NHL Union Head: Season May Be Cancelled

[Guest MikeSC]

Mike you and I will need to agree to disagree today (although this really has nothing to do with our wizzing match in CE/HD) ... how can you say that the NHL will not survive?

I see a league with payrolls that exceed revenue. A league whose TV ratings have been dropping from already-low levels to sub-XFL levels. I see a league where players HAVE to take a MASSIVE pay cut for it to survive --- but it won't happen.

 

Unions, honestly, kill pro sports. They've had these problems for many years. And, with the work stoppage, the fans are going to care even less.

Maybe it won't survive as it's presently known, but it'll take more than a prolonged lockout to put an end to franchises such as the Red Wings, Maple Leafs, Canadiens, Bruins, Flyers, etc.

Unfortunately, the days of a league able to survive on so few franchises has passed us by. A lot of teams will fall, quite possibly. The remaining teams will be stocked with good players --- but how can they consider expansion?

 

They won't address the big problem (THEY NEED A SOLID SALARY CAP) and until they do, the league will die.

Maybe a team like the Panthers will cease to exist, or the Penguins, or the Mighty Ducks, but the NHL existed long before those teams came about, and would continue to exist even if some of the new-school teams folded.

I could see more than half of the league folding, to be perfectly honest.

 

And teams folding gives fans the belief that the league is folding.

 

So, the fans will stop coming.

-=Mike

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Tom already stated most of what needs to be said about MLB. There's a system in place where you retain your players for six years. This keeps the balance of power with player development and drafting, not free agency. In fact, with draft compensation, free agency sometimes hurts teams long term.

 

This doesn't just go for hockey, but for all pro-athletes that complain about finances.

 

You get paid millions to play a damn game. If you don't want to do it then I'm sure there are thousands of other people who would be willing to do so. I mean sure, the owners would be nowhere without the players...but players are alot easier to replace than owners.

 

Ah, the obligatory bitch about how much athletes earn. One, athletes work HARDER than the average individual. Two, athletes get paid what they are paid because they are NOT replaceable. If they were, they would have been replaced already. There's always someone willing to buy a healthy sports franchise. There's not as many people who can play shortstop and hit 57 home runs. Last I checked, there was one.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

Ah, the obligatory bitch about how much athletes earn. One, athletes work HARDER than the average individual. Two, athletes get paid what they are paid because they are NOT replaceable. If they were, they would have been replaced already. There's always someone willing to buy a healthy sports franchise. There's not as many people who can play shortstop and hit 57 home runs. Last I checked, there was one.

 

Too much isn't X Millions of Dollars. Too much is more than you bring in. The NHL is in big trouble financially. The owners should be able to police themselves, but they are too greedy. The unions are too greedy too. Thus, competitive balance is thrown out of whack, work stoppages become frequent occurences and the fanbase is driven away. The fans are everything. Without them, the foundation for both the owners and players collapses. I have complained about MLB alot, but their problem is miniscule compared to the NHL right now. The league cannot survive as is, and the league cannot survive a work stoppage. The only option is for the players to give in. Otherwise the league will fold and they will be out of work.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

Ah, the obligatory bitch about how much athletes earn. One, athletes work HARDER than the average individual.

Bullshit. My father for example works 12hrs a day, 5 days a week and then proceeds to work another 5hrs on Saturday in a sweatshop of a diecasting place. Athletes work half a year and then can choose to work out during the off-season or just lounge about. If you think Gilbert Brown could do what my father does for a year then you're kidding yourself.

 

Two, athletes get paid what they are paid because they are NOT replaceable.

Again, bullshit. Anybody can hit a baseball or shoot a basketball. Pro Athletes can do it better sure, but lets seem them give somebody a tracheotomy when there's something lodged in their throat and they can't breathe.

 

There's always someone willing to buy a healthy sports franchise.

Doesn't mean they can afford to

 

There's not as many people who can play shortstop and hit 57 home runs.  Last I checked, there was one.

