cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 http://www.thestar.com/sports/article/570634 According to Paul Kelly, who was interviewed by Ron MacLean, prior to the HNIC broadcast of the Montreal - Ottawa game Saturday. Kelly kind of took a swipe at the NHL and the ASG by saying that the representation that matters is that each of the 30 Clubs has a player representative involved. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
taxidermistWINGSfan 0 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 ok i dont follow cap or any of that because it realy doesnt interest me... but im trying to understand the article. what i gather is the players are going to vote on weather or not the like the cap and weather or not it should stay or go back to how it was prior to the cap? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MacK_Attack 108 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 (edited) ok i dont follow cap or any of that because it realy doesnt interest me... but im trying to understand the article. what i gather is the players are going to vote on weather or not the like the cap and weather or not it should stay or go back to how it was prior to the cap? They're voting to decide whether or not to re-open CBA negotiations before next season. The players won't be able get rid of the cap, it's here to stay. It's a moot point, though. They're definitely not going to re-open negotiations. Edited January 18, 2009 by MacK_Attack Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 http://www.cbc.ca/sports/ondemand/?playlis...eoId=1002942918 Last night's Kelly - MacLean interview. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 (edited) http://www.cbc.ca/sports/ondemand/?playlis...eoId=1002942918 Last night's Kelly - MacLean interview. Edit: Sorry, I got a "flood control" error message. Double post. Edited January 18, 2009 by cusimano_brothers Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
IILeiBlazeII 15 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 Call me crazy... but I'd rather we have another year-long lockout than keep the system we're in right now. The new CBA is killing teams like Phoenix, denying them a slice of the pie because they can't hit numbers, and teams like Detroit are going to be loosing homegrown talent because the cap is going to shrink. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I'll have to dig into my closet for my "No Hockey League - What the Puck?" shirt, methinks. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Chelios57 31 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 Here's my two cents: the cap is a really good way to run the league, but shrinking the cap is not a good thing at all. (What if all teams had their salaries maxed out at 56.7 for 3 years because that's the cap?) It's stupid to be able to shrink the cap. Also my third cent: don't screw teams out of revenue sharing (i.e. Phoenix). Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Konnan511 1,736 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 Call me crazy... but I'd rather we have another year-long lockout than keep the system we're in right now. The new CBA is killing teams like Phoenix, denying them a slice of the pie because they can't hit numbers, and teams like Detroit are going to be loosing homegrown talent because the cap is going to shrink. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I'll have to dig into my closet for my "No Hockey League - What the Puck?" shirt, methinks. You're crazy on so many levels. The first lockout nearly killed the NHL, another lockout a few years later will kill the NHL. There will not be another lockout, just because the CBA is re-opened doesn't mean they are saying let's keep everything the same. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
YoungGuns1340 1 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 Call me crazy... but I'd rather we have another year-long lockout than keep the system we're in right now. The new CBA is killing teams like Phoenix, denying them a slice of the pie because they can't hit numbers, and teams like Detroit are going to be loosing homegrown talent because the cap is going to shrink. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I'll have to dig into my closet for my "No Hockey League - What the Puck?" shirt, methinks. Phoenix and other small market teams get plenty of undue help as it stands. If they can't cut it despite being supported by big market teams, they shouldn't have a franchise. As far as I'm concerned, the cap is a good thing. The NHL is much more competitive than it was in the past, and no one gets dogged for "buying cups." On top of that, NHL organizations now put more effort into getting the best bang for their buck, and its shown up on the ice. Being a complete player is becoming more and more a staple for teams, and its only improved the athleticism of guys across the board. The only problem I have is that lowering the cap is going to result in a ridiculous disparity between salaries across the board for pre- and post-cap salaries, which could have an affect on the lockerroom. Nobody wants to know that Brian Campbell is being paid nearly 8M a season while a "max out" price for a guy like Patrick Kane is 5M. The NHL should re-instate the CBA as is, but should push for another roll-back in prices. Maybe not a 24% roll-back, but a 10-15% roll-back would be helpful and alleviate some of the chaos thats going to come with the cap decrease. Its not like teams with payrolls of 50M+ can just ship off a few large contracts to teams with 20M in cap space. The only teams that have the cap space to take advantage of valuable players coming via cheap trade don't have the organizational money to do it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MacK_Attack 108 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 Even if the the 'PA for some reason decided to re-open negotiations, there's a "gentlemen's agreement" between the two sides that they would continue to play under the terms of the old CBA until a new one is agreed upon. Besides, any new CBA would merely be a tinkered version of the current one. Nothing drastic like last time. