NHL is Finally Going to have Talks

[Penguinfan]

The New York Rangers should be relegated reguardless

Yo do bring up some interesting points however. But as long as you have owners like Ted Leonsis and George Steinbrenner you need a salary cap to keep the small market teams alive. Yes it does water down the talent pool and yes there are games that are unwatchable, even on Monday Night sometimes, but without a salary cap you will have no NHL or at the very least will be watching the original 6 again and nothing else. It's a sport and a business, both sides need to realize that. Things are very different in America than England.

[BlackCoffee]

I dont know if it's that different in England. Man Utd is a huge team worth nearly a billion. Chelsea has a russian billionaire owner who's buying everybody and is now leading the league. The difference is that if you live in a small market, you can still cheer on your team against other small markets.

Even when the NHL had the original 6 teams, it was not balanced. Montreal and Detroit dominated, Toronto was next and then Boston.
Chicago and the Rangers sucked.. I think the Rangers missed the playoffs (4 teams) 10 years in row.. in a 6 team league!

I dont mind owners like Leonsis and Steinbrenner. They've proven that spending money doesnt work. The Yankees haven't won since 2000 and might not win again for another few years. Leonsis has taken the Capitals to 1 final and they have no future at all.. it's a dead team. I dont want the salary cap because I want rich owners to spend foolishly so i can laugh at them. ie. NY Rangers, Washington Capitals, toronto Maple Leafs, Baltimore Orioles, Chicago Cubs etc..

[GeoffM]

I think the biggest problem was created by Bettman when he expanded to 30 teams from 21 since the early 90s. Stupid, did it too quickly without his existing franchises being financially stable. The NFL is methodical at expanding slowly, once their newer teams get a foothold in the market and they are certain profit will be made (you'd have to be an idiot not to make a profit in the NFL though).

Some say it's the owners fault, some the players. I'll tell you one thing though, when you are told your employer is losing money, and you refuse to take a paycut, do you not get laid off in the real world? Guaranteed contracts are something the players would not budge on. If a guy scores 50 goals one season and triggers a $2 million bonus, and then the next season lays an egg and scores 10, does he pay back the money? NO. Can the team ditch him? NO. The owners have accepted the fact that it was their fault the salary situation has gotten out of hand, and now are asking for the players assistance to fix it.

However, I must say that I don't see the problem with the luxury tax the players are offering. If an owner (..cough...Rangers...cough..) wants to go over, fine, take the tax money and give it to a team losing lots, assuming they spend a certain minimum. Getting rid of teams is not an option because again, the PLAYERS would never allow it. 1 thing I don't agree with, however, is revenue sharing. An owner's profit is an owner's profit. I don't see that being implemented since teams like Toronto and Minnesota that make boatloads of cash won't want to give up a portion of that, and quite frankly I think it is unfair to expect them to.

The NFL is the best run league because of the TV deal and the salary cap. Players rarely jump ship like the other 3 major sports, there are rarely trades or free agent moves, etc. Any team (except the Bengals ) at the start of any given season can win the Super Bowl (or at least lose to New England on the way). Take S.D., I thought they would be last overall, but are comfortably atop their division. The Jets, another team that IMO suck, securing a playoff spot with 4 games left in the season.

People like Steinbrenner are bad for baseball, people like Cuban that don't care about a salary cap are bad for basketball, but you know, at least they pay their taxes and help smaller markets whilst winning tons of games.

[Penguinfan]

Any word on today's talks?

[GeoffM]

Players offered:

24% salary roll-back, saving somewhere between $500 and 600 million for owners instantly.

The problem is they only offered a 20% luxury tax on payrolls over $45 mill. Don't know if the owners will like this point. However, when you think about it, if they take that rollback and just use the contracts that come out of them, they could easily just use the new contracts as the standard for all future contracts. But the problem is owners are rich and have nothing better to do with their money.

I hope they take this. The Leafs will have a payroll in the $60 million range anyway, so bringing them down to $45 will allow them to spend about $13 million more, which means they could go after Glen Murray as has been rumoured, and perhaps even a guy like Demitra to stack our third line. I like this deal for the players and the owners if they can keep their wallets from jumping too much.

But I think the problem with this deal is that it will also allow the big spenders to spend more. Since their players are now worth less contract wise, they can elevate their payrolls further as mentioned above about the Leafs. I mean, when you think about it, just about every NHLer wants to play with the Leafs, so they will be able to stack their roster even further. Ditto for the Wings and Avs and Rangers, yadayadayada. This will, IMO, make smaller market teams unable to compete still, maybe even more than the current system.

[BlackCoffee]

I think smaller markets not being able to compete is a myth. Smaller teams beat bigger teams all the time. The big spenders such as the rangers, flyers , blues and leafs.. what have they done over the last 10 years? Look at New Jersey.. 3 cups and 5 finals in the 10 years of the last CBA. They're by no means a big spender.

There's no such thing as competitive balance. Every sports has good teams and bad teams. Even in the NFL, Teams are 11-1 and 1-11.

I think the players are giving alot back and as you said, the base salaries to work with will be lower (especialy for arbitration). You can't put in automatic fool-proof systems to protect the bonehead owners from themselves. This is like limit poker and no-limit poker . A salary cap is limit, that's no fun. Let the owner's go 'all-in' on their superstars and then we can all laugh at them when they finish last like the Rangers.

[Penguinfan]

Isn't the salary rollback idea just a temporary solution to a permenant problem? Will be anxious to see the owners counter offer, especially since the NHLPA said there is still some room to negotiate the previous offer.