|
Comments
Re: No NHL....
by love_911_porsche on Sunday, February 20, 2005 The most powerful hockey team owners no longer reside in New York City, Philadelphia, Toronto and Detroit. They live in small places like Edmonton, Nashville and South Florida. As a result, the bottom 10 franchises in terms of fan base and passion now control the league and, unfortunately, the lockout. This means the lockout is really about the bottom franchises and their desire to compete with the Torontos, Philadelphias and Detroits for top talent. But, these teams do not generate sufficient revenue to afford the best players. The answer? Reducing salary levels to what teams in small-markets can afford. As a businesswoman, I have no sympathy for those that can’t compete. These people bought hockey francises in markets that do not have the fan bases sufficient to generate revenues to afford top players. Boo hoo. You made a stupid purchase. Let free markets prevail.
by yoyodyne on Sunday, February 20, 2005 I think I'm in love. by smytty on Monday, February 21, 2005 wow thats a very good point. never thought of it that way until now. by Kerrzy on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 if the NHL was losing so much ($1.8 billion in 10 years) why were so many new teams brought into the market? each new team raises the average salary...
Re: No NHL....
by yoyodyne on Sunday, February 20, 2005 Kerrzy, thanks for giving me a place to dump on this toad. According to The Hockey News, Bettman (spit), even though he was not allowed to attend, again pulled a bait and switch on the P.A. The offer put before the players was worse than the one that was rejected and cancelled the season. I now have to retract my going away party for Bettman (spit) and ask if anyone has a wooded stake and mallet they aren't using. This toad must be dispatched.
Re: No NHL....
by jsgongér35 on Saturday, February 19, 2005 Get real about all this love of the game crap. These guys do love the game, but lets face it they do work their asses off and the average career lasts for about 3 years in the show. A cap is unfortanetely nessessary in any league that has such a diversity in markets, but there is no way in hell that every team would have had to spend the 49 million, bettman is full of it and should be in jail for fraud. Team owners in cities like NY obviously dont want to give up another 10 million of the 100 million they make each year to help out smaller market teams. THis is about greed from the owners. Kerrzy keep up the good work!
by Kerrzy on Wednesday, February 23, 2005 yeah exactly, and another thing offered in the NHLPA's proposal was a lot of luxury taxes that the bigger teams would pay out etc. it's all bullshit but there's not much we can do now. I just read the book scarface, I think everyone should...then we can take down GB haha
Re: No NHL....
by Hick31 on Thursday, February 17, 2005 Ok look honestly i think that all of the players who declined the salary cap offer are fucking assholes..you could honestly find players from lower levels' who would give up their right nut to be in the nhl and they wouldn't care how much they made! the're just happy being in the NHL beacuse thats every kids dream....:evil:
by Kerrzy on Friday, February 18, 2005 hey man it's easy to say that when you're makin $5.90/hr flippin burgers at the local mcdonalds by yoyodyne on Saturday, February 19, 2005 Yeah, and that would be pond hockey with an NHL logo. Most of these guys cannot be scabbed out of their jobs by gleaning the lower leagues because it would only revist the halcyon days of replacement player NFL football.
Re: No NHL....
by Kerrzy on Thursday, February 17, 2005 Taken from an article on faceoff.com: "What's left for the players to give? They've already offered a salary cap, a luxury tax, a 24 per cent salary rollback, a stronger rookie salary cap and the right for teams to take players to arbitration for a pay cut." What has the NHL given?
Re: No NHL....
by allin44 on Thursday, February 17, 2005 in all honesty, i dont think at any time was the union actually going to accept the cap deal. as they have been reporting on the news, now that they have "agreed" on a principle economic system, the NHL now has a VERY hard case to take to the labour board to get impasse granted, meaning its going to be tough as hell for them to use replacement players next year.
Re: No NHL....
by yoyodyne on Thursday, February 17, 2005 I agree both sides have a great big bite of the stinking sandwich coming to them, but Bettman (spit) deserves every bit of scorn coming his way. This lawyer cannot be allowed to portray himself as the last bastion before financial ruin for the league when, as we all know, it was at his direction that the league began this march toward oblivion. His saintly act, his heartfelt sorrow at the loss of the season, and his finger pointing at the NHLPA are his last tricks of his chosen profession--a lawyer. He made his name muddying the waters at law, not at telling the truth. All the owners have done is find a mouthpiece who will stand before a bank of microphones and mouth all the proper phrases to show that the players are the problem. They are not the problem. Bettman (spit) is a scumbag representing a cadre (hopefully, the minority) of scumbag owners who bought his snake oil spiel of uncountable wealth offered by NHL franchise ownership. I pray that the owners who have a love for this game in their heart can get together and give this jerk the going away party he so richly deserves--a quick ride out of the NHL's offices on a rail wearing a suit of tar and feathers.
by Kerrzy on Thursday, February 17, 2005 FUCK YEAH. Those are all great points that you make, and there is nothing I hate more than listening to comments made by Bettman portraying this "hard-done-by" band of owners who want nothing more than to play hockey...yeaaaah right. He's made a craft out of lying, and if you ask most people what they think about the lockout they'll tell you and you'll notice how much of what they know is the GB spin on things. It's pathetic but that's been his main focus all season; to save face in the media. it's pathetic and I'm glad I'm not the only one that thinks so.
by yoyodyne on Saturday, February 19, 2005 Looks like I'll be buying the first round at the bar. Thanks for the compliment.
