NHL is Finally Going to have Talks

[Penguinfan]

Ego and love of money squashed it like a bug.

[omahilo]

you know some cities shouldnt have teams when the Sabres and Senators couldnt even pay their players last year.

[BlackCoffee]

Parity isnt a problem in hockey even with the discrepancy in salaries. Look at the finals.

1999: Dallas-Buffalo
2000: Dallas-New Jersey
2001: Colorado-New Jersey
2002: Detroit-Carolina
2003: New Jersey-Anahiem
2004: Tampa Bay- Calgary

That's pretty even.. no real dynasties except New Jersey and they're no excatly a rich team. If you watched hockey 20-30 years ago, you would have lived through 3 dynasties.. Montreal (76-79) Islanders (80-83) and Oilers (84,85,87,88,90).. How do you think people in places like Hartford and Winnipeg felt about 'parity' back then.

Sports is a different phenomenon in itself and is very hard to compare to regular business because there is only one prize. In the real world, Company A and Company B are not necessarily competing with each other.

Let's take your little corner coffee shop and Starbucks. If you work at the corner store and Starbuck hires you for 5X the amount.. you'd go, but the corner store wouldn't be hurting, they just hire someone else cheap and make their small profits every year.

The problem with sports in north america is that there's only one prize. All teams go for it and if one team spends more, then the other teams have to spend more also or cry foul. The salary cap only works in the NFL because they have a huge pool to split up from tv money. And even that's a questionable argument.. have you seen the NFL lately? there's 16 games a week and at least 10 of them are mediocre. If you weren't betting, you probably wouldn't be watching. There's alot of BAD teams.

I dont think a salary cap would work in hockey or baseball because it would really dilute the talent pool. It sort of works in basketball because each team only needs 1 or 2 superstars and the rest are grunts. Basketball games are terrible these days, there are no mid-range players.

Does anyone follow english soccer? That is a system that's 100% free market.
Players are owned by their teams and can be bought and sold to other teams. Plus there are many prizes.. the rich teams go for league and european success.. the mid teams go for UEFA Cup qualification, the bottom teams fight for survival from relegation, and the top teams in the lower division tries for promotion and so on. Plus knockout cup matches.

Think something like that would work in the NHL?

You could have Medicine Hat Play Guelph to make the next division

Or better yet, the New York Rangers get relegated!

BlackCoffee

[Penguinfan]

The New York Rangers should be relegated reguardless

Yo do bring up some interesting points however. But as long as you have owners like Ted Leonsis and George Steinbrenner you need a salary cap to keep the small market teams alive. Yes it does water down the talent pool and yes there are games that are unwatchable, even on Monday Night sometimes, but without a salary cap you will have no NHL or at the very least will be watching the original 6 again and nothing else. It's a sport and a business, both sides need to realize that. Things are very different in America than England.

[BlackCoffee]

I dont know if it's that different in England. Man Utd is a huge team worth nearly a billion. Chelsea has a russian billionaire owner who's buying everybody and is now leading the league. The difference is that if you live in a small market, you can still cheer on your team against other small markets.

Even when the NHL had the original 6 teams, it was not balanced. Montreal and Detroit dominated, Toronto was next and then Boston.
Chicago and the Rangers sucked.. I think the Rangers missed the playoffs (4 teams) 10 years in row.. in a 6 team league!

I dont mind owners like Leonsis and Steinbrenner. They've proven that spending money doesnt work. The Yankees haven't won since 2000 and might not win again for another few years. Leonsis has taken the Capitals to 1 final and they have no future at all.. it's a dead team. I dont want the salary cap because I want rich owners to spend foolishly so i can laugh at them. ie. NY Rangers, Washington Capitals, toronto Maple Leafs, Baltimore Orioles, Chicago Cubs etc..

[GeoffM]

I think the biggest problem was created by Bettman when he expanded to 30 teams from 21 since the early 90s. Stupid, did it too quickly without his existing franchises being financially stable. The NFL is methodical at expanding slowly, once their newer teams get a foothold in the market and they are certain profit will be made (you'd have to be an idiot not to make a profit in the NFL though).

Some say it's the owners fault, some the players. I'll tell you one thing though, when you are told your employer is losing money, and you refuse to take a paycut, do you not get laid off in the real world? Guaranteed contracts are something the players would not budge on. If a guy scores 50 goals one season and triggers a $2 million bonus, and then the next season lays an egg and scores 10, does he pay back the money? NO. Can the team ditch him? NO. The owners have accepted the fact that it was their fault the salary situation has gotten out of hand, and now are asking for the players assistance to fix it.

However, I must say that I don't see the problem with the luxury tax the players are offering. If an owner (..cough...Rangers...cough..) wants to go over, fine, take the tax money and give it to a team losing lots, assuming they spend a certain minimum. Getting rid of teams is not an option because again, the PLAYERS would never allow it. 1 thing I don't agree with, however, is revenue sharing. An owner's profit is an owner's profit. I don't see that being implemented since teams like Toronto and Minnesota that make boatloads of cash won't want to give up a portion of that, and quite frankly I think it is unfair to expect them to.

The NFL is the best run league because of the TV deal and the salary cap. Players rarely jump ship like the other 3 major sports, there are rarely trades or free agent moves, etc. Any team (except the Bengals ) at the start of any given season can win the Super Bowl (or at least lose to New England on the way). Take S.D., I thought they would be last overall, but are comfortably atop their division. The Jets, another team that IMO suck, securing a playoff spot with 4 games left in the season.

People like Steinbrenner are bad for baseball, people like Cuban that don't care about a salary cap are bad for basketball, but you know, at least they pay their taxes and help smaller markets whilst winning tons of games.

[Penguinfan]

Any word on today's talks?