PDA

View Full Version : NHL


DeepSouth
12-15-2004, 08:24 AM
Just heard that the NHL players are locked out. Am I the only one that didn't realize there's no hockey being played and that I don't miss it.

Braincase
12-15-2004, 08:27 AM
Is anybody else here not surprised that they don't get a lot of NHL news in Alabama?

HC_Chief
12-15-2004, 08:31 AM
lol

I'm glad ownership locked their asses out. They need to implement a salary cap... the player's union is dead set against any sort of cap. Too bad for you, Pierre, now STFD and STFU!

Time to bring in the scabs

morphius
12-15-2004, 08:33 AM
We have had mulitple threads talking about the lockout here, LOL!

Deberg_1990
12-15-2004, 08:46 AM
The NHL is finished.......Nobody cares outside of Canada.

Bearcat
12-15-2004, 08:54 AM
Bettman should be fired, and the owners should be kicked in the nuts. While the deal wouldn't have solved every problem in the NHL for eternity, it would have solved the two major issues -- bringing the percent of revenue back down towards NFL levels, and bringing a good enough plan to the table that will allow them to PLAY HOCKEY THIS SEASON.

What the owners are saying is equivelant to saying: "I'm not responsible enough to run my business so that I don't lose millions of dollars a year."

Hockey doesn't need a salary cap.

ChiefsCountry
12-15-2004, 08:56 AM
Bettman should be fired, and the owners should be kicked in the nuts. While the deal wouldn't have solved every problem in the NHL for eternity, it would have solved the two major issues -- bringing the percent of revenue back down towards NFL levels, and bringing a good enough plan to the table that will allow them to PLAY HOCKEY THIS SEASON.

What the owners are saying is equivelant to saying: "I'm not responsible enough to run my business so that I don't lose millions of dollars a year."

Hockey doesn't need a salary cap.

That is like baseball saying it don't. All sports need a salary cap, only way to keep salaries down.

Bearcat
12-15-2004, 08:57 AM
Just heard that the NHL players are locked out. Am I the only one that didn't realize there's no hockey being played and that I don't miss it.


There's been a few players that have said they're shocked that a lot of people haven't noticed... they have pride in their sport, and I don't think they expected this much apathy.

It says a lot when you're willing to take a 24% paycut... even if they are millionaires.

HC_Chief
12-15-2004, 08:59 AM
The hell it doesn't! Salaries have eclipsed revenues. That means hockey is losing money. You either cut salaries or increase ticket prices and concessions. We already know the latter is not an option: hockey is the second most expensive sport to attend (behind the NBA). A large portion of diehard hockey fans have already been priced out.

The outrageous salaries need to be leashed. FFS, hockey players make more than NFL players!!!

Bearcat
12-15-2004, 09:08 AM
That is like baseball saying it don't. All sports need a salary cap, only way to keep salaries down.


There's a huge gap between the top teams and bottom teams in MLB... it's the reason they have 5 game series in the first round of the playoffs... because the lower seeds aren't expected to put up a fight. Also, there's almost no movement in the standings... can't remember exactly, but there was a long streak of teams in the AL East finishing in the same order.. NY, Boston, etc. While a couple of teams have managed to squeak by the large payroll teams, it still comes down to beating the Yankees every year.

It's not like that in the NHL. Sure, you have big payroll teams that make the playoffs every year, but Detroit was out in the first round a couple of years ago, Colorado in the 2nd last year and in the 1st 2 years ago... the Rangers are a black hole for talent... there's 2/7, 3/6 upsets in the first round every year. There's teams that rise or are rising to playoff calibre, and minus the Penguins, there's no team that has such little talent that they can't at least compete for a playoff spot.

It comes down to this --- You can't buy the Stanley Cup. You can buy a World Series ring (see NYY, even though the Marlins' first Championship might be the better example).

chiefs4me
12-15-2004, 09:31 AM
YEP,,you are the only fool that doesn't know it has not been played for 4 months,,,,,hockey doesn't miss you either,,,,,:harumph::harumph:

chiefs4me
12-15-2004, 09:35 AM
The NHL is finished.......Nobody cares outside of Canada.


or people who live in dirtville SA,,,,,,You have no clue how many hockey fans there are in the world or Texas,,,,,,,AND I CARE :harumph:

shaneo69
12-15-2004, 09:39 AM
It says a lot when you're willing to take a 24% paycut... even if they are millionaires.

