EHM The Blue Line

Thansk Batdad I haven't thought about it.

Already one year today that the Lokomotiv plane crashed and killed 44 people.

The Bruins front office is keeping active despite the impending lockout. A week or so ago they signed Brad Marchand to a 4 year deal and I just read today that they re-signed Tyler Seguin to a 6 year deal. They're locking up our young talent! Love it!

Nice deal for Seguin and Marchand too! Good job by the Bruins.

Very nice indeed! Seguin has come on leaps and bounds the past season. As has Marchand.

So here we go again! The press seems fairly optimistic that the lockout will be resolved in time for some sort competition this season. Hopefully they're correct and it won't be as bad as last time's lockout.

To be honest, I hope this is far worse than last time.

At the rate we're going, every new CBA is gonna be kicked off with a lockout, simply because these idiots can't negotiate their way out of a wet paper bag. I think these guys need to be dumped out on the street, servicing homeless guys for crack, and we need something to finally trigger that. Hopefully this lockout will get out of hand and childish enough to do that.

I have no sympathy for the players...millionaires trying to tell their bosses how to run things (why do they think they can tell their bosses how to be bosses!)

If the game imploded the owners would be fine! They have other businesses! They'd still make many millions per year (though they'll likely say they're losing 50 million because they used to make 80 million a year and now they only make 30!)

The players life if the game imploded...the vast majority would be lucky to ever make more than $100,000 in one year (many would be lucky to make half that); I’ve heard the players argument that they only have a limited time in hockey – why do they think they deserve a lifetime of money in just a few years? Because they play hockey?

They could cut in half all ticket/souvenir prices and things would still be ridiculously expensive...

If they “paid for themselves” maybe I wouldn't care, but in almost every market they receive huge subsidies (here in Edmonton owner Daryl Katz wants the taxpayers to pay 380 of the 480 million to build the new rink plus pay Katz 6 million a year to operate it, and all Katz wants in return is ownership of the arena and 100% of all money made in all events!!!)

I used to be so passionate about hockey...don't change core rules, must keep teams in Canada/hockey markets, etc....Now I feel the opposite: Bettman's desire to have teams in non-hockey markets for decades has eroded such passion in me - if so many cities that don't belong can have teams, who cares if Edmonton has a team (Quebec still doesn't and should!)...and the excessive TV Time Outs and oversized equipment and composite sticks etc has eroded my passion about the game's purity, and so now I think they should figure out the % that goalies are "bigger" nowadays and make the nets that much bigger too (I can't imagine even considering the idea in my youth)...this would fix a lot IMO as goalies would actually have to move around and make saves!! And while they're at it, sacrifice the dollars and make the rinks bigger!!! But I can't see it happening...everyone is their own special interest group, and the only thing they all agree on is greed is good...the NHL game hasn’t interested me much in many years, and I won’t really miss it

And a final thought to my rant...Bettman (and others!) seem to think the game is better because pretty much every year they have a different winner...There's only two explanations for this IMO: either you're manipulating everything so it's "fair" (like you do when toddlers play a game) and/or you've watered things down so much there's no real opportunity for talent to play together - NHL hockey has sucked for a long time now IMO because it's now a manipulated entity that exists only to make money! NHL hockey used to be a great game to watch, but now it's "entertainment" that I way too frequently don't find the least bit entertaining/interesting...


End of old man rant...I think I need a nap now

This is Kasparaitis as usual. Both side are a bunch of kids whining. Fourth lock-out in the Buttman era, what the hell is everyone waiting to kick that guy off his chair? What's worse in this is since 4-5 days the owner keep signing their players at 5-6 years deal with a ridiculous amount of millions. Both side look completely stupid doing that. They are suppose to be agains't each other, still they are giving them a useless amount of millions ( Lucic 6 millions per year what the hell ) and the players are like "Hell yeah! more money! Oh and I can't agree with you boss, I want 24% of the share not 19%."

philou21 wrote:and the players are like "Hell yeah! more money! Oh and I can't agree with you boss, I want 24% of the share not 19%."

And the players actually want more than 50% of the share!

nino33 wrote:And a final thought to my rant...Bettman (and others!) seem to think the game is better because pretty much every year they have a different winner...There's only two explanations for this IMO: either you're manipulating everything so it's "fair" (like you do when toddlers play a game) and/or you've watered things down so much there's no real opportunity for talent to play together - NHL hockey has sucked for a long time now IMO because it's now a manipulated entity that exists only to make money! NHL hockey used to be a great game to watch, but now it's "entertainment" that I way too frequently don't find the least bit entertaining/interesting...

I agree. Since the last lockout, this league has felt "engineered" and fake. In fact, it's the one thing that irks me the most about Bettman - he doesn't seem to have a care in the world for hockey, he's simply trying to create a profitable entertainment product. The scary thing about that is the enormous potential to sell-out, like engineering goals, or diversity in league champions.

