So, I'm somewhat unclear on your stance here. So the NHL is a money making business and the NHL and anyone else who says otherwise if full of shit? Yet no one (except apperently you) is saying that there haven't been huge losses?
And as for the rollback, as Canadian Chris pointed out, it's obvious your not reading anyone else's posts because it has been stated many times that a salary rollback is a short term fix. Sure, it will drop salaries for the moment but they will just grow back up to where they were.
Let's take a look at a few more numbers here.
Total salary paid out last year was approximately 1.3166 billion. A 10% rollback on that only comes to a little over 130 million. I wonder where the players are getting this extra 20 million from? Rsshh, do you just blindly listen to everything the P.A. spews or do you bother to check some of the facts.
On top this, that rollback would save each team (mind you this is only a one-time saving) approximately only 4.3 million for next season. So, going by the Forbes stats (because they are the only ones you will believe), most teams, with the NHLPA's rollback suggestion stand to only break even next year before proceeding to lose money in the years after that. Hey, that's a great plan to fix the game.
The other 20 Mill come from a Cap on the Rookies and something else that is very small that escapes me at this time.
My stance is that the NHL is losing money, but 75% of it is 6 teams. So, instead of contarcting those 6 teams or creating Revenue Sharing that would help these teams make money, a Salary Cap is a quick fix and hinders teh game long term. A cap is a system that stops Owners frokm being idoits but it still dosn't solve the problem that Edmontin can't afford their Free Agents. In Revenuie Sharing or a Luxury Tax, a team like Nashiville or Florida gets money back from the Big Dogs so they can keep their stars. A cap amkes them ZERO in the revenue category.
Right, because that's helped baseball SO much.