Rink on Renfrew Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 Would you look at that!? Bettman has gotten what he wanted, parity! It's nearing the end of December and I was just looking at the standings, all teams are tied. Truly a festivas Mur-ah-cull. I have a lack of sympathy for the PA but I blame the owners to a higher level, especially due to their Commish hiring practices. I hope when this all finally gets settled, we have a new face handing out the cup every spring. The one the have is getting pretty stale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unknown33429 Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 How do you run a competitve league without the collusion you are referring to. Without spending limitations the TO Laffers would theoretically win the CUP every year. The players are complaining about lost revenue but the NHL is also keeping 5 - 6 teams afloat who should be bankrupt. More teams more NHL player slots. In a lot of ways it is a two way street. A lot of people talk about losing 25 NHL player slots for every team that fails but the reality is that most franchises have 50 pro contracts signed. There is the possibility that successfull litigation could destroy the minor pro system which will impact player development in a major way. I cannot see this happening as any sports league requires restrictions simply to stay competitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 EDIT: Wrong thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerg Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 For all of the people complaining that players get more than they are "worth" who continue to ignore supply and demand economics or even human nature which says we'll gladly overpay for what we want, but cheap out on what we need, I invite you all to put your money where your mouth is. Petition the local government to raise your taxes to give significant raises to police officers, firefighters, nurses, teachers and paramedics. (Start by petitioning they end luxury tax breaks for sports teams and billionaires to pay for it and I'll gladly sign it!) Offer to give your daycare workers a raise. Tell your boss you'll take a pay cut if needed to ensure (s)he makes enough profit for themselves. Let's be honest, you probably get paid too much for playing around on CDC and Facebook all day anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 What a dumb post. There's a difference between multi-millionaires playing a sport and blue collared workers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 23, 2012 Share Posted December 23, 2012 The players are complaining about lost revenue but the NHL is also keeping 5 - 6 teams afloat who should be bankrupt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Money Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 What a dumb post. There's a difference between multi-millionaires playing a sport and blue collared workers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smurf47 Posted December 24, 2012 Share Posted December 24, 2012 i'd love to have a job where i get 50/50 split with the people who employ me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 Pretty much 50/50 @ this point.we'll see .The media is just dyin to call a winner/loser in this debacle.but ultimately it is us fans that lose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 Owners have already won, only thing that remains to be seen is what the score is at the end. If it ended today ummm 6-1 owners, Bettman 1g 2 assists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 Then they really need to learn how to play to protect the lead! That's not when you take unnecessary risks, like continuing a lockout you've already gotten most of what you wanted from while sponsors and fans alike continue to be more and more angry on their way to deciding to wash their hands of the NHL all together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Sparkle Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 ...and hopefully they will keep you for the 5 yr career that NHL players average. Of course, I'm counting on the fact that you are going to add, in a big way, to the revenue generated by your high skill and entrtainment value !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twilight Sparkle Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 .. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 I look at it as calculated risk, not unnecessary risks. Risk is built into the dna of every business man on this planet. From the guy who borrows and begs from family and friends to start a shoe shining business on the sidewalk of a slum in Africa to the owner of the Tampa Lightning who invests hundreds of millions $ in a professional sports team. Owners will not relent, they will get the best deal possible. It's a calculated risk on their part, I'm confident they know what they are doing. One billionaire could have a brain cramp and guide his/her company into going bankrupt, But not 30 billionaires siting together in a board room advised by the best lawyers, accountants and business school graduates in the world. Calculated risk is justified. It's part of doing business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 Risk is inherent, but only an idiot takes unnecessary risks and that is what they are doing. Sponsors have publicly voiced their displeasure. The NHL is risking $200M just with their NBC TV deal if they lose a season (because they'll have to give them a year for free after their current contract ends if they cancel the season). They're risk a lot only now they're risking it for things that, even by their own admission, will not effect the bottom line of any team. Risk may be inherent to business, but knowing when to take risks and when to take your winnings and go home is too, and that is where they are failing. Businesses, including those run by brilliant billionaires, lose all the time when the owners take stupid risks they shouldn't have. Just because this group of people were "smart" enough to inherent a bunch of money doesn't mean they are less likely to make the same mistakes others have made. And it's a lovely fantasy to imagine that there are 30 owners (though most teams actually have more