View Full Version : NHL to increase minimum, maximum team salaries
NHL to increase minimum, maximum team salaries
Associated Press
RALEIGH, N.C. -- The NHL salary cap will be about $44 million next season, an increase of $5 million per team, after league revenues were higher than expected in the first year following the seasonlong lockout. NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and players' association executive director Ted Saskin met Monday in New York and set the upper level of the cap at approximately $44 million with the minimum rising to about $28 million, according to two people with knowledge of the meeting who declined to be identified because the final figures have not been released. Bettman returned to North Carolina on Monday night and presented the Carolina Hurricanes (http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/clubhouse?team=car) with the Stanley Cup following their 3-1 victory over the Edmonton Oilers (http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/clubhouse?team=edm) in Game 7 of the finals. Before the start of the series, Bettman said he expected next season's cap to fall in the $43 million to $44 million range. The cap figures will be a topic Wednesday when the NHL board of governors convenes in New York. The final numbers will be officially set once all the revenues from the 2005-06 season are calculated by the end of June. They are expected to be in the $2.1 billion range, significantly higher than the projected amount of $1.8 billion. The league and the union used that figure to set this season's cap at $39 million with a floor of $21.5 million. "The previous cap wasn't miscalculated, it was a negotiated number," Bettman said before Game 1 of the finals. "It is predominantly an increase in revenues. The cap was lower than it should have been this year based on what the revenues turned out to be, but nobody had any idea what the revenues were going to turn out to be because nobody had ever been in the situation that we were in. "Revenues will be at an all-time high for this league." The NHL just completed its first season with a salary cap system. It was the major sticking point in the lockout that forced the cancellation of the entire 2004-05 campaign. The players' association had said it would never accept a salary cap, yet relented last summer to get a deal done.
shmuck
06-20-2006, 10:17 AM
NHL is on the right track, that lockout hurt them, but was only a speed bump for them.
NHL > MLB
NHL is on the right track, that lockout hurt them, but was only a speed bump for them.
NHL > MLB
MLB >>> NHL
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:19 AM
MLB >>> NHL
Ahahahahaahaha.
Richter35
06-20-2006, 10:20 AM
that is a pretty significant increase...if 6m (ish) is the max salary that could give every team a chance to sign one or more of their star players that are going to look for the max... its good and bad...
It helps the teams that were closer to the cap....
but a lot of the teams that thought the big stars would be available because of the cap situation will have to hope those star players just dont want to stay with the same team anymore...
Richter35
06-20-2006, 10:21 AM
MLB >>> NHL
the leagues maybe... but not the sport!
shmuck
06-20-2006, 10:22 AM
the leagues maybe... but not the sport!
I dont even think you can compare the leagues.
domenick2x
06-20-2006, 10:25 AM
MLB >>> NHL
NHL is on track to follow NFL into a competitive, fiscally solvent league.
MLB still has a lot of haves vs. have nots. There's too great a possibility for MLB to come crashing down in the next 20 years (i.e. 3 or 4 teams buying up all the talent and being the only competitive ones year in and year out).
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:26 AM
that is a pretty significant increase...if 6m (ish) is the max salary that could give every team a chance to sign one or more of their star players that are going to look for the max... its good and bad...
It helps the teams that were closer to the cap....
but a lot of the teams that thought the big stars would be available because of the cap situation will have to hope those star players just dont want to stay with the same team anymore...
The beautiful thing about the cap is that when it goes up, so does the max contract. So even still your going to have greedy players wanting even more.
shmuck
06-20-2006, 10:27 AM
NHL is on track to follow NFL into a competitive, fiscally solvent league.
MLB still has a lot of haves vs. have nots. There's too great a possibility for MLB to come crashing down in the next 20 years (i.e. 3 or 4 teams buying up all the talent and being the only competitive ones year in and year out).
Thank you. I went into a bit yesterday.
For a sports league to be competitive in today's world, they must have a hard salary cap. MLB lacks a lot of things.
GodofMike
06-20-2006, 10:27 AM
Nfl>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>nhl>>>>>>>>>>nba>>>>>>>>mlb:D
the leagues maybe... but not the sport!
Right, baseball is better.
NHL is on track to follow NFL into a competitive, fiscally solvent league.
MLB still has a lot of haves vs. have nots. There's too great a possibility for MLB to come crashing down in the next 20 years (i.e. 3 or 4 teams buying up all the talent and being the only competitive ones year in and year out).
MLB is the oldest professional sports league and will be around just as long as any other sport.
shmuck
06-20-2006, 10:29 AM
The beautiful thing about the cap is that when it goes up, so does the max contract. So even still your going to have greedy players wanting even more.
Can't have everything in world. Greedy players will always exist in every league.
Richter35
06-20-2006, 10:29 AM
The beautiful thing about the cap is that when it goes up, so does the max contract. So even still your going to have greedy players wanting even more.
thanks Dano, i didnt know that!
Thank you. I went into a bit yesterday.
For a sports league to be competitive in today's world, they must have a hard salary cap. MLB lacks a lot of things.
In Canada the NHL may be G-d, but they're barely number 4 in the US (and NASCAR may have overtaken them by now).
Richter35
06-20-2006, 10:31 AM
Right, baseball is better.
not even close!!!
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:31 AM
In Canada the NHL may be G-d, but they're barely number 4 in the US (and NASCAR may have overtaken them by now).
Which is easily expected when the league takes a year off and is back on sparingly on network television.
not even close!!!
You're right, baseball is way better. Thanks for correcting me! :p
shmuck
06-20-2006, 10:33 AM
In Canada the NHL may be G-d, but they're barely number 4 in the US (and NASCAR may have overtaken them by now).
