The salary floor is driving teams bankrupt. That is the key part of the system introduced in the last CBA. The rollback offset some of those losses for teams at the bottom and put a poop load of money in MLSE's bank account.
- Canada Cup

Salary floor is there for the NHLPA, not the owners.

They won't give it up.

Sorry

Salary floor is there for the NHLPA, not the owners.

They won't give it up.

Sorry
- Atomic Wedgie

Nice location

Salary floor is there for the NHLPA, not the owners.

They won't give it up.

Sorry
- Atomic Wedgie

What's your point? Do you think the players were pushing for a cap and floor in the last CBA? The owners crushed the union and got the system they wanted. That system is deeply flawed and we will get lockouts at the end of every CBA.

His name is Lynch, Marshawn Lynch.
- Scooby_Doo

Both backs had 100+ yards today.

Why are you all trying to argue with MJL? He is living in a fantasy world. No point in arguing with him when he just sees what he wants to see.

What's your point? Do you think the players were pushing for a cap and floor in the last CBA? The owners crushed the union and got the system they wanted. That system is deeply flawed and we will get lockouts at the end of every CBA.
- Canada Cup

Maybe Gary is using this job as a spring board to his ultimate job. Replacing Adam West as the mayor of Quahog(sp)

Both backs had 100+ yards today.
- LeftCoaster

Arizona had what 9 turnovers?

And do you realize why player salaries have grown so much? Whose fault is that? So were again back to mismanagement. Players don't think they're immune when things go wrong. They've agreed to take a lesser share of revenue going forward. Which is going to cost them Millions, if not billions.They won't even have their current contracts honored in full at this point. So tell me how are they wanting to have it all? They gave in the last CBA, and they're giving to the League again! But let's ignore that and pretend that doesn't exist.
Supporters of the NHL whine and complain when the players cry poor according to them. But are gullible beyond belief is stating that profits are non existent for NHL teams. Some of the NHL supporters should take a class in common sense.
- MJL

Pardon me if all this was rehashed earlier but it's been a few hours since i checked the board.

Players get 57% of revenue. They are an expense that is growing faster than the revenue (any expense over 50% will grow faster than the revenue, math 101). The owners got the best deal they could last CBA, that doesn't mean they got everything they wanted. The possibility of losing a second year was still there before the players signed the last CBA. If the owners had demanded a 50/50 split they would've lost a second year.

The players would not have lost any money in actual dollars if they would've taken the deal earlier in the offseason with the one year transition. Using the growth rate the NHL had been seeing, the cap in year 2 would be the same or exceeding the cap from last year so they would've lose ZERO actual dollars. The fact that that the players have no lost upwards of 500 million dollars in salary is entirely on the players. The math doesn't support what the players want, even if the players accepted the make whole offer today and started playing in 2 weeks, they are still down 100's of millions of dollars. The players are down alot of revenue but also have lost 57% of expenses (player salaries). The teams that weren't making money are actually ahead in this scenerio. Hockey fans lose, players lose, the owners other than the big 3 profitable teams, haven't really lost that much.

The bottom line that everyone should take from the last CBA is that the owners, as a collective, know what's better on the money issues, than the players. The cap was the best thing that happened to hockey in the last 20 years. The players had to lose an entire year's worth of salary and a salary rollback because they couldn't understand that. The league revenues thrived because of that but obviously they hadn't corrected everything. They have the emotional maturity of a 12 year old and i would tell them that to their faces to if i could. Bring a freaking economic expert to the table and have him explain it to the NHLPA because obviously they aren't smart enough to see beyond their egos.

It's one thing to stand up for yourself but it's another just cost yourself and your bosses money because you feel slighted. Now, everyone loses because of the NHLPA.

Common sense is highly overrated. It was once common sense that the earth was flat. It was once common sense that leeches could cure most ills. It was once common sense that you could tell that someone was a witch by trying to drown them. Before the housing market crash it was common sense that real estate would always go up. Many people believe that vaccinations only cause people to get sick and have no benefit. Many people believe it's common sense that the earth is only 5000 years old.

I could go on for a long time but the point is that common sense is most often wrong. Bring me what you know, not what you think you know because you think you are smarter than everyone else.

Why are you all trying to argue with MJL? He is living in a fantasy world. No point in arguing with him when he just sees what he wants to see.
- niedermayer27

Agreed, he would likely spend days/weeks arguing the glass half full, half empty theory.
Pretty obvious he is pro NHLPA, (he would argue that too),.
There is nothing wrong with him having an opinion, just pi$$es me off how everyone else is wrong if they disagree.
And the fact most of his posts end with a question to be answered.
Ya, I hope everyone ignores his biased comments and not respond and feed the one sided monster.

