Re: Bettman says no new CBA = Lockout
posted at 8/13/2012 10:58 AM EDT
In Response to Re: Bettman says no new CBA = Lockout
In Response to Re: Bettman says no new CBA = Lockout : If everything profit wise has improved over 6 yrs why does it need to go in reverse? Why? So owners make more money. As an owner I would love this. For a player it wouldnt sit well. If its for the simple purpose of controlling the players better I am all for it. But at the same time shouldnt ticket prices come down as well? Zero chance. Never ever will that happen. Owners had their way the first go round and it worked. But they also screwed their own system and found ways around the rules...how can a player be at fault bc of this. I love that the NFL only gurantees a certain amount of the contract. The NHL needs to take a look at this. No way the NHLPA would go for that though.
Posted by shuperman
Your NFL point is a good one, and what's happenning in other pro sports has to be taken into consideration. Many people say these players are making too much, but that's the end of their argument. NHL players should be somewhat in the ballpark monetarily with other pro athletes, in comparison to league revenues.
Last time I was solidly behind the owners, because I thought their demands were reasonable. This time, they're not. Every economic blunder in the league is created by the owners. It's not the players fault the league is constantly circumventing their own policies. It's not the players fault that someone is stubbornly insisting that a money losing team be located in Phoenix. The players don't make the offers, the owners do.
The only reason we're seeing what we are here....is because of success. If league revenues were the same as they were 5 years ago, this process would probably go pretty quickly. Most of these owners rail on and on about the virtues of capitalism, and the strengths of our western economic ideology.....until they see something easier. Now they want a system that could have been drawn up by Stalin.
Like failure, success is only temporary too. League revenues will not always go up. They most certainly will top out then trend down for a few years at some point.
There are some things that need negotiated. A 50-50 split is reasonable. Something like guaranteed contracts should be at the top of the owners list, but oddly, I don't think it's ever been brought up. I don't have a problem with the RFA/UFA thing as is. The only reason it's on the table is so owners can wait longer to pay these guys market value. Same with entry level contracts.
These guys have a cap to work within, they really don't need any more protection. They got where they are on the merits of free enterprise, and now they're trying to take it right out of the equation.
These players are the 700 and something best on the planet at what they do. Those in that category always make sickening amounts of money, and I don't begrudge them. Especially knowing I'd probably pay the same amount for a ticket, if they were playing for free.