Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

RE: [hockhist] Re: WHAT A BUNCH OF JERKS

Expand Messages
  • William Underwood
    ... You are right, hockey fans are loyal. But the game will suffer severe consequences when it returns. They will lose revenues from so many different sources,
    Message 1 of 33 , Feb 5, 2005
      >The owners are taking a huge risk here as well.

      You are right, hockey fans are loyal. But the game will suffer
      severe consequences when it returns. They will lose revenues from so
      many different sources, and not from just a drop-off in fan

      Where? The same sponsors will be back. In Canada the sport will get them
      back as it is a major product in the US it doesn't have many to begin
      with. The TV money is a joke and can't go much lower. This is a gate
      driven sport. The main loss or gain is predicated on the fans coming

      >You even mention that some franchises may have to fold. We'll that's
      great if you are not one of those franchises. The funny thing is
      that the prime candidates for folding are the franchises that
      >Bettman's in bed with.

      The second part is true. the first part has a bad other side to it. You
      are actually better off folding than continuing in the same bad system
      or a new half assed successor. Several owners have actually went out of
      their way to say this.

      >Bill, I know you are pro-owner - but everyone is to blame and
      >everyone loses.

      I'm not really totally lauding the owners. The owners are to blame for
      creating this mess over the past ten years and I was one of the first to
      point an accusing finger at them. The wild eyed greed laced pipe dreams
      of the 90's of Bettman and co are exactly what got us into this mess!
      But now, they are trying to clean up the mess that they made themselves
      and it is the players who are the ones now who are the wild eyed, greed
      stricken pipe dreamers, the shoe has shifted to the other foot.

      For over ten years, the owners made one miscalculation after another and
      the players took advantage of it. Now the owners are trying to bring us
      back to sanity...

      >P.S. - You can't try to go from a free-market system to a hard-cap
      system without trying some intermediate ideas first. I know the
      whole speech against revenue sharing and luxury taxes, but that's
      >were a short-term deal could have been made.

      Sure you can! Both the NFL and NBA did with NO transitional period. And
      this sport can't stand any more half solutions,. It need s a full
      solution and it need sit now. The problem with hockey is that we have
      had to darn many half measures right across the board on and off ice. If
      football and hoops can do it so can we. An awful lot of contracts are
      over now and going into next year, I submit that there has never been a
      better time than now top do it. By 2006 a huge percentage of the league
      will be done with their deals, very few long term deals have been signed
      of late.

      The one thing this sport may not be abler to take is to be back where we
      are in 3 or 5 years. We need a system in place for the long term today
      to prevent that. This lockout we may survive but if we need to go
      through another one down the line in the not so distant future, the
      league may well then be in all of the trouble that the worst gloom and
      doom sorts say band more...

