Quote:
Originally Posted by cgy2london
Thanks for your suggestions. what I'm trying to show is........
Pre salary clap world:
Teams buying the league
flames not being able 2 compete, ( losing seasons showed by stats)
equaling poor attendance figures, thus allowing for major loses in revenues
in turn having season ticket drives....threats of moving (Portland)
in the salary cap world:
EQUITY SHARING=all teams to benefit from the success of certain franchises
salary cap controls spending allowing everyone to be competitive, which in turn allows for all teams to compete on a level playing ground
on a side note, i know the flames became extremely successful in the 03/04 season with no salary cap in place. all I'm trying to do is show how the salary cap provides parody and an equal playing field as compared to the dark years when the Rangers, Leafs, Avalanche, and Red wings bought everyone who was ever good forcing Calgary for the most part to ice crummy, no competitive teams
|
You make some valid points, and I personally am in favour of the cap. I think that the cap has allowed Calgary to compete on a level playing field. I just think that the Flames have done quite well after their cup run, and that many other teams would have faced the axe before Calgary. I would say that Calgary is in a better position to buy up a competetive team now than Colorado or possibly even the Red Wings. A successful team can only go so far if no one can afford tickets to the games.
BTW - I think the word you were looking for is 'parity', not 'parody'.