Paul McCann: The Gauntlet Drops and some Randoms

Why do owners need to be saved from themselves if salaries are tied to revenues? The issue is that too many franchises cannot make money meeting a salary floor being driven by significant revenue growth from a small number of teams. Going after salaries or length of contracts will not address fundamental flaws in the game's business model.

That will take contraction, real revenue sharing or some combo.

Why do owners need to be saved from themselves if salaries are tied to revenues? The issue is that too many franchises cannot make money meeting a salary floor being driven by significant revenue growth from a small number of teams. Going after salaries or length of contracts will not address fundamental flaws in the game's business model.

That will take contraction, real revenue sharing or some combo.
- Canada Cup

I still wonder if you would be screaming for contraction if you weren't part of the Original Six?
Yes, it sucks that your franchise is somewhat footing the bill for other struggling franchises but it is a necessary evil much like it is in baseball and basketball. When has any major sport used contraction and have it work out in the end? Isn't the overall point of any sport to grow and expand into markets so that the brand and sport as a whole can get more and more attention (i.e. TV, merchandising, actual product)?
Just wondering out loud this afternoon after your comment. Maybe I'm a little biased about contraction as the Predators were once in a position where we could be the contracted team. Do I think it is working in Phoenix? Not really, but can it be moved to a location where it does work? Sure can. I never want to see a city lose it's team ever, but sometimes it is not up to Joe and Jill fan, it might not have the corporate support or it might not be a good draw or it might even be the location of the arena (looking at Phoenix). Many factors contribute. Just my $.02.

I still wonder if you would be screaming for contraction if you weren't part of the Original Six?
Yes, it sucks that your franchise is somewhat footing the bill for other struggling franchises but it is a necessary evil much like it is in baseball and basketball. When has any major sport used contraction and have it work out in the end? Isn't the overall point of any sport to grow and expand into markets so that the brand and sport as a whole can get more and more attention (i.e. TV, merchandising, actual product)?
Just wondering out loud this afternoon after your comment. Maybe I'm a little biased about contraction as the Predators were once in a position where we could be the contracted team. Do I think it is working in Phoenix? Not really, but can it be moved to a location where it does work? Sure can. I never want to see a city lose it's team ever, but sometimes it is not up to Joe and Jill fan, it might not have the corporate support or it might not be a good draw or it might even be the location of the arena (looking at Phoenix). Many factors contribute. Just my $.02.
- HardCorePredFan316

I didn't realize I was screaming or that I said that contraction was the only option. I do think though that the owners are trying to after salaries as a way to deal with more fundamental problems with the basic business model in the league - many low revenue teams are having trouble hitting the floor which is being driven up by big revenue growth in a few teams.

While I think revenue sharing should be enhanced, hockey isn't like other sports where much of the revenue comes from a big tv deal.

In some ways, easiest thing would be to get rid of leafs, rangers and Habs. They are causing problems by making so much money.

I didn't realize I was screaming or that I said that contraction was the only option. I do think though that the owners are trying to after salaries as a way to deal with more fundamental problems with the basic business model in the league - many low revenue teams are having trouble hitting the floor which is being driven up by big revenue growth in a few teams.

While I think revenue sharing should be enhanced, hockey isn't like other sports where much of the revenue comes from a big tv deal.

In some ways, easiest thing would be to get rid of leafs, rangers and Habs. They are causing problems by making so much money.
- Canada Cup

Sorry if I stepped on your toes...was just using "screaming" as an example (more like lobbying) of many from the Original Six that go right into contraction for the first part of the argument. Like I said before the Floridas, Islanders and Coyotes of the league are definitely not living up to the standars of attendance and are being floated on by the league and revenue sharing...but teams like Pittsburgh and Nashville were also in the same boat and have been able to turn things around. Atlanta was the first in a while to succumb to this and they moved rather than fold.

I would like to know from someone who follows the larger market Canadian teams just how much of their revenue is from t.v. contracts. I realize league-wise that T.V. doesn't fly quite as well as it does in the NFL, but I would imagine Canadian teams do quite well with CBC or other affiliates and the subscriptions to Satellite or Cable providers is probably amped up even more since hockey is the #1 sporting draw in Canada (at least I hope it is).

Now addressing your last quote...nice and snarky just how I like my Canadian posters to be. We here in Nashville have enjoyed your over-bearing revenue sharing for years. It has helped us tremendously in pulling in high-level talent with bigger contracts and lucrative deals to get the best the league has to offer since we are playing with other teams money. Helps get us to the playoffs more so than most Canadian teams not named Vancouver...right? Oh wait...we still have to be below the salary cap mid-point to qualify so I guess we can't really go after the top level talent like Toronto and Montreal...so is our success an aberration? Or is it just better money management given the circumstances and the league's favor of revenue sharing?

Sorry if I stepped on your toes...was just using "screaming" as an example (more like lobbying) of many from the Original Six that go right into contraction for the first part of the argument. Like I said before the Floridas, Islanders and Coyotes of the league are definitely not living up to the standars of attendance and are being floated on by the league and revenue sharing...but teams like Pittsburgh and Nashville were also in the same boat and have been able to turn things around. Atlanta was the first in a while to succumb to this and they moved rather than fold.

