http://gamingtrend.com
August 21, 2014, 06:30:26 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: I miss Hockey!!!  (Read 1688 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Tim Maynard
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 90


View Profile
« on: December 10, 2004, 03:21:18 PM »

I watched a replay of the CBN broadcast of game seven of the Stanley Cup finals and I realized how much I miss the NHL. After going thru the grind of last season I welcomed a break. During the playoffs and finals I think the Tampa Bay Lightning gave me an ulcer but watching game seven and the parade again made me long for those days. I'm not sure how I would feel about a short season but man do I miss the game. The great thing about the broadcast last night was that I was able to see the post game wrap-up for the first time. I was one of the estimated crowd of 15,000 that sat outside the arena during game seven and watched the game that was projected onto the side of a parking garage. I stayed outside and partied for a few hours so I missed the post game on TV.
Logged
Clanwolfer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Online Online

Posts: 1379


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 10, 2004, 03:42:50 PM »

Considering that hockey was always my favorite pro sport, and that I hate the parade of suck that has become of most pro sports nowadays, I'm allmost glad they're locked out.  I miss the hockey, but it gives the owners and players time to start acting like professionals, realize they're only screwing over their fans and themselves, and maybe start acting like civilized people again.
Logged

whiteboyskim
Senior Staff Writer
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7848


Hard partier


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 10, 2004, 03:45:26 PM »

I heard a few weeks back when the local ESPN affiliate radio station was interviewing a commentator about this. He said he hoped hockey would scale back the number of teams out there and get out of the expansion mindset. It would then tighten the schedule, constrict some of the loses in revenue, and in general help. And the likelihood of that would be.... zero. biggrin

I'm just hoping they start up next year.
Logged

Behold the glory of my new blog!
Filmmaking is vision plus faith plus balls, all 3 of which Hollywood knows little about.
Shifter
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 132


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2004, 04:39:50 PM »

I miss hockey also.  As for a shortened season, I don't know.  I think this season has been ruined and would the team that one the cup truly deserve it ? I'm not sure.

I really think the NHL should take the rest of this season to fix the CBA, find some kind of marketing strategy to excite non-hockey fans and most important ,really focus on taking a look at the games rules.
Logged
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5357


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2004, 04:58:16 PM »

The proposal the players union pitched yesterday is a GREAT start.  Now if the owners can only get off their asses and either accept the deal or make a decent (no salary cap) counter offer, we'd be in business in short order.

It's quite simple: counter with a stiffer luxury tax, if you're going to counter with anything at all.  It's unreal that the players would offer a 24% slash in salaries across the board for the life of the deal.

Mike
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
Devil
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7742



View Profile
« Reply #5 on: December 10, 2004, 05:56:16 PM »

Quote
The proposal the players union pitched yesterday is a GREAT start.


I disagree. A 24% cut in current salary if fine for now, but with no cap it's just window dressing. I take my 24% cut today, become a free agent next year and the Rangers or Red Wings make up for the 24% and then some.

It helps for this year and that's it.
Logged

XBox Gamertag: Devil13Devil
Wii Number: 0305 6568 6417 2609
PS3 Thing: Slived
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5357


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 10, 2004, 06:26:15 PM »

Actually, the 24% cut is supposed to be something for the length of the deal, with the salary guidelines set now being valid for free agents in other years, too.  At least, that's how I read it.

Mike
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
Devil
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7742



View Profile
« Reply #7 on: December 10, 2004, 06:37:28 PM »

They can put in all the guidelines they want, but when the Rangers decide to give Ramzi Abid a 5 year contract at 13M per year, everything gets thrown out of whack again.

They NEED a cap of some sort.
Logged

XBox Gamertag: Devil13Devil
Wii Number: 0305 6568 6417 2609
PS3 Thing: Slived
Arkon
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 6073


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: December 10, 2004, 07:04:36 PM »

Luxury Taxes will not work when you have one or two owners who are willing to say F' the tax and carry a payroll of 60 mill.  They will gladly pay the tax to monopolize the best players.  To me, if the NHLPA is willing to set the tax to begin at say 45 million, then that means they recognize there is a level at which salaries are too high... so why not make the cap at 45 million... the only reason they won't is because they know the tax system does nothing to truly curb salaries.
Logged
Doopri
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2853


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: December 10, 2004, 08:46:54 PM »

At least there's finally been some real progress - this is def a big time offer from the players (though I dont believe the final answer) but it sure beats the window dressin BS they had been puttin out there.  In defense of the players I think they are sayin that the 24% less cuts will be the "new standard" - ie in six years (I think thats the duration of the proposed offer) they'll get pay cuts or increases in line with the "new" salaries.  So if a guy is makin 1 mil now, hell go down to 750,000 - after six years hes salary will be maybe renegotiated to 800,000 or 900,000 - NOT 1.5.  In defense of the  owners - they want some promise in contractual form that this will be so.  I wish the players had more love for the game and took salary caps.  Wheres the fun in playin and bein either the hog makin all the money on your suck team, or watchin 3 or 4 big market teams dominate in utterly non competitive leagues?  Not to bring in sports that I bet a bunch in here think are jokes - but baseball should take note of this too - I love my Sox dearly but they are members of the baseball bougeourise (man all my years of Marx and I still cant spell it w/o checker smile)  I know its different because of the relative size of the money involved - but why the hell cant all sports say NFL did it, why cant we?
Logged
Koz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


View Profile WWW
« Reply #10 on: December 10, 2004, 10:03:48 PM »

As Devil said, the 24% paycut does nothing to ensure the contracts of the future. Yes, a player can take a 24% paycut slash to his $10M contract and save the team $2.4M. But that doesn't prevent the next team from paying him $10M again when the player becomes a free agent. If there was a 24% paycut, then they'd pay him $12M and effectively they still would be paying him $10M.