So Malkin and Ovechkin don't have anything to do with making the NHL the best Hockey in North America? Seriously? I know you're smarter then that.
- MJL

How wouldn't the NHL not be the best hockey in North America if Malkin and Ovechkin were still in Russia? Seriously?

The absolute only way that your argument holds any water,is if Ovechkin and Malkin were playing in a competing league in NA. There is no such league, ergo your argument holds no water.

If Malkin and Ovechkin had stayed in Russia (and despite protests the contrary they will run back over here as fast as they can get a plane ticket) the NHL would still exist and still have the best talent in North America. I really think that's the part your missing completely. The NHL doesn't have to have the best talent in the world, it just has to have the best talent in NA. It will have that regardless. If you have an argument where having Ovechkin and Malkin not in NA makes them the NHL the second best league in NA, i'd be happy to hear it because so far I haven't heard an argument for it.

Russians care about the KHL, the Germans care about the German league, the Swiss about the Swiss league, the Americans/Canadians only care about the NHL. The only time the US fans care about players in Russia is during Worlds or the Olympics.

Arizona had what 9 turnovers?
- Bieksa#3

Yup...it was ugly on their part. Did not bring their A game for sure.

Pardon me if all this was rehashed earlier but it's been a few hours since i checked the board.

Players get 57% of revenue. They are an expense that is growing faster than the revenue (any expense over 50% will grow faster than the revenue, math 101). The owners got the best deal they could last CBA, that doesn't mean they got everything they wanted. The possibility of losing a second year was still there before the players signed the last CBA. If the owners had demanded a 50/50 split they would've lost a second year.

The players would not have lost any money in actual dollars if they would've taken the deal earlier in the offseason with the one year transition. Using the growth rate the NHL had been seeing, the cap in year 2 would be the same or exceeding the cap from last year so they would've lose ZERO actual dollars. The fact that that the players have no lost upwards of 500 million dollars in salary is entirely on the players. The math doesn't support what the players want, even if the players accepted the make whole offer today and started playing in 2 weeks, they are still down 100's of millions of dollars. The players are down alot of revenue but also have lost 57% of expenses (player salaries). The teams that weren't making money are actually ahead in this scenerio. Hockey fans lose, players lose, the owners other than the big 3 profitable teams, haven't really lost that much.

The bottom line that everyone should take from the last CBA is that the owners, as a collective, know what's better on the money issues, than the players. The cap was the best thing that happened to hockey in the last 20 years. The players had to lose an entire year's worth of salary and a salary rollback because they couldn't understand that. The league revenues thrived because of that but obviously they hadn't corrected everything. They have the emotional maturity of a 12 year old and i would tell them that to their faces to if i could. Bring a freaking economic expert to the table and have him explain it to the NHLPA because obviously they aren't smart enough to see beyond their egos.

It's one thing to stand up for yourself but it's another just cost yourself and your bosses money because you feel slighted. Now, everyone loses because of the NHLPA.

Common sense is highly overrated. It was once common sense that the earth was flat. It was once common sense that leeches could cure most ills. It was once common sense that you could tell that someone was a witch by trying to drown them. Before the housing market crash it was common sense that real estate would always go up. Many people believe that vaccinations only cause people to get sick and have no benefit. Many people believe it's common sense that the earth is only 5000 years old.

I could go on for a long time but the point is that common sense is most often wrong. Bring me what you know, not what you think you know because you think you are smarter than everyone else.
- Flyers_01

I think you need to take another look at the NHL original take it or leave it offer and tell us the players wouldn't have lost money. 24% rollback with no deferred money, 48-52 split on revenue or was is 47-53?

The owners have said from the beginning that they would insist on five year contract limits and the players have said from the start that they are against that. They still are and will negotiate those once Gary gets over his little fit.
- Canada Cup

The players thought the same thing about the Salary Cap in 2004. Did Gary move off the cap even though it cost them a season? Given how that played out, who knew better how to grow the game, the owners or the NHLPA?

What's your point? Do you think the players were pushing for a cap and floor in the last CBA? The owners crushed the union and got the system they wanted. That system is deeply flawed and we will get lockouts at the end of every CBA.
- Canada Cup

The point is, you say it's Bettman's system, what THEY fought for, and then point to the very part of the CBA that's there for the PA as the culprit. The cap is what is stopped the NHL from absolutely hemorrhaging. The floor is what you're pointing to as killing teams. The cap is there for the owners. The floor for the PA.

He also saw that he could crush the union and assumed he could do it again and keep getting the players to make up for the losses created by that system. Why do you think they hate Fehr so much.
- Canada Cup

No question. That they tried to keep Fehr out of the room says it all. And why they again walked away from the negotiating table. They want the players to start questioning their leadership in an effort to destabilize the Union. For lack of a better term.

