Jump to content

Front-loadin': Full financial terms of Shea Weber's 14-year offer sheet


Irishjim

Recommended Posts

Greeting:

Putting aside whether this ls CBA compliant, I have to wonder if NHL Central can be happy with a deal that basically screws over a small market team that has produced a consistently good product for a devoted fan base? Trotz-Poile have done wonders on a budget shoestring. On that score, I am not happy with the deal. As a Flyers fan, I have to hand it to Homer for his ballsy move.

Best,

Howie

Howie, I've finished sympathizing with that organization because they had every opportunity to keep their guys an add talent and they played games and got very cheap. They could have kept Suter and Weber before they got to free agency and added offensive talent but they never invested any money into it. They had space and they always went the cheap route. It came back to bite them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The more I think about it the more Nashville seems to be in a lose lose situation. I would not mind seeing a show of good faith tradeto recover those picks back after the signing. Like a scenario that sends them some NHL talent back in exchange for our picks. Metzler's article in his blog explains the entire thing very well. I think it would go a long way to making this sit better with everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with that Howie, but this is the reality if you're going to put NHL teams in non-hockey markets. If Bettman doesn't like it he has only himself to blame.

You know what was a "non-hockey market" in 1967?

Philadelphia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it's true that Nashville isn't a traditional hockey market, it's actually become a good hockey city. I definitely wouldn't lump Nashville in with Atlanta, Florida, and Phoenix. They've built a good fanbase. Based on the numbers, it seems tickets average between 45-50 dollars, lower if the ticket revenue includes playoffs, so they're on the low side.. I'm also guessing they have poor TV and advertising revenue streams, because a team at 98% attendance shouldn't be doing as poorly financially as they seem to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AJgoal - I'm not saying that hockey has no chance to succeed in Nashville, but let's face it- if you've got the option of putting a team in Nashville or say, Quebec City, which do you think has the greater chance to succeed? And actually make money? The Leafs make money while putting out a crappy product year after year. That's a great hockey market. Nashville may not be Phoenix, but it's still a hard sell imo. Thus far the franchise has basically operated as a farm system for big market teams. That's not a recipe for long term financial success. Now, faced with having to compete directly with big market teams we see how difficult it is for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it's true that Nashville isn't a traditional hockey market, it's actually become a good hockey city. I definitely wouldn't lump Nashville in with Atlanta, Florida, and Phoenix. They've built a good fanbase. Based on the numbers, it seems tickets average between 45-50 dollars, lower if the ticket revenue includes playoffs, so they're on the low side.. I'm also guessing they have poor TV and advertising revenue streams, because a team at 98% attendance shouldn't be doing as poorly financially as they seem to be.

They have built up to 98% attendance. It's been gradual. But it shows that there is a market there for good, competitive hockey. They won't see 98% next season after all this...

The NFL knows how this all works (see: Bay, Green). Arguably the best league on the planet - and full-on revenue sharing.

There is still money involved and still opportunities for GMs to royally screw up and sink their franchises for years. But "having the most money" isn't a guarantee for success or even the best players.

The Tennessee Titans don't need to worry about some jury-rigged offer sheet from the Eagles specifically contrived to steal one of their players away.

Again, if this deal was about "paying Shea Weber $7.8M a year, each year, for the next 14" I wouldn't have a problem with it at all. If Nashville couldn't match *that* offer, then fine.

But it's not about that.

If I was a multibillionaire? I'd match the offer, assign Weber to the AHL at the start of the season (no waivers necessary) and pay him $7.8M to ride busses around upstate New York for the next 14 years.

NO CUP FOR YOU

Suck on that.

(I am aware there are likely reasons this can't happen - but I like the sound of it anyway)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AJgoal - I'm not saying that hockey has no chance to succeed in Nashville, but let's face it- if you've got the option of putting a team in Nashville or say, Quebec City, which do you think has the greater chance to succeed? And actually make money?

Can I pick the one that hasn't already failed as an NHL city?

:ph34r:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing is, hockey actually ISN'T a hard sell in Nashville, which is why the financial situation is perplexing.

What is the "financial situation" that is the problem? Not wanting to invest $27M in a player who is going to be a gloomy gus prima donna not giving 10)% because he's a sulking babby?

