Welcome to the TTP community

Be apart of something great, join today!

NHL Lockout 2004

Dial 9-1-1

Active Member
Jul 9, 2002
1,314
0
Tokens
2
Dirty Money
100
Regs said:
.What would stop the NHLPA from starting up their own league?

Uh...money? Like lots of it. Owners have had to build new freaking buildings to earn their money. Are you telling me that some local owner is going to pony up for a new building to pay Todd "the saint" Bertuzzi his millions? Filling up the Coliseum alone won't pay the bills.

One other major factor you've forgotten, Regsi...there are a lot of members in the NHLPA. Think of how many jobs they will lose with your plan to reduce teams to a handful. You think they'll vote on something like that? All the misplaced players (and there are far more of them than "star" players)...they'll come running back to the NHL where there is an established league with rich owners.

It'll never fly. Striker 14 will say something intelligent and/or homorous before that ever happens.
 

Regs

Staff member
Total Bastard
Jun 28, 2001
32,143
18,871
Tokens
16,263
Dirty Money
55,668
I think an "NHL Star" would not mind making way less money in a league run under the NHLPA than under any system run by the current owners in the NHL.

New buildings? Not needed.

~Regs.
 

STD

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2003
1,961
910
Tokens
1,755
Dirty Money
100
I really hate to agree with Dial on anything but he does make a few valid points. A salary cap is needed, it is the only way to keep certain owners in line and prevent them from setting salaries too high. Yes you can say certain owner are at fault and they are the ones to blame but it is the system that allows them to do so and that is what needs to be fixed. If you do go with a cap though there has to be an open book on revenues and an agreed upon percentage that the players get so you can prevent the owners from taking advantage of the players.

Where I like to disagree with dial is I think there should be revenue sharing because teams like NY, Toronto, Detroit and the other rich teams have to accept that without the smaller market teams you don't have much of a league. So you can't really use your coffee comparison because in this case having healthy competition makes your buisness more valuable. The league did go into markets that it had no buisness going into but that will sort it self out over time when the talent level catches up with the expansions they did and there is nothing preventing them from moving to better markets in the future.

Anyway that is enough for now and I would just like to say that Dial is homorous at times.

I don't usually correct peoples spelling because I can't spell but you always like to use it in your piss takes so fair is fair.
 

striker14

Well-Known Member
Jul 29, 2002
1,720
42
Tokens
0
Dirty Money
100
I too...hate to say anthing that agrees with Bettman the lil' fcuk...agree with a Salary Cap. It keeps teams from "buying" their way to Lord Stanley and making teams a bit more even. I also agree with the getting rid of the "luxury tax"...who started that up anyways...what a joke!

"Here is your 5 million dollars to play the sport you love, and hey, let's throw in another mill just because you are you!!" :rolleyes:

JUST GET IT DONE...that's all I ask!!

striker14

arethereanyotherchicksonthissitewhowatchhockeyorwhat?
 

Dial 9-1-1

Active Member
Jul 9, 2002
1,314
0
Tokens
2
Dirty Money
100
STD said:
Anyway that is enough for now and I would just like to say that Dial is homorous at times.

I don't usually correct peoples spelling because I can't spell but you always like to use it in your piss takes so fair is fair.

Yeah, well I think you are homorous too. :p

And just to set the record straight, I don't always like to use it in my piss takes. We all make spelling mistakes. The only time I do is when someone goes around calling others "imbasols." Or "idoits." Or "loosers." Or "Einstiens." They leave me no choice.

I see your point about the revenue sharing. I know all about "revenue sharing" come tax time and pay cheque time when my money goes to others who would rather sit on their asses all day and shoot heroin.
 

Dial 9-1-1

Active Member
Jul 9, 2002
1,314
0
Tokens
2
Dirty Money
100
Regs said:
I think an "NHL Star" would not mind making way less money in a league run under the NHLPA than under any system run by the current owners in the NHL.

New buildings? Not needed.

~Regs.

Just because I like analogies.

This is like somebody who would rather work out of his basement fixing computers because he likes being his own boss rather than working for Microsoft.

New buildings not needed? Tell that to the fine folks in Winterpeg.
 

STD

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2003
1,961
910
Tokens
1,755
Dirty Money
100
striker14 said:
I too...hate to say anthing that agrees with Bettman the lil' fcuk...agree with a Salary Cap. It keeps teams from "buying" their way to Lord Stanley and making teams a bit more even. I also agree with the getting rid of the "luxury tax"...who started that up anyways...what a joke!

"Here is your 5 million dollars to play the sport you love, and hey, let's throw in another mill just because you are you!!" :rolleyes:

JUST GET IT DONE...that's all I ask!!

striker14

arethereanyotherchicksonthissitewhowatchhockeyorwhat?

A luxury tax if it is set high enough really is a salary cap it is just another way to present it. If a team spends too much on players or what they call a luxury they get taxed and if a stiff penalty goes to teams that do not go into what they call the luxury market then it is not going to make sense to do it. I'm sure some teams still would but I guess you could call it revenue sharing then. Problem is the NHLPA know this and will not allow the NHL to set a high enough tax.

No matter what system you set up large market teams will always try to buy the cup because there always will be loop holes. The only thing they can do is try to level things out enough so smaller markets can compete and not loose money. There should also be more of a resrictions on player movements but the players will never go for that either.
 

TheRob

Well-Known Member
Jul 4, 2001
6,123
294
Tokens
436
Dirty Money
80
I like the NBA model personally. I believe there is a cap, but as long as you stay on the team that drafted you, you can make a ton of cash. Move to a different team, you don't make as much. I think that is how it works anyway.

Are you Ok STD? You don't sound good. You aren't sarcastic or anything and it's weirding me out. :(
 

STD

Well-Known Member
May 23, 2003
1,961
910
Tokens
1,755
Dirty Money
100
Surrey Rangers are going to win div. 1 this year and TR is going to get 90 minutes.

Is that better.
 

utah

Well-Known Member
Sep 19, 2003
1,986
1,056
Tokens
2,388
Dirty Money
188
Hope I'm correct in this, but in the NFL I believe that each team is able to have a "Franchise Player" that is able to make crazy amounts of money. The contract this player signs doesn't go against the teams salary cap. I think this has potential in the NHL formula because there is not that many players of superstar status in the NHL, but enough for one player like that per team.
 

Members online

Your TTP Wallet

Tokens
0
Dirty Money
0
TTP Dollars
$0
Top