I think you need to take another look at the NHL original take it or leave it offer and tell us the players wouldn't have lost money. 24% rollback with no deferred money, 48-52 split on revenue or was is 47-53?
- Bieksa#3

I never said the original proposal, the original proposal I think everyone can agree was a lowball starting point. It was over a month ago, i'm pretty sure that the owners offered a 1 year transition. If it came across that I meant the players should've accepted the owners first proposal i apologize but I thought it was late October/Early november that the league moved to the 50/50 1 year transition period. If i'm incorrect about that, please let me know.

How wouldn't the NHL not be the best hockey in North America if Malkin and Ovechkin were still in Russia? Seriously?

The absolute only way that your argument holds any water,is if Ovechkin and Malkin were playing in a competing league in NA. There is no such league, ergo your argument holds no water.

If Malkin and Ovechkin had stayed in Russia (and despite protests the contrary they will run back over here as fast as they can get a plane ticket) the NHL would still exist and still have the best talent in North America. I really think that's the part your missing completely. The NHL doesn't have to have the best talent in the world, it just has to have the best talent in NA. It will have that regardless. If you have an argument where having Ovechkin and Malkin not in NA makes them the NHL the second best league in NA, i'd be happy to hear it because so far I haven't heard an argument for it.

Russians care about the KHL, the Germans care about the German league, the Swiss about the Swiss league, the Americans/Canadians only care about the NHL. The only time the US fans care about players in Russia is during Worlds or the Olympics.
- Flyers_01

Well said.
The NHL was around long before import players were injected.
And you can be 100% sure they would be fine without them.

The players thought the same thing about the Salary Cap in 2004. Did Gary move off the cap even though it cost them a season? Given how that played out, who knew better how to grow the game, the owners or the NHLPA?
- Flyers_01

Oh yeah, the owners grew the game. You're hilarious.

Last time I checked, all the marketing tools in the NHL are on the NHLPA side. Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Stamkos, Giroux, Brodeur, Price, etc. If these players don't play at elite levels and draw ridiculous amounts of attention then the league is nothing.

But, yeah, sure the owners did all the work. The salary cap saved hockey from crazy high contracts and floundering teams. Sure did. The cap is the reason that Phoenix made money, wait....I mean the cap is the reason Shane Doan got the 2.5 million contract he's worth...wait...

The owners fought tooth and nail to get this CBA last time and now they want to fight tooth and nail again. (frank) them. They'll get their way this time, as usual, and they'll gripe about it again 7-10 years from now and blame it on the players once again and you sorry suckers will lap it right up.

Oh yeah, the owners grew the game. You're hilarious.

Last time I checked, all the marketing tools in the NHL are on the NHLPA side. Crosby, Ovechkin, Malkin, Stamkos, Giroux, Brodeur, Price, etc. If these players don't play at elite levels and draw ridiculous amounts of attention then the league is nothing.

But, yeah, sure the owners did all the work. The salary cap saved hockey from crazy high contracts and floundering teams. Sure did. The cap is the reason that Phoenix made money, wait....I mean the cap is the reason Shane Doan got the 2.5 million contract he's worth...wait...

The owners fought tooth and nail to get this CBA last time and now they want to fight tooth and nail again. (frank) them. They'll get their way this time, as usual, and they'll gripe about it again 7-10 years from now and blame it on the players once again and you sorry suckers will lap it right up.
- trolleytracks

You lost all credibility with me when you included Carey Price in this list.

The players would not have lost any money in actual dollars if they would've taken the deal earlier in the offseason with the one year transition. Using the growth rate the NHL had been seeing, the cap in year 2 would be the same or exceeding the cap from last year so they would've lose ZERO actual dollars. The fact that that the players have no lost upwards of 500 million dollars in salary is entirely on the players. The math doesn't support what the players want, even if the players accepted the make whole offer today and started playing in 2 weeks, they are still down 100's of millions of dollars. The players are down alot of revenue but also have lost 57% of expenses (player salaries). The teams that weren't making money are actually ahead in this scenerio. Hockey fans lose, players lose, the owners other than the big 3 profitable teams, haven't really lost that much.


- Flyers_01

No question that the players are down over 500M in salary, that they've lost in the lockout. But I disagree that they would've lost zero actual dollars if they had taken the deal earlier in the off season. That was never going to happen in this CBA. They may not have taken a salary cut. And they wouldn't have lost as mich money due to the lockout. But going from 57% to 50% of revenue is going to cost them a ton of actual dollars. The players were willing to lose paychecks this year to fight the League. Right or wrong.

