Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf
skullman80 wrote:I don't think another lockout happens. I'm not even slightly concerned about it to be honest.
helmespc wrote:There's no way the NHL/NHLPA is insane enough to go through another lockout... losing an entire season really hurt the league's reputation, and the NHL can ill afford to give the KHL any leverage....
columbia wrote:Also, they don't have to sign a deal before the season starts.....because they can just continue under the old arrangement, while working on a new one.
columbia wrote:Rylan wrote:I don't care about the players. I am just thinking on the owners side of rationalization.
Why not?
There are a lot of bubble/AHL players that barely make more than a well payed secretary, who sacrifice their body (and perhaps their brain) and have to find another way of life in their late 20s. Sometimes earlier.
Bioshock wrote:helmespc wrote:There's no way the NHL/NHLPA is insane enough to go through another lockout... losing an entire season really hurt the league's reputation, and the NHL can ill afford to give the KHL any leverage....
The demands of the owners in this negotiation don't startle me as much as it did once i looked at how the NFL and NBA did theirs and i really think this whole thing now is PR by the NHLPA to make the owners look bad. But, if you don't think that this league would lock itself out again, you have another thing coming. Remember, this is the NHL we are talking about here. The same league that goes out of its way to pander to gritty no-name players and turns it's blind eye to head shots and has no consistency regarding any sort of discipline. The NHL's worst enemy has always been itself and if you think they won't shoot themselves again, you're dead wrong.
I expect we won't be playing hockey until about Thanksgiving. At the earliest...
Kaizer wrote:bring on the scabs
spiritfan wrote:I won't miss hockey one bleeping second if there's a lockout... there's so much else to do in life than be concerned bout bickering millionaires and billionaires... really?
Zach6668 wrote:Well, the floor was instituted to make the gap between all of the teams as small as possible. Essentially, they wanted the smaller market teams to spend more, in order to be more competitive, while restricting the bigger market teams as well.
The problem with that, is that poorly managed small market teams will be losers no matter what they do (both financially and on the ice).
The thing about that, however, is even if you get a team, like say Nashville, that turns it around, is very well run, successful enough on the ice to start to build a fan base, you have to remember it's only been 7 years since the last lockout. Creating a fan base is a very long term thing, and even with the smashing success Nashville has had as a small market, they're still not necessarily assured of cultivating long term fans.
So, basically, what I'm saying, is that while lowering the floor looks good, it's really a short-term fix. It allows some of the weaker, more poorly managed smaller markets to show a profit, potentially, in the short run, but it would have much more devastating effects in the long run. We'd have the last 10 years of Florida's existence, perpetually. Weak teams, spending no money, and bringing in no fans.
Florida finally got to the playoffs last season, and now they'll start to draw more fans casually. If they have another strong season, maybe win a round, or win the division again, then you see that attendance and interest start to creep up a little more. It's a long, slow process in the non-traditional markets, especially those with a history of being awful.
The Panthers, for example, may lose money in the short-term, but all of it is going towards the long-term goal of developing a fan base.
So, yeah, widening the gap between the cap and the floor is a short term solution, and a poor one, at that, IMHO. You'll likely end up with more teams spending (relatively) no money, with no long term ability to attract a long term fan base.
shafnutz05 wrote:Definitely feeling like an incoming lockout.
KG wrote:shafnutz05 wrote:Definitely feeling like an incoming lockout.
I don't want to go there...
You would hope/think that the players, owners and Bettman learned their lesson from the lockout...
I can't imagine they would be that stupid to do it again...
KG wrote:shafnutz05 wrote:Definitely feeling like an incoming lockout.
I don't want to go there...
You would hope/think that the players, owners and Bettman learned their lesson from the lockout...
I can't imagine they would be that stupid to do it again...
Nizzy wrote:owners cant make money without players playing for their team/the sport
players cant make money without owners owning teams, arenas, whatever it takes to have a place for them to play
goes both ways, I don't understand why its not 50/50 spit in every single sport or at least 51% for the owners because there's no financial backing/starting of anything without them putting money in first.
Why can't both sides agree on 50/50, not just in NHL but really every sport...
Users browsing this forum: Antonio, BitterClinger, brwi, BurghThing, Crashguy66, DelPen, Ericf, farnham16, flame, Humperdink, IAmScore, lemieuxReturns, Lesky, Malkintent, NashvilleCat, pensfaninhudsonvalley, pressure=9Pa, RentedMule66, ScottIsMyName, Skatingpen, Stillerz Bar, Tonythepenguin, Zalapski33 and 71 guests