Anybody "pro player" in this dispute now is a teen-age groupie/ hero worshiper. The owners are successful people who made their fortunes in other businesses; the players are just lucky jocks who make way too much money. The inappropriate and offensive personal attacks made by ignorant players will not be quickly forgotten by grown-up fans, or the owners.
- allycat

Wow! So simple, yet absolutely true.

aka you have no rebuttal to this and don't want to part from your ideology. Got it.

Bottom line is NHL needs higher revenue sharing amongst it's owners to remain competitive. All I was trying to do is show that this a huge problem that needs to be fixed. If comparing to another league doesn't work for you than that's fine, but it's the only examples available for the result of higher revenue sharing we would want to see. I certainly do not want the NHL to be "MLB's baby" if you think just because higher revenue sharing works in another league and therefore it will not work for the NHL, then you sir have no idea what you are talking about. And you are correct, there is no point in this debate.
- Boosinicka

What are you talking about? I've been sitting here all morning rebutting this stupid nonsence. I've just decided that yours is so stupid that it doesn't require any further rebuttal.

20 years ago i used to pay pretty much equal attention to MLB and NHL.

Now baseball has become a joke, and if youre not a Dodger,Philli,Yankee,Bosox fan, then there is rarely anything to get excited about.

NHL on the other hand has done nothing but improve since then.

It went from being a league where most of the playoff teams were decided by Christmas, and only maybe 2 or 3 had a legit shot at the Cup. With midseason games being almost meaningless.

To what we have now. A league where teams have to fight tooth and nail ALL season long, and the ones that make the dance all have a real chance to win it all. As has been evident by the number of 8th seeds to reach the Finals during the last CBA.

I don't know about you, but i know which NHL i have enjoyed more.
- steveb12344

totally agree, in bold, if I could bold it darker I would, I can't take the landscape of the game of baseball anymore either

Actually the NBPA threatened to decertify, then a deal was reached. Big difference.

Again you cannot compare from one league to another, the circumstances are much different in each case.

I hope the threat would be enough to get this settled. Though sadly i think the PA will have thier hands full if they go down that road. I don't believe that the NHL will allow itself to be strongarmed into signing a deal that they can't live with moving forward.
- steveb12344

Leagues may be different but owners are using the same approach developed by the same lawyers. They will always win. Players will threaten to and eventually turn to decertification to change things up.

your avatar!

Palmateer?
- puckhead17

Yes Palmateer is GOD!!! Or as Brian McFarland nicknamed him in game 7 of the 78 series vs the Isles: " the Little Miracle" However after that seires, I re-named him "the Little Jesus".

You realize that baseball had revenues of well over 6 billion and profits of well over 500 million in 2011. Which in both cases is about double what the NHL generates.

The NHL showed profits of less then 300 million. They have been offering 200 million in revenue sharing to the players in thier recent proposals.

How much more room do you think there is to give.

Also the NHL is mostly a gate-driven league. Which means most of the revenues are generated by the individual teams. Where MLB and the NFL have massive TV contracts which generate huge percentage of thier revenues.

You cannot reasonably expect the NHL to follow the MLB of NFL models.
- steveb12344

Did you even read the article? Let me guess, you just don't like it when something goes against what you've felt and spewed about for so long.....

Allow me to summarize with this most important point.

1. The players want to see the $230 miilion they give up from their share of HRR go directly to revenue sharing, thereby propping up the teams that " can't survive " under the current structure.

2. The owners want the players to give up $230 million of HRR, but give only $50 million of it to revenue sharing.

Let me guess, the players are greedy but the owners aren't.

Anybody "pro player" in this dispute now is a teen-age groupie/ hero worshiper. The owners are successful people who made their fortunes in other businesses; the players are just lucky jocks who make way too much money. The inappropriate and offensive personal attacks made by ignorant players will not be quickly forgotten by grown-up fans, or the owners.
- allycat

Thank you. It is good to know what the grown ups think. I guess if I ever get out of my teenage groupie/hero worship years, I will learn how to to link whole sets of arguments to someone's age.

If you haven't left, I'd love to hear your views on race issues.

Did you even read the article? Let me guess, you just don't like it when something goes against what you've felt and spewed about for so long.....

