There will be a strike

[Tiger]

ukcanuck said:

What I am suggesting is that some people seem to resent the players their share of the pie,
focusing on the appearance that its a game that they play while completely ignoring the owner
in the background making much more playing their own monopoly game.

So the owner of team x puts up 200 million dollars ( about average franchise price ? ) to buy a franchise with about a
50/50 chance of it making money . When times are good and the fans fill the seats he's a winner ! But this is not true of most franchises in the NHL. Many owners have to pony up more money each year just to keep operating..
and the league average return per year is 4.2 million ( average profit on a franchise in the NHL according to Forbes )
.. a lousy investment I would say . ( Ballard makes 4.6 mill ) So where do you get this much more ?

Anyway I am getting carried away, the comment to which you and the others (dogsalmon apparently)
are laughing at me over, was a lament over the apparent blindness by some that the owners got there in part
by a dishonest and biased system that maybe once was free, but now is dominated by corporate monopolies
and crony capitalism. Maybe you think that’s too black and white, but I know I am not the only one who thinks
the system sucks

Of course the system here in BC sucks.. too much socialism. ICBC.. Ferry Corporation, BC Medical ( All are second rate and corrupt ) Government monopolies .. Socialism ?. and a complete disregard of a very simple fact that Darwin stated .. " The survival of the fittest ".. which does apply to both venture capitalists and hockey players. The guy that saves a few bucks and invests his money in a business is the guy you seem to dislike He might buy dint of hard work a little brains anda bit of luck become an OWNER

[Cornuck]

...it could actually be argued that the path to the board room and exec can is more readily available to the average Joe than any opportunity to play in a major sports league.

Or the NHL for that matter.

Example "A" George W Bush (vs) Alex Burrows.

[donlever]

Example "A" George W Bush (vs) Alex Burrows.

Not sure where you are going here.

Burr is an average Joe with limited hockey skill?

Is that the contention?

[Cornuck]

Burr is an average Joe with limited hockey skill?

No - but it seems like he worked his ass off to get from the "E" to the top line on of the best teams in hockey.

This whole discussion is melting my brain. I'm trying to stay out of it, since it just pisses me of.

They knew for 6 fucking years that it would come to this and now they're back in the middle of the pissing match (again).

[donlever]

lol

So you decide I'm the guy who gets the jab then eh?

[Cornuck]

lol

So you decide I'm the guy who gets the jab then eh?

Nothing personal, it's Monday, there's no hockey, it's cold, I'm still on my first coffee and the dart hit your name.

[donlever]

Perfect.

I expect nothing less.

Carry on.

[Potatoe1]

Example "A" George W Bush (vs) Alex Burrows.

Even Burrows, (who is perhaps the poster child for guys coming out of no where to be a good pro) was still playing major jr. hockey at 17, which means he was probably still one of the very best players in his age group early on.

I'm not sure where he played before the "Q" or why he was behind where most NHLers are at the same age, but despite his quite obvious talent, Alex had to take a far harder path to the league.

If Alex shows anything at all it's how hard it is to get into the league when you have fallen off the normal development path for NHL players.

[ukcanuck]

Have a look at this years first round, how many of those kids have a father or brother in the league?

Do you think that's just random?

The truth is it's parents and families that produce great hockey players. They pass on their genes, then put them on skates when they are 3, then buy them new gear, then get them to the rink at 5 every day, then get them the best coaching, then invest thousands to make sure that by 13 years old they are on the radar for the Bantom draft.

The vast, vast majority of players drafted into the NHL have already cast their die by that age. Those who make it later are a total anomaly.

On one hand he rails against the mythical dream that anyone can just become wealthy, but then contradictorily perpetuates the mythical dream that anyone can become a pro-athlete.

Laughable indeed.

read it again both of you,

Yes, yes, both actors on this stage were lucky and have characteristics that enable them to be relatively successful in their lives and that’s why they find themselves doing what they are doing. However, the opportunity and path to pro sports is open to anyone regardless of class or stature, while the path to the boardroom and key to the executive washroom is far from open.

