NHL Fans: Don't Go Away Mad, Just Go Away

Graphic Comments
September 04 2012 05:41PM

Don't go away mad, just go away

You're an NHL fan. You spend your hard-earned money every year going to games. You buy merchandise. You subscribe to Centre Ice. You've been through one, maybe two lockouts, and even a strike if you're really old. And now they're threatening to make you go through yet another lockout.

This makes you mad.

So mad, in fact, that you're willing to take action and show the world just how angry you are. And maybe, just maybe, your action combined with the actions of thousands of other outraged fans might even have an impact and a lockout will be avoided or at least shortened.

Well, you have every right to be outraged. But make no mistake, the angrier you get and the more you show it, the more you ensure the lockout goes on.

Think about it. Putting effort, energy and passion into showing your displeasure and trying to avoid a lockout just shows how passionate about NHL hockey you are. And if you're passionate enough to take time out of your day to go and protest at the NHL offices or boycott NHL-related businesses, you're sure as heck passionate enough to come back to the rink no matter how long the lockout lasts:

Take our money, please

And this is exactly what the owners are counting on. From their perspective, the NHL really does have the "world's greatest fans:"

In the lockout-shortened season of 1994-95, each game averaged 50 more people in attendance compared with the previous season. The results were more impressive for the 2005-06 season, the first full year of hockey under the expiring CBA. The NHL reported a 2.4% increase in attendance over the 2003-04 season, and in the process, the league averaged a record 16,955 fans per contest. For the next three years, the NHL continued breaking its regular season attendance records.

Let that digest that for a second.

Need a Tums yet? You will.

A couple of weeks ago, @draglikepull put together a nice little summary estimating team-by-team ticket revenues, which added up to $1.2 billion. So if this lockout is anything like the last one, you the NHL fans, will flood back to the tune of about $30 million in additional ticket revenue. (Note: This is for illustrative purposes only. Past performance is not an indication of future results.)

So what's an NHL fan to do when throwing a tantrum is actually counter-productive? Hopefully if you've read this far down, you'll know the answer is not: "spend countless hours putting together a video with really nice production values based on the Howard Beale rant from the movie Network in the hopes of getting fans to unite to stop the lockout." I mean, nice sentiment, but shame about the facts:

Nice sentiment, shame about the facts

No, as Motley Crüe put it, "Don't go away mad. Just go away." The owners are not going to be at all concerned about what you the fan thinks about the NHL as long as you're still thinking about the NHL:

Apathy rules

So if you want to make a difference, go away. And I don't mean go watch other forms of hockey like Juniors, the AHL or the NCAA. That's like going on methadone. The owners know that once you get a sniff of the good stuff, you'll be back mainlining it like, well, Motley Crüe in their heyday.

For real impact, go away to one of the other major league sports. Drive up the attendance of your local NFL, MLB and, god forbid, NBA team. Buy their merchandise. Subscribe to their cable, pay-per-view and online access packages. This you can do loudly.

Because, ultimately, the most likely way to end this lockout is to appeal to the owner's greed:

The end of the NHL lockout

* You may wonder what this has to do with the NHL lockout ending, but rumour has it that Gary Bettman negotiated the rights to hold the Winter Classic in Hell should it ever freeze over. All it cost him was getting booed at every public appearance he ever makes. Small price to pay, in the overall scheme of things and just one more example of his shrewdness as a negotiator.

C867930d1f1ba5cf2b078a93d3bd1a68
I'm not a hippie or on welfare. I don't live in Kits, wear Birkenstocks or own an umbrella. I've never been to the Capilano Suspension Bridge, but I'm sure it's very nice. I have a mayor, not a crack addict. I drink pale ale, not Blue. And I call it a cabin, not a cottage. I can proudly say my team's been to the Stanley Cup Final in the last 45 years. They may not have won, but at least they got there. I believe in sunshine, not haze; heat, not humidity. And that sushi is a healthy and tasty meal. A coho is a fish. A ski hill is a mountain. And the plural of leaf is leaves. Okay? Not leafs. Leaves! Vancouver is the country's third-largest city, certainly the most beautiful, and the best part of Canada! My name is petbugs and I am a Canucks fan! ... You can find me on Twitter @petbugs13 or send your hate mail to petbugs (at) gmail (dot) com but it better be funny or it's getting plonked.
Avatar
#1 Wäx Män Riley
September 04 2012, 11:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
6
props
dougtheslug wrote:

Please explain exactly why it is Zach Parise's fault that he signed a contract offered to him by the Minnesota Wild management?