Allow me to summarize with this most important point.

1. The players want to see the $230 miilion they give up from their share of HRR go directly to revenue sharing, thereby propping up the teams that " can't survive " under the current structure.

2. The owners want the players to give up $230 million of HRR, but give only $50 million of it to revenue sharing.

Let me guess, the players are greedy but the owners aren't.
- golfingsince

Revenue Sharing
The NHL has proposed to increase the Revenue Sharing pool for 2012/13 to $200 million (assuming League-wide revenues of $3.303 Billion), representing an approximately 33% increase over the amount that will be distributed on account of 2011/12. This enhanced amount is at least comparable to the levels of revenue sharing in the NBA and MLB, and will be adjusted proportionately upward or downward based on Actual HRR results in future seasons.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=643572

That 200 million from thier share of the next 5 years revenues that they proposed would equal about $40 million per year.

Just what am i missing here?

totally agree, in bold, if I could bold it darker I would, I can't take the landscape of the game of baseball anymore either
- puckhead17

Any comments on the big spending Orioles, A's, Braves, Nationals or Reds all with 90 or more wins who all would have made the playoffs if they had the same strucutre as NHL?

Did you even read the article? Let me guess, you just don't like it when something goes against what you've felt and spewed about for so long.....

Allow me to summarize with this most important point.

1. The players want to see the $230 miilion they give up from their share of HRR go directly to revenue sharing, thereby propping up the teams that " can't survive " under the current structure.

2. The owners want the players to give up $230 million of HRR, but give only $50 million of it to revenue sharing.

Let me guess, the players are greedy but the owners aren't.
- golfingsince

i get a little confused here. so the other 180 just gets dispersed evenly? and the other 50 goes to say 7 teams?

so those 7 teams get there 6 mil share of the 180 along with the other 23 teams... plus an extra 6ish mil each from the 50 earmarked for revenue sharing.
not bad.

does this also include the revenue sharing already in place?

Thank you. It is good to know what the grown ups think. I guess if I ever get out of my teenage groupie/hero worship years, I will learn how to to link whole sets of arguments to someone's age.

If you haven't left, I'd love to hear your views on race issues.
- Canada Cup

I've read enough of your posts to know that all you really want is a system that would allow the Leafs to buy thier way to a StanleyCup, because they've clearly demonstrated that they have no shot as long as all the teams are on even ground.

I've read enough of your posts to know that all you really want is a system that would allow the Leafs to buy thier way to a StanleyCup, because they've clearly demonstrated that they have no shot as long as all the teams are on even ground.
- steveb12344

I guess that's easier than dealing with the substance of the argument. It's important to stay in your intellectual comfort zone Chuck.

Implying NHL players read his blogs....

i get a little confused here. so the other 180 just gets dispersed evenly? and the other 50 goes to say 7 teams?

so those 7 teams get there 6 mil share of the 180 along with the other 23 teams... plus an extra 6ish mil each from the 50 earmarked for revenue sharing.
not bad.

does this also include the revenue sharing already in place?
- hugefemale dog77

It's all just a shell game. It doesn't change the fact that the NHL teams profits only equal roughly 15% of the amount that the players pocket.

Which is exactly how Fehr and the players like it.

Any comments on the big spending Orioles, A's, Braves, Nationals or Reds all with 90 or more wins who all would have made the playoffs if they had the same strucutre as NHL?
- Canada Cup

no one said that the the low payroll teams will never be good. those same orioles have been brutal for ages.
but on the flipside, the big spenders are generally in the mix every year single year.

aside from all the back and forth on the mlb, we've done the no cap thing along with rising salaries etc in the nhl. for 12ish years. the league was never more of a mess both on and off the ice.
the top 5 spenders literally won 9/12 cups. the top ten won all 12. two teams moved. countless more almost did.

lets also not forget the difference in culture and money. teams like the royals can be bad every single year, but theyll remain financially solvent at least. that happens in hockey outside canada and that franchise if fuked.
and i dont just mean the preds, coytoes. i mean some big american markets too. original 6 chicago was a mess after those years of bottom feeding not so long ago. people stopped coming

Implying NHL players read his blogs....


