Comments on: Ladd to Hamrlik, Neuvirth: Get your facts right

By: budvw14

budvw14 — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 13:13:22 +0000

Tampa Bay and Carolina have something that Florida, PHX, and Columbus now lack… a marketable superstar! It’s easy to make money nationally when you offer the Staal brothers and Stamkos. But unfortunately nobody will tune into NBC to watch Stephen Weiss take on Radim Vrbata. It’s just too hard to sell hockey to fans who, unlike cold northern market fans, just have way too many other things they can do, without a premier name to draw them. Columbus…well…they’re just cursed to be in an area that breathes football 24-7-365, and Howson is developmentally disabled.

By: tortowl

tortowl — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 16:35:31 +0000

I agree, even though Im a Panther fan, but why stop there – Columbus, Tampa, Carolina….

By: thomaspratt

thomaspratt — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 06:26:23 +0000

I don’t know that a league with a well entrenched top tier is worse that the artificial parity we currently have in the NHL. Why should fans of top teams like the Rangers, Leafs, Canucks, Flyers, etc pay to artificially support the competitiveness of teams like Columbus. Florida, Dallas, Colorado. etc? Believe me, it’s not so I can watch the Jackets and Stars four times a year and the Avs eight times. The lack of a free market keeps those teams from feeling the truth of their poor markets and bad management.

I would also think a free market would allow team owners to move their teams to much more profitable locations. It is a crime that the NHL’s monopoly power means there is only one team in Toronto. The NHL claims to be a gate driven league, but fails to situate teams in a way that achieves maximum attendance.

Certainly, if you are a fan of Norwich City or Swansea, it can get tedious playing Man U (though Canaries did beat Man U last weekend). But you also have a series of extra-league competitions and cups that it’s possible to win. Promotion and relegation is a decent solution to the problem of perennial uncompetitive clubs. And if you can’t afford to see Man U in person, maybe you can take in the nearby Bolton Wanderers. Maybe if you’re a really big fan, you’ll pay attention to academy games.

I just don’t know if I think the current NHL set up is really worth going to the wall over. There seems to be just too many weak or poorly run teams to justify the sacrifice needed to keep them afloat. From a fan perspective, I don’t think a free market in hockey is much to fear.

By: budvw14

budvw14 — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 05:07:01 +0000

Simple solution…get rid of Florida and Phoenix. Lose the dead weight of AHL talent playing on 4th lines and let the league flourish. Brings teams back to hockey markets like Quebec City and forget trying to sell hockey to people who don’t know or care about the sport.

By: east96st

east96st — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 01:07:51 +0000

thomaspratt – Okay, technically, I should have emphasized I was discussing US based leagues. Thought that went without saying since we are discussing the NHL. But, I would point out, that neither the EPL nor most European soccer leagues are really all that competitive. The big market teams dominate, pretty much, year in and year out. Pay for view is common and some clubs charge tickets prices that make the NHL look like a bargain. If you’re a fan of ManU or Chelsea, you’re usually guaranteed a competitive season. But if you’re a fan of Derby, well, all you hope for is if your team does get promoted, it won’t be one season and relegation all over again. I like the promotion/relation system, but it’s got to wear on you as a fan of a team that just cannot compete with the salaries and never having your team have a chance for it’s moment at the top.

By: thomaspratt

thomaspratt — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 00:35:06 +0000

[quote]Free markets have NOTHING to do with professional sports. Sports couldn’t function in a true free market[/quote]

The EPL and most European soccer leagues seem to do just fine working on this type of model.

By: sportsfan69

sportsfan69 — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 00:30:49 +0000

Thanks my friend

By: sportsfan69

sportsfan69 — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 00:28:40 +0000

awesome!

By: blomfeld

blomfeld — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 00:22:09 +0000

I think I got it !

By: sportsfan69

sportsfan69 — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 00:12:50 +0000

Blomfeld,

Sorry, not that one, but still it’s good. Thanks!!

From the movie Valkyrie that stared Tom Cruise. search by – Operation Valkyrie
Operation Valkyrie, it’s 5 mins long. It’s appropriate. Arrest and detain the Fuhrer and his brother, before we any further destruction of the NHL.

By: blomfeld

blomfeld — Sun, 25 Nov 2012 00:05:10 +0000

here you go friend … hopefully this is the one you wanted ?

