jkrdevil Posted June 8, 2005 Share Posted June 8, 2005 Big breakthrough in the cba negotiations.http://tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=127314 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingssss Posted June 8, 2005 Share Posted June 8, 2005 I just saw this on ESPNEWS. There are still many things to be agreed on but this is HUGE first step. I cant wait for hockey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suigi Posted June 8, 2005 Share Posted June 8, 2005 Uh-huh.Don't post here about it.Don't talk about it.Then they'll get a deal done.Ignore them until they say "Hey! We're back! And we're cutting ticker prices!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bleujayone Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 Blah blah blah blah blah.......In the words of Mike Myers in the role of Dieter of "Sprokets""Your story has become tiresome...."Bottom line, if there's no game on, these two sides can form a knitting circle for all I care. I'm tired of being puck teased by these people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 It will fall through and negoations will break off for the summer when Gary Bettman and Goodenow get involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingssss Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 It will fall through and negoations will break off for the summer when Gary Bettman and Goodenow get involved. yea, probly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEAD! Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 I'll believe it when I see it!I'll believe it when I see it!I'll believe it when I see it!I'll believe it when I see it!I'll believe it when I see it!I'll believe it when I see it!I'll believe it when I see it!I'll believe it when I see it!I'll believe it when I see it!I'll believe it when I see it!........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBTV Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 How the hell can each team have a different cap? How does that work? It would suck to be a fan of a team that even if the owner wanted to spend money to win (despite the financial losses) that he couldn't because of his team's cap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaolinaJoe Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 How the hell can each team have a different cap? How does that work? It would suck to be a fan of a team that even if the owner wanted to spend money to win (despite the financial losses) that he couldn't because of his team's cap. Plus you get a Luxury Tax at the half way point of the cap. What the hell is that? Talk about scaring off the lower end teams from signing guys. This will end up just like baseball, the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer. I don't see how this helps hockey at all. But it also looks like the players screwed theirselves out of $12 million worth of cap, wasn't the last number 48? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted June 9, 2005 Author Share Posted June 9, 2005 How the hell can each team have a different cap? How does that work? It would suck to be a fan of a team that even if the owner wanted to spend money to win (despite the financial losses) that he couldn't because of his team's cap. Plus you get a Luxury Tax at the half way point of the cap. What the hell is that? Talk about scaring off the lower end teams from signing guys. This will end up just like baseball, the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer. I don't see how this helps hockey at all. But it also looks like the players screwed theirselves out of $12 million worth of cap, wasn't the last number 48? The NHLPA. Before the cancellation the NHL offered a a cap of 42 million without a revenure linkage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
epper Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 It will fall through and negoations will break off for the summer when Gary Bettman and Goodenow get involved. biggest.pessimist.ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dwertman Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 Bob McKenzie's take on it allhttp://www.tsn.ca/columnists/bob_mckenzie.aspAn intresting story and i tend to agree with him on this point"Think about it. Say for argument's sake, one NHL team has revenues of $100 million and another team has revenues of $50 million. If, as an example, the teams are permitted to spend 54 per cent of revenues on salaries, one team would have a cap of $54 million, while the other team would have a cap of $27 million. That is a $27 million spread between the two teams' caps and you can rest assured it will be a frosty Friday in hell before NHL teams sign off on that type of discrepancy."I dunno it should be intresting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkrdevil Posted June 9, 2005 Author Share Posted June 9, 2005 How the hell can each team have a different cap? How does that work? It would suck to be a fan of a team that even if the owner wanted to spend money to win (despite the financial losses) that he couldn't because of his team's cap. simple this isn't about competitive balance. This cap is about enduring that every team makes money. The is a minimum a team must spend so I don't think there will be a big problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wheateater Posted June 9, 2005 Share Posted June 9, 2005 How the hell can each team have a different cap? How does that work? It would suck to be a fan of a team that even if the owner wanted to spend money to win (despite the financial losses) that he couldn't because of his team's cap. simple this isn't about competitive balance. This cap is about enduring that every team makes money. The is a minimum a team must spend so I don't think there will be a big problem. That's what the NHL has so wrong. Yes, the cap is there to limit -- and, in this case, with the floor, to force -- spending. But it should also be there to reduce the huge discrepancies in payrolls, which theoretically leads to more competition in the league.I'd say a good 1/3 of the teams know they really have no chance to make the playoffs let alone win the Cup from the start of the season. Isn't there something wrong with that? Why the hell are these teams operating if all they can do is provide easy wins to other teams while simultaneously losing money?The NFL has it right (though the Pats keep winning; mind you, they don't spend all that much money). MLB is soooooo wrong and when its CBA runs out, it'll be done for awhile....longer than the NHL.It's so disheartening to know that the same teams will be at the top of the conferences and mostly the same teams will be at the bottom. Prior to Tampa winning the Cup last year, 4 teams had won the Cups from 1995 thru 2003. These 4 (DET, COL, DAL, NJ) accounted for 12 of the 18 Stanley Cup Finals berths, resulting in very humdrum, "here-we-go-again" series. And when someone new made it, the outcome wasn't much in doubt.The average fan without any strong allegiance to a team might not care, but if you're a big fan of a particular team that has a snowball's chance in hell of winning the Cup, it's really tough to have hope, particularly under the old CBA.Sorry that I kinda went off on a tangent, but hockey is first and foremost a sport, and most business dealings (besides the crucial problems) should come in second. Otherwise, I say that if you're having trouble surviving as a franchise, you shouldn't even be in the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.