The Tennessee Plan: How to Help the NHL & NHLPA's Partnership
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 26, 2010 3:12 PM CDT
in Opinion
Email
Print[Editor's note: JJfromKansas is the newest member of Winging It In Motown and is going to be providing some extra punch to our writing. Welcome him in to the fold]
Since before the lockout which stole a year of hockey from the best fans in sports, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman has been talking about the "partnership" between the league and the players. Two groups, often at odds, working together to make sure that everybody was making the most money possible working toward making the sport of hockey the best product possible. Of course, this is a facade fed to the fans to put a pretty ribbon on what has only at the best of recent times been an uneasy truce.
Nothing brings two warring sides together quite like a common enemy. I think we have one that, for different reasons, could help the NHL and the Players' Association work together, which should help when it comes time to negotiate a new Collective Bargaining Agreement in two years. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the state of Tennessee.
Earlier this year, Red Wings defenseman Brian Rafalski brought up a grievance about a Tennessee tax which went into effect July 1, 2009. Tennessee's "jock tax" is nothing new for professional athletes, with 17 other states levying some charge against professionals to play within their borders, but it seems the Tennessee tax remains the only one which does not allow a player to gain tax relief elsewhere for money already paid. The tax charges players $2,500 for each game played in Tennessee with a maximum charge of $7,500. Bottom line is that every player for a Central Division NHL team who plays in Nashville three times per season will pay as much for the privilege of visiting their fine state as do the home-team players who have 41 games per year in the land of stupid whistles and Tim McGraw goal celebration songs. In total, this tax brings in over $2.5 million worth of revenues from the NHL to a state with no ordinary income tax.
Rafalski claims that he lodged the complaint on behalf of 17 teammates which he says would be paying more in taxes than they would be earning. Since nobody asked him to show his work, I did some of my own. You can't only consider a player's salary by games played; consider that Andreas Lilja was paid his full salary last year while playing only a handful of games. The way I calculated was by taking a full American work year of 260 days (5 days a week for 52 weeks) and gave that player 12 whole weeks of vacation. I think this is a more conservative figure than needed, especially for the Red Wings who have had less time for golf than any other team in the league since the lockout on account of them being awesome. A player doesn't have to be on the ice in front of television cameras during a game to be considered working for the organization. I realize there are a lot of people who work significantly more and harder hours for substantially less pay than professional athletes, but those people also don't have to pay $2,500 out-of-pocket for the privilege of showing up to work on any given day. Using that math, a player making league minimum of $500,000 working 200 days a year makes $2,500 per day he works. On a day he works in Tennessee, he pays $2,500 in taxes. When you consider federal income taxes and the income taxes from their home states, not to mention the equipment they have to buy, the NHLPA escrow payment they make, the food they eat, the clothes they wear, the gas they buy to get to the airport, and the cell phone plans they purchase to call their wives when they get there, you have more than just league-minimum guys paying more than they're earning for a day trip through Nashville to do a little business.
This may seem like a problem only for the NHLPA, and for the most part, it is. The league owners don't really care what happens to the players' money after it begrudingly leaves their checkbooks. But, the league should have an interest in helping out here.
If the league challenges Tennessee lawmakers to change things to benefit the players next summer, they put themselves in a no-lose situation. A threat to move the Predators out of Tennessee should be enough to make them capitulate very quickly, giving the league a big bargaining chip when it comes to talking about how much the league cares about the players' futures when the next CBA talks heat up for the following year. If the Tennessee state government refuses, then the league has every reason to take one of the best-run clubs in the league and direct them to a market where averaging 14,000 attendance is of no concern. Even better, they get to do that while spinning the entire thing as Tennessee's fault. The Predators franchise gets a fresh start in an area that's already hockey-crazy (like oh, say, Canada), they probably get a name-change that makes people stop making Chris Hanson jokes, they get a fanbase that has more teeth than the players and, if we're lucky, get people who would also rather take a blowtorch to each of their toes than listen to any more of those ridiculous train whistles.
Hopefully, they'll also get moved out of the Central Division, so the Wings don't have to witness first-hand what Barry Trotz can do with players when he's given more talent up front than just Marty Erat and a couple of leprechauns too.
