Injektilo said:
Why should finances mean an advantage on the ice?
Basically, you're admitting that you're worried your team won't be able to compete on a level playing field, no?
what's fair in the real world is not always what's fair in the sporting world. learn to separate the two.
No, I think my team would still be competitive. But, what I am fearful of is seeing my team's best players leaving town...just as fans of small market clubs have seen this happen to their teams. I can empathize with those fans but I certainly don't want to see it happen to my team if it has accumulated a great roster via trades/drafting as the avs have done! I want to see my team win...sue me!
As well, If I'm in a large market and paying more money to see my team than fans in a smaller market, why the heck should some of money go to help other teams beat mine??? If I'm paying more, it should go only to my team (i.e. asking for a good return on my investment).
If, however, there's a system that allows all teams to keep their best players...I'm in favour of it. I also wouldn't be opposed to some revenue sharing, though I believe the large markets owe it to share more money b/c of this mess they helped create.
I still believe the owners should form a partnership amongst themselves with significant revenue sharing before asking the players to become partners. If this means significant revenue sharing is what's required to get a deal done...I'll live with it because at least NHL hockey will return. Will I be happy with such a CBA? Nope!
As well, IMO, the real world is much less fair than the sporting world.