And if he goes on strike with all the pitchers throwing 90-100mph I'm sure somebody could do a good job at replacing him. You bring in scrubs who throw 75-85mph and other scrubs who can hit the ball well enough off of that speed and you get homeruns.

 

These people get paid to play something that in the end is quite meaningless and they love to do. My father doesn't enjoy diecasting metals but it puts food on the table.

 

Athletes have it better than they ever should, and to think otherwise is foolish

[Dr. Tom 0]

Ah, the obligatory bitch about how much athletes earn.  One, athletes work HARDER than the average individual.

Bullshit. My father for example works 12hrs a day, 5 days a week and then proceeds to work another 5hrs on Saturday in a sweatshop of a diecasting place.

Then he's not the average person, is he? The average person works 40-45 hours a week over five 8-9 hour days. Pro athletes have a harder workload during the season. MLB players play six games a week on average, and have to travel all over the country to do their jobs. Other leagues don't play as often, but the travel can be just as grueling.

 

Athletes work half a year and then can choose to work out during the off-season or just lounge about.

Any athlete who just "lounges about" in the offseason will have to work twice as hard to get into game shape when the season starts. Conditioning oneself as a pro athlete is a year-round job. They have to lift weights, stretch, run, and do exercises specific to their sport to maintain muscle memory.

 

Two, athletes get paid what they are paid because they are NOT replaceable.

Again, bullshit. Anybody can hit a baseball or shoot a basketball.

Sure. I can do both. And I'd hit about .014 against major league pitching. In the NBA, I'd be lucky to shoot 25% from the field, and that would be before the 7-footers started getting all up in my grill before I shot. The point is that very few people can hit a baseball or shoot a basketball at the levels competitive professional athletics demand. People won't spend their ticket money to watch a bunch of scrubs: look at the NFL's attendance plunge during the scab games of ~15 years ago. Fans expect certain levels of competency and performance, and that is part of what makes pro sports so compelling.

 

... but lets seem them give somebody a tracheotomy when there's something lodged in their throat and they can't breathe.

Strawman. They're not paid to do that, and doctors are compensated quite well for their work.

 

There's always someone willing to buy a healthy sports franchise.

Doesn't mean they can afford to

They wouldn't start the process if they didn't think they could finish it.

 

And if he goes on strike with all the pitchers throwing 90-100mph I'm sure somebody could do a good job at replacing him. You bring in scrubs who throw 75-85mph and other scrubs who can hit the ball well enough off of that speed and you get homeruns.

Unlikely. The odds against Joe Random having the same skills and being in the same condition as Alex Rodriguez are ludicrously small. The pitching wouldn't suffer nearly that kind of dropoff, as there are plenty of college and semipro chaps who can throw 90 and never sniff the majors. Again, the caliber of players involved in replacement games would be orders of magnitude worse than the standard, and owners would be committing financial suicide if they tried to find replacements for 750 MLB players.

 

These people get paid to play something that in the end is quite meaningless and they love to do.

And with your bitter tirade, you make it sound like it's their fault. It isn't. Americans will pay a lot of money to be entertained. People love competition and living vicariously thru their favorite athletes and teams. The market dictates things like salaries. If there weren't 75 million people going to baseball games every year (a guess), the current salary structure -- which is much more fiscally responsible than a few years ago, showing the market can and does adjust -- couldn't be maintained.

 

Athletes have it better than they ever should, and to think otherwise is foolish

That's a matter of perspective. As long as people are going to the games and generating revenue, and as long as spending doesn't exceed that revenue, then I don't care what the players make. There are far more important things to worry about than the size of Manny Ramirez's biweekly paycheck.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

As long as people are going to the games and generating revenue, and as long as spending doesn't exceed that revenue, then I don't care what the players make.

 

That's what I said. But in the NHL, which this thread is about, except for a few select markets, spending well exceeds revenue. That's where the problem is.

