Thunderstruck said:
The NHL is clearly on record stating they will discuss ANY SYSTEM that links salaries and revenues.
If that is true, then great!
This fan has no issue with that premise. The concern is with the knee-jerk reaction among many fans for a restrictive, hardcap.
Their line: it will restrict the escalation of ridiculous salaries and make for an even playing field with regard to payrolls.
Both true.
However, it will also allow for teams to lose talent at a younger age (by virtue of a likely tradeoff in the UFA age), will force teams to jettison quality players solely to get under the artificial cap, facilitate
more roster instability year-to-year and most likely ensure that championships teams will lose talent and thus any ability to remain on top year-to-year. Read: forced mediocrity, (See: NFL. Oh, where have you gone recent SuperBowl Champs/Finalists like Tampa Bay, Oakland, Carolina, NY, Baltimore? People talk about the horror of "cinderellas" - playoff teams who quickly disappear in the NHL. That is
commonplace in the "glorious"
NFL.)
The NHLPA
should be willing to link overall league revenue to salary structures, not unlike the NBA does. However, it does not have to be acheived through a draconian hardcap. (Seems to me that the abundance of hardcappers simply wish to punish "overpaid" players and successful, well-run franchises, but that's another story.)
None of this is presented from a "pro-NHLPA" perspective, nor an owner's perspective. It is presented from what is best from
a fan's persepctive. Perhaps some (many) have no qualms with rooting simply for the jersey, and having a never-ending merry-go-round of roster changes on a yearly basis. No long-standing identity of players (save for a couple), much like today's NFL, as contracts are dispersed with regularity.
This fan appreciates consistency year-to-year, even if it does not result in the Cup. The NYI team that exists today, albeit a mediocre one, resembles in great part, the same team formed in the summer of 2001. The best teams in the league retain their core talent. That will not be the case in a hardcap world.
Some may be willing to make that tradeoff. Be careful what you wish for.
Simply wish the hardcappers would open their minds to other options. For a hardcap will not solve the problems of the NHL. It speaks nothing at all to generating additional revenue, nor will it ensure lower overall salaries. (Check out the history of salaries in the post-hardcap NFL. A brief reduction, followed by continued overall escalation. Meanwhile, under a
much less restrictive system, the median MLB salary has decreased significantly - to ~$800,000 - since the last CBA in 2002. Yet, ironically, many pro-hardcappers never acknowledge this point.)
Just my opinion.