| 0 |
Subject: Looming Lock out discussion..
Posted by: mogwai
- [397471511] Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 12:33
I have a bad feeling about this but had a few things to ask as well as seek opinions on
Question 1.
If there is a lock out in the NHL does the AHL for example keep going?
If that were the case would you think a lot of 3rd/4th liners would go to the AHL affilates? If there was a strike I'd see players like Foresberg going back to Sweden to play while a 3rd liner, just looking to "play" may go to the AHL
Comment/Idea.
The issue is with the cap. What about "grandfathering" in the cap. Say for example teams have 5 years to make a roster work for 40 Million (Not sure of the actual $$ amnt they want). Using the grandfather teams like Detroit could see the ends of some guys in a DET uniform. Think about it..in 5 years you'd have Chelios, Yzerman, Hasek, and Hull gone for sure. Lidstrom, Shanny, Cujo? and more? That is a lot of dough tied up on some guys. Build your team on Pavel D for exmaple and say "we can only pay you so much because we have a cap in 2 years". Think about it..5 years a lot of the big guns may be ready to be "done". How many more years do many teams marquee players have? ATL is a younger team but using DAL, DET and AVS as an example of an "older team". Perhaps I am way off..but my silly idea seems to make sense. NYR have 10M USD tied up on Pavel Bure....
Just tossing it out there... |
| 1 | Smackrat
ID: 59117310
Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 12:54
|
They are probably going to set restrictions about who is eligible to play in the AHL and other minor leagues. For example: players who play under a certain amount of NHL games will be eligible to play in the minors. This has been one of the theories floated in Fleury's case. Send him to juniors this year so he doesn't play so many NHL games that he's ineligible to play in the AHL next year.
|
| 2 | StLCards
Leader
ID: 31010716
Fri, Feb 06, 2004, 12:54
|
I've heard talk of "grandfathering" in the cap as well. No way could teams go from where they are at now, down to as low as $30M in one year. Recently Bettman said $30M was not per team, but rather $30M x 30 teams. Conceivably some teams could be under and some could be over up to say a $40M upper limit and then pay a "luxury tax" similar to baseball.
The bottom line is the revenue just isn't there from TV as it is in other sports. No way will the current ESPN deal be renewed without a major cut in $$. Some of the Blues are making more $$ than Marshall Faulk, and football is by far better off financially.
My feeling is that the players are not going to accept such a low salary cap and a work stoppage will happen at the end of this year before the playoffs. The older players like Hull will retire, while others will go play in Europe. Things aren't looking good at all for the future of hockey.
|
|
|
|
Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)
|
|