      --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "William Underwood" <wausport@b...>
      > I'm not so sure it will be all that bad Joe. Hockey fans are a
      > bunch. Where there are real fans they will be back. And even in
      > where the game is more anonymous, how angry can people be about a
      > being gone that they are not even aware is gone? The game may well
      > stronger. You might lose markets that don't belong and get a
      > league with better competition. Or you may see the same teams back
      > the league more sensitive to its market.
      > As for franchise values, with a cap they may actually be better
      off. A
      > prime reason why teams have been tougher to sell as sand in the
      > or an outdoor nudist resort at the north pole ahs been the crazy
      > economics. A more sensible system will make people more interested
      > buying. It will also male more venues able to support hockey. I
      > there are nay sayers but a reasonable cap COULD (not WILL) allow a
      > Winnipeg or Quebec to seriously look at getting back into things.
      > would also give places like Portland and Houston more security in
      > looking at teams. There would be more takers!
      > Having a season for the sake of having a season under a half assed
      > would do more harm. Franchise values would collapse and you would
      > teams die. Oddly enough you would see both sides of the pro and
      > expansion crowd weep. In Canada teams like Edmonton, Calgary and
      > would be gone. And in the US, a lot of the newer non traditional
      > would have a death sentence. Miami, Raleigh, Nashville and Atlanta
      > all probably die!
      > Franchise values have stagnated because if three reasons. One, an
      > artificial value set by expansion. Two, there has been a 10 year
      > era for sports that has slowed as of the past 5 years. Three, a bad
      > economic system in the NHL has been a killer that has infected it
      > than other sports. The third issue will be gone! The best teams
      > have an even better bottom line with 20-40 million in costs gone,
      > smaller markets will be able to survive and more places that don't
      > teams now will be able to look at them. It may well arrest the
      > difficulty that teams have had in being sold. There have been some
      > the market for between 3 and 5 years with no takers under this
      > Once more, they may well be things that fewer people want to sell.
      > Another fourth problem has been that the market is glutted with NHL
      > teams for sale relative to other sports. It is actually a buyers
      > With a good hard cap linked to revenue you may well see less
      with "for
      > sale...must go" signs on the door.
      > As for player salaries...you will be absolutely right if the
      > don't wake up and smell the coffee! If they push the owners to the
      > of impasse they could lose out more and if not if they force a
      > reorganization they will DOUBTLESSLY lose more! They don't realize
      > good the offer is right now! In all honesty the owners are
      probably off
      > by 5-10 million for real safety. I tend to think that range should
      > more 25-35 mill! And if they REALLY want to get nasty in a new
      > they COULD make Goodenow's boogie man of "no more guaranteed deals
      > no arbitration" a self fulfilling prophecy. The fact is that the
      > might get what they fear most by doing what they are doing now.
      > things are not being taken away by the current proposals, thus
      they are
      > fighting with wind mills, but if there is a reorganization, their
      > stubbornness now may well turn them into real dragons! Then more I
      > about it the more I'd love to get Bob Goodenow to a poker table!
      > keep on thinking you are bluffing and raise the pot against your 5
      > bullets with his three of a kind...a guy can rich that way! This
      is the
      > sort of negotiation we are seeing. Then owners could well have
      those 5
      > bullets with reorganization...Hey I'll bet he is free tonight! :)
      > All joking aside, the players just don't realize how much worse it
      > get. I think that they have had POOR leadership from day one.
      First they
      > had Alan Eagleson who robbed them deaf dumb and blind, now they
      > Goodenow who got them the current deal more out of owner
      > than him being good. But there are new faces at the table now and
      > different circumstances. Hr hasn't read that and they will be the
      > to suffer if these guys are as determined as they seem to be.
      There is
      > still time for them to sign onto this deal with a bit of fine
      > not enough to save this season but perhaps to get the next one
      > Perhaps there need sot be a certain guaranteed growth for
      inflation to
      > prevent the cap from contracting as hockey is the one sport where
      > could imagine revenue actually declining thanks to its lack of TV
      > presence. Maybe arbitration needs more fine tuning and perhaps a
      > age for unrestricted free agency. It is not a bad deal as it is
      now when
      > you compare it to what it could be if the owners have to go al the
      > to the wall. It is time that they start to think that way or one
      > is for sure, a lot of careers will end prematurely. Older guys will
      > retire, if we have a smaller league there will be less jobs and
      the ring
      > leaders, unless they are top players in their prime will be on the
      > outside. Time is not on the players side. The young guys want to
      get on
      > with their careers and the guys that are looking to be drafted in
      > next two to three years want theirs to start. More and more cracks
      > start come in their ranks, once this thing got to the point where
      it has
      > now, the prospect of sweating the owners out declined by a HUGE
      > You are right Joe, if the players don't settle BEFORE we reach an
      > impasse they may pay more than they can possibly imagine!
      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: joe_gucciardo@y... [mailto:joe_gucciardo@y...]
      > Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2005 9:17 AM
      > To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [hockhist] WHAT A BUNCH OF JERKS
      > The sport is dead. It will take years to recover from this, if it
      > recovers at all. The owners and players have killed themselves.
      > When the league comes back - or reorganizes - franchise values
      > be half of what they were and player salaries will be a lot less
      > than the currently proposed cap ranges.
      > What a bunch of idiots.
      > To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to
      > hockhist-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > Yahoo! Groups Links

      To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to

      Yahoo! Groups Links
    • William Underwood
      True. I just don’t see it happening in the NHL with its lack of TV and VAST disparity of markets without a hard cap. ... From: joe_gucciardo@yahoo.com
      Message 33 of 33 , Feb 9, 2005
        True. I just don’t see it happening in the NHL with its lack of TV and
        VAST disparity of markets without a hard cap.

        -----Original Message-----
        From: joe_gucciardo@... [mailto:joe_gucciardo@...]
        Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 12:59 PM
        To: hockhist@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: [hockhist] Re: WHAT A BUNCH OF JERKS


        I want everything that you want (Quebec, Winnepeg and a competively
        balanced league). We just believe in different ways that this can be
        accomplished. Let's agree to disagree. Anyway, I'm sure this thread
        will be declared dead pretty soon.