We really need a hockey guy in charge; Someone with a personal connection to the sport. We've seen enough from the fat-cat businessmen.

My hope is it goes on long enough that multiple NHL teams fold...but it's likely wishful thinking

If they skip the year completely, you can be sure Phoenix won't last long.

Very true post, nino!

nino33 wrote:I have no sympathy for the players...millionaires trying to tell their bosses how to run things (why do they think they can tell their bosses how to be bosses!)

If the game imploded the owners would be fine! They have other businesses! They'd still make many millions per year (though they'll likely say they're losing 50 million because they used to make 80 million a year and now they only make 30!)

The players life if the game imploded...the vast majority would be lucky to ever make more than $100,000 in one year (many would be lucky to make half that); I’ve heard the players argument that they only have a limited time in hockey – why do they think they deserve a lifetime of money in just a few years? Because they play hockey?

They could cut in half all ticket/souvenir prices and things would still be ridiculously expensive...

If they “paid for themselves” maybe I wouldn't care, but in almost every market they receive huge subsidies (here in Edmonton owner Daryl Katz wants the taxpayers to pay 380 of the 480 million to build the new rink plus pay Katz 6 million a year to operate it, and all Katz wants in return is ownership of the arena and 100% of all money made in all events!!!)

I used to be so passionate about hockey...don't change core rules, must keep teams in Canada/hockey markets, etc....Now I feel the opposite: Bettman's desire to have teams in non-hockey markets for decades has eroded such passion in me - if so many cities that don't belong can have teams, who cares if Edmonton has a team (Quebec still doesn't and should!)...and the excessive TV Time Outs and oversized equipment and composite sticks etc has eroded my passion about the game's purity, and so now I think they should figure out the % that goalies are "bigger" nowadays and make the nets that much bigger too (I can't imagine even considering the idea in my youth)...this would fix a lot IMO as goalies would actually have to move around and make saves!! And while they're at it, sacrifice the dollars and make the rinks bigger!!! But I can't see it happening...everyone is their own special interest group, and the only thing they all agree on is greed is good...the NHL game hasn’t interested me much in many years, and I won’t really miss it

And a final thought to my rant...Bettman (and others!) seem to think the game is better because pretty much every year they have a different winner...There's only two explanations for this IMO: either you're manipulating everything so it's "fair" (like you do when toddlers play a game) and/or you've watered things down so much there's no real opportunity for talent to play together - NHL hockey has sucked for a long time now IMO because it's now a manipulated entity that exists only to make money! NHL hockey used to be a great game to watch, but now it's "entertainment" that I way too frequently don't find the least bit entertaining/interesting...


End of old man rant...I think I need a nap now

What he said..... in spades!!!!!!

It's kind of cool to watch the game highlights of Ovechkin and Malkin in Russia. Is there any way to watch the games over here (online)?

It's so boring on TV and on the internet without any news of hockey. Guess I'll watch closely the QJMHL, with all those young guns sent down the show will be good probably. Instead of seeing my 1 Habs game at 130$ a ticket I'm gonna go watch the Cataractes for 30$ a game!

Well.

After this, I'm probably officially done with the NHL, despite my love for the Habs.

From scanning the posts thus far, I may be in a minority here, but I have to agree with the players. They, IMO, *have* offered to take a cut in their portion of the income, but that's not enough for the owners, they want even more of the record-high income they're making... greedy buggers. Do they not realise that without the players they have no product?

I read something that makes sense, too, regards why Phoenix hasn't yet been moved: money-losing teams are good for the rich owners, in that it keeps the salary cap down, meaning they can spend less on players and keep more of their income... in this light, Atlanta-to-Winnipeg makes the most sense if you consider that with their tiny arena, regardless of how popular the Jets get, their income isn't going to be all *that* horribly huge...

As for Buttman - why do they keep him? Because he's doing exactly what the owners need him to do: be the lightning rod for all the rage from the fans. Bettman is the face, so all the rage goes against him, when he's only doing what the (rich) owners want him to do.

Just saw a thing in the paper that the Oilers' owners are talking about potentially moving to Seattle...

Bleh. Sod the NHL, I hope this lockout lasts into next season too... bring back the WHA! And in the meantime, I can get my hockey fix on KHL and WHL!

XenHL wrote:Do they not realise that without the players they have no product?

I think maybe the problem is NHL owners make pretty much all their money outside of hockey...Oiler's owner Katz is apparently worth 2 billion (owning 1800 drugstores and Canada's only mail order pharmacy business)...I'm not sure NHL owners really "need" the hockey money at all

I can't ever side with professional athletes anymore...they make to much money for me to care anymore what their complaints are...IMO the product is and always will be the game, not the players

I think you'd find the players are completely supportive of any money losing franchises too, because it's jobs they'd otherwise not have - if the house of cards was to tumble down a lot of player jobs would be lost

I find it hard to have sympathy with anybody. Regardless of the outcome of the CBA, the owners, NHL and players will all make heaps of cash at the expense of the fans. It seems like the sports equivalent of bankers' bonuses...