115 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Hell yeah, JJ
Welcome to the community, you’re a hell of a guy with a hell of a voice and I look forward to reading it.
by Michael Petrella on Jul 26, 2010 3:14 PM CDT reply actions
Thanks, man
I’m looking forward to doing what I can around here. The Red Wings blogosphere is an awesome place.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 26, 2010 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions
This is stuff that you rarely think about during the season just because of everything that is going on in the standings, front office, etc. but it’s definitely a bit of a problem area.
If I understand it right, they get charged regardless of whether they play or not (in the press box)? If so, that’s just a slap in the face to the players like Derek Meech who make $500k compared to others that aren’t in the Western Conference/Central Division that don’t play there as many times.
It would be interesting to do a comparison between ticket, concession, merchandise sales for when the Red Wings are in town vs when they’re not and see if there’s a difference. If there is, which i’m guessing there is, it’s even weirder. “Oh, hey thanks for helping the economy. Give us more money still.”
I definitely understand the argument, but as hard as the players work, those guys still make half a million dollars a year. I feel like if the NHL / NHLPA really made that big of a stink over it, a fair amount of people would just see it as rich guys whining.
That being said, where would you want Nashville to move? What division would they play in and who would come to the Central?
I think with hockey it’s a bit different. Fans know that the player salaries pale drastically in comparison to the NFL/NBA but there stil lwould be complaints I believe.
by Casey Richey on Jul 26, 2010 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions
As far as Nashville moving
I’d like to see them in Edmonton, that is if the Coyotes don’t pull up shop and beat them there. Gets them out of the Central, but keeps the # of teams in the West the same.
Back off man, I'm a scientist
Winging It In Motown
and SB Nation Detroit --SB Nation's regional hub for all your Detroit sporting needs
Twitter
Scratch that
meant Winnipeg. I’m dumb today.
Back off man, I'm a scientist
Winging It In Motown
and SB Nation Detroit --SB Nation's regional hub for all your Detroit sporting needs
Twitter
I agree that a lot of people would still see it as rich guys whining, which would be a problem for the NHL and the Predators organization all the way to the bank as they went to a market that’s more excited about hockey and isn’t worried about what got them out of Nashville.
In all likelihood, they probably wouldn’t leave the Central. I still think Hamilton needs a team, which isn’t too far East of Detroit, so there’s no real point in moving them there. If they moved to Quebec, then you’d probably have to look at moving the Sabres or Maple Leafs to the West. If they went to Winnipeg, then you could argue to move the Wild to the Central, but that’s not really worth it, considering that Winnipeg isn’t that far west of where the Wild play. I just worry about how good that team would be if they had ownership that could afford talent. There isn’t really a solution there that makes things easier for Detroit unless the Wild move and I think that’s probably the least likely scenario.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 26, 2010 3:44 PM CDT up reply actions
“so there’s no real point in moving them there”
Should read that there’s no real point in moving them out of the Central if they go there.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 26, 2010 3:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Sweet
Welcome to the cult club JJ
Back off man, I'm a scientist
Winging It In Motown
and SB Nation Detroit --SB Nation's regional hub for all your Detroit sporting needs
Twitter
Best of luck with the new gig, JJ
But I have to say… your “solution” is incredibly stupid.
Given the lengths that the NHL went to in order to keep franchises like Phoenix and Nashville in place, you think they would issue “a threat to move the Predators out of Tennessee” over this tax? The owners of the team would have something to say about that, as would the city of Nashville with their binding lease agreement.
Now unquestionably, there are some serious problems with Tennessee’s privilege tax. The guys it hurts the most are those who get called up for just a game or so, earning their AHL salary most of the year, then getting called up to the big leagues only to find out that you end up paying for the thrill of going to work that day.
This actually happened to Peter Olvecky last season for the Preds, who played just one game in the NHL last season.
I don’t think that in the current political and economic climate there’s any chance that the NHL or NHLPA could make headway on this issue, despite the obvious problems. When social service budgets are getting cut, nobody’s going to stand up for pro athletes getting taxed too much.
More fun than a stick to the face!