I wonder how much a disparity there is between teams for a luxury cap though. It's certainly not like baseball, and it's much harder to "buy teams" in the NHL than it is in MLB (Exhibit A, B, and C: The Rangers). I don't think I'd be too opposed to this, but the owners are insisting on a cap, and the players simply won't give them one (I wouldn't if I was a player either) this year and probably not next year either.

When neither side is willing to compromise, nothing gets done.
Logged
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5357


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: December 10, 2004, 11:00:26 PM »

Koz, I think you've misunderstood.  From how I've read it, there will have to be a clause in the CBA stating that your scenario cannot happen.  Once the rollback happens, all the players with unsigned contracts will be stuck in the price range set for players of a similar skill level, and players who become free agents down the road will be stuck in the same bracket.

Mike
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
Devil
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7742



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: December 11, 2004, 12:39:47 AM »

Quote
Once the rollback happens, all the players with unsigned contracts will be stuck in the price range set for players of a similar skill level, and players who become free agents down the road will be stuck in the same bracket.




I don't get it. Who decides the skill level? Is it stat driven?

Bobby Holik's 9M contract will roll back to 6.8M and another free agent with 56 points can expect the same 6.8M?

Scott Stevens gets paid like a 4th line winger because he doesn't score?

Maybe I'm not understanding?
Logged

XBox Gamertag: Devil13Devil
Wii Number: 0305 6568 6417 2609
PS3 Thing: Slived
Tim Maynard
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 90


View Profile
« Reply #13 on: December 11, 2004, 01:26:56 PM »

Here are  the key points to the NHLPA's proposal:

Key points to proposal
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.
Logged
Koz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1357


View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: December 12, 2004, 08:36:50 AM »

Still no cost certainty there, hence no deal. The only thing close to it here is a restriction on free agent offer. The owners want one thing: salary cap. Until it's there, there's no NHL.

I'm not siding with one or the other here, but that proposal isn't close to what the owners want. The luxury tax applies after $45 million, which is nice, except the owners want a HARD CAP in the $35 million vicinity.

I like how the union is being proactive, but I still can't see anything happening any time soon.
Logged
Rich in KCK
Gaming Trend Reader

Offline Offline

Posts: 43


View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 13, 2004, 09:00:06 AM »

I have to agree with Koz and Devil here this proposal is nothing more than a bandaid, a very large bandaid but still a bandaid.  Guidelines help owners when negotiating contracts more than they help the players and if an owner really wants a player when another owner is offering him what the guideline says he is worth the owner with more money will get him no matter what the guidelines say.  This kind of reminds me of the franchise tag in football, you get nailed with it and you are guranteed a contract comparable to the top paid players at your position but it doesn't stop other teams from offering more than that if they really want you.  Without a hardcap there are too many loopholes for the top owners to jump through to get who they want and the players know this.  But it still is going to hurt the teams like the Canucks who can't layout that kind of cash if they had to.

Even though Football has a cap teams have found ways to sign players for more money than they can afford under the cap it just comes back to bite them at a later date like the Cowboys of the late 90's.  

Just like my own Union these guys running the league say they are all about protecting their players and the game but when it comes down to signing the thing all they care about is the money.  Frankly I'm thinking this 24% rollback wasn't looked on to kindly by a lot of the players.  Sure the guy makeing 8 million is now making a bit over 6, but the guy who was making 1 is now only getting 750K.

I'd love to see a flat base salary by position loaded with tiered incentive bonuses such that no one position would be looked at by the kids in junior as the one where you make all the money.  I'm just tired of seeing players rewarded for what they did 2 years ago and then not working hard on the ice for the money they are being paid now.
Logged

Formerly SJSharks
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5357


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 14, 2004, 11:44:56 PM »

As posted at the Octopus:

The owners, as expected, rejected the Union proposal and countered with a salary cap system. Suggested amount is 54% of league revenues, with flexibility ranging from 51% to 57%, depending on what the team wants to do. Salary rollbacks will also occur, but on a scaled system; players under $800,000 a year lose nothing, players over $5mil at 35% rollback. The NHL also agreed to raise the minumum entry salary, to maintain the median salary at $800,000 where it currently is, and reduce the free agency age by one year. The NHL also wants to ditch arbitration, and ensure that all contracts remain guaranteed.

As expected, the players rejected this.

Links:
http://nhlcbanews.com/news/comparison.html
http://nhlcbanews.com/news/comparison.html
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.138 seconds with 57 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.057s, 2q)