Because Shawn Horcoff sucks!

Avatar
#2 westcoastoil
September 04 2012, 06:49PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props

In support of apathy I refuse to reply to this post...doh!

Avatar
#3 The poster formerly known as Koolaid drinker #33
September 04 2012, 07:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props

Good read.

I bitched and screamed about never watching hockey again during the last two lockouts,. But the reality is, as soon as I see the first Nuge to Eberle one timer hi-lite, I'm a fan again.

Hockey for me is that girl that totally abuses and treats you like crap but you can't give her up cause she's amazing in the sack.

Avatar
#4 justDOit
September 04 2012, 09:45PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
2
props

As for the looming CBA grief, it would make me feel better if the strategies and lessons learned in the new NFL deal were being looked at by either the owners or PA.

According to this article: http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2011/07/25/the-cba-in-a-nutshell/

The new NFL contract saw a cap reduction, but new rules for the salary floor to increase overall spending and for revenue sharing to help with that. It also included a $3.5M borrow from a future year, and some more basic bargaining points like safety. Limits were placed on full-on practices and more down time during the season guaranteed.

I'm sure that the NHLPA could come up with a few ways in which they could make the job safer for it's members, and how that might also financially benefit the membership. Sure helps to renegotiate when you've been healthy all year, it's easier to hit your bonus goals from outside the infirmary.

Avatar
#6 OilLeak
September 04 2012, 07:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Uh no. Hockey is like crack and nothing really replaces it for me. More studying? Nope.

More exercise? This works, but dealing with several injuries that will take a few months to heal, so nope.

More video games or tv? Not really, works for a short time, but doesn't really satiate my appetite for hockey.

I really hope that season isn't canceled but I'll probably tune into the OKC barons especially if Hall++ are playing there during the lockout.

Avatar
#7 Wäx Män Riley
September 04 2012, 08:10PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

If you want to make a difference, don't support the stations that gave the NHL $400M, and cancel your cable package. Watch the games online.

Don't buy merchandise. Unsubscribe from twitter feeds, unlike Facebook pages, and disconnect from the advertising on their websites (firefox, noScript, Adblocker).

Don't support the owner's businesses (Rexall, Molson, Roger's/Bell, Birchwood, etc...).

I don't know that this will get the season started sooner, but that is the only way to get back at those "greedy" owners.

Avatar
#8 Horcsky
September 04 2012, 10:21PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

@Wäx Män Riley

But but but, Fluoride is good for our teeth!!

Avatar
#9 Devolution
September 04 2012, 10:38PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

I agree with everything you say here as it makes perfect sense. I also agree with the people who say that Canadians will come back, we always do. Americans and the NFL have a similar relationship, although I think the NFL treats its fans better.

Besides, I don't think 50 year old white guys from Edmonton are going to be buying a lot of oversize LeBron James gear.

Avatar
#10 Pouzar99
September 04 2012, 11:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

Focusing on Bettman is playing right into the hands of the corporate entities that own the teams. They dictate policy, not Bettman. His reptilian personality insures that fan frustration is directed at him, not the people whose orders he is following. They get a free pass and Bettman gets $8 million a year as a result.

Sure, boo the guy when he shows up at your arena but always remember he is just an empty suit. Think of the corporations that own the Rangers, Leafs and Habs. Think of Snider and Jacobs and the Wirtzes. Don't boo Charles Manson's defence lawyer. Boo Charlie.

Avatar
#11 SilentNoise
September 05 2012, 01:08AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props

After seeing the "Together We Can" video the other day, I'll say that it's a good video, but a little too one-sided toward the players IMO.