than one owner) sitting together in a room and making decisions based on what's best for the business of the NHL. The problem is, that's nothing more than a fantasy. Some owners have far more say than others. Jacobs is known for telling some owners to not talk during meetings because they haven't earned that right in his opinion. Others have told sports reporters that they signed up for certain Twitter feeds just to keep up-to-date on what was going on in the CBA negotiations because they weren't being told anything, and several people said they were surprised at how little the new owners that were added to the latest round of talks knew about what had been going on. Owners are not making decisions collectively. A few are making them based on whatever they want and they are certainly not making them with the league's health in mind, or they wouldn't be risking pissing off fans and sponsors alike just to keep players locked out to gain additional contractual controls that won't save them a single penny. And they wouldn't be proposing new rules in the CBA that hurt poorer teams or refusing to share a decent percentage of revenue comparable to what other sports leagues do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nucklehead Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 Is this true? I haven't kept up to the banter. It can only mean one thing. The terrorists have won. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 LOL,,,,,, These 30+ billionaires are idiots. So were the NBA billionaire owners, same with billionaire NFL owners. Some of the best and brightest business men in the world who also run multinational companies are idiots and they don't know how to run their businesses. Got it. Oh yeah, and they have NO say in how to run their businesses. Understood. But you know whats good for their business without ever seeing any financial statements from any of these companies. And like you said about a week ago on this thread CBA thread, Most PPl posting on TSN are "ignorant". Why? Because most of them side with owners. So in summary, any one who doesn't agree with you is ignorant, brilliant billionaire business men are idiots who don't know how to run their companies and these highly successful business men have NO say in running their businesses. Hope I didn't miss anything. Merry Xmas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEAN HARNETT Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 I blame the players. The owners assume all the risk in the business department and the players get paid either way. The players want to point the finger at the owners for offering the stupid contracts, but that's because the players don't realise that the owners are all competitive as well. The owners want a system in place in which the market is an even playing field and one that can sustain itself. I understand every market in the NHL is different and they all make/lose money for certain reasons..... But as it stands now, 60 % of the NHL's teams loses money, so it's obvious something is wrong here. I understand the players want their precious contracts honored, but what else do they really expect from the NHL? There is no way the league can sustain itself without a proper hard cap system to protect the owners from themselves and give every market a chance to compete. I for one do not want to watch a league that has 6 out of 30 teams have all the great players while the rest develop players for those said teams. The players need to realise that the revenues are not profit and that their demands are not realistic. If the league minimum salary is $525'000, then how much more can the players be asking for and why? Greed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEAN HARNETT Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 Risk is inherent, but only an idiot takes unnecessary risks and that is what they are doing. Sponsors have publicly voiced their displeasure. The NHL is risking $200M just with their NBC TV deal if they lose a season (because they'll have to give them a year for free after their current contract ends if they cancel the season). They're risk a lot only now they're risking it for things that, even by their own admission, will not effect the bottom line of any team. Risk may be inherent to business, but knowing when to take risks and when to take your winnings and go home is too, and that is where they are failing. Businesses, including those run by brilliant billionaires, lose all the time when the owners take stupid risks they shouldn't have. Just because this group of people were "smart" enough to inherent a bunch of money doesn't mean they are less likely to make the same mistakes others have made. And it's a lovely fantasy to imagine that there are 30 owners (though most teams actually have more than one owner) sitting together in a room and making decisions based on what's best for the business of the NHL. The problem is, that's nothing more than a fantasy. Some owners have far more say than others. Jacobs is known for telling some owners to not talk during meetings because they haven't earned that right in his opinion. Others have told sports reporters that they signed up for certain Twitter feeds just to keep up-to-date on what was going on in the CBA negotiations because they weren't being told anything, and several people said they were surprised at how little the new owners that were added to the latest round of talks knew about what had been going on. Owners are not making decisions collectively. A few are making them based on whatever they want and they are certainly not making them with the league's health in mind, or they wouldn't be risking pissing off fans and sponsors alike just to keep players locked out to gain additional contractual controls that won't save them a single penny. And they wouldn't be proposing new rules in the CBA that hurt poorer teams or refusing to share a decent percentage of revenue comparable to what other sports leagues do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 25, 2012 Share Posted December 25, 2012 Actually, you missed a lot. Like my entire point. I never said I think people are idiots for simply not agreeing with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.