- Giroux_Is_God

PUCK NHLPA

I guess that's easier than dealing with the substance of the argument. It's important to stay in your intellectual comfort zone Chuck.
- Canada Cup

Do you deny it?

no one said that the the low payroll teams will never be good. those same orioiles have been brutal for ages.
but on the flipside, the big spenders are generally in the mix every year single year.

aside from all the back and forth on the mlb, we've doen the no cap thing along with rising salaries etc in the nhl. for 12ish years. the league was never more of a mess both on and off the ice.
the top 5 spenders literally won 9/12 cups. the top ten won all 12. two teams moved. countless more almost did.
- hugefemale dog77

Exactly!

I guess all the teenage hero-worshippers aren't old enough to remember this.

no one said that the the low payroll teams will never be good. those same orioiles have been brutal for ages.
but on the flipside, the big spenders are generally in the mix every year single year.

aside from all the back and forth on the mlb, we've doen the no cap thing along with rising salaries etc in the nhl. for 12ish years. the league was never more of a mess both on and off the ice.
the top 5 spenders literally won 9/12 cups. the top ten won all 12. two teams moved. countless more almost did.
- hugefemale dog77

It certainly is better to have lots of money. I wonder though what would happen if the NHL went to no cap. It seems that MLB managers got smarter and learned how to spend smart. In NHL, lots of money was often a substitute for brains.

It certainly is better to have lots of money. I wonder though what would happen if the NHL went to no cap. It seems that MLB managers got smarter and learned how to spend smart. In NHL, lots of money was often a substitute for brains.
- Canada Cup

No need to wonder. HB77 just laid out perfectly what happened with no cap about 4 posts back.

Do you deny it?
- steveb12344

Deny what? That I am pushing to get rid of the cap so my beloved Leafs will win the Stanley Cup? We'd probably have to get rid of colour T.V.s and computers if we are going to go back that far. You aren't very smart, are you Chuck?

all i want is a league that makes sense and makes it fair for everyteam. cant wait till there is a CBA that makes sports economics less of an issue. i would love to see a league that is set-up so that 50% of your success is from the draft, 20% from free agency, 20% from favorable and smart contracts and 10% of it from luck.

No need to wonder. HB77 just laid out perfectly what happened with no cap about 4 posts back.
- steveb12344

Read the post, Chuck. Baseball managers got smarter. Hockey GMs might as well.

It certainly is better to have lots of money. I wonder though what would happen if the NHL went to no cap. It seems that MLB managers got smarter and learned how to spend smart. In NHL, lots of money was often a substitute for brains.
- Canada Cup

? we did it..in the 90's and early part of the 2000's. i said that.
and u cant compare any time frame before that either with no cap, because the salaries were manageable. peanuts in comparison.

the league was a mess. the top 5 spending teams won 9 of 12 cups from 93-04.
top 10 spenders won all 12.
the bottom feeders financially were also bottom feeders on the ice. cdn teams moving.
it was everywhere with the small markets, but speaking for edm, they basically became a farm team for the big clubs. it was like a feeder system. get a young cheap guy. develop him, 3-5 years in..big payday. gone. start all over again.

it

Revenue Sharing
The NHL has proposed to increase the Revenue Sharing pool for 2012/13 to $200 million (assuming League-wide revenues of $3.303 Billion), representing an approximately 33% increase over the amount that will be distributed on account of 2011/12. This enhanced amount is at least comparable to the levels of revenue sharing in the NBA and MLB, and will be adjusted proportionately upward or downward based on Actual HRR results in future seasons.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=643572

That 200 million from thier share of the next 5 years revenues that they proposed would equal about $40 million per year.

Just what am i missing here?
- steveb12344

I guess you never played connect the dots as a kid. Too bad, it's a life skill you seem to need help with now.

The players are proposing that ALL of their HRR concessions go directly to revenue sharing, thereby meaning no teams should be losing money anymore. That's roughly $230 million in a full season IN ADDITION to what is currently in place.

Let's summarize.

1. The owners are crying broke

2. They want a larger share of HRR

3. The players say ok but it goes to teams that are losing money.

4. Owners aren't interested.

5. Fans say poor owners, they can't survive under current system

So who's trying to fix the system and who's just clamouring for more money?