y2kcanucks
Le Sex God
I have a self-imposed cap, yes.
What I don't have is a spending cap imposed by my homeowners association.
I have a spending cap imposed by the bank. I'm pre-approved for a $xxx mortgage. I cannot spend higher than that.
I have a self-imposed cap, yes.
What I don't have is a spending cap imposed by my homeowners association.
Wait, are you saying a large market team should be able to "buy a championship?" or are you saying you think fans in smaller markets should pay the same price you do to see essentially the same product?
I'm very curious because I am a fan of both types of teams and a ticket buyer for both types of teams.
But if i am forced to pay the highest average ticket prices in the league , which we do, then i expect the consumer should be able to receive some kind of competitive advantage that they pay so dearly for.
No, I'm saying i should pay what small market fans pay or something that looks similar to the floor/max set up. Don't get me wrong, i know it ain't happening.
But if i am forced to pay the highest average ticket prices in the league , which we do, then i expect the consumer should be able to receive some kind of competitive advantage that they pay so dearly for.
Let's face it, the new CBA was all about leveling the field , it did it's best to neuter the financial clout (impact of the fans) of the big markets. But sadly their fans got left behind, we as fans still pay as if we are in a big market , yet our franchises are not able to(for the most part) act like one when it comes down the the product we are paying for.
It bothers not the owners of the big markets , it gives them perfect cover to spend less then what we as fans might be able to pressure them into.
Unfortunately our ticket prices do not reflect the new realities in comparison to those being imposed on our owners.
Like i have said , what are our options to be able cause change ?
Not show up over a course of time and hopefully ownership will respond with lower prices for a short time?
How do you explain to your young kids that there will be no live games for a few years because you are trying to take a stand? Damned if you do and damned if you don't.
I'm not part of the evil empire known as MLSE but as a fan of the leafs i am surely feeling the effects of the war.
My anger is directed at the fact that we can't explore all avenues to improve my entertainment value per dollar spent.
My anger is directed toward the fact that a portion of the monies i spend on me and mine go toward others that get to view the same product at a fraction of what i pay.
No, I'm saying i should pay what small market fans pay or something that looks similar to the floor/max set up. Don't get me wrong, i know it ain't happening.
But if i am forced to pay the highest average ticket prices in the league , which we do, then i expect the consumer should be able to receive some kind of competitive advantage that they pay so dearly for.
Let's face it, the new CBA was all about leveling the field , it did it's best to neuter the financial clout (impact of the fans) of the big markets. But sadly their fans got left behind, we as fans still pay as if we are in a big market , yet our franchises are not able to(for the most part) act like one when it comes down the the product we are paying for.
It bothers not the owners of the big markets , it gives them perfect cover to spend less then what we as fans might be able to pressure them into.
Unfortunately our ticket prices do not reflect the new realities in comparison to those being imposed on our owners.
Like i have said , what are our options to be able cause change ?
Not show up over a course of time and hopefully ownership will respond with lower prices for a short time?
How do you explain to your young kids that there will be no live games for a few years because you are trying to take a stand? Damned if you do and damned if you don't.I'm not part of the evil empire known as MLSE but as a fan of the leafs i am surely feeling the effects of the war.
1) Does this anger translate over to other businesses... say, movie theaters? Chain restaurants? Clothing stores?
2) Do you really think that your ticket prices would EVER go down under any circumstances, as long as people in your city are willing to pay them?
One thing Vancouver has done with the surplus of money ownership has received as a result of this, is to reinvest in other areas of the team. Ownership has committed to increasing our scouting and player development budget. Rogers Arena underwent some extensive renovations to the team dressing room, and player facilities. The Aquilini's have poured a lot of money into the team in order to make Vancouver an attractive location for free agents to come here.
Just because your city doesn't support its team doesn't mean it's bad for every other city to support their team.
1) Does this anger translate over to other businesses... say, movie theaters? Chain restaurants? Clothing stores?
2) Do you really think that your ticket prices would EVER go down under any circumstances, as long as people in your city are willing to pay them?
