Posted on 02/18/2005 11:35:24 AM PST by Alberta's Child
But that's what MADE this situation in the first place. The problem with the salary structure is the top guys, they're the balloon that lifts the whole structure. There is no way to lower the wages of the middle guys and NOT lower the wages of the top guys, the entire salary structure is BUILT around the TOP guys.
People pay to see their team win. And hockey is the ultiumate team sport, you don't just win because of the top guys, if they ensured victory the Rangers would have won 6 straight Cups in recent. You need solid 3rd lines and roleplayers to win.
There's no way your second line guys are going to be happy playing for 1/8 of what the top dogs make. Your 4th liners will be OK with it sure, and that's what they already make. Your 3rd liners will be OK with 1/4 of what the top dogs make, which is again what they already make. But your 2nd line guys will want at least half. THe ONLY way to drop down the pay of those 8-12 guys you see the problem with is to drop the pay of the marquee players. Any other system will get sent to arbitration and be over turned in minutes.
I have to disagree about Draper. The Grind Line is EXTREMELY popular in the Detroit area, and sells the jerseys to prove it.
Nationwide, Draper isn't a big draw, but locally he is, similar to the enforcers of the 80's.
"Rambling thoughts on hockey" ping. LOL.
I always had the same routine (I went to games by myself). I'd walk in as soon as the gates opened and would get a slice of pizza and a Coke. Then I'd go to the game room and spend a few quarters to bang away at those pinball machine or maybe even one of those "newfangled" video games like Space Invaders or Galaxian.
Then I'd buy a program and make my way to my seat for the actual game.
It is true that unless you see a game in person, you will never truly appreciate what a great sport ice hockey is. If your only experience with pro hockey is watching it on TV, you just have no idea at all. That is the true bane of hockey. On TV, it sucks.
I stopped going in the 1980s because it just got so damn expensive.
Yeah, but a team full of Kris Drapers is nothing without a Shanahan, an Yzerman and a Federov, is it?
Individual players may be popular with the fans, (I happen to be a huge Rod Brind'Amour fan, btw) certainly, but popularity doesn't bring home Stanley Cups. Big-time players do. And big-time players need to be paid big time salaries, and the only way to do that is to short the rest of the guys on the team. Otherwise ticket prices rise to Knick or Laker-like prices and no one shows up at Joe Louis.
The "give" in this situation can't come from the "low-end", it can only come from the middle. The very guys who are overpaid, incidentally.
This gets more surreal almost by the hour.
LOL! Yeah... what's the NHL?
I'm not sure if it even makes sense to get a season going at this point. The 28-game season being talked about earlier this week would at this point be a 24-game season.
But no doubt the players are coming to the realization that making less money is a lot better than making no money at all.
The story floating around here in New York is that it was the owners who initiated this effort. I think there's a lot of concern on their part about just how bad things are going to be for the league if ESPN exercises their April 15th option to terminate their NHL broadcast agreement.
Then close the damn thing. The solution isn't to replace it with a $250 million white elephant in Newark.
OUTSTANDING post!!
I have been a hockey fan for decades, and even played for a few years (a nice adult league) back in the '80s. I remember going to see the Flyers play the Blues back in 1967 - - attendance was so small that my brother and I were able to scoot around and find a few loose pucks under the seats in the upper part of the lower section at the Spectrum. Back then, if you brought your skates with you, you were allowed to go out on the ice after the game and skate around for a while. Lots of people did this.
That would be great. I predicted they wouldn't meet again until July. I'd love to be wrong.
From Hockey News via ESPN: Season could be Uncanceled Saturday
There might be an NHL season, after all.
The NHL and the players' association will meet in New York on Saturday after the league requested the sides get together again. The Hockey News reported Friday night that the sides had already agreed in principle to a deal that includes a $45 million salary cap and could un-cancel the season Saturday.
Asked if there was any way a deal won't get done, a player close to the talks who asked to remain anonymous told The Hockey News, "Not that I can see. I couldn't possibly imagine the idea that somebody is going to try to make a name for themselves in the last minute here."
Wayne Gretzky and Mario Lemieux are still believed to be major players in the process. Both are reported to be in New York taking part in the talks.
"I believe all (that) stuff is pretty accurate," said the player close to the talks.
A second source confirmed to The Hockey News that Lemieux traveled to New York on Friday.
On Wednesday, commissioner Gary Bettman canceled the season, saying it was too late to play any semblance of a schedule. The cancellation made the NHL the first major North American sports league to lose a full season to a labor dispute.