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BlakChamber 8 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 Call me crazy... but I'd rather we have another year-long lockout than keep the system we're in right now. The new CBA is killing teams like Phoenix, denying them a slice of the pie because they can't hit numbers, and teams like Detroit are going to be loosing homegrown talent because the cap is going to shrink. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I'll have to dig into my closet for my "No Hockey League - What the Puck?" shirt, methinks. You're crazy. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joshy207 156 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 Here's my two cents: the cap is a really good way to run the league, but shrinking the cap is not a good thing at all. (What if all teams had their salaries maxed out at 56.7 for 3 years because that's the cap?) It's stupid to be able to shrink the cap. Also my third cent: don't screw teams out of revenue sharing (i.e. Phoenix). There's a reason the cap is going to drop next year... the same reason the cap has risen for the past few years. The salary cap is (I believe) 54% of the league's total revenues. That number is guaranteed to the players... nothing more and nothing less. So, the more money the league makes, the more the players get, but if revenues drop, so does the cap. Always the same 54% of total revenues though. It's something that the league's GMs need to think about when they're dropping big bucks on players, especially over long-term contracts. YoungGuns--I agree with most of your post, specifically on Phoenix and the value in having the cap. However, to your point about Campbell and Kane, GMs have to learn that they can't afford to overpay any players because it'll cost them other assets in the long run. Detroit, for example, is in a potential jam this summer with Zetterberg, Franzen, and Hossa all reaching UFA status. If one of these guys is lost--Franzen or especially Zetterberg--for a million or two per year, some people might look at Filppula's $3M, Cleary at $2.8M, and Stuart getting $3.75M and say "these guys might be getting a little more than they should be. Had they been signed for less, he'd still be here." That's just a small example, other teams are way more guilty than Detroit. Also, I think if the owners went to the table and asked for another rollback, the PA would have a conniption. They'll say it's not the players' fault that the owners have been fiscally irresponsible AGAIN. And I'd have to agree with them... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joshy207 156 Report post Posted January 18, 2009 Call me crazy... but I'd rather we have another year-long lockout than keep the system we're in right now. The new CBA is killing teams like Phoenix, denying them a slice of the pie because they can't hit numbers, and teams like Detroit are going to be loosing homegrown talent because the cap is going to shrink. Stupid, stupid, stupid. I'll have to dig into my closet for my "No Hockey League - What the Puck?" shirt, methinks. Dude, you can kiss the whole NHL goodbye then. Had the lockout gone on longer than it did, or if the cap had not been put in place, the league would be on the verge of falling apart if it wasn't already dead. The teams and the league are businesses, and businesses can't survive if they are not profitable. Look at the WHA in the 70s if you think a league can survive with some of its franchises hemmorhaging money. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
WingNut 25 5 Report post Posted January 19, 2009 I sincerely hope the NHLPA members vote to opt out of the current CBA and open negotiations on a new system. The lowering of the cap is utterly and totally ridiculous. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
toby91_ca 620 Report post Posted January 19, 2009 The lowering of the cap is utterly and totally ridiculous. Please explain. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
CenterIce 83 Report post Posted January 19, 2009 Even if the the 'PA for some reason decided to re-open negotiations, there's a "gentlemen's agreement" between the two sides that they would continue to play under the terms of the old CBA until a new one is agreed upon. Besides, any new CBA would merely be a tinkered version of the current one. Nothing drastic like last time. Any source on this? I hope it to be true, but I would believe it only if I see it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MacK_Attack 108 Report post Posted January 19, 2009 Any source on this? I hope it to be true, but I would believe it only if I see it. Bill Daly was on the radio a couple months ago and said the league would not lock the players out if they chose to re-open the CBA, and Paul Kelly has always said that the players won't strike. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
joshy207 156 Report post Posted January 19, 2009 The lowering of the cap is utterly and totally ridiculous. There's a reason the cap is going to drop next year... the same reason the cap has risen for the past few years. The salary cap is (I believe) 54% of the league's total revenues. That number is guaranteed to the players... nothing more and nothing less. So, the more money the league makes, the more the players get, but if revenues drop, so does the cap. Always the same 54% of total revenues though. (From my post, 2 before yours.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lets go pavel 2 Report post Posted January 23, 2009 (edited) Players voted not to re-open CBA ... link Edited January 23, 2009 by lets go pavel Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cusimano_brothers 1,655 Report post Posted January 24, 2009 In a Nutshell Ouch! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jwo 7 Report post Posted January 25, 2009 Something needs to be done about how owners can buy tickets up to make ends meat from the revenue sharing. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
