>>>I really don't have anything else to say. :)
>>
>>With or without a salary cap?
>
>Where do you side on this one, Denis?
>
>Me, I'm with the players.
>The owners have always decided players' salaries. Trouble is, a FEW owners want to win at any cost so they pay the BIG BUCKS, effectively driving up the salaries overall.
>So as I see it the owners seem to need a salary cap just to let them keep a few renegade owners in line. They can't do it amongst themselves, for whatever reason.
>One might say that the owners want to enjoy the benefits of capitalism while imposing communism on their employees.
>
>Sure, the players are HIGHLY paid. But whose fault is that... the players? The players don't sign the cheques, do they. The players don't make the salary offers, do they? We have seen where a player holds out for more and it does happen that he doesn't get more.
>
>Are the owners going to put price caps on the seats, on the hot dogs and beer, on the baubles they sell as souvenirs, etc?... not bloody likely!
>Are the owners richer than the players?... well DUH!!
>
>I just gotta go with the players.


I'm warning you Jim this is a lenghty one <g>


I never really thought seriously about it. I'll try to do it now.

Player's salaries are insane. But then again Bill Gate's fortune, Larry Ellison's fortune, Michael Dell's fortune... are also insane. They won't get a company profit cap.

There was a time when Hockey was a sport. I remember the 1976 season of the Montreal Canadians. Wow! that was just amazing. Nowadays Hockey is a business. And as for any business only the ones with the most money will probably survive. We just have to look at the NY Rangers. If they let them throw money like they do right now to sorta buy the Stanley cup eventually they'll have the right players and win (if we can still call that a win) that cup.

If I analyse thoroughly what you said it makes a lot of sense. If we look at the situation overall they make it look like the owners are together on that crisis. As I think about it while writing this looks like a monumental bluff. The only thing uniting them is probably that they want to invest the least in the product and make the most out of it. Is'nt that the basic mentality of a business.

If they really liked the game they'd protect their investment (the best players). they'd really call the penalties. (even if there's one minute left in the third period and the game is tied). That sport was probably one of the most exciting sport to watch. But because now there are too many teams, there are not enough good players to put in each team. So each team have to get more bullies, plumbers. In short second and third rate players. But hey who cares this is not a sport anymore it's a business.

So if it was still a sport then perhaps a salary cap would make more sense. But if it was still a sport salaries would have never get so high. It's not the athletes that decided on those high salaries. It's the businessmen that spotted that it could've been changed into a business.

So my verdict <g> No salary cap.

But and this a big but. I interrogate myself. Businessmen involved in Hockey probably have other businesses. So if that (hockey) business is shut down then they will go on with their other businesses. And then perhaps they won't be as much affected as the hockey players who won't really do something else. Ok perhaps a minority won't be affected but the majority of those hockey players are just that. Hockey players. How long will they be able to afford to not play hockey.

So what will decide of the outcome of the crisis. If the business is really healthy the lock-out should'nt be that long. Who in his right mind wants to stop a business that is going well. But if on the other side the business is not going that well then the players will probably have to cave in and accept the salary cap.

There is a big problem though with that business. Sadly we have to question ourselves and wonder if the Canadian businesses (Montreal Canadians, Toronto Maple Leafs, Calgary Flames, Edmonton Oilers, Vancouver Canucks) can still compete with the american businesses. We already lost the Winniped Jets and the Quebec Nordiques. Which one will be the next to go?

So a salary cap would perhaps be good in saving our businesses. Because there are also other factors to consider. The potential of attraction of the sports. It's tough to compete with a market has big as New-York. When a city can afford to have multiple franchises in many sports you know that it's because they have a huge potential. How can you compete with them unless there is a salary cap.

So my new verdict <bg> Yes to the salary cap.

But considering all sides of the matter I'd say no to the salary cap. The reason. Hockey was a sport to begin with. And a very interesting sport. Then it turned into a business and became a very dull sport to watch. Concidence... I guess not.

So if we can't play (Canada) with the other businesses because only money talks then why don't we sell those businesses and start again by redefining hockey. Build another league, Make strict rules. Have contests to pick the players with the best abilities. You know like the contest they do with the all-start each year. The players that could'nt make the good times would'nt be able to play in the new league. Would'nt that be great? Probably but then again this one would probably be turned into a business eventually.

Should I say infinite loop ;-D

How do I feel about this situation. I DON'T CARE. I don't really watch hockey anymore. I don't know if it's an age factor. Or if it's only because I'm tired of watching the puck dumping at the end of the other side of the rink or the trap (anti-hockey). The only time I'll watch is when there is a tie after three periods and then they play overtime 4 against 4. Then It reminds me of what hockey was once upon a time.


The real sad thing with this conflict is not about the owners or the players but will all the persons working for those teams that will lose their jobs.