Or did it?
In a statement released Friday night, the players' association said the NHL made the offer late Thursday night to get back together. NHL spokesman Frank Brown told ESPN that the league had no comment on the reports.
There was no immediate word on who would take part in the meeting, although Canada's TSN reported earlier Friday that NHL vice president Bill Daly and NHLPA senior director Ted Saskin -- who ESPN The Magazine's E.J. Hradek reported was traveling to New York on Friday night -- will be in attendance. TSN said Bettman and Goodenow may not be directly involved in the meeting.
One general manager told The Hockey News that Bettman used the cancellation to force NHLPA executive director Bob Goodenow's hand -- i.e., if Goodenow thought he could maintain his reputation of being a successful deadline hunter, he was wrong.
"I think the timing has always been to get an agreement so that we can play," said New Jersey Devils president Lou Lamoriello, who has taken part in previous negotiations. "Right now, it's still get an agreement, and then if we get an agreement, then can we play?
"I think it's a little different than it was before," he said.
Hradek reported that even if an agreement is reached, there is no guarantee a season will be played this year.
"The way everything has transpired, nothing surprises me," said Lamoriello, who declined to say whether he would be in attendance.
Daly was involved in a closed-door meeting Friday evening and declined to comment.
There hadn't been any official contact between the NHL and the players' association since Tuesday night -- when the sides traded what they said were final offers.
All proposals were rejected, and Bettman went ahead and canceled the season Wednesday at a news conference that was scheduled two days earlier.
"I don't think anything was premature. It was a necessity," Lamoriello said. "It didn't appear to be going anywhere and there was too much jockeying going on.
"Right now, there's a chance of people getting down to possibly getting this done," he said.
Bettman said in a letter to Goodenow on Tuesday that the league's salary cap proposal of $42.5 million was as far as he could go and that there was no time or flexibility for negotiation.
Goodenow sent a letter back, proposing a soft cap at $49 million that could be exceeded by as much as 10 percent by teams twice during the course of the six-year deal.
It appeared there was momentum toward reaching a deal and that the season had a chance to be saved, since the sides were only $6.5 million apart on their cap numbers. But talking ceased after each side sent two letters to the other on Tuesday night.
There were big breakthroughs Monday in Niagara Falls, N.Y., when the NHL agreed to drop its demand that player costs be linked to league revenues and the union, in turn, came off its steadfast opposition to a salary cap.
"We got through the philosophical end of it, so there's a better chance, but I think there is still a lot of work that has to be done and it still takes some time," Lamoriello said.
Bettman said the NHL couldn't afford the union's final proposal and said if all 30 teams spent $49 million on player costs, then more money would be paid out to players than last season.
Rumors began to swirl on Thursday, once the realization set in that the season had indeed been canceled.
"A lot of players, owners, managers saw how close the two negotiating teams got to a deal and I think people are just exploring if that can be explored any more," agent Pat Morris said Friday. "I don't know if it'll have a successful conclusion."
Bettman has said that teams lost more than $1.8 billion over 10 years -- the last time a collective bargaining agreement was reached. The previous lockout cut the 1994-95 season down to 48 games per team.
NHL clubs claim to have lost $273 million in 2002-03 and $224 million last season.
Bettman said that a deal would have to be in the drafting stages by the end of last weekend if there was going to be time to play a 28-game season and a standard 16-team postseason.
This is a great post by resident Canadian Freeper & Hockey Afficianado Alberta's Child. My apologies for getting this out to the list so late, was away from the computer for most of the day.
Regards,
H-T Freep mail or ping me if you want on or off the Hockey Ping List.
If the Hockey News is a source - it's legit.
I think the intensive involvement of Devils' GM Lou Lamoriello in these talks can be construed a number of different ways -- he's the best GM in sports and is respected by owners and players alike, but I also wonder if the New Jersey franchise is teetering on the brink of insolvency in this whole mess. There is already a move in the New Jersey state government to shut down all plans for that new arena in Newark as long as the NHL is not playing.
THe way I see it
A - it's in New York so Lou is near
B - everybody likes and trusts Lou
C - Lou's well known for not overpaying, or underpaying, if there's one guy that can say "it takes this much money to put a good team on the ice" and make it stick it's Lou
D - inspite of their on ice success the Devils are in grave financial trouble, which really drive home the problems
Sports Center is on in 16 minutes. We'll see.
Thanks so much, HT. I pinged you to an earlier post from someone named musical_airman who wanted to be added.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.