|
Post by PitbulI on Jan 17, 2005 18:50:30 GMT -5
TSN reports that the top men from both the NHL and NHLPA might have a meeting. The meeting was proposed by the NHLPA to talk about talking again. However, neither Goodenow or Bettman are invited.
Does that mean a deal could be reached by the lower guys and force out those two bullheaded morons? I hope so.
Of course the NHLPA says no salary cap. Why can't they just say lets take a look at this all. We don't want the players to lose too much money and the owners just raking it in but there must be a happy medium. That's what they should say.
|
|
|
Post by Yar on Jan 18, 2005 2:03:03 GMT -5
a new meeting to officially cancel the season.
|
|
|
Post by FrontierSaga on Jan 18, 2005 2:05:03 GMT -5
nothin is going to happen in that meeting...just a talk and thats it....SEASON DONE! and Tampa Bay fans will never know if they'll ever see another game again haha jk .... well maybe some
|
|
|
Post by jamiebez on Jan 18, 2005 13:50:55 GMT -5
There's an article on ESPN about this. Interesting stuff: the author seems to think one of two things may happen: 1. The players will give in to the cap and try and get concessions on other areas (notably revenue sharing) 2. The owners will take the cap off the table in exchange for some other ideas (removal of all bonuses, eliminate arbitration) Some interesting food for thought: if the players DO want to dictate the terms of revenue sharing in exchange for taking a cap, that's the best scenario for us. The revenue sharing the owners have proposed is pretty weak - if this gives it more bite AND we get a hard cap... we're laughing! Link is: sports.espn.go.com/nhl/columns/story?id=1969177
|
|
|
Post by PitbulI on Jan 18, 2005 15:38:25 GMT -5
THe union wants revenue sharing because they want there to be a way for the teams to afford their salaries. Also, no cap because they won't get paid enough (Yeah right)
The owners want a salary cap because they can make profits. But they don't want revenue sharing why? Because they don't want the entire league to prosper?
I think the cap and Revenue sharing can live with eachother. Have a higher cap (Hard cap) and have the revenue sharing around so all teams can afford to not fold. THis forces the players and league to try and better the sport for the sake of all the teams.
Only a handful of owners won't like revenue sharing in my opinion. Look how good its done for the NFL. Of course it would be smaller scale for the NHL, but it could work.
There should be no reason why the NHL should have salaries climbing to that of the NFL.
|
|
|
Post by jetblood on Feb 14, 2005 2:44:36 GMT -5
It would defently work the nhl would be healther then ever. Not only that but every team would be able to operate on an even keel with the rest of the league. It'll be very balanced and the league will profit by doing this big time.
|
|