NHL Lockout Begins

By Chris Allen
in The Sporting Arena

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Ayepecks

Posted
Posted
This has happened many times before and the hardcore fans alway come back. The NHL knows this and that's the reason they don't care. The NHL isn't in such a great financial state right now, though so this is bad timing.

The hardcore fans? Do you know just how few of hardcore fans the NHL has? Very, very, very few.

Leagues always struggle after a lockout. The NHL was already struggling.

Mentor

axis

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hockey is to global, all these guys know they can go else where and play the game. Many of the NHL players are already signing or have signed with European teams. It's not like you can say, "Well if you don't play in the NHL, you can't play". Football has the CFL and NFL Europe. Same with basketball and baseball seems to only be in Japan where players could go. Hockey, they can go to Canada, or many many European countries. This hurts me as a religious fan and I know how baseball fans feel now. You feel betrayed, makes you want to boycott when they do come back.

Hockey is in a generation gap, that is it. It is the most up and coming sport among kids and teenagers. I am around it every day, this is just a fact. I know hockey needs it now, but it will have to hold out. As the people getting into get older and they commit more time to playing, they will want to watch it. Then they will go to it and the cycle will start.

Edited by axis
Grand Master

Fred Derf Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
a lot of the teams WERE in canada, and then they moved them to the US!! i forget why that happened...hartford, winnepeg, i think there were more.

Winterpeg (Winnipeg) Jets moved to Phoenix.

Quebec Nodicks (Nordiques) moved to Colorado.

The Altanta Flames went the other way (to Calgary).

Hartford moved to Carolina but that was within the US.

Grand Master

Fred Derf Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
Hockey is to global, all these guys know they can go else where and play the game. Many of the NHL players are already signing or have signed with European teams.

If the NHL dies...

I'd like to see a global hockey league. Some teams over here in North America and some in Euiope with limited travel between the two continents. Then the winner in North America could play the winner in Europe.

Grand Master

Fred Derf Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
oh ****, hartford is in the US?  i need to learn more about geography :p

forgot about quebec...

Once upon a time the Whalers, the Devils, the Islanders and the Rangers were all within a short commute of each other. I'm sure the players loved the travel.

Hartford is in Connecticut.

Grand Master

Chad

Posted
Posted
uhh, nba, nfl, and mlb do... :p

(i *think* all them have caps)

MLB doesn't have a cap, unfortunately. They SHOULD hvae one....Yankees spending almost double of the second highest payroll...makes me sick :x

The NFL setup is a horrible joke - the players were sold out by Upshaw. realmad.gif

No, the NFL has the best system. They have the highest revenue, the best competition, and it's become America's pastime. No other league can boast the level of competition the NFL has. It's rare that a team is good for 3-4 years in a row...I'm talking REALLY good. You look at MLB, NHL, NBA....essentially the same teams have been good for quite a while

The NHL will definately be hurting after this. Take a look at baseball after the recent strike. It took up until last season to really get people back in the stands. That's a long time. Add on the fact that the NHL has little to no money left.

Grand Master

Bearded Kirklander

Posted
Posted
No, the NFL has the best system. They have the highest revenue, the best competition, and it's become America's pastime. No other league can boast the level of competition the NFL has. It's rare that a team is good for 3-4 years in a row...I'm talking REALLY good. You look at MLB, NHL, NBA....essentially the same teams have been good for quite a while

I disagree that the NFL system is best. No guaranteed contracts = Teh Suck! Especially in a game that is so brutal and violent. Most only play for a short time. They should be given guaranteed contracts. Also, I don't like the Franchise Player rule. It limits your ability to change teams. You should be able to go to whatever team you want, even if it is for less money. You should not be forced to stay with a team year after year because they designate you the Franchise Player.

Grand Master

Chad

Posted
Posted

I love that they don't have guaranteed contracts. NFL is unique in that one year, someone could have a huge year. Two years later, he's a dude. It happens more often in the NFL than any other sport.. If the player knows his contract can be voided at any point, he'll sure play a lot hard knowing that...as opposed to knowing the money is his no matter how well he plays. Contracts should be based upon performance. The NFL is the only one to do that correctly. Why give a guy a guaranteed 4 year deal worth 20 mill, when you don't know if he'll even be on your team in 4 years.

Franchise player

There are two types of franchise players. Clubs retain exclusive negotiating rights to an "exclusive" franchise player by committing to a minimum offer of the average of the top five salaries at the player's position as of the end of the restricted free agent signing period or a 20 percent increase over his 2003 salary, whichever is greater. No other clubs can negotiate with exclusive franchise players.

The second type of franchise player is offered a minimum of the average of the top five salaries at his position in the 2003 season, or a 20 percent salary increase, whichever is greater. This latter type of franchise player may negotiate with other clubs. The original club may match the offer and retain the player, or receive two first-round draft choices as compensation if the original club elects not to match.

Also, a club may designate a transition player in lieu of a franchise player in any year when the franchise designation is available. A transition player designation gives the club a first refusal right to match an offer sheet given to the player by another club. To designate a transition player, the club must offer a minimum of the average of the top 10 salaries of 2003 at the player's position, or a 20 percent salary increase, whichever is greater.

Sounds like a good deal for both parties. It's hard enough working with the cap room teams have. This just allows them to remain competetive AND pay the player what he's worth

Grand Master

Bearded Kirklander

Posted
Posted

Well, I guess I just respectfully disagree.

Anything that limits freedom of movement, like the Franchise tag, bothers me. Further, if the team can void a contract and cut a player, any player should be able to also void a contract and move to another team. Fair is fair.

With the NFL, careers tend to be much shorter, so players should be able to get what they can while they can.

I really, really hate the NFL system. It is very unfair to players, imo.

But I guess I'm drifting off topic, so I'll try to focus on hockey and not football. :)

Grand Master

Fred Derf Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted
I love that they don't have guaranteed contracts. NFL is unique in that one year, someone could have a huge year. Two years later, he's a dude.

That's possible in hockey now under the current CBA. It's called walking away from salary arbitration. It's only ever been done twice and both times by the Boston Bruins.

The owners have all the tools they need to control salaries which suggests to me that their economic situation is not as bad as they claim.

I would also argue that some teams (NJ, Ottawa) are perrenial favourites with relatively low payrolls while some teams with huge payrolls (obviously the NYR) are unable to make the playoffs.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.