If this was a "pay Shea Weber $7.8M a year deal" Nashville would match with no problem.

This isn't a "financial situation" problem - it's a bully with big bucks problem and the rules that enable it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rad, I'm talking about the fact that even with a pretty darn good fanbase and 98% attendance, that they're still losing money. That's what's perplexing to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rad, I'm talking about the fact that even with a pretty darn good fanbase and 98% attendance, that they're still losing money. That's what's perplexing to me.

Do you think they'd be at 98% capacity if their average ticket price was $123.77?

http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/stars/post/_/id/13315/stars-have-cheapest-ticket-in-nhl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure you can. Do you really think that you could make more money with a franchise in Nashville than you could with one in QC?

No - I think there are too many teams.

But Canadian teams simply can't compete with Comcastbucks in this environment, either.

I've posted this elsewhere but of the past 36 Cup Finalists since the last Canadian team won, three have been Canadian (with Vancouver, twice).

In that time Dallas*, Tampa, Carolina, Anaheim and Los Angeles have won Cups with Florida, Washington, Dallas, Carolina and Anaheim have made Finals apperances.

Are Edmonton, Winnipeg and Calgary in a position to match this offer? Do you think *Quebec* could?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NFL knows how this all works (see: Bay, Green). Arguably the best league on the planet - and full-on revenue sharing

Whoa... let's not compare the NHL to the NFL. They're not even as close as apples and oranges. Football has been religion in the US for a long time. Even before the NFL really took off college football was a big deal. You can stick an NFL franchise pretty much anywhere in this country and succeed. Kids grow up playing football in playgrounds all across the country. Totally different situation with hockey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No - I think there are too many teams.

But Canadian teams simply can't compete with Comcastbucks in this environment, either.

I've posted this elsewhere but of the past 36 Cup Finalists since the last Canadian team won, three have been Canadian (with Vancouver, twice).

In that time Dallas*, Tampa, Carolina, Anaheim and Los Angeles have won Cups with Florida, Washington, Dallas, Carolina and Anaheim have made Finals apperances.

Are Edmonton, Winnipeg and Calgary in a position to match this offer? Do you think *Quebec* could?

Again, how are Cup championships relevant to this discussion? The Leafs are easily the most valuable NHL franchise, how many Cups have they won in the last few decades? It's about money, and Nashville hasn't been making any. Do you really think the fact that Carolina has won a Cup is going to guarantee their financial success as an NHL franchise? Is it ok for the Islanders to be losing money just because they won 4 Cups around 30 years ago?

As for matching this particular offer, maybe none of those cities could. Maybe. Some healthy franchises probably couldn't either, depends on their existing salary burden. But Nashville is clearly having a very difficult time keeping good players. This year alone, Suter and now Weber. If both of those guys were Flyers, do you think Homer and Snider would lose them both?

Edited by JackStraw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a definite maybe. Winnipeg has shown they can support a team (at least in the short term) even though they previously lost one. Atlanta, however, failed miserably.

"Definite maybe" is a valid answer. Look, it's really pretty simple common sense here. Hockey is a sport with mainly regional appeal. If your region is cold in the winter, you're more likely to play and follow hockey. If the league wants to try to expand the sport to "non-traditional" markets, fine. Good for them. But nobody should cry "foul" when one of those markets struggles. As a very wise man once said, "if you're going to stick it up there where they can shoot at it, you can't complain about getting shot."

(approximate quote, reference is here http://www.theuncool.com/journalism/the-grateful-dead-creem-magazine/)

Edited by JackStraw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that a lot of the reason QC and Winnipeg failed in the first place is that there were a lot of issues around the value of the Canadian Dollar at the time, which resulted in protections being put in place against the fluctuation of relative currency values.

Jack, the Preds average ticket price is only about $15 less than the Flyers. Do you think that you would have 98% attendance in Philly if you doubled the average ticket price to $124?? I don't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget that a lot of the reason QC and Winnipeg failed in the first place is that there were a lot of issues around the value of the Canadian Dollar at the time, which resulted in protections being put in place against the fluctuation of relative currency values.

Jack, the Preds average ticket price is only about $15 less than the Flyers. Do you think that you would have 98% attendance in Philly if you doubled the average ticket price to $124?? I don't.