On the Forecheck is SB Nation's blog covering the Nashville Predators.
by Dirk Hoag on Jul 26, 2010 4:07 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
Thanks for the Well-Wishes, Dirk
I don’t think the NHL is amenable to the concept of moving the Predators or the Coyotes either, I just don’t fully understand why they aren’t. The binding lease agreement they have is for a paltry $20 million if they leave this year, $25M if they leave next year or only $10M if they leave in 2012. I’m sure any of the three cities named in one of my comments above would be more than happy to pony up the cash to pay the Predators’ way out of that binding lease agreement. The ownership group did recently sign an agreement that said they would not exercise that clause before 2012, but if the league waits until summer 2011 to actually pick that fight, like I suggested, then that would be moot. The league gets to wage that fight with Tennessee for the entire season leading up to the new CBA summer, which lets that little weasel Bettman talk about how they’re sticking up for their partners.
If Tennessee doesn’t relent, which you seem to think they won’t, then the league absolutely should move the Predators. As a Wings fan, I’m thrilled they’re not a better team, but try to imagine how well they would have done over the past several years if they could afford to spend more money. The only reason they can’t is the market they’re in.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 26, 2010 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions
I would have thought that after everything that’s happened over the last few years, folks would understand that leagues don’t just pick up teams and move them like chess pieces. Least of all over such a relatively tiny financial issue as this tax.
More fun than a stick to the face!
On the Forecheck is SB Nation's blog covering the Nashville Predators. Catch me on Twitter at @Forechecker.
The tax, as far as the league is concerned, is a red herring. The bigger issue is that moving a team that’s ready to be a bonafide cup contender to a better hockey market would yield instantaneous positive results for the league and the franchise. Unfortunately, the league can’t just up and say “we’re pulling the plug on the Nashville project” because then it makes them look like bigger dicks than if they at least try to mask it with a fight over a tax about which league owners don’t even care.
As for the players, they’d benefit from having a much stronger bunch behind them in their fight against a tax that actually DOES hurt them and one they actually do care about. Hell, as partners to the league, the players should also care that Nashville isn’t making as much money as they could be because bigger profits from all of the teams mean smaller escrow payments and larger contracts for the NHLPA.
It’s a bit sad that, in a gate-driven league, the cities of Hamilton, Quebec City, and Winnipeg would all be more profitable than Nashville, considering none of them have even half the metro population.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 26, 2010 4:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Then why not write from the context of your “bigger issue”, rather than couching it in terms of a fight over the Privilege Tax?
That way we can just file it as Case #42,986 in the “Joe Blogger thinks the NHL should move a team” file.
More fun than a stick to the face!
On the Forecheck is SB Nation's blog covering the Nashville Predators. Catch me on Twitter at @Forechecker.
Meant as a reply to your 4:45 comment, of course.
More fun than a stick to the face!
On the Forecheck is SB Nation's blog covering the Nashville Predators. Catch me on Twitter at @Forechecker.
It should be pretty well understood that it’s a “Joe Blogger thinks the NHL should move a team” angle from the league’s benefit to do this. Sorry for not making that much clearer, but I figured I had covered it in the second-to-last paragraph. The owners don’t care about the tax, but they could be made to pretend to care as a show to the players’ association when asking for concessions in the next CBA talks.
“Spin” never has a connotation that speaks to truth. That’s why I said that the NHL should spin the whole situation to make it look as though they’re fighting for the players when in reality any excuse that gets them out of Nashville without making them take a loss in the expansion market scoreboard would be good for business
The big issue is still the privilege tax. It’s an horribly unfair tax in the way it’s written and it should be abolished. But, without reason for the league to take up this fight, then it just belongs in Case #102,119 of the “Joe Blogger thinks Tennessee is doing something stupid” File.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 26, 2010 5:48 PM CDT up reply actions
welcome J.J.
And thanks for being another wonderful writer that I can read online. :)
"While there's life, there's hope." --Cicero
Science nerd and proud of it!
Tennessee Tax, team movement and Detroit
I’m a lifelong Wings fan that moved to Tennessee last year, and all of my friends here are Preds fans. They’re not fans of the tax, either. They are, however, some of the most hardcore, classy and knowledgeable hockey fans I have ever met. The Preds are successful here, and are gaining widespread acceptance. I went to two Wings/Preds games last season in Nashville, and I had some of the best times of my life there. Hockey is here to stay in Tennessee. Accept that. Even the McGraw goal celebrations and those damned whistles. The tax does have to go, but perhaps and effort to make the people of Tennessee, maybe the more casual Preds fan, realize the unfairness of it would go a long way to repealing it. Keeping hockey in Canada is no way to spread our favorite sport. Making it easier for other teams to play in the expanded market will.
