billsfanone Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 f em. If there was a demand for hockey, there would have been a resolution already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 f em. If there was a demand for hockey, there would have been a resolution already. 227337[/snapback] Not true. This is a cripple fight to the max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 I agree they are all overpaid, but we go and buy the $75 dollar tickets, $15 parking, $6 hotdogs and $6 beers to go and see the games. If we stopped going to the game until the prices became more reasonable it would all level itself out. Question: Did anyone have Sabres season tickets? How much did they cost and did that include parking? 227209[/snapback] F%^k 'em all. Better hockey in the minors anyway for about a fifth the price. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 F%^k 'em all. Better hockey in the minors anyway for about a fifth the price. 227456[/snapback] I'd say the best hockey right now is the Quebec Senior Mens Hockey League, or whatever they call it now. Lotsa fighting, wide open hockey. Brashear was playing there, until he got suspended for beating the absolute crap outta some minor league goon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 f em. If there was a demand for hockey, there would have been a resolution already. 227337[/snapback] That's the problem. There IS a demand. A Huge demand. (arenas sell out for regular season games). However, relatively speaking, (relative to the NFL, or MLB) that demand turns small again. This is what the players must realize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clayboy54 Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 No cap, the league should have profit sharing. 227261[/snapback] If they had profit sharing, most of the players would have to pay back their salaries and again some just to cover the losses. The NHL, not unlike soccer, is a second-rate sport in the US and will never command top dollar for its athletes. This is clearly a case of the "Peter Principle." The league has risen to the level of its incompetence. We have some real fun out here with the UHL, though. After a few years of playing the players get real jobs and are an asset to the community. Tickets start at $11 and the whole family can have a fun night out for a fair price. Reminds me of the old Bisons games at the Aud in the 60s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 I'd say the best hockey right now is the Quebec Senior Mens Hockey League, or whatever they call it now. Lotsa fighting, wide open hockey. Brashear was playing there, until he got suspended for beating the absolute crap outta some minor league goon. 227462[/snapback] That is the great thing about hockey --- you can go all the way down to the high school level and see a great game. The players only get lazy when they reach the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloWings Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 I'd say the best hockey right now is the Quebec Senior Mens Hockey League, or whatever they call it now. Lotsa fighting, wide open hockey. Brashear was playing there, until he got suspended for beating the absolute crap outta some minor league goon. 227462[/snapback] The college ranks aren't doing bad, either. I live in the Albany area and have season tickets to Union College hockey ($8 each!!) and follow the entire NCAA. They're all having a typical year, which is good, down-to-earth hockey. I don't miss hockey THAT much, except for on a Tuesday night when there's crap on regular TV and I miss the Sabres. The main problem with the NHL's finances is public interest. If there was enough, there would be a national TV contract bringing in a lot of money (a la the NFL). But there isn't, so they can't use the same cap model. I'm in favor of a cap, but the owners need to realize that they can't guarantee contracts anymore and stop paying gazillions to players that don't deserve that much. You need the cap to make things fair for the smaller markets. Having said that, it may be in their best interest to contract. The union won't want to hear that, though. The NHL doesn't need 32 teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkyMannn Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 Having said this, if there is a cap put in place, they better roll back ticket prices AND concession prices too to reflect the changes in the new CBA. 227188[/snapback] Heck YEAH!!! If these guys are shutting down hockey, and the owners saving money, I BETTER see some of that. Or screw them when they come back. And of course you won't see it. Didn't the Sabres drop ticket prices like $5/seat this year? Pretty lousy perk to the fans when they knew all along there won't be a season. I went to the December Amerks game @ HSBC. $125 for 8 tickets, parking, and free hot dog, popcorn, and pop. How do you beat that? The play quality was only slightly lower than NHL. Offensive creativity wasn't there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 I agree that no matter WHAT the revenues are, the players should get a pre-set and fixed percentage regardless. Again base it on the NFL model. And the NFL allocates ~67% of revenues for the cap. 227212[/snapback] In the NFL model there is NOT a fixed percentage for the cap but a range which varies based on gross fixed revenues and what invididual teams do in terms of total team salaries within another range. The cap total started at roughly 65% of gross designated revenues but has escalated to around 70%, The owners don't mind at all because a key for them is relative cost certainty (which even a moving cap within specified ranges comes close enough to giving them) and the fact that overall income is increasing by significant amounts. Add to that the owners have shifted income out of the designated gross revenues and into income streams they need not share with the players (for example lowering the gate at the Ralph by 5K from the designated revenue stream of general ticket sales and building more luxury seats for which they don't have to share the income) and NFL owners are making out like bandits under the market controls of the NFL system than they would make from a free-market system. In the end, the perfect outcome to me of this strike would actually be if it resulted in cutting out the middle-man between the hockey players and the fans, namely the owners. The owners are fairly redundant and not worth the hassle of their stupid deals with players abd the NOGOAL insanity of the league. If the players (who have gotten enough capital to be owners in some cases as seen by the Lemieux example) can figure out a method for divving up themselves and distributing their talent through the league and create a system for hiring team managers who keep their jobs because of producing good records and selling seats to customers, i could easily do without the owners. If there is one thing North America has its capital and the owners as sources of capital are simply more trouble to the game than they are worth. They can be replaced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tux of Borg Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 I think the owners have the upper hand here. Who the hell wants to see Satan play? Half the time he's on the ice just going through the motions. Drop the ticket prices and bring in the replacement players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted February 3, 2005 Share Posted February 3, 2005 The college ranks aren't doing bad, either. I live in the Albany area and have season tickets to Union College hockey ($8 each!!) and follow the entire NCAA. They're all having a typical year, which is good, down-to-earth hockey. I don't miss hockey THAT much, except for on a Tuesday night when there's crap on regular TV and I miss the Sabres. The main problem with the NHL's finances is public interest. If there was enough, there would be a national TV contract bringing in a lot of money (a la the NFL). But there isn't, so they can't use the same cap model. I'm in favor of a cap, but the owners need to realize that they can't guarantee contracts anymore and stop paying gazillions to players that don't deserve that much. You need the cap to make things fair for the smaller markets. Having said that, it may be in their best interest to contract. The union won't want to hear that, though. The NHL doesn't need 32 teams. 227536[/snapback] The biggest problem with lack of public interest is the inability of the leadership (Betteman) and his cronies to make meaningful changes to the game. There are plenty of suggestions out there but they have thus far shown no willingness to implement them. The game needs to be returned to the skill players and taken away from the coaches and goalies. Oh, and get the damn advertisments off the friggin' boards so those of us watching on the telly can see the damn puck! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts