NHL lockout

Ah, professional sports. What fun would they be if there weren't contract disputes? Well, they would definately be more fun for the fans if the games were played. The NHL Announces Lockout , which may keep the entire 2004-05 season from being played.

The problem, as I understand it, follows these lines:

Teams had combined to lose more than $1.8 billion over 10 years and cited bankruptcy filings by teams in Buffalo, Los Angeles, Ottawa and Pittsburgh.

Well now, if those teams are bankrupt they must not be filling their arenas. And if you aren't filling your arenas you aren't selling merchandise. And if you aren't selling merchandise your team must not be popular. Yet you pay your "star players" exhorbant amounts of money. If they can't bring in fans are they really worth the cost? Either close those clubs or cut the players salaries. If they don't like it there is surely a guy in the AHL who would gladly fill the vacancy.

But here is the problem:

players "are not prepared to entertain a salary cap in any way, shape, measure or form."

Boo hoo. If your team can't pay you and another team won't take you on for that price how much are you really worth? Seriously, hasn't this gotten out of control? Now in the grand scheme of sports salaries, hockey players make peanuts. Football, baseball and basketball players make salaries that put hockey to shame. But it all comes down to how much you can bring to the team. If you can't pull in the fans you probably aren't worth the money it takes to ship you from game to game.

Now, granted, I don't understand the inner workings of the NHL. I wonder if the people who are in charge of the NHL understand them. But the solution seems obvious to me, in my own simple mind. Shut down teams that aren't able to break even, use players who are willing to work for what you can pay. Isn't that the way most successful corporations run?