Probably not, but you'd come a lot closer than you would in Nashville.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whoa... let's not compare the NHL to the NFL. They're not even as close as apples and oranges. Football has been religion in the US for a long time. Even before the NFL really took off college football was a big deal. You can stick an NFL franchise pretty much anywhere in this country and succeed. Kids grow up playing football in playgrounds all across the country. Totally different situation with hockey.

The point is that the way the NHL's finances are run allow some franchises to have an unfair competitive advantage simply because they have more money. The NFL doesn't have this.

Again, how are Cup championships relevant to this discussion? The Leafs are easily the most valuable NHL franchise, how many Cups have they won in the last few decades? It's about money, and Nashville hasn't been making any. Do you really think the fact that Carolina has won a Cup is going to guarantee their financial success as an NHL franchise? Is it ok for the Islanders to be losing money just because they won 4 Cups around 30 years ago?

So the answer is more teams in small Canadian cities that have failed to compete before?

Cup championships - and Finals appearances (which were also mentioned) - is a good view of "competitiveness". Canadian teams made up 20% of the teams in the league and had 11% of the Finals appearances.

I don't know how the Islanders factor into this discussion at all. If you can clear that up, please do.

As for matching this particular offer, maybe none of those cities could. Maybe. Some healthy franchises probably couldn't either, depends on their existing salary burden. But Nashville is clearly having a very difficult time keeping good players. This year alone, Suter and now Weber. If both of those guys were Flyers, do you think Homer and Snider would lose them both?

No, they wouldn't - because they have the $2.44B of Comcast money to paper over their obvious and glaring mistakes over the years. And I think the Predators management are fools who are primarily differentiated from the fools running the Flyers by the amount of money they have.

This is why they don't want a level playing field - they're not sure they can compete on it.

And I've been over this, but players saying they won't sign in Nashville because players won't sign in Nashville is a ridiculous, self-serving excuse.

I have precious little respect for Ryan Suter and the way he handled himself.

Suter really thinks MINNESOTA is closer to a Cup than Nashville? They haven't made the playoffs since 07-08. Nashville's been to back to back Conference Semis. Don't tell me this is about "going to a winner."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is that the way the NHL's finances are run allow some franchises to have an unfair competitive advantage simply because they have more money. The NFL doesn't have this.

Not so sure about that. Rich teams like the Redskins and the Cowboys (and the Eagles) do have some advantage when it comes to signing free agents. Both leagues have a salary cap, which is supposed to level the playing field somewhat. I don't know that I'm in favor of a completely level field, where every team is subsidized enough to be able to afford to spend to the max. The NFL is not like that. I don't know of any professional sports league that is.

So the answer is more teams in small Canadian cities that have failed to compete before?

I didn't say that. I just asked which do you think would be the more likely to succeed. The NHL doesn't need to add any more teams afaic. They could contract and I'd be ok with that.

Cup championships - and Finals appearances (which were also mentioned) - is a good view of "competitiveness". Canadian teams made up 20% of the teams in the league and had 11% of the Finals appearances.

Cup championships are great. I want more in Philadelphia. But the NHL is a business and money is the bottom line. Otherwise the Leafs would be in serious trouble as a franchise.

No, they wouldn't - because they have the $2.44B of Comcast money to paper over their obvious and glaring mistakes over the years. And I think the Predators management are fools who are primarily differentiated from the fools running the Flyers by the amount of money they have.

It's been mentioned several times that one of the Preds owner is a billionaire. I have no doubt... ZERO, that the Preds can match if they want to. The question is not can they come up with the money now, it's do they have the revenue to cover their losses, and God forbid actually make a profit, down the line. The Flyers can spend to the cap because they know they will be making money every year. The Preds can't do the former because they don't know the latter.

Suter really thinks MINNESOTA is closer to a Cup than Nashville? They haven't made the playoffs since 07-08. Nashville's been to back to back Conference Semis. Don't tell me this is about "going to a winner."

Who said anything about going to a winner? You're the one who keeps bringing up the Cups. Suter wanted to play with Parise, and Parise wanted to play near home. Suter's fiancee (or whatever) is from Minny I believe. And Minnesota is a solid hockey market. When the North Stars bolted everyone knew it was just a matter of time before the NHL put another franchise there. If Nashville does fail, do you think the NHL will be back there any time soon?

Edited by JackStraw
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...