[Guest Rrrsh]

A: Canadian TV Ratings and Canadian Revenues makes teh NHL a profitable League

 

B: The NHL DOES NOT need a Salary cap...its need revenue sharing or a Luxury Cap. If the cap is 50 mill, CALGREY STILL CANT KEEP IGINLA CUZ THEY DONT HAVE THE MONEY. If the owners get the money, they will spend it. But they need the money.

[MrRant 0]

So you are saying that the 6 teams or so that CBC covers is enough money to keep the league afloat?

 

How much crack did you smoke this morning?

[stahl 0]

CBC does Hockey night in Canada, every saturday. The NHL has a contract with TSN that shows an average of 2-3 games a week on the network. CBC has Stanley Cup Final rights but TSN is the major network for hockey in Canada.

[MrRant 0]

Still that isn't enough to make the league "Profitable".

[Guest Rrrsh]

So you are saying that the 6 teams or so that CBC covers is enough money to keep the league afloat?

 

How much crack did you smoke this morning?

I am saying that the revenue that Canada generates is NEVER considered when people look at the NHL troubles. I know ABC and ESPN has shit ratings, but CBC had its second and third highest rated games EVER this year. So, the league is not bad off, some teams just are.

[Guest Rrrsh]

Double post

[MrRant 0]

No you said that the Canadian TV and Canadian revenues make the (i'm going to bold it for you) profitable. That is not the case.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

Is there any place where one might find good analysis of the NHL's profits and losses?

[Guest Rrrsh]

No you said that the Canadian TV and Canadian revenues make the (i'm going to bold it for you) profitable. That is not the case.

It does, it puts the league from non-profitable to profitable. America only makes it Non-profitable, Canada makes the diffrence. I never siad Canada ONLY makes it profitable.

[MrRant 0]

A: Canadian TV Ratings and Canadian Revenues makes teh NHL a profitable League

That isn't what you said.

[Guest Rrrsh]

It does. Its the X factor. Without it, the league would not be profitable.

[Lightning Flik 0]

Is there any place where one might find good analysis of the NHL's profits and losses?

Nope. Only speculation on what the teams and league tell us.

 

Yet, since the players have admitted that the teams aren't fairing too well, it's kinda hard not to say they aren't.

[MrRant 0]

http://www.nhlcbanews.com/uro_results.html

 

That is according to the NHL itself though. Going by that they are losing money.

 

Edit : 2002-2003 season.

[EVIL~! alkeiper 0]

http://www.nhlcbanews.com/uro_results.html

 

That is according to the NHL itself though. Going by that they are losing money.

 

Edit : 2002-2003 season.

After the MLB fiasco, I don't give the leagues themselves a shred of credibility.

[Guest Rrrsh]

http://www.nhlcbanews.com/uro_results.html

 

That is according to the NHL itself though.  Going by that they are losing money.

 

Edit : 2002-2003 season.

After the MLB fiasco, I don't give the leagues themselves a shred of credibility.

To add to that claim, which I agree with, the Flyers had the nerve to say they lost money this year after hosting three round of playoff games, where you get 1 million for each home game.

[MrRant 0]

http://www.bizjournals.com/tampabay/storie...09/daily37.html

 

Granted the guy was paid by the NHL to go over the books.....

[Guest Rrrsh]

That is total propaganda by the owners. Same shit as the MLB pulled.

[The Czech Republic 0]

In regard to how shortening the schedule would hurt TV revenue: no. It'd just hurt the gate, which is what hockey thrives on. People bitch about NHL games on TV being hard to watch, then they go to a hockey game live and say it's the coolest thing they've ever seen. It's a sport that evidently has to be seen in person or on CBC coverage to be appreciated. So what they should do is keep the 82 to 84 games a year, scale back salaries, and maybe-just-maybe design some merchandise that people wouldn't be ashamed to wear. Expansion teams, I'm looking at you.

[Guest FrigidSoul]

... but lets seem them give somebody a tracheotomy when there's something lodged in their throat and they can't breathe.

Strawman. They're not paid to do that, and doctors are compensated quite well for their work.

That was more to have to do with Pro Athletes being the hardest working people out there thing. To say doctors work less than Pro Athletes is wrong. Not to mention doctors get paid less than pro-athletes and provide the world a greater service.

