wprager wrote: davetherave wrote: wprager wrote: davetherave wrote: rooneypoo wrote: SpezDispenser wrote:"Over the last few months, there's been a lot of speculation that the cap's going to go down 20 percent. That's absurd. That's just made-up. It isn't going to happen," Bettman said. "I think it will be somewhere near where it is ($56.8 million), up a little, down a little, somewhere near where it is."
http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/devils/devils_have_even_more_fun_in_florida_tiq2rTUfF4Hyk7kB25h18I
I'll believe it when I see it. The Coyotes alone ought to cost the league close to $1 mil / team on the cap, LOL.
The cap has been going up even as teams lose money, so why should next year be any different?
Because the economy sucks everywhere? We are not talking about 30 teams staying in the black, but for league revenues overall to continue going up. Some are raising ticket prices, but quite a few cannot sell tickets at all. The Sens did not sell out their home opener. As far as I know the Leafs didn't raise prices, and with no post-season in Toronto, Montreal or (likely) Edmonton this year, that's half of the $95-cent-loonie teams not getting any post-season gate receipts.
I'm not saying the cap will go down, but I'm not saying there isn't a reason to think that it would.
So are you saying you don't know one way or the other, and neither do any of us on this forum?
You asked: why should next year be any different? I see lots of reasons why this year could be different.
Tovaritch Prager, you cite no concrete economic forecasts other than the 'economy sucks' phrase to buttress your position.
These are the questions that one needs to consider when discussing this very complex subject:
Have the revenues from NHL ticket sales and merchandise declined, flatlined or risen over last year?
Are there indicators that these revenues will decline, flatline or rise in the next 10-12 months (the decision on salary cap being, logically, be made as a result of financial analysis and forecasting by the league's accountants)?
Does the lowering of the salary cap benefit the players and the NHLPA? Would they fight a further lowering of the cap, given the impact on players who lost both jobs and revenue as a result in the past few months?
Do the owners, having 'cleaned house' as it were by the attrition of a significant number of mid-range salaries, now consider that further attrition is unnecessary?
Who are the influential voices on the Board of Governors, who ultimately decide--NOT Gary Bettman--whether the cap will stay the same, go down or even rise?
With 21 of the 30 teams currently over the $54MM level, why would any of this majority lobby for a lowering of the cap, which only makes it more difficult to retain their talent and/or acquire new talent in order to field the most competitive possible product?
And when influential owners like Ed Snider, Jeremy Jacobs, Ted Leonsis, Rocky Wirtz, Mario Lemieux, Francesco Aquilini, and Mike Illitch, to name a few, are all spending close to the cap in order to maintain their box office success, why would they support a lowering of the cap?
Your perception of the economy may have its own merits, as it relates to your life. But your perception and the financial perspective of the NHL may be entirely different.
Of course, if you know the answers to these questions, then by all means, let's hear them.
For my part, I make no such assumptions, but I welcome your thoughts in the spirit of our discussion.