I know that, but I'm thinking in the long term. The NHL will never be really popular in the southern most states, but it will get more popular if the product continues to get better which it is.
I cant say baseball is getting anymore popular with all their damn problems they have.
Which is easily expected when the league takes a year off and is back on sparingly on network television.
Except that it has always been number 4 and the year off only made things worse.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:33 AM
thanks Dano, i didnt know that!
I believe the max is 20% of the cap, regardless of the cap number. So when the cap gets kicked back up to 50 mil, players are gonna start wanting 10 mil again. Lovely.
I don't know why Shmuck decided to diss baseball but I forgive him!
Anyway, I'm glad the salary cap is going up. Maybe that means the Blues can afford some decent players.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:34 AM
Except that it has always been number 4 and the year off only made things worse.
Not in 94 :)
Richter35
06-20-2006, 10:35 AM
You're right, baseball is way better. Thanks for correcting me! :p
im not going to go back and forth with you here... you know which sport im talking about!
im not going to go back and forth with you here... you know which sport im talking about!
Baseball.
shmuck
06-20-2006, 10:36 AM
Except that it has always been number 4 and the year off only made things worse.
There's a reason why I said as the product gets better then they will become more popular.
There's no denying that hockey is/was the number 4 sport. But it will get more popular.
randomguymike
06-20-2006, 10:36 AM
MLB still has a lot of haves vs. have nots. There's too great a possibility for MLB to come crashing down in the next 20 years (i.e. 3 or 4 teams buying up all the talent and being the only competitive ones year in and year out).
Bah, team 14th in payroll this year has the best record in MLB. Oakland (Also outside of the top 10) is the hottest team.
The only thing baseball needs is a salary floor. Tampa Bay, Florida, Pitt, KC, are the worst teams in the league becuase they do not spend enough to be competetive. Once you reach about $60million you can win it all. These teams, Spending $14MIllion and $35 MIllion have no shot, though. Thats the best part of this NHL deal is the floor. Glad to see the floor getting a hefty boost too.
I still think MLB will be fine once they get rid of the used car salesman. No doubt he's the worst commish in sports. Just as Goodenow was the worst Sports Union Head and almost drove hockey into the ground.
Not in 94 :)
That was 12 years ago. The NFL went on strike in 87, maybe you could argue that 19 years ago the NHL was more popular?
Richter35
06-20-2006, 10:37 AM
I don't know why Shmuck decided to diss baseball but I forgive him!
Anyway, I'm glad the salary cap is going up. Maybe that means the Blues can afford some decent players.
you do realize everyone started with the same cap this year... every team had the chance to buy out those players that had large contracts...
There's a reason why I said as the product gets better then they will become more popular.
There's no denying that hockey is/was the number 4 sport. But it will get more popular.
I've heard that about soccer gaining popularity, too. It's really a niche sport without mass appeal. Don't get me wrong, I'm a hockey fan, but I just don't see it being as big as any of the other major sports in the US.
you do realize everyone started with the same cap this year... every team had the chance to buy out those players that had large contracts...
Yep, but the Blues were up for sale, which is why they made the decisions they made (traded Pronger).
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:40 AM
There's a reason why I said as the product gets better then they will become more popular.
There's no denying that hockey is/was the number 4 sport. But it will get more popular.
Realistically, I doubt it. Regardless of the product, until hockey becomes an affordable sport to play, it will never become popular. A lot of kids can't even get into the sport if they wanted to at a young age because of the price of the gear, so the parents push the "cheaper" sports to the kids if they want to remain athletic. With that mentality, the love of hockey will die down as the kid gets older and eventually will disappear. It's a sad reality really.
Richter35
06-20-2006, 10:44 AM
the rangers organization started the Ice Hockey in Harlem, so that kids that done have the money to buy the equipment can get a chance to play... and maybe spark an interest in the sport...
even if they dont continue to play the sport, they can still have an interest in it...
i know full well that baseball is more popular then hockey with out a doubt... but i this hockey is a far better sport then baseball!
Vegas
06-20-2006, 10:45 AM
I know that, but I'm thinking in the long term. The NHL will never be really popular in the southern most states, but it will get more popular if the product continues to get better which it is.
Tell me again the geographic region of the last two Cup winners.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:46 AM
I've heard that about soccer gaining popularity, too. It's really a niche sport without mass appeal. Don't get me wrong, I'm a hockey fan, but I just don't see it being as big as any of the other major sports in the US.
Soccer isn't a niche sport. Soccer took the wrong approach in America with MLS. They tried to promote AMERICAN soccer with AMERICAN players. Not a smart business move as the best players are (clearly) not American. What they should have done was try to coax a bunch of billionairs to start a league to rival those in Europe. America CERTAINLY has the resources to pull of this move, but US Soccer doesnt seem to want to abandon the "home grown" approach.
Vegas
06-20-2006, 10:48 AM
Anyway, I'm glad the salary cap is going up. Maybe that means the Blues can afford some decent players.
No offense, but I hate the blues almost as much as I hate Montreal. I hate Montreal for the obvious reasons. I hate the Blues, because they started the whole salary escalation in hockey that put the league in such bad shape.
the rangers organization started the Ice Hockey in Harlem, so that kids that done have the money to buy the equipment can get a chance to play... and maybe spark an interest in the sport...
even if they dont continue to play the sport, they can still have an interest in it...
i know full well that baseball is more popular then hockey with out a doubt... but i this hockey is a far better sport then baseball!