Immortal love life advice - "Just because there's a goalie doesn't mean you can't score."
by DarkKnt1047 on Jul 26, 2010 7:36 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
Nashville fans don't have teeth!!! LOL!!!! GOOD ONE!!!!!
You are one of the worst hacks I’ve ever seen. You write a blog about moving Nashville like nobody has ever done that before, you use somebody else’s reasons because you can’t come up with your own, and then you fill it with the same Nashville jokes that have been made a million times. You have reached 100% hackery!
Since you obviously have no idea what is going on in Nashville, why don’t you stick with writing about your team? Or is it more fun to write about a team on the way up instead of one on the way down?
All you Red Wings fans ripping Nashville better enjoy it while you can. Once that cess pool of a city finishes it’s economic collapse and completes it’s transformation into the US version of Afghanistan it’s way more likely that the Wings will be playing in Canada than the Predators.
whut teeef?
I gotz muh teef – awl sciex sexc sicx ov um. Dagnabit. Pluzz, ize gradeated fum Univorsitee of mishiGun, Kaint yawll telz? Weuns luvz are ha-kee, soz stfu.
Wow...
I love it when a fan of a certain cities hockey team who happen to suck has to result to economic issues when it comes to talking to a wings fan. O burn! you got us! but in the end you will still be our bitch and looking up at us in the standings come october. O and we are on our way down? do you honestly believe that?
Wow JJ
100% hackery in your first post? You have the makings of a legend dude.
by handsomerob1 on Jul 27, 2010 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions
Seriously...
You have a point about it being “unfair,” but any credibility or respect you could gain as a writer is immediately discarded when you throw out ridiculous and false stereotypes of Nashville fans. Even if your stance had any feasibility, nobody will listen to you because your sad attempts at humor come across as sheer foolish ignorance. You have clearly never been to a game in Nashville and have probably never even had a conversation with a single Nashvillian. You sound like an ignorant fool. Period.
by dnorm4 on Jul 26, 2010 9:22 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
i thought it was pretty funny...
besides, its just a joke. And I’m pretty sure everyone in the Red Wings blogosphere will listen to him because he’s a damn good writer. If Nashville fans put aside their anger while reading this post, it makes pretty damn good sense.
by Casey Richey on Jul 27, 2010 7:38 AM CDT up reply actions
As a Preds fan...
It is amusing, in an ignorant way. Hockey is still fairly nascent down here, but even that is not the full excuse of why we don’t fill the arena every game. Add in some complications like:
- The 04/05 lockout
- Swindlers and business scum trying to pull the team out from under us. i.e. Lie-pold, Boots, and Mr. RIMjobber.
- Lie-pold’s great fire sale as a part of the above point
- Scum not paying the team for advertising. i.e. Sommet Group
I could go on. Now we will have in August, 95% Tennessee-based ownership. The new chair of the group is bullish on the team, the city, and bringing them to the apex of the NHL. Spending spree? No, but they will not be as limited as they have been. The dark clouds have passed, and a new sun shines bright on this team.
This team is not moving anywhere without a hell of a fight.
You thought which part was pretty funny?
The part about taking a “blowtorch to each of their toes” or “Marty Erat and a couple of leprechauns”? Ooh Leprechauns, take that Nashville!
Or was the part about averaging 14,000 in attendance being a concern a joke?
If I was you, I’d say this post was an example of allowing differing opinions on your site. Probably not one you want to stake your credibility on too…
the Tim McGraw and train whistles part.
And why do you call my judgment into question in terms of credibility. This isn’t CNN, we’re supposed to be opinionated.
by Casey Richey on Jul 27, 2010 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions
I must say
I had a great time the times i went down there for games. But from what i seen it does bring its fair share of country bumpkins to the party.. ive witnessed it first hand… so if jj hasnt been, Ill second it.
Sigh. I think we can all agree that the privilege tax is annoying and probably unnecessary, but this is ludicrous. Why in the world would a league threaten to move the team for legislation that is the state’s responsibility? Do you want the NFL to move the Titans, too, because the Lions will have to pay this tax at some point?
Additionally, nice job. You managed to work nearly as many false stereotypes and misconceptions into one paragraph as Ryan Lambert did in his entire eulogy.
Congrats on the new gig, JJ, and hopefully the next piece on the Predators gets us on better terms :).
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
The Titans aren’t mentioned in the tax because the NFL, as the country’s top-earning league, has the power and the pull to make sure that the NFL’s teams remained exempt from this ludicrous charge.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 9:34 AM CDT up reply actions
ok, my bad
Rephrasing the question, should the NBA move the Grizzlies, because the Pistons would have to pay the tax?
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 9:42 AM CDT up reply actions
That depends
Are there a handful of cities which would instantly be a better fit for the Grizzlies?
Ok, not really, because as much as the NHL has a problem with their willingness to relocate even one franchise, the NBA has a problem relocating them too often. The issue is much deeper than that. I do think that a dual threat from the NBA and NHL would probably solve the entire problem and get the tax changed and forego the entire relocation talk in the first place. That is, unless Tennessee is so completely stubborn as to willingly lose both franchises.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 9:51 AM CDT up reply actions
So you want to give the NHL the NBA's same bad reputation?
I also like how you’re ratcheting up your imaginary ultimatum.
For the Record
I never once called Nashville fans stupid. I said the whistles are stupid and I’ll fight your face until the end on that one. If you went ahead and made a correlation between how many teeth you have and how intelligent you are, that’s your own bias.
I have spoken personally with numerous intelligent and savvy Nashvillians, unfortunately as it ties into this article, none of them were hockey fans.
From my perspective, if the Predators have an ownership group that’s willing to make them a serious cup contender (an uphill battle, considering the current CBA nearly guarantees they can’t), and the fans come out, then I’m ok with them staying in Nashville. There are three teams in the Coyotes, Thrashers, and Panthers that are all better candidates for relocation based on how little they’re pulling in (although one could argue that only the Coyotes are equal a candidate based on ability to actually have an important winning season in their first season in their new city. However, the tax has to go. I know that Tennessee lawmakers are not going to be willing to outright repeal a tax that probably brings in north of $5M to the state with NHL and NBA dollars brought in, but something has to change to benefit the players. While Nashville has the potential to become a strong hockey market, it’s not worth it if half a team is losing money for the days they play there. I know, it’s probably heartless of me, but I care more about Drew Miller actually making money to play in Tennessee than I do about the state’s public roads being funded. My choice if I don’t like paying state income tax is to move from Kansas to a state that doesn’t have that tax. All I’m suggesting is that the NHL and NHLPA’s choice if they don’t like paying an unfair and non-reciprocative jock privilege tax is to stop playing games in a state that charges it.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 9:32 AM CDT reply actions
I know, it’s probably heartless of me, but I care more about Drew Miller actually making money to play in Tennessee than I do about the state’s public roads being funded.
Roads aren’t a social service (or even mostly a state priority), which is what Dirk was talking about above. You will sound pretty heartless if you want to make this an issue of you wanting millionaire athletes protected before the underprivileged citizens of Tennessee. Tennessee actually has some of the best roads in the country because of decades of Federal earmarks.
Also, I find the whole premise that because the Predators exist in a small market they can’t be cup contenders ludicrous. Teams in small markets compete in every sport, especially in hockey with the salary cap. The Rays are the second best team in baseball despite having a third of the Yankees payroll…do you really think the Predators are going to never win a cup because they operate at 75% of the highest payroll in their sport?
Or should I list off all the teams the Predators had a better record than last year, despite a higher payroll? Can you really say the Preds aren’t cup contenders NOW, when they came closer than even the Flyers to beating the Hawks in the playoffs last season?
All I got out of this article is that you need to be mailed a Tootoo whistle.
Sorry about my misconception about the roads, but it is a nicer way than saying that I care more about the Red Wings than I do about “underprivileged” Tennesseeans who pay no state income tax. There are just as many millionaire Tennesseeans who aren’t helping your state’s underprivileged classes.
As far as the small market argument, that could be an entirely separate article and probably will be at some point. Since the lockout, exactly zero teams have won the cup while spending under the salary midpoint ($8M below the cap and the mark that’s one qualifier for teams to get group A compensation under current revenue sharing rules). Exactly one team has even made it to their conference finals in those years and that Buffalo Sabres team was probably not even a serious cup contender then.
