Since it was introduced after the lockout, it has ballooned to a point where after a meager 4 years its already almost double what it began at. Does it need to keep expanding to keep players playing harder to seek the incentive, or should it be froze to not expand ticket prices back to ginormous sizes (again)? Or should we go back to free-market again?
2007-10-12 03:11:40 · 9 answers · asked by Jon S 2 in Sports ➔ Hockey
Cap and revenues are related. So if it goes up it must mean the teams are making money. The only part I have a hard time with is that one guy can take up 20% of it. Last time I checked they needed at least 6 guys on the ice to play so why should one guy take 20%?
2007-10-12 03:20:28 · answer #1 · answered by PuckDat 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The salary cap was ratified in June 2005................just over two years ago, nowhere near 4.
It started at $39MM and is now $50.3MM, a mere 28% increase. Nowhere close to double.
The salary cap is a lagging indicator. This year's salary cap is based on LAST year's revenues. The theory behind that is that teams WON'T have to raise ticket prices to maintain the cap (although how many owners will admit that). Also, the cap has nothing to do with the players playing 'hard'. The entire cap is based on revenues..............TV contracts, sponsorship, advertising, retail sales, ticket sales etc.
So.............
- if the economy doesn't go into a major recession
- fans continue to buy merchandise (a record last year)
- rink attandance continues to increase ( a record last year)
- total revenues continue to grow (a record last year)
The Salary Cap will increase (remember, players are guaranteed a percentage)
However, if the economy tanks, and revenues shrink, the salary cap will decrease.
YOu mention tocket prices going BACK to ginormous prices. Not too many cities decreased prices after the lockout, and 27 of the 30 currently have higher ticket prices this year than they had in 2003-04.
CME
Widget makers make $20 and hour and unionized? Where do I sign?
2007-10-12 03:58:07 · answer #2 · answered by Like I'm Telling You Who I A 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think its still a work in progress, the problem I see is if the cap going up are strictly based on profits , it could be bad for the sport in every city not named New York. Heres why. If a team does not spend up to the cap and makes money because they are being cheap/frugal then the cap would get raised again since teams are making a profit , making only the richest of the rich able to spend to the cap. Once again creating the problem that they put the salary cap in to combat. We have already seen its effect in Buffalo where they were unable to pay up to the cap (currently under by apx 7 million) but had to let Briere and Drury go to much larger markets who can afford to spend to the cap. Now if Buffalo makes 2 million profit (on the books) this season the NHL will take that into account when raising the cap when in reality if they would have spent to the cap they would have lost 5 million. Over time the desparity will continue to grow worse as the cap raises. Already the (Coyotes 12 mil, Sharks 9 Mil, BlueJackets 9 Mil, Predators 16 Mil, Sabres 7 Mil, Islanders 8 Mil, Penguins 9 Mil, Thrashers 6 Mil, Panthers 6 Mil, Lightning 8 Mil, and Capitols 11 Mil) are sitting 5 Million or more under the cap. Now in some of these cases its because their stars are young and they are preparing for salaries to escalate dramatically, or ownership just being cheap and not spending what they can afford, but in most cases here its teams in smaller markets that simply cannot spend to the cap or they would have no chance to make money.
2007-10-12 03:50:58 · answer #3 · answered by Dennis Y 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well for one, I believe the NHL should never go back to the free market. Once you decide to go with a salary cap, you never step back out of it.
The more money the NHL makes a year, the more its gonna rise. I think the number it's at right now is a great place to be in. But dont be surprised if it goes up a million or two by the start of next year
2007-10-12 03:39:09 · answer #4 · answered by TBL 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Maybe you need to really read the details of the cap and the CBA, and let the league, owners, and players association worry about it. Turn off the TV and go do something.
2007-10-12 06:08:52 · answer #5 · answered by Goalie 79 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As far players playing harder for more money, I'd like to think they play as hard as they can, now. Kinda like your doctor. More money wouldn't make him a smarter doctor. Any career / job is like that, if you're a lazy, $15. / hr widget builder, a $5 raise would probably make you a lazy $20 / hr widget builder. You may not want me for your union steward.
2007-10-12 04:03:28 · answer #6 · answered by cme 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It should be frozen at 44 million.
2007-10-12 04:30:14 · answer #7 · answered by Adam Chambers 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you freeze it, the players go on strike.
2007-10-12 04:34:05 · answer #8 · answered by Canadian Biology Man 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
free market!!!
2007-10-12 04:12:09 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