A lot of kids I grew up with played street hockey on rollerblades it seemed like all the time. But, once they got to a certain age and wanted to play organized hockey, they had to get a ride about 10 miles away to this other suburb that had an ice rink. I don't know how cold winters get in NYC, but in STL I'd never recommend trying to skate across a frozen pond!
domenick2x
06-20-2006, 10:49 AM
Realistically, I doubt it. Regardless of the product, until hockey becomes an affordable sport to play, it will never become popular. A lot of kids can't even get into the sport if they wanted to at a young age because of the price of the gear, so the parents push the "cheaper" sports to the kids if they want to remain athletic. With that mentality, the love of hockey will die down as the kid gets older and eventually will disappear. It's a sad reality really.
I'd disagree with that.
How many kids in the last 10 years really play baseball? Soccer is the biggest sport among the youth... but a professional league in the US is far, far below Hockey.
Hell, LaCrosse and Soccer, professionally, are still lower than the WNBA.
It's all about broadcasting. If you show it, people will watch. If the games are good, you'll win a following. The dominos continue to topple, until you have a top tier sport.
As far as popularity goes, it's like this:
NFL>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NBA>>>>>MLB>>>NASCAR>>>NHL>>>>>WNBA etc.
But I think that the NHL is headed in the right direction and will eventually (assuming no major upheavals) move up to a weak 3rd place. MLB is dropping, and until they manage to get some control, it will continue to do so. NBA peaked in the early/mid 90's, and has been on a slow decline ever since. NFL has only gotten STRONGER - and I think you can credit that to two factors, a hard cap (which keeps teams competitive) and a short season. NHL has one factor in common there, and that will help propel it for the next decade.
No offense, but I hate the blues almost as much as I hate Montreal. I hate Montreal for the obvious reasons. I hate the Blues, because they started the whole salary escalation in hockey that put the league in such bad shape.
That's okay, to each his own. I hate the Blues because they always fuck everything up. I still root for them, though.
Vegas
06-20-2006, 10:51 AM
Soccer isn't a niche sport. Soccer took the wrong approach in America with MLS. They tried to promote AMERICAN soccer with AMERICAN players. Not a smart business move as the best players are (clearly) not American. What they should have done was try to coax a bunch of billionairs to start a league to rival those in Europe. America CERTAINLY has the resources to pull of this move, but US Soccer doesnt seem to want to abandon the "home grown" approach.
Soccer will always have a tough time in the US. There is no season for it as they will always have to compete against the major sports regardless of the time of year. In addition, there are no timeouts and thus no big revenue from commercials. Without the big TV contracts, it will always be a niche product.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:51 AM
the rangers organization started the Ice Hockey in Harlem, so that kids that done have the money to buy the equipment can get a chance to play... and maybe spark an interest in the sport...
even if they dont continue to play the sport, they can still have an interest in it...
A few teams have done similar programs, but it's still not enough. Hockey Companies make ridiculous amounts of money on gear because the cost to make the stuff is so low and the prices they sell for are RIDICULOUSLY high. Even if kids DO emerge from poorer settings, eventually as they get older the cost of equipment becomes even more. Why throw out thousands of dollars for hockey gear EVERY year when you can get a pair of cleats, a glove and a bat that will last years?
domenick2x
06-20-2006, 10:51 AM
Soccer isn't a niche sport. Soccer took the wrong approach in America with MLS. They tried to promote AMERICAN soccer with AMERICAN players. Not a smart business move as the best players are (clearly) not American. What they should have done was try to coax a bunch of billionairs to start a league to rival those in Europe. America CERTAINLY has the resources to pull of this move, but US Soccer doesnt seem to want to abandon the "home grown" approach.
US ought to see about hosting a couple of expansion teams from the European leagues. Only have them in the cities that actually have a following (NYC, maybe Miami)... and slow-grow.
STLCARDSFAN1
06-20-2006, 10:51 AM
yeah I wouldn't say that nhl is better then mlb but I am really starting to like hockey more.
Soccer isn't a niche sport. Soccer took the wrong approach in America with MLS. They tried to promote AMERICAN soccer with AMERICAN players. Not a smart business move as the best players are (clearly) not American. What they should have done was try to coax a bunch of billionairs to start a league to rival those in Europe. America CERTAINLY has the resources to pull of this move, but US Soccer doesnt seem to want to abandon the "home grown" approach.
Kids play soccer but don't care to watch it on TV or go to games. Once soccer is seen as something more than just something kids play, once they have actual heroes to follow, soccer'll do better. But, MLS has a niche following just like Major League Lacrosse.
Richter35
06-20-2006, 10:55 AM
A lot of kids I grew up with played street hockey on rollerblades it seemed like all the time. But, once they got to a certain age and wanted to play organized hockey, they had to get a ride about 10 miles away to this other suburb that had an ice rink. I don't know how cold winters get in NYC, but in STL I'd never recommend trying to skate across a frozen pond!
a lot of kids i grew up with did the same thing.... I have a roller hockey rink down the block from my house... even if it was cold enough to skate on a frozen pond in NYC, we dont have ponds! I know of plenty of ice hockey rinks that are a short drive away...
the problem in NYC is that 90% of schools dont have hockey teams.... mostly catholic schools....
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:55 AM
Soccer will always have a tough time in the US. There is no season for it as they will always have to compete against the major sports regardless of the time of year. In addition, there are no timeouts and thus no big revenue from commercials. Without the big TV contracts, it will always be a niche product.
Companies pay MILLIONS of dollars to get each of those little advertisements you see along the sidelines of fields in Europe. Then there are jersey advertisement rights worth tens of millions. As for TV, they often have the "this broadcast is brought to you commercial free by blah blah", thats money. If there was a way to even get a couple superstars IN THEIR PRIME over to America, it would catch on like wildfire. Everytime Beckham sets foot on US soil, the stadiums sellout. Chelsea will be taking on an MLS All-Star team in I think August, that game will also sell out.