The fact that the Preds came closer than the Flyers (or any other team Chicago faced) to beating the Blackhawks in the playoffs is EXACTLY my problem. Nashville spent $12M under the cap last season because they have to rely on the broken revenue sharing system in place and they still have not claimed an operating profit since the lockout (for various reasons, many listed in DonBorvio’s comment above). Looking back, Nashville gave Chicago everything they had, but it wasn’t good enough. Quenneville got heartily outcoached by Trotz, but the talent of the stacked Blackhawks club was too much for the Predators as an also-ran to overcome. Now imagine how differently that series might have gone if Nashville had made a move for Kovalchuk at the trade deadline or if the Predators had the cash to have signed Marian Hossa instead of the Blackhawks.
The Predators, by virtue of being a very well-run and very well-coached team have been able to do more with less in a way better than any other team. Unfortunately, that doesn’t make them serious cup contenders. They’re a strong team and probably will continue to be so; but, until they can afford to pony up the cash for what’s now price-certain talent, they’re going to have to rely on incredible luck if they want a real chance of winning the cup.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 10:07 AM CDT up reply actions
Or what if Martin Erat hadn't thrown the puck away?
Now imagine how differently that series might have gone if Nashville had made a move for Kovalchuk at the trade deadline or if the Predators had the cash to have signed Marian Hossa instead of the Blackhawks.
I can pretty confidently say Nashville would be interested in neither of those players.
Also thanks for putting underprivileged in quotation marks, as if they’re no poor people in our state because they don’t pay a state income tax.
Underprivileged and poor should not be interchangeable terms. I just think that the responsibility to take care of them should fall farther on the shoulders of their fellow Tennesseeans than on professional athletes. But, this is just about as much I want to discuss politically.
So, what if Martin Erat hadn’t thrown the puck away? The Predators could have maybe won a fourth game (and maybe not) and then they could have finally made it out of the first round to face a San Jose team that was still forgetting to choke in the 2nd round and were a very strong matchup to the Predators’ style of play. I don’t think you can honestly argue that the Predators would not have had a better chance to advance to the cup finals and possibly not embarrass the West by taking six games to finish off the Flyers if they had spent more money on their payroll.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions
So, what if Martin Erat hadn’t thrown the puck away? The Predators could have maybe won a fourth game (and maybe not) and then they could have finally made it out of the first round to face a San Jose team that was still forgetting to choke in the 2nd round and were a very strong matchup to the Predators’ style of play. I don’t think you can honestly argue that the Predators would not have had a better chance to advance to the cup finals and possibly not embarrass the West by taking six games to finish off the Flyers if they had spent more money on their payroll.
I think you’re changing the subject – the Chicago series is what was being discussed, specifically what would’ve happened in that series had Nashville had Ilya Kovalchuk or another high priced, overrated player. What we would have accomplished in later rounds is rather immaterial.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions
overpaid... probably... overrated.. really?
I think there is a reason certain clubs decide to spend the money on certain stars.. and i dont think its because their overrated.. just a thought.
Specifically speaking, I think that Ilya Kovalchuk is overrated – but thats pretty off topic.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions
It's more on topic that you think
the fact that teams overpay so much for UFA-eligible stars is just one of the market forces that keep small-market teams, who have to be more careful spending on the margins, in contention.
Yeah, but...
This UFA market has really marginalized the majority of forwards on the market. Their salaries will be flat if not deflated because teams aren’t paying the asking price.
Defensemen are still making big money. Goaltenders are signing for less than was projected. Forwards not from Russia for the most part are not signing for outrageous salaries. There’s a bit of a market correction, but only in some areas.
Of course I’m worried there will be another lockout. And then I’ll have to become a soccer fan or something drastic.
www.stlouisgametime.com
In that Case
Please explain to me how exactly small-market teams have benefitted here. Maybe in 2008-09 when the small-market Hurricanes (who spent above the salary midpoint and lost money that year) got swept out of the Eastern Conference finals by the Penguins? That’s as close as a small-market team has come to sniffing the cup since 2007 and they would have needed a whole ton of luck to make it past both the Penguins and the Red Wings in that playoff season.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm not arguing it helps to be a small market team by any means
and since I need to stop commenting on this thread, I’ll say in parting you’re sharp and a good writer. I fully understand your argument, but this isn’t a fight worth picking.
