Jump to content

2012 Nhl Labour Troubles Thread


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 321
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

THe thing I'm worried about is how different I feel about this work stoppage as opposed to the last one. This one leaves me disgusted with both the players and the owners, although I don't have the s

McKenzie for commissioner.

How dumb would all involved be if there's a stoppage? They've made such progress in growing the game since 05. Why kill it now. Both sides have to realize this. The owners are making money and the salary cap has gone up substantially since 05.46782454e91e3d0e731a210011c03a71.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm guessing it was 0not sure how reliable this site is but it's probably close enoughhttp://www.hockeyzoneplus.com/$maseq_e.htmaverage was 44min was 23.2 from Nashvillemax was 77.8 from Detroit (Rangers were 77.0)median and std dev would make looking at list a bit more interesting

Link to post
Share on other sites

The improvement in revenue was almost all with the Canadian teams mostly due to the relative strength of the $CDN.They need to lower the floor or increase revenue sharing a lot. Under the current system there are a lot of US teams that can never break even if they were to make the Cup Finals every year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a major failing of the current CBA that the floor and cap are fixed numbers above and below the median rather than a percentage (ie: min equal to 75% of median, max equal to 125% of median).

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 posts I wrote a few days ago on LetsGoPens.com:

The thing with sports teams isn't really that they need to be profitable, per se, on an annual basis. The biggest thing for the owners is the valuation of the team, as in, what they can sell for. That's usually where the "profit" comes from.The other thing, with a lot of these teams which ate listing as losing up to ten million, is that I believe most of them SHOULD probably be breaking even, of they weren't just so woefully mismanage (Columbus, Florida, NY Islanders, etc.). The others just suffer from being in smaller markets.
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.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Spent some time with NHL Alumni over the weekend and according to them it doesn't look good. No chance the season starts on time and the big question is the outdoor game which is worth like $50-60 million. If a deal isn't done by December 1st then the owners will be ok with scrapping the whole season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if they lockout again I'll save a shit ton of money, or well I'll save my parents a shit ton of money. I'm intrigued to see what this alternative deal is that they want to throw out there tomorrow.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm intrigued to see what this alternative deal is that they want to throw out there tomorrow.
me too. I have some thoughts, but I doubt Im anywhere in the ballpark.I also find it quite interesting that Crosby, Ovechkin+Stamkos will all be there. No f'ing around, bringing out the big PR boys.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Well if they lockout again I'll save a shit ton of money, or well I'll save my parents a shit ton of money.
I won't, it's just gonna mean I'm spending $$$ on a CHL package of some sort for the computer. Can't go another season without any hockey, that's just not happening.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just hate how slowly everything happens. They've known when this CBA was going to expire for as long as this CBS has existed, yet now we are 2 months form hockey season and we have one shitty offer from the owners, very litte communication from either side, and no official counter offer from the NHLPA.Just get all the decision makers in a room for a week and figure this out. It's ludicrous that we are looking at 2 lockouts in the same decade, especially after all of the positive strides that the NHL has made in the last 8 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya, seems silly and counter productive to each of their own causes to wait so long. I get thats how you negotiate, but still stupid.I would love to be able to get a real breakdown of the proposal from the NHLPA. Sometimes this CBA stuff intrigues me, and in this situation of where someone is coming in with a "new alternative way of looking at things", I'm curious to see if some truly positive bright ideas were presented, as opposed to more of the usual greed.I wonder when they say "the players will take less", what it really means.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I know my son is hoping that there is a lockout for a couple of months. He gets to see guys like RHN in the minors.Funny thing is my son heard that they were having the meetings at the NHLPA office, so he woke up at 8 am (summertime and he never gets up that early) so he can try and get Crosby and Ovy. He calls me at 10 am and says he just saw Tavares and Stamkos walk in, unfortunately he had nothing for those 2 stiffs. He then says he saw Bettman. I then asked him who is taller Bettman or him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...