Richter35
06-20-2006, 10:57 AM
A few teams have done similar programs, but it's still not enough. Hockey Companies make ridiculous amounts of money on gear because the cost to make the stuff is so low and the prices they sell for are RIDICULOUSLY high. Even if kids DO emerge from poorer settings, eventually as they get older the cost of equipment becomes even more. Why throw out thousands of dollars for hockey gear EVERY year when you can get a pair of cleats, a glove and a bat that will last years?
i completely understand... but an interest in the sport might spark so that they watch the game... not just that they play it!
the problem in NYC is that 90% of schools dont have hockey teams.... mostly catholic schools....
My high school had a club hockey team but that was it. They played very few different teams around the state because there just weren't a lot of other schools with teams.
There's a reason that only 2 players from STL have ever made it to the NHL.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:58 AM
Kids play soccer but don't care to watch it on TV or go to games. Once soccer is seen as something more than just something kids play, once they have actual heroes to follow, soccer'll do better. But, MLS has a niche following just like Major League Lacrosse.
That's my point. They need to bring superstar soccer players over here. I bet you most little kids know who Ronaldo, Beckham and Ronaldihno are. I bet you they know Freddie Adu and would love to see the kid play, but MLS is WASTING the kid by having him come off the bench.
hotpapa666
06-20-2006, 10:58 AM
NFL>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>NBA>>>>>MLB>>>NASCAR>>>NHL>>>>>WNBA etc.
What do you base this on? Popularity? TV contracts? financial health of the league? Of the teams?...
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 10:59 AM
i completely understand... but an interest in the sport might spark so that they watch the game... not just that they play it!
True, but for a lot of fans, the interest comes from playing the sport. Obviously not all, but a lot. If their ability to play it slowly dies down, so will their interest in the sport as they are now playing football/basketball and both sports compete for the same schedules.
That's my point. They need to bring superstar soccer players over here. I bet you most little kids know who Ronaldo, Beckham and Ronaldihno are. I bet you they know Freddie Adu and would love to see the kid play, but MLS is WASTING the kid by having him come off the bench.
Knowing who they are is one thing, idolizing them the way kids idolize Albert Pujols, Tom Brady or Dwyane Wade is completely another.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 11:03 AM
Knowing who they are is one thing, idolizing them the way kids idolize Albert Pujols, Tom Brady or Dwyane Wade is completely another.
They dont get the CHANCE to idolize them because they see them once every four years if they aren't finding clips on the internet.
Richter35
06-20-2006, 11:06 AM
My high school had a club hockey team but that was it. They played very few different teams around the state because there just weren't a lot of other schools with teams.
There's a reason that only 2 players from STL have ever made it to the NHL.
my high school only had baseball, basketball teams...
we didnt have football or hockey...
I dont know how many players from NYC have made it to the NHL, i know of at least one... Mathieu Schneider!!!!
They dont get the CHANCE to idolize them because they see them once every four years if they aren't finding clips on the internet.
Right because soccer isn't valued as anything more than a niche sport (because if it was, there'd be more coverage and MLS would be more popular). It's a vicious cycle, huh?
I dont know how many players from NYC have made it to the NHL, i know of at least one... Mathieu Schneider!!!!
We had Pat LaFontaine and Cam Jansen (currently playing for the NJ Devils).
domenick2x
06-20-2006, 11:09 AM
What do you base this on? Popularity? TV contracts? financial health of the league? Of the teams?...
The line immediately before the one you quoted was:
As far as popularity goes, it's like this:
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 11:11 AM
Right because soccer isn't valued as anything more than a niche sport (because if it was, there'd be more coverage and MLS would be more popular). It's a vicious cycle, huh?
It's not a cycle. It's my point.
If US Soccer took the CORRECT approach of making a league with INTERNATIONAL SUPERSTARS, the league would catch. The MLS is all about players being HOME GROWN. Basically, it's like AA to the European League's MLB because once players do enough in MLS they "head to the big leagues" in Europe. Why would a league catch on when you know the best players in the league are only going to leave in 3-4 years anyway?
Even if you assemble a 6 team "super" league in HUGE markets and HUGE soccer markets, NYC, Texas, Florida and such, interest would blow up because even Americans would care about the sport if they are getting the best in the world.
If you've ever been to a soccer game in Europe, you'd know the atmosphere is absolutely electric. Americans love that sort of thing as well, which is why Football games are sold out literally everywhere all the time. If you have that atmosphere at soccer games in America, interest would certainly grow.
It's not a cycle. It's my point.
If US Soccer took the CORRECT approach of making a league with INTERNATIONAL SUPERSTARS, the league would catch. The MLS is all about players being HOME GROWN. Basically, it's like AA to the European League's MLB because once players do enough in MLS they "head to the big leagues" in Europe. Why would a league catch on when you know the best players in the league are only going to leave in 3-4 years anyway?
Even if you assemble a 6 team "super" league in HUGE markets and HUGE soccer markets, NYC, Texas, Florida and such, interest would blow up because even Americans would care about the sport if they are getting the best in the world.
If you've ever been to a soccer game in Europe, you'd know the atmosphere is absolutely electric. Americans love that sort of thing as well, which is why Football games are sold out literally everywhere all the time. If you have that atmosphere at soccer games in America, interest would certainly grow.
The error in logic is, of course, that "if only the fans had a chance to see the really good players, they'd be hooked." I don't buy that. It's going to take a lot more than convincing David Beckham to suit up for MLS to make soccer a huge deal. Society needs to value soccer as a legit sport for it to catch on. For it to catch on they have to have big names. They can't get the big names without there already being a genuine interest in the sport. There's an interest, but it's not like people are rioting to see MLS matches.
