Friday, July 15, 2005
A True Partnership
When talk of a salary cap was first brought up, I wasn't a fan of the idea. The NHL's proposal was an extremely low cap figure that essentially served only to "idiot-proof" the system and guarantee owners a profit. If an owner was guaranteed to make money no matter how poorly his team was managed or how his team performed, then where would the motivation to win come from? And even if the owner was motivated to win... if the team was at or close to the cap, it severely limits the improvements that can be made, a scenario that I do not like as a fan.
So how do I feel about the present, proposed cap system?
Quite honestly, I like the system that the owners and players have agreed to. The new CBA does include a team-by-team cap of $39 million in players salaries, but more importantly, it also links league-wide players salaries to 54% of league revenues. With this linked system - this "partnership" - both the owners and players will have a motivation to build the game and build revenues. The most obvious way to build the game is by improving the on-ice product - and an improved on-ice product is something that I can appreciate as a fan.
So how do I feel about the present, proposed cap system?
Quite honestly, I like the system that the owners and players have agreed to. The new CBA does include a team-by-team cap of $39 million in players salaries, but more importantly, it also links league-wide players salaries to 54% of league revenues. With this linked system - this "partnership" - both the owners and players will have a motivation to build the game and build revenues. The most obvious way to build the game is by improving the on-ice product - and an improved on-ice product is something that I can appreciate as a fan.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home