The bottom line that everyone should take from the last CBA is that the owners, as a collective, know what's better on the money issues, than the players. The cap was the best thing that happened to hockey in the last 20 years. The players had to lose an entire year's worth of salary and a salary rollback because they couldn't understand that. The league revenues thrived because of that but obviously they hadn't corrected everything. They have the emotional maturity of a 12 year old and i would tell them that to their faces to if i could. Bring a freaking economic expert to the table and have him explain it to the NHLPA because obviously they aren't smart enough to see beyond their egos.


- Flyers_01

If the Owner's know what's better on the money issues, we wouldn't be in this mess. The Owner's certainly know what is better for them on the money issues. I also don't know that the Cap was the best thing to happen to Hockey in the last 20 years. You only see lockouts in League's that have a salary Cap. And I'm not denying that some type of spending control was needed. But it's double edged sword. League revenues thrived because of the Salary Cap? Am I reading that correctly? Because I doubt that. Saying that the players have the emotional maturity of a 12 year old, is something that a 12 year old would say. So good luck saying that to the players. You'd be making yourself look foolish. And you obviously overlook that the NHLPA has their own economic experts and advisers.

It's one thing to stand up for yourself but it's another just cost yourself and your bosses money because you feel slighted. Now, everyone loses because of the NHLPA.


- Flyers_01

It's simply a biased comment to state that everyone loses because of the PA. When there is legitimate criticisms to be made towards both sides. And to single out the PA as the only cause of the lockout is to overlook the facts.

Common sense is highly overrated. It was once common sense that the earth was flat. It was once common sense that leeches could cure most ills. It was once common sense that you could tell that someone was a witch by trying to drown them. Before the housing market crash it was common sense that real estate would always go up. Many people believe that vaccinations only cause people to get sick and have no benefit. Many people believe it's common sense that the earth is only 5000 years old.

I could go on for a long time but the point is that common sense is most often wrong. Bring me what you know, not what you think you know because you think you are smarter than everyone else.
- Flyers_01

If you would use some common sense, you might come to some correct conclusions. Because you obviously overlook and or ignore the times when common sense came to the correct conclusion. But really what does that have to do with anything? Not much.

Well said.
The NHL was around long before import players were injected.
And you can be 100% sure they would be fine without them.
- sloppyseconds2

Let me add that the only reason 70-80% of the people know the names of 2 russian hockey players, no matter how talented, is because they play in North America and the NHL marketed them to death. How many people do you think can name 3 KHL stars outside of the NHL players other than die hard international hockey fans? Bill Meltzer ( shameless plug) could probably name half the rosters on the teams but your average hockey fan would be hard pressed to name even one KHL player. I am no Bill Meltzer and I am happy to read about Flyers prospects in Europe but I have no desire to follow them myself. My only interest in them is what they bring to the Flyers, not what they bring to their European teams.

First post on here but think it's worth it: visit the site below on Youtube.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRYvUUV20TU

This is a grassroots effort to send a message to the NHL and NHLPA with a commitment from fans to boycott the NHL if the lockout proceeds beyond 21 December. Yes, it is focused to hurt the owners but if you truly boycott everything NHL related it will send the message to the player when no-one shows up to their autograph appearance. Like them on Facebook and continue to spread the message. Show how the free market system is supposed to work.

You lost all credibility with me when you included Carey Price in this list.
- Emperor Filonius

and who is this Sidney Crosby girl everyone is mentioning? The next Miley Cyrus?

Yup...it was ugly on their part. Did not bring their A game for sure.
- LeftCoaster

Damn that was ugly!

How wouldn't the NHL not be the best hockey in North America if Malkin and Ovechkin were still in Russia? Seriously?

The absolute only way that your argument holds any water,is if Ovechkin and Malkin were playing in a competing league in NA. There is no such league, ergo your argument holds no water.\


- Flyers_01

Absolutely my argument hold water. I didn't say that the NHL wouldn't be the best hockey in North America if Malkin and Ovechkin were still in Russia. Only that Malkin, Ovechkin, and other star players contribute greatly to making the NHL the best hockey in North America.

Why is the NHL better Hockey then the AHL? Because there are better players in the NHL versus the AHL.

If Malkin and Ovechkin had stayed in Russia (and despite protests the contrary they will run back over here as fast as they can get a plane ticket) the NHL would still exist and still have the best talent in North America. I really think that's the part your missing completely. The NHL doesn't have to have the best talent in the world, it just has to have the best talent in NA. It will have that regardless. If you have an argument where having Ovechkin and Malkin not in NA makes them the NHL the second best league in NA, i'd be happy to hear it because so far I haven't heard an argument for it.


- Flyers_01

Again, I wasn't arguing that not having Ovechkin and Malkin in the NHL makes the NHL the second best League in NA. I was arguing that Malkin and Ovechkin contribute to the NHL being the best Hockey in NA. And I was not arguing that those two players were the sole reason why the NHL is the best hockey in NA. Pretty simple.