Also, soccer is a sport that requires patience since most games only have about 2-3 goals. Americans like action (see NFL and NBA) and soccer isn't always action-packed.
STLCARDSFAN1
06-20-2006, 11:17 AM
soccer is just too boring to watch.
soccer is just too boring to watch.
While I won't agree with that statement, that's how a lot of people feel (and is one of my points).
hotpapa666
06-20-2006, 11:19 AM
The line immediately before the one you quoted was:
Gotcha. Then the list is completly wrong. NASCAR is much more popular than the NBA, as is MLB.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 11:28 AM
For it to catch on they have to have big names. They can't get the big names without there already being a genuine interest in the sport. There's an interest, but it's not like people are rioting to see MLS matches.
Also, soccer is a sport that requires patience since most games only have about 2-3 goals. Americans like action (see NFL and NBA) and soccer isn't always action-packed.
Baseball isn't action packed either. There's an average of what...7 minutes of actual "action" during a 3 hour baseball game? What makes baseball such an "exciting" game?
To the point.
I'll throw out some numbers to tickle your fancy.
57,431
51,350
61,316
44,910
What are those you ask? Attendance figures for some of the MLS CHAMPIONSHIP games. If you can draw 45k+ to GARBAGE soccer, why wouldn't you be able to draw 45k+ consistently for the world's best?
You know what draws interest from players to play in their leagues???
$
$
$
Nothing speaks more than the almighty dollar and America and it's billionairs sure as hell have a lot of it. I assure you, if US Soccer really wanted to do something decent, they wouldnt start a league that has a SALARY CAP of....get ready for it...TWO million dollars. I'm quite sure guys like Zidane, Beckham and Shevchenko shit out two million dollar bills. Where is the incentive to play in America when you are making pennies on the dollar? There is none and thats why America has a shitty soccer league, with a shitty developmental program and a shitty following.
Baseball isn't action packed either. There's an average of what...7 minutes of actual "action" during a 3 hour baseball game? What makes baseball such an "exciting" game?
To the point.
I'll throw out some numbers to tickle your fancy.
57,431
51,350
61,316
44,910
What are those you ask? Attendance figures for some of the MLS CHAMPIONSHIP games. If you can draw 45k+ to GARBAGE soccer, why wouldn't you be able to draw 45k+ consistently for the world's best?
You know what draws interest from players to play in their leagues???
$
$
$
Nothing speaks more than the almighty dollar and America and it's billionairs sure as hell have a lot of it. I assure you, if US Soccer really wanted to do something decent, they wouldnt start a league that has a SALARY CAP of....get ready for it...TWO million dollars. I'm quite sure guys like Zidane, Beckham and Shevchenko shit out two million dollar bills. Where is the incentive to play in America when you are making pennies on the dollar? There is none and thats why America has a shitty soccer league, with a shitty developmental program and a shitty following.
Baseball has fallen behind the NFL (which, by the way, has about the same amount in time of action as MLB) because of a perceived lack of action.
MLS isn't garbage, I never referred to it as that. Again, until society changes it's views on the sport it will continue to flounder in obscurity. People have deep emotional attachments to their MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL teams, I'm not sure the same can be said about MLS teams.
Vegas
06-20-2006, 11:31 AM
soccer is just too boring to watch.
I agree completely. It puts me to sleep, even with the guy on the Mexican channel screaming "GGGGOOOAAALLLL!!!!!!!"
I'm not 100% sure how we started talking about soccer, baseball, football and high school sports on a hockey board but at least this board finally got some traffic! Thanks for posting everyone!
I agree completely. It puts me to sleep, even with the guy on the Mexican channel screaming "GGGGOOOAAALLLL!!!!!!!"
That guy rules. I wish he was calling all of the World Cup games (he may be on Copa Mundial on Univision and Galavision but I'm not sure).
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 11:36 AM
Baseball has fallen behind the NFL (which, by the way, has about the same amount in time of action as MLB) because of a perceived lack of action.
MLS isn't garbage, I never referred to it as that. Again, until society changes it's views on the sport it will continue to flounder in obscurity. People have deep emotional attachments to their MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL teams, I'm not sure the same can be said about MLS teams.
Yes, the MLS is garbage. Very, very stinky smelly garbage.
There is no INCENTIVE to have a deep emotional attachment to MLS teams BECAUSE THE PLAYERS ARE TERRIBLE and the ones who ARENT go over to Europe where they aren't paid minimum wage. If by chance they DO decide to stay in MLS they are usually moved anyway. Why? Because the league runs the transactions. Yes, you heard right. MLS is in charge of it's players transfers, not the individual teams. They feel it's a way for each team to "stay competitive" (or in DC United's case, keep them stacked) Would you get attached to the Cardinals if you knew Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds would spend 2-3 years here then head to Japan, only to have the next Cards superstars do the exact same thing?
Helton72
06-20-2006, 11:36 AM
No offense, but I hate the blues almost as much as I hate Montreal. I hate Montreal for the obvious reasons. I hate the Blues, because they started the whole salary escalation in hockey that put the league in such bad shape.
Was that the year they were ranked in the top 3 in total salary? I thought the Blues, Star, Rangers or something like that were all really REALLY high in payroll one year or something. Is that what you mean with your hatred towards my sucky Blues?
Vegas
06-20-2006, 11:40 AM
Was that the year they were ranked in the top 3 in total salary? I thought the Blues, Star, Rangers or something like that were all really REALLY high in payroll one year or something. Is that what you mean with your hatred towards my sucky Blues?
It was more of a cumulative thing where they were outbidding teams for free agents and paid salaries way too high for what they were getting. It set the bar too high for average or above average players so when anyone went to arbritration, the salaries kept on going up.