The problem is, six years after an entire NHL season was lost to a long, drawn out strike, NO ONE has learned anything, and in 2012 I see it as being BOTH SIDES who are to blame if another one occurs this year. However let's be honest, we have the owners sticking to their guns during the summer of 2005 and the emergence of a salary cap system to thank for the not only the NHL making record profits from 2006-12, but for teams like Edmonton, Calgary, Pittsburgh, Columbus, Phoenix (pain in our collective butts), Carolina, Miami, Tampa, and more to even continue to exist - many of which are now up and coming, or massively competitive franchises, to even exist in the NHL as they do today (not that a downsizing of the league by at least 3-5 teams would be a horrible thing to be completely honest).

Today's game has the league and it's owners making record revenues over the last six years, but that goes hand-in-hand with what the players are making in today's game. So when it comes to revenue sharing - seemingly the largest sticking point - why should the players take a larger piece of the pie than the people owning the arenas, the teams signing their cheques, and the people which give them the opportunity to play the game for a living?

Do Crosby, Malkin, Ovechkin, etc deserve to make over $8M/year? Well, without getting into politics outside of sports, but STRICTLY for their skill, what they do for the game, and the NHL wanting to use their names and faces to sell the NHL name, then I say yes they do. HOWEVER, does a 3rd liner deserve $3-4M/season while teams have no recourse? No. I believe that both sides need to give and take respectively right now, and not believe it's just a one-way street while contract lengths are ludicrous, and front-loaded contracts are strictly built just to circumvent the meaning of a cap system (while paying the agents more than they're worth) and hang a team later on as the player ages and his performance declines (looking at you Kovalchuk, Parise, Suter).

Why does a 50/50 revenue split not make sense FOR THE LONGEVITY of the league to these so-called "businessmen"?

If a player wants a 12-year deal, why is a team not able to have any financial recourse against him in a salary cap era should they continuously under-perform? *COUGH* YASHIN *COUGH*. Instead, their only options are to buy him out and still have to pay roughly half his so-called "allowed" salary, or demote him like the Oilers with Souray, and still be hung for half his salary while he gets paid to play while also be signed by yet another NHL team)?

Until someone comes to their senses, I refuse to side with the players or the league during this stoppage because I think both sides are being unreasonable, arrogant, and stubborn.

Do the players have legitimate concerns? Of course. Do the owners though? Hell yes. However, both sides NEED to realize that each of them are EQUALLY responsible for growing the game as much as it has since 2006, as well as digging themselves into a hole of deep stupidity when it comes to contracts and salaries.

What does it all mean? Now we, the fans, are going to be the ones paying for it.

Avatar
#12 Pouzar99
September 05 2012, 01:28AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
freemarket! wrote:

@s2h: Its called free market and teams want to compete. You are kidding yourself if you don't think its in the agent's / the player's best interests to secure the best deal possible.

GM's like Burke get blasted for not spending the cash, and GM's like Fletcher get blasted for spending too much..

I'm not siding with the owners here .. but the rising salaries throughout the league is the fault of the players/agents taking advantage of all the holes and loopholes within the last CBA and it has to change..

Staggered contracts at the very least have to go.. If you want a player, they should receive the same amount of money every year.. and all compensation should be included as cap hit..

The rising salaries throughout the league are a result of the owners willingness to circumvent their own rules and offer players enormous contracts because they want to win at any price. Shea Weber and his agent did not tie up Flyers management and force them to draw up that toxic offer sheet. No one made the Flames throw all those bags of money at bloody Dennis Wideman. And on and on. These are not hostage takings. You make the players sound like bad helpless 9-year-old boys seducing elderly priests.

I agree that the staggered contracts have to go, that the salary paid should be the same every year and no more signing bonuses. The cap circumvention must end for a host of reasons. Most of those proposals by the owners are targeted at each other like members of Spendthrift Anonymous. The last two Cup winners rank 14th and 18th in salaries for their 7 most expensive players. The losing finalists 12th and 19th.

Avatar
#13 cableguy - 2nd Tier Fan
September 05 2012, 07:20AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
1
props
Wäx Män Riley wrote:

Debbie Downer post, be warned:

I love hockey. I really do. I am not a season ticket holder, but do regularly go to games. I went to 16 games last year, similarly the year before, bought playoff packages back in the playoff days, etc...