I would like to know from someone who follows the larger market Canadian teams just how much of their revenue is from t.v. contracts. I realize league-wise that T.V. doesn't fly quite as well as it does in the NFL, but I would imagine Canadian teams do quite well with CBC or other affiliates and the subscriptions to Satellite or Cable providers is probably amped up even more since hockey is the #1 sporting draw in Canada (at least I hope it is).

Now addressing your last quote...nice and snarky just how I like my Canadian posters to be. We here in Nashville have enjoyed your over-bearing revenue sharing for years. It has helped us tremendously in pulling in high-level talent with bigger contracts and lucrative deals to get the best the league has to offer since we are playing with other teams money. Helps get us to the playoffs more so than most Canadian teams not named Vancouver...right? Oh wait...we still have to be below the salary cap mid-point to qualify so I guess we can't really go after the top level talent like Toronto and Montreal...so is our success an aberration? Or is it just better money management given the circumstances and the league's favor of revenue sharing?
- HardCorePredFan316

Ease up sparky. I'm not attacking or even being snarky. I appreciate that the Preds manage their money and rosters very well and I don't think I ever suggested that big revenue = on ice success. I am even suggesting that better revenue sharing is one solution to the basic economic problem. Contraction is another.

The tongue in cheek suggestion of getting rid of high revenue teams (probably 4 or 5 of the 30) is simply an acknowledgement that their revenues are driving up the floor and making things difficult for a lot of teams. They are the outliers in a league where most teams are either losing money or barely breaking even.

Ease up sparky. I'm not attacking or even being snarky. I appreciate that the Preds manage their money and rosters very well and I don't think I ever suggested that big revenue = on ice success. I am even suggesting that better revenue sharing is one solution to the basic economic problem. Contraction is another.

The tongue in cheek suggestion of getting rid of high revenue teams (probably 4 or 5 of the 30) is simply an acknowledgement that their revenues are driving up the floor and making things difficult for a lot of teams. They are the outliers in a league where most teams are either losing money or barely breaking even.
- Canada Cup

I can agree with that...sorry about the snarky comments....just playful banter not meaning to be taken seriously hence the "Modest Proposal" ending paragraph.
However I truly am curious if the Montreal, Toronto etc. TV ratings and subsidies from their contracts help them in their revenue sharing or if it is all primarily ticket-driven?

Seriously...

I know last offseason was bad...but this is turning out to be a joke at this point. And I am not only talking about the Preds...I mean the NHL as a whole. The most exciting thing to happen has been Suter/Parise gonig to the Wild...and about 5 people on this site cared about that.

Too.....Many...Words....

So Webers being traded today?

Too.....Many...Words....

So Webers being traded today?
- buelleo

Boom...outta here.

Boom...outta here.
- PoileRulezzzYo

Every team has been quiet, this may be the reason.

Poile is clandestine and probably demands trade partners act similarly.

Don't know if I want to read what Ek posts on this however.

Every team has been quiet, this may be the reason.

Poile is clandestine and probably demands trade partners act similarly.

Don't know if I want to read what Ek posts on this however.
- Fangor

Ek is ice cold on his rumors for some time now. I don't believe that DP has moved this quick with his track record the last 2 years.

Give Weber a contract similiar to Crosby and offer Doan a 3 year-18 mill contract.

Too.....Many...Words....

So Webers being traded today?
- buelleo

It's funny that Ek tweeted that only to be followed by a tweet that Weber and the Preds have both agreed to extend the deadline for him to accept his qualifying offer. That doesn't sound like trade time to me. I also don't think the Preds need to make a move right now. They have until Sept. 15 when the current CBA expires.

Btw, does anyone know what Shea's qualifying offer was?

It's funny that Ek tweeted that only to be followed by a tweet that Weber and the Preds have both agreed to extend the deadline for him to accept his qualifying offer. That doesn't sound like trade time to me. I also don't think the Preds need to make a move right now. They have until Sept. 15 when the current CBA expires.

Btw, does anyone know what Shea's qualifying offer was?
- Predaceous

Not sure what he was offered but I think 100% of last year is all that is required once past $1m.

Not sure what he was offered but I think 100% of last year is all that is required once past $1m.
- blueline

Then why the deadline extension? What would he need to think about? This was a mutual extension of the deadline by Weber and the team, otherwise he would have had to accept or decline yesterday.

Poile must've offered something pretty significant otherwise I can't imagine he wouldn't have just said no.

Then why the deadline extension? What would he need to think about? This was a mutual extension of the deadline by Weber and the team, otherwise he would have had to accept or decline yesterday.

Poile must've offered something pretty significant otherwise I can't imagine he wouldn't have just said no.
- Predaceous

I guess he could elect to sit out a season (jk - he'd never do that). Also, could be waiting to better evaluate whatever long-term offer the Preds have put on the table. Then again, maybe he has wind of an offer sheet and is holding off for that.

Lots of possibilities actually.