Big deal. Once Illitch and Kroenke get their money back from the 24% paycuts, they'll go out an sign free agents like Pavol Demitra and Teemu Selanne to 24% more money than their worth. And the average salaries will go right back up again.

It's not a matter of owners needing to be responsible enough to not lose millions of dollars. It's the fact that owners who want to win will end up outbidding each other for the best players, driving the salaries up. And owners who want to be responsible and not lose money will be lambasted by their fans (like Lamar Hunt has) for not trying to win.

A salary cap is necessary.

Deberg_1990
12-15-2004, 09:41 AM
or people who live in dirtville SA,,,,,,You have no clue how many hockey fans there are in the world or Texas,,,,,,,AND I CARE :harumph:


Sure there are Hockey fans out there..and they are pretty loyal. The problem with Hockey is, no one watches it on TV because its hard to watch on TV. For better or for worse, TV drives all the major sports league with $$$$$$

Bearcat
12-15-2004, 09:44 AM
The hell it doesn't! Salaries have eclipsed revenues. That means hockey is losing money. You either cut salaries or increase ticket prices and concessions. We already know the latter is not an option: hockey is the second most expensive sport to attend (behind the NBA). A large portion of diehard hockey fans have already been priced out.

The outrageous salaries need to be leashed. FFS, hockey players make more than NFL players!!!


They would be cut --- 24%!!!! ....not only would that have taken place immediately, but the plan was for 6 years, to ensure salaries didn't skyrocket again.

You bring up another big issue... like I've mentioned before, the NHL has a rule that so many seats in each arena have to be $25 or under. They should implement rules for the entire arena.... let the rich people have the first few rows, but limit prices on other lower bowl tickets and even the good 2nd level/upper bowl seats. Take part of that 24%, and fix ticket prices.

IMO, the owners don't think of it as savings... in the back of their minds, they think of it as a chance to spend 24% more on other players. Again, that's not the players' faults.

If the players' salaries are at 50-60%, like they would have been with the new deal, it falls on other things... not only the owner's responsibility, but marketing the NHL, getting big time TV contracts, getting the average fan into the arena for a decent price in a decent seat so he'll come back for more.

None of it can happen without Bettman & the owners budging a little.

chiefs4me
12-15-2004, 09:47 AM
Sure there are Hockey fans out there..and they are pretty loyal. The problem with Hockey is, no one watches it on TV because its hard to watch on TV. For better or for worse, TV drives all the major sports league with $$$$$$


I have no problem watching hockey on tv or following the puck,,,,,maybe you need glasses,,,,,,ROFL

HC_Chief
12-15-2004, 09:47 AM
Oh I agree there needs to be compromise, but I'm of the mindset that once something is broke, you take the time to fix it properly. The NHL has been hemmoraging money for quite a while now, and the players have been reaping the benefits. It's wrecking the game IMO.

Lock 'em out and come up with a solution that works (in other words, model it after the NFL).

I would LOVE to see MLB have the balls to do the same (I know I'm just dreaming there)

Bearcat
12-15-2004, 09:51 AM
Big deal. Once Illitch and Kroenke get their money back from the 24% paycuts, they'll go out an sign free agents like Pavol Demitra and Teemu Selanne to 24% more money than their worth. And the average salaries will go right back up again.


Beat me to it... I'll get back to this.... have that work thing... ;)

DeepSouth
12-15-2004, 10:35 AM
Is anybody else here not surprised that they don't get a lot of NHL news in Alabama?

I have to admit that I've never been a big Hockey Fan. However, for a short time we (Mobile, AL) had a semi-pro team. I did attend a few games. The most amazing thing was how infatuated the chicks were with hockey players. The local team players used to frequent one of our local watering holes after games. The chicks were all over these guys. Several of the players spoke french and the only thing they knew how to say in english had to do with sexual favors.

Bearcat
12-15-2004, 11:15 AM
Here's the main points of the deal, for those who might not know... from espn.com

Salary Rollback
Immediately cuts 24 percent off all existing contracts. NHLPA says that will save teams $270 million in the first year and $528 million over three years. The previous offer of Sept. 9 offered a 5 percent rollback.


Salary Restraints

Would restrict rookie contracts to $850,000 a year for three years, down from last season's $1.2 million level. There would also be reductions in qualifying offers to restricted free agents, and would give clubs the chance to elect arbitration in a system similar to one used in baseball. The union estimates clubs will save $400 million over the next six years and reduce the aggregate qualifying offers due to restricted free agents by $285 million over three years.