I have played hockey for almost 30 years, starting on a team when I was just 4, and I still play. I LOVE HOCKEY.

I have seen this type of post in blogs and hockey websites. BOYCOTT! SHOW THE OWNER WHAT YOU REALLY THINK! STOP GOING TO GAMES!

The truth is, in Canada, people will always support hockey. I agree that in the States; Phoenix, Florida, Columbus, the lockout might damage the already fragile fanbase, but there aren't really fans there to complain in the first place.

I'm sorry, but I think organizing rallies (Fire MacT???) and signing petitions for an entertainment business making internal decisions that really don't affect your everyday life is stupid.

If you want to do something productive and meaningful, try something like getting Fluoride out of our drinking water, or reforming our electoral process to something that reflects the Canadian majority.

Let the entertainers worry about the entertainment. Hockey is a game, and I want the season to start in October like everyone else, but having people sign online petitions, or stand in front of league offices will do nothing to affect the millionaires/billionaires decisions. Not having a season means there is nothing to boycott.

i agree, to an extent.

in my perfect little world, i am hopeful that somehow, someway, it is organized so that the first game of this season is played in empty barns all over the league.

just 1 game...

though, as a disclaimer, my perfect little world also involves midgets dancing around a chocolate fountain..

Avatar
#14 fishbone
September 04 2012, 06:37PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I think its time we as hockey fans all across the league unite and chant "FIRE BETTMAN" at every game and in every arena until he's far far removed from the sport of hockey... it worked for Leaf fans when they wanted Wilson gone right!?

Avatar
#16 madjam
September 04 2012, 07:02PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

It does not matter what Canadian clubs do , as there are plenty of additional fans that will pay when a settlement is done . The Canadian addiction . Same cannot be said of U.S. based teams , however . Bettman lockout this time could hold many disappointments , and loss in team and league revenues for a forseable length of time considering the spinoff elements effected . Their market is bigger than they can accommodate in a lot of areas but dwindling none the less as more decide to use monies elsewhere for entertainment . Not like hockey is that big in States to begin with , considering other major sports they prefer with interest .

The " show must go on" despite lack of a ratified ageement , simply because the old one in effect was/is working , and it just takes the owners to correct their own indiscretions - not the players fault nor should they be the ones to pay to have to fix it and keep them inline .

Avatar
#17 fishbone
September 04 2012, 07:14PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

As much as your right, im sure the last thing the owners want is the play-by-play announcers being drowned out by chants about their commissioner during a national broadcast. Plus it would be just as fun as making fun of him!

Avatar
#18 Reidja
September 04 2012, 07:19PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I completely agree with this thesis. Not only for my sanity but also because I am trying to personally come to terms with a world without hockey...

I know, I know, I keep reading FlamesNation everyday, was raised by Ed Whalen and all that... but I am toying with the thought of placing my disposable sports income elsewhere. I am building-up my hockey apathy bit by bit.

Up with apathy!

Avatar
#19 vetinari
September 04 2012, 07:28PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

To borrow a turn-of-phrase from baseball, given that this is likely to be Bettman's third strike, is he out? [Don't bother answering that question: I know the owners love him]

I think the only way that there will be hockey before December is for the PA to come out and say, "if no deal is done by the end of November, all our players will go oversees and not reopen negotiations with you until next June".

The other alternative would be for the players to decertify, make all unsigned players and prospects UFA's, and form a WHA style league... THAT would get the oner's attention.

Avatar
#21 The poster formerly known as Koolaid drinker #33
September 04 2012, 08:00PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Graphic Comments wrote:

Ha! Should have gone with Self Esteem from The Offspring as the theme for this post.

I may be dumb but I'm not a dweeb.

Avatar
#22 Wäx Män Riley
September 04 2012, 08:03PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Debbie Downer post, be warned:

I love hockey. I really do. I am not a season ticket holder, but do regularly go to games. I went to 16 games last year, similarly the year before, bought playoff packages back in the playoff days, etc...

I have played hockey for almost 30 years, starting on a team when I was just 4, and I still play. I LOVE HOCKEY.

