|
Post by Pitbull on Feb 23, 2005 2:20:35 GMT -5
Now we can all have a free opinion to whatever we want about what the new CBA should have in it.
Please, no bashing anyones ideas. If there are things you want in it that will help the jets or if it doesn't work for the Jets, it doesn't matter, just what do you think?
Also, if you were the owner and or players association, what would be fair to you then?
Here's the best part. If you were a person who had money to bring the Jets back. Say the arena, chipman and everyone went along. What would you like to have in the new CBA?
|
|
|
Post by toeblake on Feb 24, 2005 15:08:19 GMT -5
Mine wouldn't be too complicated:
$35 million cap per team dollar for dollar tax for payrolls over cap up to $40 million two dollars per dollar tax over $40 million plus loss of a first round draft pick - maybe this would encourage teams to develop players rather than buy them
2 way contracts until 400 games played or age 25, whichever comes first - you have to earn a one way contract by proving you belong in the NHL.
Rookie cap set at $750,000 including bonuses for first 3 years
Free agency begins after 500 games played or age 30, whichever comes first - players complain now that they have to wait too long. If they have proved themselves by staying in the league they can be rewarded with free agency as early as age 25. This is to alleviate player whining about a $35 million cap.
74 game season: play teams in own division 6 times each and rest of league 2 times each.
|
|
|
Post by hawker14 on Feb 27, 2005 13:17:06 GMT -5
minimum of 75% revenue sharing between teams
|
|
Nuck
Veteran Member
Posts: 102
|
Post by Nuck on Feb 28, 2005 17:10:01 GMT -5
minimum of 75% revenue sharing between teams ;D ;D ;D Not gonna happen. Toronto, New York, and Detroit don't want to share with the Nashvilles, and Edmonton's of the world. They have made that clear to Bettman.
|
|
|
Post by hawker14 on Feb 28, 2005 17:44:09 GMT -5
;D ;D ;D Not gonna happen. Toronto, New York, and Detroit don't want to share with the Nashvilles, and Edmonton's of the world. They have made that clear to Bettman. lol, the canucks are a have-not team as well. i don't see why you're so giddy.
|
|
|
Post by hawker14 on Feb 28, 2005 17:45:25 GMT -5
or did the canucks indeed earn $ 25 million in profit last season, and Arthur Levitt's report is indeed a sham ?
|
|
|
Post by hawker14 on Feb 28, 2005 17:47:51 GMT -5
oh, and of course
FREE BERTUZZI,
he was framed !!!
|
|
|
Post by hawker14 on Feb 28, 2005 17:50:05 GMT -5
Winnipeg Jets Stanley Cups =0 Vancouver Canucks Stanley Cups =0
keep the legacy alive out on the left coast...
|
|
|
Post by hawker14 on Feb 28, 2005 17:52:15 GMT -5
and 'Nuck, as i'm sure you read, it stated please no bashing anyone's ideas.
and as anyone can see, i have bashed no one's ideas !!!
go Jets go and stomp them Canucks !!!
|
|
|
Post by hawker14 on Feb 28, 2005 17:56:54 GMT -5
and now the irony...
in the Maple Leafs NHL season cancellation press conference, President Richard Peddie responded to a direct question ... that the Leafs wouldn't lower ticket prices regardless of any salary cap figure due to possible revenue sharing.
i don't believe him either, but revenue sharing isn't such a far fetched idea for a healthy league. i don't see the humour in the concept.
|
|
|
Post by Pitbull on Mar 1, 2005 1:21:08 GMT -5
For some information. These teams that wouldn't want revenue sharing also wouldn't want a salary cap. Obviously there are less than 8 teams that don't want either so it should all happen.
Both sides have to show they believe in the NHL and success in order to go forward. I can possibly see both Bettman and Goodenow being forced out after this whole thing is done.
|
|