Luxury Tax
Would penalize teams 20 cents for each dollar they spend between $45 million and $50 million. The penalty would increase to 25 percent the second year and 30 percent in the third. Teams spending between $50 million and $60 million would be taxed 50 cents on the dollar the first year, 55 cents the second year and 60 cents the third. Those with payrolls above that would have to pay 60 cents for every dollar the first year, 65 cents the second, and 70 cents the third year on each dollar over the threshold. Includes a revenue-sharing plan to bring the bottom 15 teams within 30 percent of the revenues of the top 15 teams.


Joint Players-Club Committees
Committees would be designed to ensure improvements in the game, its marketing and its revenues. The players proposed to play in the 2006 and 2010 Winter Olympics.
-- Associated Press



It's not a matter of owners needing to be responsible enough to not lose millions of dollars. It's the fact that owners who want to win will end up outbidding each other for the best players, driving the salaries up. And owners who want to be responsible and not lose money will be lambasted by their fans (like Lamar Hunt has) for not trying to win.

A salary cap is necessary.

You're comparing a profitable team that raises ticket prices & parking prices every year or two, but refused to improve the product via FA, to hockey teams that are losing money. A team can't justify a huge profit, partly through raising the price of admission, and then not improve the product. A team can justify not improving the product because they can't afford to. Restricting rookie contracts would be huge for, say, Pittsburgh. There's still the problem of watching a young star leave for bigger things, but again, it doesn't take even 2 lines of All-Stars to be competitive.

I actually didn't see the part on the Joint Players/Club Committees when I first read the article, but that has huge potential. Crack down on penalties, market the star players, get a decent tv contract.... all of it would help teams like Buffalo and Pittsburgh.


I totally agree that salaries will be driven up because of competition, but it's still the owner's responsibility to say "We aren't going to spend more than X million dollars on salaries this year".... and it does go back to the fact that 1) you don't have to spend as much as everyone else to be not only competitive, but have a chance at the Stanley Cup, and 2) the gap between Detroit's/Colorado's and Pittsburgh's salaries isn't nearly as big as the gap between the Yankees and [whoever is last].

If you want to beat the best teams in hockey, you need a little firepower and a good goaltender. You don't have to be in the bidding war for big priced FA just to be competitive.

Bearcat
12-15-2004, 11:28 AM
Oh I agree there needs to be compromise, but I'm of the mindset that once something is broke, you take the time to fix it properly. The NHL has been hemmoraging money for quite a while now, and the players have been reaping the benefits. It's wrecking the game IMO.

Lock 'em out and come up with a solution that works (in other words, model it after the NFL).

I would LOVE to see MLB have the balls to do the same (I know I'm just dreaming there)

I know it would suck to go through this again in 6 years, but I think it would be smarter to play now under the proposed system & see if it works... and start discussing tweaked or new plans in 3 or 4 years, than to cancel this season.

IMO, the NHL has more of a chance of surviving under the proposed plan, than cancelling the entire season.... and who knows.... maybe next season. They can make this plan work. They can't keep screwing the fans.


Sure there are Hockey fans out there..and they are pretty loyal. The problem with Hockey is, no one watches it on TV because its hard to watch on TV. For better or for worse, TV drives all the major sports league with $$$$$$

I think people just get frustrated with it too easily... in football, you don't have to know what every penalty is to enjoy the game. In hockey, OTOH, you have to know what the lines mean, or else you're going to have no idea why they keep stopping play. And unlike football, where the ref explains why the flag was thrown, the announcer saying "offsides" or "icing" doesn't help those who don't know hockey.

I actually think a hockey game is more entertaining on tv than a football game, because you can't see the plays develop when watching football on tv.


I The most amazing thing was how infatuated the chicks were with hockey players. The local team players used to frequent one of our local watering holes after games. The chicks were all over these guys. Several of the players spoke french and the only thing they knew how to say in english had to do with sexual favors.

You know what they say.... football players watch the cheerleaders, but hockey players take them home :p

Calcountry
12-15-2004, 12:24 PM
lol

I'm glad ownership locked their asses out. They need to implement a salary cap... the player's union is dead set against any sort of cap. Too bad for you, Pierre, now STFD and STFU!

Time to bring in the scabs
agreeed. To us Hockey crazies, any thing that remotely resembles a hockey game right now will do. Sorry Kristi Yamaguichi won't do, wait a second, she'll DO nicely. :p

Calcountry
12-15-2004, 12:25 PM
Bettman should be fired, and the owners should be kicked in the nuts. While the deal wouldn't have solved every problem in the NHL for eternity, it would have solved the two major issues -- bringing the percent of revenue back down towards NFL levels, and bringing a good enough plan to the table that will allow them to PLAY HOCKEY THIS SEASON.