I have seen this type of post in blogs and hockey websites. BOYCOTT! SHOW THE OWNER WHAT YOU REALLY THINK! STOP GOING TO GAMES!

The truth is, in Canada, people will always support hockey. I agree that in the States; Phoenix, Florida, Columbus, the lockout might damage the already fragile fanbase, but there aren't really fans there to complain in the first place.

I'm sorry, but I think organizing rallies (Fire MacT???) and signing petitions for an entertainment business making internal decisions that really don't affect your everyday life is stupid.

If you want to do something productive and meaningful, try something like getting Fluoride out of our drinking water, or reforming our electoral process to something that reflects the Canadian majority.

Let the entertainers worry about the entertainment. Hockey is a game, and I want the season to start in October like everyone else, but having people sign online petitions, or stand in front of league offices will do nothing to affect the millionaires/billionaires decisions. Not having a season means there is nothing to boycott.

Avatar
#23 Jordan
September 04 2012, 08:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Awesome Motley Crue title.

Avatar
#24 Subversive
September 04 2012, 08:33PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I plan to get really into online poker again and take money from all the fish. Hooray!

Avatar
#26 toetag247
September 04 2012, 09:25PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Great column! more like it! I also acknowledge now, that I am part of the problem.

Avatar
#27 justDOit
September 04 2012, 09:27PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

You really shouldn't attend any games where either the NHL or PA owns interest in the team - even if that only means the team is playing in an NHL building.

Avatar
#28 puck-bandit
September 04 2012, 09:51PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I average 20 home games a season, don't care what I pay so long as no one gets my seats.

I'm angry, bitter, in absolute and total withdrawal, to include drooling on my desk. Now considering yelling, screaming, fire my staff, and pull my hair out and blame everyone hockey associated; players, and league.

Won't tell how old, but this is not the 1st or second lock-out, and have vowed, as I did last time, "this is it".

Has Bettman got this Canadian Boy figured out? Yes; you bet he has, I just can't stay away.

When all the fan and player bickering is done, you will all be back. Besides I'm not giving my seats up!!!!!!!

Avatar
#29 s2h
September 04 2012, 10:50PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

why does everyone dog pile on bettman? he's not the guy making the decisions, the owners vote on everything that matters and decide things as a group. and remember, this is a group of millionaires and billionaires, so they can't be complete idiots.

why don't we hear more complaining about the spoiled and greedy players? no i'm not gonna waste my time digging up stats and financial figures , but i'm pretty sure only about a 3rd of the teams even make money, another 3rd break even and the final 3rd annually bleed money.

what is the incentive as a owner to spend your hard earned fortunes on buying a business that has a 66% chance of not making money? there is none. that's why there's a team in the desert that the league's been propping up for 2 years. there's plenty of wanna be billionaires trying to scratch together a decent offer - but any savvy businessman won't touch that rotting carcass with a 10 foot pole, and who can blame them?

the players got something like 56% of the revenue last time? and they think they got hose-bagged??? give 'em 46% and they'll all still be millionaires. hell, give 'em 36% and they'll all still make more than anyone of us clowns do in a lifetime.

i think bettman is as greasy as the next guy, but he's not the problem. lets be realistic - this fringe major league simply cannot pay out the salaries they currently are (zach effing parise $98 million????), and that is why they will cancel the season rather than continue to operate under the current system.

Avatar
#30 dougtheslug
September 04 2012, 11:17PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
s2h wrote:

why does everyone dog pile on bettman? he's not the guy making the decisions, the owners vote on everything that matters and decide things as a group. and remember, this is a group of millionaires and billionaires, so they can't be complete idiots.

why don't we hear more complaining about the spoiled and greedy players? no i'm not gonna waste my time digging up stats and financial figures , but i'm pretty sure only about a 3rd of the teams even make money, another 3rd break even and the final 3rd annually bleed money.

what is the incentive as a owner to spend your hard earned fortunes on buying a business that has a 66% chance of not making money? there is none. that's why there's a team in the desert that the league's been propping up for 2 years. there's plenty of wanna be billionaires trying to scratch together a decent offer - but any savvy businessman won't touch that rotting carcass with a 10 foot pole, and who can blame them?

the players got something like 56% of the revenue last time? and they think they got hose-bagged??? give 'em 46% and they'll all still be millionaires. hell, give 'em 36% and they'll all still make more than anyone of us clowns do in a lifetime.

i think bettman is as greasy as the next guy, but he's not the problem. lets be realistic - this fringe major league simply cannot pay out the salaries they currently are (zach effing parise $98 million????), and that is why they will cancel the season rather than continue to operate under the current system.