Re: No NHL....
by sittinndippin on Thursday, February 17, 2005 Bettman is Joe McGrath gone bigtime. Financial viability? This game was huge in the mid 90's, even after losing half a season to labor problems. NHL 94 and 95 on Genesis was the essential video game from Michigan to Arizona (before they even had a team). SI did a cover on why the NBA was down and the NHL was up. Now nobody gives a rat's ass about the death of major pro hockey. And don't think it's going to get better when the strike is over. This schmuck will probably be sending Domi and Kovalchuk to do fashion shows to recover "lost revenue" before cutting ticket prices. This isn't the Players vs. the Owners, it's Players and Owners vs. Fans. Bettman and the Owners who paid the ridiculous wages took a game on the rise and turned it into monster trucking without the popularity or legitimacy. A great year to be a hockey fan in Russia, Germany, or Sweden. Sure sucks in North America.
by Kerrzy on Thursday, February 17, 2005 MANDATORY FASHION SHOWS... haha fuck atta boy, nice slapshot bit there. I agree with you, the whole lockout has been to fix the problems on one side, not fix the problems on both sides. If the problems are economical and the one side says "okay, well take a quarter of our wages...that should help"... and NOTHING happens, you've got to start questioning the motives of the other side. Nobody seems to care that Gary Bettman and the NHL have lied their asses off about financial loss either...and for a lawyer you'd expect something a little bit better. $278-million overstatement in the "we lost this much in the last three years" statements from the beginning of the lockout... $900-million overstatement when they said that they calculated a $400-million loss using the NHLPA's proposal...to which the NHLPA showed what numbers the NHL used, told why they were wrong, put in their numbers, told us why they were right and came out on top by $500-million... But nobody said shit. This guy needs to go
Re: No NHL....
by Newf on Thursday, February 17, 2005 i didn't finish reading your article yet so forgive me, i just wanted to say a thing about bettman turning down the 49 million dollar cap. from the starting point, the owners supported bettman in shooting for a 31 million dollar cap, and they made it clear they were willing to wait as long as it takes to get it. bettman went from 31 to 42.5 million over the course of the lockout, and some owners are unhappy that hes gone THAT high. a 49 million dollar cap would help, but it wouldnt be able to pull off a miracle and save the game. i think 42.5 million is a very fair deal both ways, i think the PA should of accepted it.
by Newf on Thursday, February 17, 2005 and now after finishing the read i am back again... bettman has done a lot for this game. he had hockey set up to overtake basketball as the 3rd most popular sport in america before the '94 lockout. in '94, he won the owners a good cba, but the owners are idiotic, just like you said. the big market teams paid out all the money so its impossible for the little market teams and expansion teams to compete. this is not bettman's fault. bettman gave the owners the ability to use a free market system so that the owners could keep player salaries at a sane level, but the big market owners took advantage of it, and thats why we're here discussing this today, because the owners of teams like detroit, colorado, dallas, new jersey, st louis, etc. we cant blame bettman for their mistakes.
by Kerrzy on Thursday, February 17, 2005 sorry pal, it's not the big teams you mentioned, in my opinion, that are the reason that we're sitting here today not watching hockey. the best example of overpaid players is places like ny, BOSTON (lapointe was the biggest example used throughout this whole thing) and lots of new teams that needed that big namer to get some fans in the gates...those guys might not be the highest paid in the league, but they raised the average salaries for their type of player, which raises everyone elses after a while. That's just my opinion though, but I will say this... while it's the owners who are at fault it's Gary Bettman who is responsible for them. and he could have gone about the lockout in a totally different way if he wasn't such a prick. think about all the money he 'overstated about', all of the bullshit he spun in the media. it's pathetic and like many players said, his owners run teams like it's a hobby, and so they're looking for an idiot proof system...but in doing that they killed a year of hockey.
by Kerrzy on Thursday, February 17, 2005 one more thing...when you're talking about the huge 11 million that the NHL went up in it's salary cap, don't forget the $500-million that the players offered in roll back salaries way before this bullshit.
by Newf on Monday, February 21, 2005 that salary rollback meant nothing for long term purposes. first of all, 3/4 of the players arent on contracts now anyways because everyone knew this lockout was coming. and if that 24% rollback was used with a luxery tax, the individual salaries would just go back up to normal in like 2 seasons. and that whole 11 million means a lot when you are dealing with 30 teams. for the league thats another 330 million dollars. so even if that 500 million dollars gained from the rollback, thats still less than 200 million saved. and in the long run, it would be money lost. bettman has got the PA to cave into a salary cap, so he's already accomplished what many thought was impossible. bettman has goodenow squirming. bettman is saving this game and he'll do it with a 42.5 million dollar hard cap.
by Kerrzy on Tuesday, February 22, 2005 bettman is a twat and relies on hypothetical situations to get out of any possible agreement...as he's proved time and time again |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
