey
Doug Favelle was his name. Their other goalie may have been a bit better. What was his name? Oh yeah. Bernie Parent.thundarr said:I remember watching hockey many years ago when Doug Favre was the goalie for the Flyers
I managed a sports bar during the last lockout. If you all remember, that was also the year of the baseball strike. Bar owners need your support now. It really sucked, especially at bonus time.
I'd say bar owners need to come up with some alternate attractions to retain our business. Entertainment, deals, special menus, etc., etc.... The onus is on them to attract customers, not for the the customers to spend money out of sympathy.bigdik said:Bar owners need your support now.