By: rainyday56

rainyday56 — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:58:24 +0000

Cottage cheese rotting on the shelf ? I respectfully submit many of the players who are inactive in this lock out are healing up nicely and will return to action better than ever. Remember how good the hockey was after the last lockout?
Rule changes had their effect sure. But everyone started the next season healthy. It makes a big difference.

By: tortowl

tortowl — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:50:16 +0000

This just in: You have tarnished your League, you have angered loyal fans and sponsors, the ones that enable you to be paid.
The fact that players are now finger pointing at EACH OTHER as well as Union brass shows how completely dysfunctional this league and it’s Union is.
I once was a huge hockey fan, it took so many years for our Florida Panthers to draw fans, get South Florida excited about hockey, compete against the Heat, and now this???
And you think it’ll be any different in other small NHL markets?
Nice job on self destructing the NHL….

By: sportsfan69

sportsfan69 — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:40:53 +0000

Blomfeld,

Please post it.

/Movies/HD_Youtube/youtube_3iojQ6Ao5WA.mp4

By: east96st

east96st — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:34:30 +0000

Adding to paperlions comments, a free market means no draft. All players can choose to play for whomever they please. Each player would negotiate his own contracts and benefits. Especially poor performing teams, like the Blue Jackets, would be forced to either hire freelance hockey players and/or pay ridiculous premiums for players and NO ONE would sign for more than two years. The best players would only, and could only, play in the biggest markets. You a Winnipeg fan? Sorry, you’re s**t out of luck. Winnipeg could never afford to pay the “you have to live in Winnipeg” premium to an all star caliber player. You would be looking at a massive loss of teams. Let’s be honest, it would probably be NY, Philly, Boston, Chicago, LA, Montreal, and a few others would struggle to hang on. No one else has large enough TV markets to really compete. TV ad revenue would go to each individual team and no national company is going to pay much for ad time during a Buffalo game. Do you like watching the game on TV? Welcome to pay per view! Each team would have to form it’s own cable network and charge for the games. Like a player so much you want his jersey? It may, or may not, be available. The top players would insist on their own merchandise deal. As for rule changes, well, expect the game to change dramatically. Top players would insist on opening up the ice and making sure they don’t get hurt. Too much at stake to risk having a shoulder separated when you get checked into the boards.

Free markets have NOTHING to do with professional sports. Sports couldn’t function in a true free market. As for complaining about “unions designed to protect millionaires”, well I guess you can say that is strange. But probably not as strange as some hockey fan who is probably making just over $35 grand a year sticking up for a billionaire owner that uses your tax dollars to build his stadiums, fill his pockets, and financially prop up his team while charging you top dollar to come and see a game. Or, in the case of a lockout year, which sure seems to happen a lot, NOT see a game.

By: sportsfan69

sportsfan69 — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:33:44 +0000

To the Veteran leadership it’s time to stand up and take over the NHLPA before there is NO season to play for.

/Movies/HD_Youtube/youtube_3iojQ6Ao5WA.mp4

By: bigoldorcafromvan

bigoldorcafromvan — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:23:35 +0000

Sorry Ladd. I am still on the Hammer.s side. The players and NHLPA are being too greedy and they will never get this season or money back. Like Keven OLeary said the players are like cottage cheese rotting on the self. Not many players have a very long self life.. total loss for them. Fuhr and the players should ask for the original offer again and accept it on monday. Sorry Andy.

By: chiefblckbear

chiefblckbear — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:16:20 +0000

In a free market there is no salary cap. I say the union vote that out and see the owners whine a free market lets the northern team that can spend the money down i.e the Boston Toronto detriot chicagos. Little teams the pheonix Tampa bay might suffer. In that. We had a free market the owners hated it and got their cap. So don’t bring up free market. Cause the nhl and owners control the market.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:11:47 +0000

….Ladd would have told you to get your facts straight before commenting.

By: paperlions

paperlions — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 23:11:14 +0000

No, a free market would have owners pay players individually, whatever they liked, allowing the MARKET to determine the value of each players contract. There is nothing “free” about the market for player skills in the NHL.

By: sampulls

sampulls — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 22:43:05 +0000

For those who wish…..really think about it…….there shouldn’t be any negotiating at all. The owners say here is what you get….and players take it or move on. Isn’t that how free markets work? Any unions designed to protect millionaires is a joke!