Maybe it would be better in the short term for the league to move one of the Southern teams to Canada, but it’s completely unrealistic and not as assuredly beneficial as you make it out to be. Besides, by writing this stuff you’re just pissing off the fans of those markets. I look forward to your other articles that don’t beat this dead horse.
I appreciate the compliment
I do like hearing the opinions of the fans of these markets. I still think and will continue to think that the jock tax is unfair and should be repealed. From the options everybody has to make that happen, I think this plan is the most overall beneficial. I didn’t write this piece to specifically ruffle the feathers of die-hard Predators fans, just that without an emotional tie to the team or the city, I’m looking at a different set of best interests.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 10:50 AM CDT up reply actions
I don’t know if Kovalchuk is overrated, but overvalued if that makes sense. He has been (and always will be) an offense-only forward. Considering that, he’s one of the best. But, since he’s not a complete player i dont think he’s worth nearly as much money as he’s offered.
by Casey Richey on Jul 27, 2010 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
Yep, this is exactly what I was getting at. I’d rather pay Marian Hossa that money than Kovy.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
agreed.
Although both are how you say “douchebag”
by Casey Richey on Jul 27, 2010 10:36 AM CDT up reply actions
It doesn't matter
JJ’s point is that your ownership doesn’t have the money/isn’t willing to spend the money on that type of player. Hossa could fit into Trotz’s system (another argument one of the Preds fans in this thread made) and would have been a great centerpiece for your team. Hell, if Hossa is a Pred instead of a Blackhawk last year I think Nashville wins that series easily.
by handsomerob1 on Jul 27, 2010 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions
JJ’s point is that your ownership doesn’t have the money/isn’t willing to spend the money on that type of player
JJ may or may not be aware that the ownership squabbles/Boots Del Biaggo shares have recently been settled, which will finally allow another owner(s) to buy the 27% of the team. This means, essentially, that David Poile would be allowed to spend up to the salary cap, sooner rather than later.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions
but also are any of those players available now is one side of the comment. I think he was mainly referring to the past on that matter
by Casey Richey on Jul 27, 2010 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
Exactly
I hope this turns into Nashville spending more money on players in the future. Barry Trotz is one hell of a coach; I would much rather see a well-coached team win a Cup rather than one that gets by on talent alone, like we saw this year.
by handsomerob1 on Jul 27, 2010 10:42 AM CDT up reply actions
thanks for the lesson in semantics
and of course the team might have had a better chance in the playoffs with more payroll, but who cares? Do you want to move any small market team that has a bit of success?
His article wasn't about moving the Preds, per se
It’s about the state tax on professional athletes. Threatening to move the team is the only bargaining chip the NHL has in this situation in order to protect its players.
by handsomerob1 on Jul 27, 2010 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions
He pretty much admitted above
the tax was a smokescreen to write how he really feels about a team being in Nashville.
Where?
Or did you miss the sarcasm there too?
by handsomerob1 on Jul 27, 2010 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions
He said:
“The tax, as far as the league is concerned, is a red herring. The bigger issue is that moving a team that’s ready to be a bonafide cup contender to a better hockey market would yield instantaneous positive results for the league and the franchise.”
www.stlouisgametime.com
That wasn't his opinion
as far as the league is concerned
by handsomerob1 on Jul 27, 2010 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions
What I admitted is that the issue of the tax has enough benefits to the NHL if they fight for the NHLPA using it as a smokescreen for saying that they care about the players.
Whether or not the Predators move at this point is pretty immaterial. It’s a bluff that they don’t lose if it doesn’t go their way, since there are better markets than Nashville. I think the Preds can be successful in Tennessee, but they don’t necessarily HAVE to be in Tennessee.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions
for the Predators as an also-ran to overcome
Also-ran, eh? 100 pt teams just plain suck, don’t they?
Now imagine how differently that series might have gone if Nashville had made a move for Kovalchuk at the trade deadline or if the Predators had the cash to have signed Marian Hossa instead of the Blackhawks.