Please explain exactly why it is Zach Parise's fault that he signed a contract offered to him by the Minnesota Wild management?

Avatar
#31 The Beaker
September 04 2012, 11:32PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@s2h

Ummm i highly doubt that 66% of the teams in the league are not making money no matter what their public figures might suggest. Creative accounting = pay less taxes and such.

I'm not on the players or the owners side but the whole "lets get mad at the players because they make more than us and should be content with ____________" is just ridiculous. Everyone one of us would push for as much money as possible no matter what the situation. If your boss pulled you in and said "im feeling generous today, I am going to give you a 50, 000$ raise" even though you do dick all I'm pretty sure you are going to take it. And if at payday they say "we changed our mind, were not giving you a raise at all" i'm pretty sure you arent just going to admit you werent worth it in the first place so its alright if they dont give you the money.

I do not begrudge the players the money. It is ludacris but that is what capitalism is all about.

Avatar
#32 EastVanHalen
September 04 2012, 11:54PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Ha. I'm feeling inspired to send a letter: "Dear Corporation Formerly Known As Orca Bay Sports and Entertainment: Could you cancel the season already and refund my tickets so I can do something better with my money than line your slumlord pockets?" It's tempting.

Avatar
#33 freemarket!
September 05 2012, 12:20AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

@s2h: Its called free market and teams want to compete. You are kidding yourself if you don't think its in the agent's / the player's best interests to secure the best deal possible.

GM's like Burke get blasted for not spending the cash, and GM's like Fletcher get blasted for spending too much..

I'm not siding with the owners here .. but the rising salaries throughout the league is the fault of the players/agents taking advantage of all the holes and loopholes within the last CBA and it has to change..

Staggered contracts at the very least have to go.. If you want a player, they should receive the same amount of money every year.. and all compensation should be included as cap hit..

Avatar
#34 freemarket
September 05 2012, 12:21AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Previous comment was suppose to be @dougtheslug

Avatar
#35 mayorpoop
September 05 2012, 05:42AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

as much as i agree with this post, it would be terrificly hard for me to stop watching hockey. as cliche as it may sounds, it is in my DNA as a Canadian. cannot help myself.

as far as blame or finger pointing, there is a lot to go around. either side is as cupable as the next.

sympathetically the people that is affects the most are the people that make it viable. us the fans. sure without the owners there would be no teams in the game, and with out the players there would no one to play the game, but without the fans there would be no game. no demand no product.

get it done don't make me suffer.

Avatar
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
justDOit wrote:

You really shouldn't attend any games where either the NHL or PA owns interest in the team - even if that only means the team is playing in an NHL building.

SO then by your logic, we can go watch the Oil Kings play because they don't play in an NHL building. RX1 is a dump.

Avatar
#37 BlacqueJacque
September 05 2012, 06:59AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

You speak truth, brother. Preach on!

Last time around I got very upset.

This time around, I cancelled my cable sports package (I'd cancelled cable completely until I found out I could get no over-the-air reception) and when Shaw asked why, I told them because the NHL wasn't coming this year.

And that's it. I don't get into hysterics when friends complain, I just say stuff like "Well, the NFL is just around the corner and the NBA has some really interesting storylines this year. The Lakers made some big moves and this may allow them to compete with the Heat. Meanwhile, the Thunder continue to develop, they're like the Oilers of the NBA."

As for hockey? Disappointing. I'm personally expecting a very long lockout, I really believe that Fehr has convinced the players they lose less than the owners over a multi-year work stoppage. The owners are very cocky and happy to lose a single season if it means the kind of gains they got last time around.

