Sport Today

it sounds good in theory, but theory isn't a city in north america that
could field a team. :)

--

don't lean on me man,
cause you can't afford the ticket
   -david bowie

sonny hays-eberts                

: how do the player-owners hire a coach, and how does this coach cut players?
: how do new players get an interest in the team/revenues? what happens to
: the interest of cut/retired players? how will the player-owners deal with
: refs? could you see mario firing them all!

: sonny hays-eberts                

But United Airlines is owned by the employees.  Hertz Car Rental is also
owned by the employees.  Apparently, they have some management system in
place which deals with the issues you raise.  These companies function, so
why couldn't a similar system work for the hockey players?

It's certainly not a straightforward issue, but it seems do-able in view of
the catastrophic stalemate in today's sports.

Kirn

not that it's a bad idea, mind you. i've obviously thought about it too.
but in addition to what the issues i've already brought up, you also have
some complex legal ones, like who owns the players rights that are
currently under contract.

don't lean on me man,
cause you can't afford the ticket
   -david bowie

sonny hays-eberts                

I've often wondered why the players just don't form a league of their own.
I could envision a league in which a commissioner doles out total league
revenues equally to team managers, who then use these funds to attract
players (free market).  In such a case, the players would be the owners,
and they could bargain with each of the teams for the best contract.  Why
do they need owners?  The PLAYERS are the attraction.

Of course, the league would be missing the tradition of the NHL teams that
we love and hate.  We'd have to cheer for the San Fransisco Whales instead
of our old favorites, but the players would be there.

Opinions?

Kirn