What the owners are saying is equivelant to saying: "I'm not responsible enough to run my business so that I don't lose millions of dollars a year."

Hockey doesn't need a salary cap.
I hope Mario Lemiex is happy.

He liked playing for the Penguins so much, he bought the company. :p

Calcountry
12-15-2004, 12:25 PM
That is like baseball saying it don't. All sports need a salary cap, only way to keep salaries down.
Baseball has a roid issue.

BCD
12-15-2004, 12:27 PM
Just heard that the NHL players are locked out. Am I the only one that didn't realize there's no hockey being played and that I don't miss it.In other news...the Sun is hot, ice is cold, film at 11...
:)

|Zach|
12-15-2004, 12:28 PM
When is the hockey season supposed to start?

Calcountry
12-15-2004, 12:28 PM
The hell it doesn't! Salaries have eclipsed revenues. That means hockey is losing money. You either cut salaries or increase ticket prices and concessions. We already know the latter is not an option: hockey is the second most expensive sport to attend (behind the NBA). A large portion of diehard hockey fans have already been priced out.

The outrageous salaries need to be leashed. FFS, hockey players make more than NFL players!!!
You can't do concessions at a Hockey game very easily. Non stop action, and they won't let you get up and down except in between whistels.

2 intermissions is it.

I love Hockey, they should think outside of the rink if they are going to gin up revenues, otherwise, the players are going to take a pay cut.

Think about it. A lot of the owners are saving money this year by not having a season. They are better off without the season. Hello players? anyone in there?

Calcountry
12-15-2004, 12:29 PM
When is the hockey season supposed to start?
Normally it would have started in mid October.

|Zach|
12-15-2004, 12:30 PM
Normally it would have started in mid October.
Oh crap really? I thought they were trying to avoid not starting the season I didnt know they have already missed a crap load of hockey.

Calcountry
12-15-2004, 12:31 PM
or people who live in dirtville SA,,,,,,You have no clue how many hockey fans there are in the world or Texas,,,,,,,AND I CARE :harumph:
I try not to care, but I still miss it.

Calcountry
12-15-2004, 12:51 PM
Here's the main points of the deal, for those who might not know... from espn.com

[/b]




You're comparing a profitable team that raises ticket prices & parking prices every year or two, but refused to improve the product via FA, to hockey teams that are losing money. A team can't justify a huge profit, partly through raising the price of admission, and then not improve the product. A team can justify not improving the product because they can't afford to. Restricting rookie contracts would be huge for, say, Pittsburgh. There's still the problem of watching a young star leave for bigger things, but again, it doesn't take even 2 lines of All-Stars to be competitive.

I actually didn't see the part on the Joint Players/Club Committees when I first read the article, but that has huge potential. Crack down on penalties, market the star players, get a decent tv contract.... all of it would help teams like Buffalo and Pittsburgh.


I totally agree that salaries will be driven up because of competition, but it's still the owner's responsibility to say "We aren't going to spend more than X million dollars on salaries this year".... and it does go back to the fact that 1) you don't have to spend as much as everyone else to be not only competitive, but have a chance at the Stanley Cup, and 2) the gap between Detroit's/Colorado's and Pittsburgh's salaries isn't nearly as big as the gap between the Yankees and [whoever is last].

If you want to beat the best teams in hockey, you need a little firepower and a good goaltender. You don't have to be in the bidding war for big priced FA just to be competitive.
Notwithstanding all of the things you mentioned, and all of Disneys movies, they have to tweak the game a little to sell it to American's.

Only the most hardened, brain frozen Hockey fan can get off on constent and repeated 2-1 scores.

I like the 6-3 level.

They have to open it up a little. If a team makes some good passes and outskates their opponent, they ought to be rewarded with a little more than a clang on the pipe once in a while.

The reason that Hockey is losing money is "THE PRODUCT", not the players. People aren't buying it. This is where it has trouble, it is a Canadian game, and they want to protect their baby, much in the same way the NL doesn't want the DH in baseball.

Calcountry
12-15-2004, 12:52 PM
Oh crap really? I thought they were trying to avoid not starting the season I didnt know they have already missed a crap load of hockey.
Ignorance is bliss.

Now if only I didn't know who the Vice President was, I would be in hog heaven.