 

When I was working I was averaging 50-55hrs a week most jobs. For the most part though in my proffesional career I cooked, so there was always overtime as people always ate. I just figured the norm was around those hours unless it was a department store.

[JustJoe2k5 0]

This doesn't just go for hockey, but for all pro-athletes that complain about finances.

 

 

You get paid millions to play a damn game. If you don't want to do it then I'm sure there are thousands of other people who would be willing to do so. I mean sure, the owners would be nowhere without the players...but players are alot easier to replace than owners.

I couldn't agree with you more, and the more money someone is making a game the less passion they have for the sport. Shortstops in baseball miss a groundball and it rolls about three or four feet behind them and they just stand there while the outfielder runs to get it, basketball players stop in their tracks when it looks like someone is going to dunk, etc. Pretty sad that the "professionals" are getting paid millions of dollars while college players are putting on better games just for the love of the sport.

[The Czech Republic 0]

That was more to have to do with Pro Athletes being the hardest working people out there thing. To say doctors work less than Pro Athletes is wrong. Not to mention doctors get paid less than pro-athletes and provide the world a greater service.

Doctors, athletes...I really can't trust either

[Red Baron 0]

if Phili/Detroit/Colorado/New Jersey/New York/Toronto/Dallas won the stanley cup, it would have been a different answer.

Of course, since all the teams you listed (minus Philly and Toronto) had won every Cup from 1994 until last year. I don't get what you were going for here, Jesus himself could have come down and led a team to the Cup and it wouldn't have changed a thing with regards to the labour situation, I don't know why you seem to think that Tampa winning is the worst thing to ever happen to the sport.

These six teams are some of the highest payrolling teams in the NHL. If one of these 6 teams did when the Stanley Cup this year, the NHLPA will agree that there isn't much competition since many of the top players go on a select teams, because of their high payroll.

 

With Tampa winning, or Calgary, the NHLPA is standing tall mainly Goodenow that even a small market team can compete.

[Guest MikeSC]

I'll say this: NOBODY on Earth is overpaid. You are paid what the market will bear, period.

 

HOWEVER, the market can drastically over-value you --- and the NHL is laden with that problem. NOBODY in the league puts any more asses in the seats than anybody else. NOBODY spikes TV ratings. Thus, paying ANYBODY much more than anybody else is a poor business decision.

 

The league is dying because everyone involved is too short-sighted to look down the road a little.

-=Mike

[Dr. Tom 0]

the more money someone is making a game the less passion they have for the sport.

Not necessarily. It sounds like it makes sense, and I'm sure it does in some cases, but there's no way this is universally true.

 

Shortstops in baseball miss a groundball and it rolls about three or four feet behind them and they just stand there while the outfielder runs to get it

In a word, no. If they've deflected the ball to the point that it's only a few feet behind them, then they'll pick it up and see if a play can be made. If the ball gets completely past the shortstop, then the outfielder might make the play. If the SS is expecting a hop he doesn't get and the ball gets under his glove, he's going to lose a second or two looking for the ball and surprised to not see it in his glove. By that point, the ball is well onto the grass and still going, so the left fielder (who should have been running in to backup the play anyway, precisely for this reason) has the better play since he's running toward his throw. The SS would be running away from the throw if he made a mad dash after the ball. And never mind that the LF is running the whole time, while the SS has to start from a dead stop.

 

basketball players stop in their tracks when it looks like someone is going to dunk

Because unless you have just the right position, you're not going to stop it. Why risk a foul and a three-point play when you can just give up the two and take the ball back? Also, a lot of the defenders who are stopping might be doing so to draw a charge.

 

Pretty sad that the "professionals" are getting paid millions of dollars while college players are putting on better games just for the love of the sport.

The quality of professional athletics is greater than the quality of college athletics. That's not to say that I don't like college sports, because I do. But the best pro teams are better than the best college teams, and thus the games are better and easier to watch and enjoy.