Price is set by demand. The entire Leafs situation is influenced by many anomalies. A lot of Leafs tickets are owned by ticket brokers. Part of the reason there are empty but sold seats at the ACC is the number of seats owned by companies and by brokers. If the fans stopped buying tickets from these brokers, they would most likely suddenly become available to the public directly from MLSE.
How does one explain to their kids no live games? I'm not sure where you live, but you can certainly go to Major Juniors games with the kids, you might not choose to support MLSE by going to see the Marlies, but you could see AHL hockey in Hamilton.
I'm lucky to live where I do. There are a number of good NCAA hockey programs within 100 miles (161 km), yet you even have more good choices in the GTA. I go to see NCAA hockey here, AND still buy season tickets for Columbus and a package for the Flyers. If I give up the Blue Jackets, which I'm seriously considering, I'd just go to more NCAA, Juniors and AHL games. It's a better value, I have as much fun, and frankly the Blue Jackets piss me off regularly. I've bought great seats for NCAA and AHL games for $20 or less, and at NCAA games, parking is free.
It does not translate over to other areas for the simple fact that the product i receive is the same as it is at the other outlets for comparably the same price.
So we are left with only one option, don't go to the games. How does that serve the fan in the long run? Make sense of that to your kids, if you chose to tell them the truth of , why?
Oh! the other options have been viewed . Jr A /OHL/ Marlies / oldtimer charity games/ local Rep games. But alas it does not diffuse the issue of when the question of " Can we go to a leafs game?". Let alone the issues when a Crosby or Ovi roll into town.
Whatever "market advantage" you are afforded as a big market fan should have nothing to do with the competitive balance of the league. There is absolutely no reason that small market teams should have to fight uphill in the player market.
Your market advantage already exists in the fact that you get to play in Winter Classics, see your team on national broadcasts, and generally reap the spoils of being in the spotlight all the time. That is in no way connected to whether your GM should have to make smart roster decisions.
As a Wings fan I feel that the cap punishes teams for being successful. I think parity is a nice word for mediocrity. In my view salary caps water down sports and create inferior product. In the 90s teams like Colorado, NJ, and Detroit were playing the game at an extremely high level albeit defensive. It seems to me that if you want to be good you should market your product as the best franchises in the league do. What do you think? Is it good that Chicago had to dismantle their team after winning a cup? Is it good that a team that drafts well and develops talent has to give up that talent as soon as they become strong NHL players?
Would there be any logic in saying that once a league gets to a certain size that a Salary Cap becomes pretty much a necessary element if you wish to try to secure the future of the teams in the League?
Current bottom-spending team is at $33M actual payroll. Current top-spending team is more than double that, at $67M.
The bottom-spending team has 15 wins in 49 games, and sits at the bottom of the league. The top-spending team has 33 wins in 50 games, and sits at the top of the league.
Twice as much spending, twice as many wins.
#3 spender is 4th overall. #4 spender is 2nd overall. #5 spender is 5th overall.
The salary cap has done nothing to make small spenders any more competitive than they were pre-cap. If anything, it appears to be making the situation worse than it was before.
This needs to be emphasized: a hard cap punishes both the most valuable fans in the league by not letting them get value for the money, and the weakest teams, who have trouble surviving even at the cap floor. The one group it most definitely helps is OWNERS of the big-market teams, who are essentially guaranteed large profits because they no longer have to compete against each other.
It's not the answer for hockey.
Current bottom-spending team is at $33M actual payroll. Current top-spending team is more than double that, at $67M.
The bottom-spending team has 15 wins in 49 games, and sits at the bottom of the league. The top-spending team has 33 wins in 50 games, and sits at the top of the league.
Twice as much spending, twice as many wins.
#3 spender is 4th overall. #4 spender is 2nd overall. #5 spender is 5th overall.
The salary cap has done nothing to make small spenders any more competitive than they were pre-cap. If anything, it appears to be making the situation worse than it was before.
what the salary cap lacks is incentive for the smaller market teams to grow or a mechanism to determine just who is unable to compete.
instead of the floor being a set 55% of the cap it would be a percentage of average revenue. right now it would be approximately 31.5% of average revenue.
This means less money for players, while retaining high profits for big-team owners. A heavy luxury tax with no cap ceiling, while retaining the cap floor, would IMO do more.