but i think that's the argument that has been made previously in this thread as well...people come to see the players, they pay money to see the stars and pay money for their merchandise, etc etc. the players are bringing value to the franchises. they're not investing their own money into it but they're investing their lives and work and the benefit to the owners is the revenue that's generated because of that.
i mean do you really think the NHL would have any kind of popularity if it was filled with ECHL level players vs. the star players that we have now (well not now...but you get the idea). you can't just replace joe thornton with brad smyth and call it good and expect people to keep shelling out the same amount of money they were
that's the argument anyways, it's not a perfect rebuttal to what you're saying cuz i don't have the patience right now to nitpick through every little point and justify everything exactly...but if the players are the ones generating revenue, why shouldn't they get part of that revenue?
i think this all boils down to "philosophical differences" though when it comes to these matters