And that's why I don't think I'll come back. I just don't care enough to get angry about that. I'm merely insulted. Life has so many interesting things to offer other than watching 24-year-olds play hockey and cheer them on like gods. From that perspective, being a sports fan is rather pathetic...

Avatar
#38 sizzler
September 05 2012, 08:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Shutting down once every 10 yrs can't be a smart way of doing business.

Avatar
#39 j
September 05 2012, 08:45AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

The last lockout benefited the Oilers by way of the salary cap (granted Katz has changed this need). It also hurt the Coyotes by way of the mandated minimum. Maybe this lockout will finally wash away the dregs of the league. How will LA fans respond to this? Just won the cup, huge popularity momentum, and a star studded team. Now the owners can't even raise the banner on opening night. Florida fans are probably excited about the prospect of Luongo returning - may never happen if a lockout occurs. Columbus? Needed to get the young guns on the ice to generate any interest. Not gonna happen.

My point is Canadian franchises are 'bit' players in the negotiations and the overall impact of the lockout. We are on the sidelines. Just sit back and watch the show below the border. That is where the fun will be.

Avatar
#40 madjam
September 05 2012, 09:09AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

Going out of business signs are commonplace and a way to drum up business . It is a business practice for some and they habitually do it almost very year . The bottom line obviously must be good for some . The hurt comes when fans continue their hockey by media and refuse to pay the exhorbitant fees for seasons tickets . Thus many only go to the odd games in years to follow , while still getting their fill of hockey by T.V. , etc in the comfort of home and/or friends . Their cost savings also allow them to turn savings into other entertainment venues ,investments , holidays, etc.. Far easier to leave a boring game from comfort of own home than at the Arena .

It's the comfort of watching from home and friends that still feeds the addiction as well as soothing it . Without media , hockey fanaticism would falter greatly as well as several spinoff industry and jobs dependent on a vibrant NHL .

Avatar
#41 MC Hockey
September 05 2012, 09:22AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

This is a serious post. I have a great song (changes words of popular tune from 3 years ago) made up about the lockout focussed on the owners greed and Gary Bettman's unreasonability. Anyone have a guitar and can film a little video to post on YouTube? Seriously...let me know! My twitter handle is Real_MC_Hockey

Avatar
#42 MC Hockey
September 05 2012, 09:27AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

While hooking me up with your guitarist friend or self (see post 41), consider this: During the last lockout, TV poker (Texas Hold 'Em) went from nothing to a huge thing on The Score, TSN, Sportsnet so what will happen this winter if both sides dig in? Will semi-pro lacrosse, PBA bowling, or senior ladies ringette catch your fancy?

Avatar
#43 Dman09
September 05 2012, 10:12AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
fishbone wrote:

I think its time we as hockey fans all across the league unite and chant "FIRE BETTMAN" at every game and in every arena until he's far far removed from the sport of hockey... it worked for Leaf fans when they wanted Wilson gone right!?

wow so everyone on here seems to be siding with the NHLPA from the sounds of it. Can't agree with you. Let me put things in a different perspective.

The CBA negotiations are like a bad divorce. For a group of 30 divorcee's the agreement stands as the following.

- From here on in and the foreseeable future you will pay your ex-wife/husband 57% of your total income.

- From your 43% you will pay for your ex-wife's/Husband's house including utility bills, maintenance and Renovations when required(Stadium, locker room etc.), Vehicle (transportation for away games), and Vacations (Hotels and equipment transport for away games)

- It is likely that you and approx. half the divorcee's are losing small to large sums of money every year with the exception of a few that are loaded, but is it their responsibility to make sure your financials are up to par by giving you some of their wealth?

Re-negotiations go nowhere because the ex’s are happy with the amount they get from you regardless of your situation and don’t seem willing to come to any compromises in the agreement.

Does this sound like an acceptable agreement to you?

Avatar
#44 OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F
September 05 2012, 10:53AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Dman09 wrote:

wow so everyone on here seems to be siding with the NHLPA from the sounds of it. Can't agree with you. Let me put things in a different perspective.

The CBA negotiations are like a bad divorce. For a group of 30 divorcee's the agreement stands as the following.