Would you get attached to the Cardinals if you knew Pujols, Rolen and Edmonds would spend 2-3 years here then head to Japan, only to have the next Cards superstars do the exact same thing?
Of course, my favorite player is David Eckstein! :p
I understand what you are saying and we're not really that far apart in what we mean. The players leave the MLS to go to Europe because they can make more money there. Why? Because sponsors, networks won't pay the amount of money to soccer teams in the US. Since the US teams don't get as much money from sponsors, they can't/won't pay the players as much. Why don't the sponsors pay as much? Because society doesn't watch soccer. Why don't they watch? The players aren't as good. Why aren't they as good? Because the good ones went to Europe to make more money! Like I posted about 10 posts ago, it's a vicious cycle.
Helton72
06-20-2006, 11:42 AM
It was more of a cumulative thing where they were outbidding teams for free agents and paid salaries way too high for what they were getting. It set the bar too high for average or above average players so when anyone went to arbritration, the salaries kept on going up.
Like who? just wanting names is all
shmuck
06-20-2006, 11:42 AM
It was more of a cumulative thing where they were outbidding teams for free agents and paid salaries way too high for what they were getting. It set the bar too high for average or above average players so when anyone went to arbritration, the salaries kept on going up.
Scott Young, Keith Tkachuk, Doug Weight, all came over in one or two years, all way overpaid. I know there's more too.
I think it was more of a Detroit, Colorado, Dallas, St. Louis competition.
It was more of a cumulative thing where they were outbidding teams for free agents and paid salaries way too high for what they were getting. It set the bar too high for average or above average players so when anyone went to arbritration, the salaries kept on going up.
You're not blaming the NHL's salary woes solely on the Blues are you? I'm sure there were other teams doing the same thing.
Helton72
06-20-2006, 11:44 AM
Scott Young, Keith Tkachuk, Doug Weight, all came over in one or two years, all way overpaid. I know there's more too.
I think it was more of a Detroit, Colorado, Dallas, St. Louis competition.
yeah but the Blues TRADED for Keith and Doug. Overpaid, yes, but they were traded here. Now if they signed extensions after being here then okay, but they werent FA signings
shmuck
06-20-2006, 11:44 AM
Of course, my favorite player is David Eckstein! :p
I understand what you are saying and we're not really that far apart in what we mean. The players leave the MLS to go to Europe because they can make more money there. Why? Because sponsors, networks won't pay the amount of money to soccer teams in the US. Since the US teams don't get as much money from sponsors, they can't/won't pay the players as much. Why don't the sponsors pay as much? Because society doesn't watch soccer. Why don't they watch? The players aren't as good. Why aren't they as good? Because the good ones went to Europe to make more money! Like I posted about 10 posts ago, it's a vicious cycle.
Soccer is more boring than baseball and that's saying a lot.
I know I'm a homer, but after watching the NHL finals, the only sport that comes as close to action packed is basketball. The only reason I say that is because you need a continuous flow. Football has too many breaks.
Scott Young, Keith Tkachuk, Doug Weight, all came over in one or two years, all way overpaid. I know there's more too.
I think it was more of a Detroit, Colorado, Dallas, St. Louis competition.
Weren't Tkachuk and Weight acquired via trade?
Soccer is more boring than baseball and that's saying a lot.
I know I'm a homer, but after watching the NHL finals, the only sport that comes as close to action packed is basketball. The only reason I say that is because you need a continuous flow. Football has too many breaks.
I like baseball and hockey but baseball will always be number one, imo. That being said, I can appreciate the action in hockey and I like the physical play, I just like the strategy of baseball a lot better.
Helton72
06-20-2006, 11:49 AM
Weren't Tkachuk and Weight acquired via trade?
Yup, we traded Handzus, Nagy and maybe picks for Keith and traded Reasoner, Hecht and someone else for Weight. We didnt outbid anyone for those players
Oh and MacInnis was traded for, as was Pronger. Young, i cant remember to be honest.
Stillman when we had him...traded for
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 11:49 AM
Of course, my favorite player is David Eckstein! :p
I understand what you are saying and we're not really that far apart in what we mean. The players leave the MLS to go to Europe because they can make more money there. Why? Because sponsors, networks won't pay the amount of money to soccer teams in the US. Since the US teams don't get as much money from sponsors, they can't/won't pay the players as much. Why don't the sponsors pay as much? Because society doesn't watch soccer. Why don't they watch? The players aren't as good. Why aren't they as good? Because the good ones went to Europe to make more money! Like I posted about 10 posts ago, it's a vicious cycle.
And it's still not a cycle.
It was a terrible approach to start the league. Money talks, period. If US Soccer wanted to throw hundreds of millions if not Billions of dollars at players, they would get them.
Why do top hockey players come to America from Europe when they know the following and Culture of hockey in Europe is much greater than in America? $
Why do top japanese baseball players come to America to play baseball even though Japan has a culture that rivals if not smurfs American's love for baseball? $
Would you give a damn about baseball if all the best players were in Japan and in America you had a league of So Taguchi's and David Dejesus'? Hell no, you'd dial up your local cable provider and ask for Nagasakicom or whatever similar to hardcore soccer fans call and ask for FSW or FSC.
Yup, we traded Handzus, Nagy and maybe picks for Keith and traded Reasoner, Hecht and someone else for Weight. We didnt outbid anyone for those players
Oh and MacInnis was traded for, as was Pronger. Young, i cant remember to be honest.
Stillman when we had him...traded for
Maybe we overpaid for Grant Fuhr? :)
And it's still not a cycle.
Okay, dude, we've hit a wall. Thanks for the discussion.