Note I didn't say I sympathise - I said I agree with them. There's a difference.

I'm not sure about the owners not needing the income... players have other options to play (see players heading to Europe, AHL, etc), owners can't sell tickets to an empty arena.

As for the money-losing teams, no, I'd say it's exactly the opposite of players' interests - salary cap is based on average income of all teams; the more teams make, the higher the cap is - the more players can get paid.

In the end though, I guess my view is opposite yours, nino... in the sense that I don't care how much someone makes, what's just is just and what is unjust is unjust. It's not any really different than if we get $20, how to split it? You offer to take 8 instead of 10, and I say no, I want 15 or I'll punch you.

XenHL wrote:in the sense that I don't care how much someone makes, what's just is just and what is unjust is unjust. It's not any really different than if we get $20, how to split it? You offer to take 8 instead of 10, and I say no, I want 15 or I'll punch you.

I agree with what you say - it's all economies of scale just like all other sports and also actors, musicians, etc. I'm sure if I were an NHL player then I'd want a fair share and I can't blame them for this. On the other hand, I feel that as the fans ultimately finance the sport (sponsorship aside - besides, the value of sponsorship depends on how many fans will see it and whether they'll buy their products, etc) they don't deserve this treatment. When the average salary in the UK is something like £22k, it is hard to sympathise with players when they are arguing over whether they get paid £5m a year or £5.5m a year...

During the last lockout, I sided with ownership because I thought that the NHL did need a salary cap. I felt that something needed to be done about the escalating player salaries. This time, I'm siding with the players. Despite the salary cap, the teams keep trying to find a way around the cap and keep signing players to crazy contracts. They keep setting the market higher than it should be by giving star money to players that are just good. And the team owners (and their horrible commissioner) seem intent on keeping teams in markets that just aren't viable locations for NHL level hockey. Many of these places would be great candidates for minor league teams but they just can't justify having an NHL team there. On top of all that, the owners went into the CBA discussions this summer with the intention of having a lockout. They weren't even trying to resolve this so that the season could start on time. To me, this is all on them.

XenHL wrote: I'm not sure about the owners not needing the income... players have other options to play (see players heading to Europe, AHL, etc), owners can't sell tickets to an empty arena

For those owners that own the arena hockey would be only about 50 nights a year…wouldn't they book in concerts/etc? Plus they’re not paying 50+ million in player salaries plus operating costs…

XenHL wrote:As for the money-losing teams, no, I'd say it's exactly the opposite of players' interests - salary cap is based on average income of all teams; the more teams make, the higher the cap is - the more players can get paid.

If they folded the bottom 10 teams, wouldn’t hundreds of players lose jobs and never play hockey again? Those players won’t be making more! (and the billionaire owners would become billionaire former owners)

XenHL wrote:bring back the WHA!

Actually it was the WHA that caused/started the salary escalations! And when the WHA finally merged/folded in 1979, many player jobs were lost

XenHL wrote:It's not any really different than if we get $20, how to split it? You offer to take 8 instead of 10, and I say no, I want 15 or I'll punch you.

Hmmm…the players already get (and are trying to keep) more than half the gross revenues (while paying for none of the operational costs) – who’s demanding $15 or they’ll get violent? Seems the players are making $11 while paying none of the costs that earned the $20
ALSO relevant IMO is "it’s a boss/employee relationship, not a partnership!" (that’s why players of money losing clubs never have their salaries reduced, players never put in money for a new arena/plane/etc)


Just to be clear, I don’t sympathize with anyone or agree with anyone…but IMO there’s nothing fair and just about professional sports


Regards

archibalduk wrote:I find it hard to have sympathy with anybody. Regardless of the outcome of the CBA, the owners, NHL and players will all make heaps of cash at the expense of the fans. It seems like the sports equivalent of bankers' bonuses...

archibalduk wrote:When the average salary in the UK is something like £22k, it is hard to sympathise with players when they are arguing over whether they get paid £5m a year or £5.5m a year...

this, every single day of the year. why does earning a unnecessarily high amount of money automatically make you think you're entitled to more? i know it's easy to sit here and say this but i'd be genuinely embarrassed to be earning $5m a year and then complaining that i'm not earning $5.5m, when you consider that there's something like three billion people living below the poverty line (< $2.50 a day = $912.5 a year! that's less than Ovechkin makes in an hour). they have no perspective, it's sad =(. and the fans are the ones paying for it with too-high ticket prices and, probably, a lockout to boot. so yeah i agree with pretty much everything nino has said.

timmy_t wrote:It's kind of cool to watch the game highlights of Ovechkin and Malkin in Russia. Is there any way to watch the games over here (online)?

i'd also like to know if this is possible. does anyone know if AHL games be televised seeing as the broadcasters don't have any NHL games to follow?