It doesn't say "regardless of class [social] stature or ATHLETIC ability," Of course the path to a career in professional sports presupposes an inherent ability to perform at a professional level. forgive me for thinking that you would understand such a basic concept without my holding your hand.

[ukcanuck]

...it could actually be argued that the path to the board room and exec can is more readily available to the average Joe than any opportunity to play in a major sports league.

Or the NHL for that matter.

Would that argument include the fact that the path to the board room goes right through private high schools, prep schools and elite universities that are not open to the general public and require not only money but the right connections and leverage to attend? Because if that argument doesn't have an answer for that, then its not going to be very convincing.

[Listercat]

The average person's annual income in Canada is $46K. The lowest paid NHLer's earn in excess of $500K a year. Darcy Hordichuk for example has been in the NHL for the past 6 years and has earned an average of about $675K pa or a little over $4 mil in that time. The "average" wage earner would have to work 86 years to accomplish that. Even at $100K per year they would have to work 40 years.

I take issue with anyone who feels their "career", if it ends in 6 years or 10 years should allow them to "retire". Whether its politicians or athletes it should piss off the working slob that is expected to pay for it.

[Cornuck]

I take issue with anyone who feels their "career", if it ends in 6 years or 10 years should allow them to "retire". Whether its politicians or athletes it should piss off the working slob that is expected to pay for it.

While I agree for the most part, you should include another 6+ years of apprenticeship as part of that career. (WHL and up)

[Listercat]

The "ordinary" working slob doesn't start out at the top of his or her salary range either so call it a saw off.

[coco_canuck]

Yes, yes, both actors on this stage were lucky and have characteristics that enable them to be relatively successful in their lives and that’s why they find themselves doing what they are doing. However, the opportunity and path to pro sports is open to anyone regardless of class or stature, while the path to the boardroom and key to the executive washroom is far from open.

It doesn't say "regardless of class [social] stature or ATHLETIC ability," Of course the path to a career in professional sports presupposes an inherent ability to perform at a professional level. forgive me for thinking that you would understand such a basic concept without my holding your hand.

It'd be nice if I didn't have to hold your hand through your own pseudo-intellectual arguments.

First you were arguing a difference in kind, and now you've capitulated to a difference in degree position that's on just as shaky ground.

You fail to recognize that your statement that " the opportunity and path to pro sports is open to anyone regardless of class or stature" comes with a necessary condition that you minimize, and that' the endowed genetic/athletic ability that would allow, in a theoretical vacum, anyone in any class or stature to make it to pro sports. By definition, that becomes an exclusive club that is only open to those that fit that necessary condition.

What you also fail to specify is that all sports are not readily open to anyone in any class or stature since some sports are costly to participate in, i.e. hockey, golf, many olympic level sports etc.

So, the only way your exhaustive and general statement holds true is if all sports are created equal, and are open to anyone in any class or stature.

What you also take for granted is the ability to move into big business without having much stature nor being part of an affluent social class. If an individual is endowed with great intelligence and an innovative mind, that person can conquer big business without being born into affluence.

Your arguments really are terrible and inconsistent. You bend your argument to appease the situation, but you still fail to realize that your entire form of argumentation has been fatally flawed throughout this discussion.

[donlever]

...it could actually be argued that the path to the board room and exec can is more readily available to the average Joe than any opportunity to play in a major sports league.

Or the NHL for that matter.

Would that argument include the fact that the path to the board room goes right through private high schools, prep schools and elite universities that are not open to the general public and require not only money but the right connections and leverage to attend? Because if that argument doesn't have an answer for that, then its not going to be very convincing.

I don't even have to answer, Coco did it for me.

What you also take for granted is the ability to move into big business without having much stature nor being part of an affluent social class. If an individual is endowed with great intelligence and an innovative mind, that person can conquer big business without being born into affluence.

I'll provide an example of an average Joe who made it.

Tony Horton.

Moved to LA to get into acting...failed.

Tried stand up comedy...failed.

Decided that the way he treated his body would be something he could provide as a service to people and make a living at...millionaire. (...and an aside, a key figure with free access to the boardroom and exec washroom at Beachbody..gross sales reported at 32 million)...

Don't like that one, how about Richard Branson?

Wayne Huizenga?

Oprah Winfrey?