        --- In hockhist@yahoogroups.com, "William Underwood" <wausport@b...>
        > Not really. I really want to see hockey survive in Ottawa,
        Edmonton and
        > Calgary. I really want to see them have a legitimate chance at the
        > I really want to see a viable competitive league. I really want to
        > places like Winnipeg and Quebec possibly get teams back. I really
        > to see trades that are made for hockey reasons not just because a
        > market can't afford to keep some astronomical salary. I also
        really want
        > to see a new hockey area have a chance of keeping its team IF it
        > give it decent support. I really am tired of each spring guys
        being put
        > up for auction for trade tom Philly, Detroit, Colorado or the
        > all others take a back seat.
        > And if it takes replacement to get that, yep, I'll be looking
        forward to
        > seeing them. And you know something Joe, the replacement hockey
        may not
        > be as bad as you think. There are a lot of good veteran players
        out of
        > work thanks to the AHL veteran rule and the NHLers stealing jobs in
        > Europe. And these guys will actually break a sweat each night. We
        > see Jagr use his skills but nor will we see him coasting 20 feet
        > side and collecting 11 mill to do it. We won't see Yashin making
        > half hearted swipe of a bad a sweep check when the should have
        taken the
        > man out. Have you watched minor pro hockey lately? Let me tell you
        > something, dollar for dollar night for night, it offers better
        > entertainment then the NHL. That's right better ENTERTAINMENT
        > guys actually WORK each night. The games are unpredictable and
        fun. I
        > can tear apart the players as not being as good as NHLers on
        skills and
        > size and speed. But I can't rip them on their EFFORT and the pure
        fun it
        > is watching the games.
        > This is not to say that I don't want the best players in the world
        > playing. But at the same time I can stand watching others for a
        while to
        > get a league that addresses the issues of the first paragraph.
        > I'll come back to you....you really want a 15 team league don't
        you? You
        > really only want 2 or 3 Canadian teams don't you? You really want
        > Flyers, Rangers, Wings et al to still monopolize the player market
        > whenever there is a star out there don't you? You really want
        > Calgary and Ottawa to be ravaged in a few years as the players
        start to
        > all demand those 3-6 million dollar pay checks that those teams
        > really afford don't you? You really don't want another Cup in
        > outside of MAYBE the Leafs don't you? You really want cots to keep
        > spiraling driving prices to keep on flying up so soon we will have
        > nobody BUT corporations watching the game live don't you? You
        > want to see the game's already low profile get smaller don't you?
        > If the answer is yes, well you want a half assed luxury tax. It
        > work so well that like baseball, one year we will see the Rangers
        > Flyers go cannibal and load up on the talent, the next year every
        > free agent going to say Detroit and Toronto.
        > Now before anyone points out the small market anomaly of last
        year's Cup
        > (and keep in mind how close Philly came to spoiling that party);
        no Cup
        > has went to Canada since this CBA, only one Canadian team has
        > the final.
        > Of the 20 finalists since then; 13 have been from top dozen
        markets. Yes
        > New Jersey counts as they have access to ancillary revenue sources
        > enabled them to keep guys like Brodeur, Stevens, Niederamayer
        etc. when
        > people try to characterize the Devils as small, they are well off.
        > fact is that the Devils can afford to keep players that they really
        > want. They have routinely been able to keep 4 and 5 guys at over 4
        > million. Keep in mind the top 8 players for any team are a major
        key to
        > success. In contrast there are teams in this league that can
        barely be
        > able to keep one. They may not over spend but nor do they ever come
        > close to having to part with Broduer. Why? They have the ancillary
        > sources to be able to compete when they have to do so.
        > Finally, three more are from top 20 US markets. Only two have not
        > top 25 markets.
        > Once more as far as repeat finalists go (have had over one
        appearance in
        > the past 10 years) there have been four. Three are top ten market
        > the other a top twenty. It gets BAD out west, we have had 8
        finalists be
        > from three high spending markets. This is what no cap does. Canada
        > no realistic hope of a regular Cup. Nor do most US cities and if
        you are
        > a small market city, no matter how well you draft you won't make
        > than one final.
        > So do I find the idea of replacement palatable? Yes I do! In the
        > run if we get a cap and hopefully some better revenue sharing
        (which may
        > well come down the line after all we did see a baby step in the
        > proposal it will make it worth it. In the meantime seeing guys set
        > example of actually WORKING each night in an NHL uniform won't be
        > terrible as it sounds. I've watched most of them before and have
        > it at lower levels.
        > Would I PREFER to see it? No. It would be nice if the players
        would wake
        > up and smell the coffee and sign the agreement that is there in
        front of
        > them now with a few adjustments like maybe a younger unrestricted
        > and an inflationary factor for the cap growth. But I would not say
        > I am averse to replacements at any cost. If it means avoiding a
        tax that
        > won't work BRING THEM ON.

        To unsubscribe from this mail list, send a blank message to

        Yahoo! Groups Links
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.