- From here on in and the foreseeable future you will pay your ex-wife/husband 57% of your total income.

- From your 43% you will pay for your ex-wife's/Husband's house including utility bills, maintenance and Renovations when required(Stadium, locker room etc.), Vehicle (transportation for away games), and Vacations (Hotels and equipment transport for away games)

- It is likely that you and approx. half the divorcee's are losing small to large sums of money every year with the exception of a few that are loaded, but is it their responsibility to make sure your financials are up to par by giving you some of their wealth?

Re-negotiations go nowhere because the ex’s are happy with the amount they get from you regardless of your situation and don’t seem willing to come to any compromises in the agreement.

Does this sound like an acceptable agreement to you?

What a ridiculous analogy

Avatar
#45 justDOit
September 05 2012, 11:14AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Oilers G-that un-retired Haiku writing MotherF^%$er wrote:

SO then by your logic, we can go watch the Oil Kings play because they don't play in an NHL building. RX1 is a dump.

The Oilers are one of two teams which do not have control over their arena - meaning they don't earn any income from food/beer/parking. If they own a part of the team though, then you're really supporting an NHL owner while they trash the sport we love.

But really, if you WANT to support either side in this, don't let any logic stop you.

Avatar
#46 madjam
September 05 2012, 11:17AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props

I wonder what the new NHL will look like after a settlement is reached if long term taken ? End the impasse before a new WHL (World Hockey League )develops to fill the void and marketplace ? I doubt fans would object to a new professional league and put an end to NHL monopoly . Money seems to be destroying game .

Avatar
#47 Dman09
September 05 2012, 11:25AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
OB1 Team Yakopov - F.S.T.N.F wrote:

What a ridiculous analogy

I'm sorry but any business that pays their employees more than the company makes is doomed to FAIL.

Avatar
#48 pelhem grenville
September 05 2012, 11:44AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Wäx Män Riley wrote:

Because Shawn Horcoff sucks!

...and while Shawn may indeed suck why isn't there a memo in his box to tell him that Gabriel Landeskog was given the Avalanche "C" ... the "C" should be on Hall's jersey come next October when the 2013-14 season begins...

Avatar
#49 Geoff
September 05 2012, 11:57AM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Dman09 wrote:

I'm sorry but any business that pays their employees more than the company makes is doomed to FAIL.

You're missing the part where the ex has to work for you and is the main reason you make anything in the first place.

As for a business paying their employees more than they make, well, that's not what's happening. They are paying the employees more than half of what the company makes. I think there are a lot of companies where the salaries of the employees make up more than half of the costs for the company. In fact, I'd guess that any company with highly skilled workers is paying over half of their net income to their employees. The players aren't asking for 107%.

Avatar
#50 justDOit
September 05 2012, 12:01PM
Trash it!
0
trashes
+1
0
props
Dman09 wrote:

I'm sorry but any business that pays their employees more than the company makes is doomed to FAIL.

Well actually, labor is quite often the biggest cost to a business. What dictates success is how much revenue is left over in profit, and this is highly debatable in the NHL. The 'books' are often criticized as being inaccurate, or at the very least, the numbers are open to interpretation.

What I don't see as debatable, is the position the owners are in. Sure, the PA has a lot of power, in that without the players there is no HRR.

I see as the NHL's main advantage being leverage. The rich owners/teams can afford to take a year off and use their arenas for more events and concerts. The break-even teams don't really suffer if they have to close their doors either, and the money losing teams actually win when they don't play hockey (hello Glendale city council).

The players didn't want the current CBA because it contained a salary cap. But what the cap actually did for the players, is level off the Sakic and Fedorov contracts of $14M - $16M with the rollback and cap, and bring up the salaries of the other players with a salary floor. Sure the 24% rollback hurt them all, but at the end of this CBA, we've now got salaries back up into the $12M - $14M range again. Middling players are getting $3M - $4M contracts, and the league minimum is near $1M. Please tell me how the players have suffered under this CBA.

No, I'm not against unions - quite the opposite. But if I had received salary increases over the last five years like the NHL salary cap has experienced, I'd be more than a little willing to take a 15% cut to keep things going.

Comments are closed for this article.