Edler Statesman*
09-05-2004, 11:38 PM
Sorry if this has been brought up time and time again, but maybe the NHLPA has some moral leverage on their side.
The fans are under the illusion that the cap that the owners are asking for is the limit to what the owners will be asking for. If the owners get a 31 million dollar cap, the market will deflate, and accordingly, when this CBA expires, the owners will claim lost profits and demand a smaller cap, citing success of the early 90s when the most expensive team was around 14 million dollars, insinuating that wages somehow correlate to the quality of the games, and everyone will buy it. They'll just keep pushing for more.
Is it too early to look this far into the future?
Licentia
09-08-2004, 08:42 PM
Sorry if this has been brought up time and time again, but maybe the NHLPA has some moral leverage on their side.
The fans are under the illusion that the cap that the owners are asking for is the limit to what the owners will be asking for. If the owners get a 31 million dollar cap, the market will deflate, and accordingly, when this CBA expires, the owners will claim lost profits and demand a smaller cap, citing success of the early 90s when the most expensive team was around 14 million dollars, insinuating that wages somehow correlate to the quality of the games, and everyone will buy it. They'll just keep pushing for more.
Is it too early to look this far into the future?
If they tried to pull something like that, they'd have to have alot of evidence to prove the need to drop the cap again.
degroat
09-08-2004, 08:48 PM
The owners aren't looking for a $31M cap. Their looking for a cap which is equal to total revenues * 50% divided by 30 teams.
When this next CBA expires, the owners may try to decrease the percentage more, but even if they did the cap itself will be greater than what it would be this coming season.
hockeytown9321
09-09-2004, 03:21 PM
Sorry if this has been brought up time and time again, but maybe the NHLPA has some moral leverage on their side.
The fans are under the illusion that the cap that the owners are asking for is the limit to what the owners will be asking for. If the owners get a 31 million dollar cap, the market will deflate, and accordingly, when this CBA expires, the owners will claim lost profits and demand a smaller cap, citing success of the early 90s when the most expensive team was around 14 million dollars, insinuating that wages somehow correlate to the quality of the games, and everyone will buy it. They'll just keep pushing for more.
Is it too early to look this far into the future?
you're right. Baseball owners have been crying poverty since the beginning of the game.
Revenues will decrease under a cap. Fans will expect decreased ticket prices, so either they'll get them, or they won't buy them. Either way, the league is losing revenue.
thinkwild
09-09-2004, 04:45 PM
you're right. Baseball owners have been crying poverty since the beginning of the game.
Revenues will decrease under a cap. Fans will expect decreased ticket prices, so either they'll get them, or they won't buy them. Either way, the league is losing revenue.
When was the last time you heard a hockey owner cry riches?
Thats an interesting point about fans demanding lower prices if they get a cap. I like it. :)
When discussing a cap, you can do it without changing anything in the current CBA other than a 20% deduction from each players cheque. This kind of cap is ok from me as a fans point of view. But the concept of a uniform team payroll cap - yuck.