Helton72
06-20-2006, 11:52 AM
Maybe we overpaid for Grant Fuhr? :)
That's why i asked for names, because the Blues didnt overpay for much. Maybe we overtraded??? lol that does exist?
People hate on the teams did that well, we were a top team in the West. People dont like that. It was Detroit, St. Louis, Dallas and Colorado. We traded for most of our talent. Sure that still set the bar high becasue we traded for high prices individuals, but we didnt over bid for them and cause it to increase in that fashion
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 11:56 AM
Okay, dude, we've hit a wall. Thanks for the discussion.
We haven't hit a wall, you just don't want to accept that money talks and US Soccer's approach of the almighty dollar with their league is flawed.There is a reason why soccer is THE most popular sport amongst youths, but quickly falls to third or fourth in most demographics when the kids approach their teenage years. There is no incentive to "go pro" in American soccer, when you can make 100x more money slamming a ball into a hoop or smacking a ball with a stick 3 times a game.
We haven't hit a wall, you just don't want to accept that money talks and US Soccer's approach of the almighty dollar with their league is flawed.There is a reason why soccer is THE most popular sport amongst youths, but quickly falls to third or fourth in most demographics when the kids approach their teenage years. There is no incentive to "go pro" in American soccer, when you can make 100x more money slamming a ball into a hoop or smacking a ball with a stick 3 times a game.
I don't care about MLS' approach to anything. The bottom line is that US fans don't really care for soccer. If they did, soccer'd be more popular than a game kids play until they transition to baseball, football or basketball.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 12:00 PM
I don't care about MLS' approach to anything. The bottom line is that US fans don't really care for soccer.
Then you totally ignored literally everything I just said. Shrug, whatever.
Then you totally ignored literally everything I just said. Shrug, whatever.
I read everything you said, but just don't agree with you. Sorry that I'm not your most recent convert to your set of beliefs about the world.
STLCARDSFAN1
06-20-2006, 12:01 PM
I can watch baseball,basketball,football,hockey but after that I pretty much draw the line. People say that baseball is boring but they don't understand thats the beauty of the game. Its a game of anticipation and strategy. I like hockey too though because its a lot of the time non stop action.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 12:03 PM
I read everything you said, but just don't agree with you. Sorry that I'm not your most recent convert to your set of beliefs about the world.
I don't even see how anything I said is my opinion.
There is a reason why A-AAA stadiums seat what...8000?
There is a reason why minor league hockey arenas seat 5000.
There is a reason why the NBDL is a joke.
There is a reason why NFL Europe, CFL and AFL draw percentages of NFL games.
It's not opinion, it's fact.
Helton72
06-20-2006, 12:04 PM
Baseball has no time limit which makes it the most unique sport that I know. It's my favorite bar none
I don't even see how anything I said is my opinion.
There is a reason why A-AAA stadiums seat what...8000?
There is a reason why minor league hockey arenas seat 5000.
There is a reason why the NBDL is a joke.
There is a reason why NFL Europe, CFL and AFL draw percentages of NFL games.
It's not opinion, it's fact.
Great. You're still wrong.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 12:07 PM
Great. You're still wrong.
Not sure how facts can be wrong, but I got you.
Helton72
06-20-2006, 12:12 PM
Vegas, do you still hate the Blues??
STILL!?!?
lol sorry
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 12:17 PM
US ought to see about hosting a couple of expansion teams from the European leagues. Only have them in the cities that actually have a following (NYC, maybe Miami)... and slow-grow.
That's a great idea. Perhaps approach a guy like Abramovich and see if he'd be willing to kick around the idea of an international league like he is doing with hockey. It's a simple way of boosting interest for soccer WORLD wide in places other than America, like Russia and China. That way you have passion for the sport around the world, every year unlike every four years with the World Cup. It would easily "bring the countries together" even if the players aren't all American, because fans would still have reason to cheer for an American team competing against other countries/international cities.
Does anyone know of a link that'll show who is under contract for each team for next season?
Richter35
06-20-2006, 12:25 PM
Does anyone know of a link that'll show who is under contract for each team for next season?
you should be able to find that at tsn.ca
Vegas
06-20-2006, 12:30 PM
Vegas, do you still hate the Blues??
STILL!?!?
lol sorry
I do. It's just one of those things. You can retaliate and hate the Kings if you didn't already. It's fine by me. I would guess that it's been a lot harder to be a Kings fan over the years than a Blues fan. Both teams have had some hard luck, but the Kings have had some unreal situations. Having your owner go to jail, for instance. At least the Blues made the playoffs virtually every year (until this one).
The salary escalation started with Scott Stevens. Don't get me wrong. I loved Scott Stevens as a player. He is definitely a hall of famer that played hockey the way it should be played. When he signed with the Blues, he got an obscene amount of money for that time. It pushed salaries for a lot of players. The Blues did a few more deals over the years that were similar. I don't remember all of them off the top of my head and don't have time to look it up right now.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 12:33 PM
I do. It's just one of those things. You can retaliate and hate the Kings if you didn't already. It's fine by me. I would guess that it's been a lot harder to be a Kings fan over the years than a Blues fan. Both teams have had some hard luck, but the Kings have had some unreal situations. Having your owner go to jail, for instance. At least the Blues made the playoffs virtually every year (until this one).
The salary escalation started with Scott Stevens. Don't get me wrong. I loved Scott Stevens as a player. He is definitely a hall of famer that played hockey the way it should be played. When he signed with the Blues, he got an obscene amount of money for that time. It pushed salaries for a lot of players. The Blues did a few more deals over the years that were similar. I don't remember all of them off the top of my head and don't have time to look it up right now.
I hate Stevens for many other reasons that don't involve the Blues. Many, Many other reasons. I gained a little respect for him when he clocked Kariya though...
