Bettman wanted to expand the game into non-hockey markets. Fine. Then when those franchises struggle he points the finger at the players as to the biggest reason why and locks them out.
It's going to take time and commitment to turn a non-traditional market into a good one for hockey. It's not the players fault that people in Phoenix just don't want to watch hockey that much. Right out of the gate owners of franchises in Detroit, Toronto, New York, etc have a HUGE advantage over those in places like Nashville and Phoenix.
It has to do with the history and popularity of the teams, the length of time hockey has been part of a culture in that market, and also the strength of the Canadian dollar. The biggest reasons for the economic disparity has nothing to do with the percentage of revenue allocated to paying players.
Bettman apparently doesn't have the skills or the will to get his owners to share more revenue and actually address the economic disparity, instead he goes after the players because it's easier and something all his owners can agree on.
Unfortunately his spineless strategy is terrible for the fans and ultimately for the NHL.
If you want to get technical, it is only an option for the union. Even if they exercise it, their average share for the life of the new CBA will certainly be lower than 57%. Also, the definition of the hockey related revenue is being changed, so the players would get 57% of the lesser total, which would be a defacto decrease in salary. Not to mention the fact, that the current system was put in place by the NHL, who used the last lockout to roll over the players union and force them to accept this CBA. If you listened to Bettman speeches then, the expiring CBA was going to set he economic house of hockey in order. And now the system they devised is suddenly favoring the players? FYI, average share of wages, salaries etc. in all the other industries of American economy is near 70%. So the owners are already getting a good deal.
What it amounts to is that the league appears to try to shake down the players at the end of each CBA period for as much as they can get away with. And lock them out if they resist. Rinse, lather, repeat every 4-5 years.
Personally, I resent their bully tactics that result in my loss of enjoyment of my favorite sport.
Someone needs to lock that Minime out. It would be the third lockout under him, no way Fehr and the NHLPA will dance like he wants them to do.
The owners got exactly what they wanted and now they will lockout their players for getting what they wanted? Talk about a big FU to the fans, Bettman you are the biggest disgrace this sport has ever seen resign already!
Edit: in all seriousness, that's a tough question. I honestly don't know if I have one at this point. There have been players that I've enjoyed outside of the Wings but they always seem to turn out to be assholes, whiners, or political martyrs.
im sorry for opening an new topic. i just wanted to introduce myself. i am new in this forum. im glad to be part of the red wings fan base.
im 29 years old and play hockey by myself for more than 20 years. since i was a child and i could remember im a wings fan! my favorite player was steve yzerman. thats why i wear the #19 for 20 years now.
i played in some higher and lower leagues in germany and im a coach for young kids too.
i follow nearly all news and when possible, games by internet or espn america.
thats about me. im sorry if my english isnt very good.
The purpose of the salary cap was to encourage parity. It succeeded in this for a few seasons. Now it is ruining the NHL. The cap is giant, and contracts have become absurdly inflated as a result. Teams almost always have the cap space to re-sign their UFAs, so few big-name players ever hit the open market; as a result, those who do go to the open market are given gigantic, ridiculous contracts. What's more, the low-budget teams--those teams to whom the cap was meant to give a legitimate shot at winning--must now dole out ridiculous contracts to remain above the salary floor. Hilarious.
This all needs to be dealt with in the CBA. The cap needs to be fixed or reduced, and contract length needs to be limited. I think that eight years is a decent number, or perhaps less.
We haven't signed any big names since Hossa because we didn't have the cap space to sign any free agents.
Suter/Parise didn't chose Detroit because it's a bad situation, they chose Minnesota because they wanted to play in Minnesota.
Holland is fine, he needs to spend his money wisely, we don't have any terrible contracts(Franzen is the worst, but he's not grossly overpaid in other words.) We aren't in a Calgary situation where we are against the cap. Holland can't make a move here just to please fans, he has to make the right moves. It's not about having a team that's good for one year, it's about having a team that is good for the long haul. We have prospects, we have cap space, we have very good pieces(Z+Dat+Kron+Howard) this is not a bad time for the Red Wings.
I'd bite the bullet and say listen, we're already handcuffed as it is. Give us an answer tomorrow by noon or we need to go in a different direction. If he REALLY wanted to play in Detroit, he'd say ok.
I live near Vancouver and this whining about the refs is sof****** annoying. It's all their team and fans do. They always brings up the Marchand punching Sedin incident and most of the fans are convinced that he didn't even get a penalty. He got two and ten with 1:30 left in the game. How much more should he have received? THe biggest problem is that it comes from the top with the coach and GM doing a lot of the complaining. The other things they always go on about is the officiating in the finals, but if you look at the penalties the Canucks had much more power play time and got away with a lot of stuff. Burrows got away with a bite that would normally be two games, and the next game he scored both goals including the ot winner.
Honestly, this team would BOTH make me happy AND piss me off....Detroit.
Obvious reason's why it would make me happy, but if they won the Cup then Holland will make ZERO changes in the off season and we'd be stuck with the same lazy players that waste my hard earned money during the regular season!
Wait, you'll be (partially) mad if they win the cup because then they won't make the changes you think they need. And presumably the reason you think they need to make changes is so that they win the cup. Your circular logic is making my head spin.
I just shake my head thinking about how the NHL lost an entire season to keep salaries in check. Now the Cap is going from 39 mil to 72 mil in a span of 7 years.
Exactly. It's obvious that the hard cap is not working. Sure, there is more parity among the league, but these inflated contracts are getting out of hand. A soft cap with a luxury tax is by far the best alternative to just completely removing the cap altogether (of which I am in favor).