Helton72
06-20-2006, 12:36 PM
I do. It's just one of those things. You can retaliate and hate the Kings if you didn't already. It's fine by me. I would guess that it's been a lot harder to be a Kings fan over the years than a Blues fan. Both teams have had some hard luck, but the Kings have had some unreal situations. Having your owner go to jail, for instance. At least the Blues made the playoffs virtually every year (until this one).
The salary escalation started with Scott Stevens. Don't get me wrong. I loved Scott Stevens as a player. He is definitely a hall of famer that played hockey the way it should be played. When he signed with the Blues, he got an obscene amount of money for that time. It pushed salaries for a lot of players. The Blues did a few more deals over the years that were similar. I don't remember all of them off the top of my head and don't have time to look it up right now.
Dont even get me started with Scott Stevens lol. Maybe there were others that signed, but i cant remember anyone. The Blues, as far as i remember of the years, made a lot of trades (Gretzky included as well) , but didnt make too much of a splash in FA. I mean its ok to hate the Blues, i dont mind at all. I hate them more then i like them anyways usually.
I dont hate the Kings per say, but I'm not a big fan of the city of LA, but that's a different story lol
Vegas
06-20-2006, 12:40 PM
I hate Stevens for many other reasons that don't involve the Blues. Many, Many other reasons. I gained a little respect for him when he clocked Kariya though...
I can't imagine why any hockey fan would hate Stevens. He played a tough game, but with all of the hits he laid on guys over the years, he only had 4 elbowing penalties in his career. He played a tough, mean game.
If you had to play one hockey game for everything you owned, would you rather have Stevens on your team or the team you're playing against??
you should be able to find that at tsn.ca
Thanks.
Helton72
06-20-2006, 12:46 PM
On 16 July (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_16)1990 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1990), Scott Stevens was signed as a restricted free-agent by the St. Louis Blues (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Louis_Blues). However, his tenure there would be short. On 25 July (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/July_25)1991 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991), former New Jersey Devil forward Brendan Shanahan (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brendan_Shanahan) was signed as a restricted free-agent by the Blues (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Louis_Blues_%28hockey%29). Consequently, the Blues owed the Devils compensation for signing Shanahan. Ordinarily this compensation would come in the form of draft picks, however the Blues already owed the Washington Capitals (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Capitals) four first-round draft picks for having signed Stevens the previous year. The Blues made an offer of compensation [to the Devils] consisting of goaltender Curtis Joseph (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curtis_Joseph), forward Rod Brind'Amour (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Brind%27Amour) and two future draft picks, but the Devils wanted Stevens. In a decision that would eventually be a catalyst for the first work stoppage involving NHL players by the owners in the 1994-1995 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994-95_NHL_season) season, an arbitrator ruled in favor of the Devils, thereby sending Shanahan to the Blues in exchange for Stevens.
Credit: wikipedia.com
1957 & Waiting
06-20-2006, 12:46 PM
yeah but the Blues TRADED for Keith and Doug. Overpaid, yes, but they were traded here. Now if they signed extensions after being here then okay, but they werent FA signings
The Blues had to work real hard to get Weight. Especially when he told Edmonton trade me to only St Louis or Detroit. Detroit was stacked with centers at the time so it basically ruled them out.
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 12:48 PM
I can't imagine why any hockey fan would hate Stevens. He played a tough game, but with all of the hits he laid on guys over the years, he only had 4 elbowing penalties in his career. He played a tough, mean game.
If you had to play one hockey game for everything you owned, would you rather have Stevens on your team or the team you're playing against??
1. What he did to Washington early in his career.
2. What he did to Big E.
3. Towards the end of his career how he would literally just go for the big hit and miss terribly.
As for the second question, of course I'd love to have Stevens on my team for all the marbles, but he wouldnt' be my first defenseman choice and in order of importance for position for me its...goalie, center, defenseman, winger, so if I needed ONE player to build around, it wouldn't be Stevens.
Helton72
06-20-2006, 12:49 PM
The Blues had to work real hard to get Weight. Especially when he told Edmonton trade me to only St Louis or Detroit. Detroit was stacked with centers at the time so it basically ruled them out.
Okay so what? We got him....he wasnt a big splash in FA was he? That's the point being made
1957 & Waiting
06-20-2006, 12:52 PM
Okay so what? We got him....he wasnt a big splash in FA was he? That's the point being made
But the Blues didn't need to sign him to a extension that averaged around 9 million dollars a year. Re-signing you own free agent can escalate the price of all players. Thats why so many people were upset with the Brad Richards deal about a month ago. Or the Rick Nash signing last year.
But the Blues didn't need to sign him to a extension that averaged around 9 million dollars a year. Re-signing you own free agent can escalate the price of all players. Thats why so many people were upset with the Brad Richards deal about a month ago. Or the Rick Nash signing last year.
Weight? I thought contracts were always backloaded. So, why would he only be making $5.7 million this year? Were NHL contract all reduced across the board or something?
Helton72
06-20-2006, 12:57 PM
But the Blues didn't need to sign him to a extension that averaged around 9 million dollars a year. Re-signing you own free agent can escalate the price of all players. Thats why so many people were upset with the Brad Richards deal about a month ago. Or the Rick Nash signing last year.
i can't deny that, nor have i ever denied that. But the way the question/comment was brought up it made the Blues out to look like the Yankees in baseball where they just sign people left and right. That wasnt the case
KopiOveyOlieKovy
06-20-2006, 12:58 PM
Weight? I thought contracts were always backloaded. So, why would he only be making $5.7 million this year? Were NHL contract all reduced across the board or something?
24%
24%
I knew it was something like that, contract reductions.
vBulletin® v3.7.3, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.