First, if you’ve followed the Predators for any amount of time at all, you’ll know that these types of players aren’t how David Poile and Barry Trotz roll. Its a team game – one player shouldn’t take up that much salary. Secondly, the lack of a star isn’t why we lost that series. Martin Erat handed the puck to Patrick Kane, and our power play failed to convert on a five minute major.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions
I didn’t say they suck, I said they weren’t serious cup contenders.
Consider this a reply to this one and your other comment above:
Perhaps a high-priced, overrated player wouldn’t have turned the puck over. Perhaps a high-priced, overrated player would have scored on a five minute major. Martin Erat is your best forward and I don’t see a good way to argue that he’s better than either Kovalchuk, Hossa, Gaborik, Havlat, or any of the other free agents/trade acquisitions from the previous year.
Winning teams find ways to overcome obstacles like what you claimed cost the Predators the series as though it was a stroke of luck or somehow just “one of those things that happens”. Turns out that those things that happen tend to happen much less frequently to serious cup contenders than they do to also-rans. I’m not saying the Predators sucked, I’m just saying that they would have been a better team with a higher payroll and that it’s unfortunate that the current situation they’re in makes that impossible.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah, no.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions
This is all semantics, and I can’t sit here and debate hypothetical, what if scenarios all day.
Two things, though – Martin Erat was not our best forward last year, and the term “also-ran” makes one think of Edmonton or Columbus, not a team that is one of four to win 40 games five years in a row.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions
Since about half of the Predators games I watched last year featured the Wings and Erat was the best forward in those games, I made that statement. I’d like to hear your opinion on who was your best forward.
As for the definition of “also-ran” it does seem that there’s a difference in what we consider that to mean. In no way do I compare Nashville to Columbus or Edmonton. But, I also don’t compare them to Chicago or San Jose as far as their chances to have actually won the cup last season.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
I’d say that Patric Hornqvist was the best forward on a consistent basis and the player who made the most impact.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions
that was also his first real season though.
One season is hard to make a full judgment on whereas Erat has 6 45+ pt seasons.
by Casey Richey on Jul 27, 2010 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions
this is true
I’m just talking about 09-10.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions
understood. Just saying that that might be where he got his opinion.
Side note: wanna trade Shea Weber for Todd Bertuzzi? It’s SUCH a good deal
by Casey Richey on Jul 27, 2010 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I wouldn’t trade Shea for Nick Lidstrom, so lets go with ‘no’.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions
Oh, of course I would – I’d trade 2/3 the roster for young Nick Lidstrom.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions
No
but we’ll give you Derek Meech for those stupid whistles and a match.
by handsomerob1 on Jul 27, 2010 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions
As an unbiased person who doesn't like either team
1. These taxes are common as you point out. The extent is obviously a bit far. In St. Louis, pro athletes are taxed 1 percent of their game check. Every person who works in the City of St. Louis pays the 1 percent tax no matter where they live. Even NFL players.
2. I’m firmly in the camp of not putting another team back in Canada unless we’re talking about a second team in Toronto. But that’s it. There’s a monopoly with the Leafs who charge $80 for the cheapest seat and sell out every game. The league would look foolish to go to Hamilton. Winnepeg doesn’t have an arena that would work. It’s just feeding the “it’s Canada’s game, silly — leave it in Canada.” That doesn’t grow the sport. That doesn’t help anyone.
3. This just makes Wings fans look more paternilistic and illustrates the “we’re better than you” attitude of the fan base. Granted, it’s much more predominant on A2M with Chef. Share the sport. If your city has a team why would you advocate taking it away for another city you don’t care about?
How about this: if the taxpayers of Detroit don’t pay for a new arena because Joe Louis is a dump, then the league should move the team to Kansas City. It would benefit the entire league. History? Screw it. I’m not a fan of Detroit. Take their hockey away! Get the drift?
4. I will never feel bad for a professional athlete for the taxes he has to pay. Ever. While paying $7,500 a year sucks for those guys, they still make a minimum of $500,000, they still get per diem, they’re not paying for equipment.
And I doubt any pro athlete would ever care about my taxes either.
www.stlouisgametime.com
Regarding point #4, I would feel bad for the sole case of Peter Olvecky. He made something like $105,000 at the AHL level last season, and got called up for one game in Nashville, for which he ended up paying out of pocket that day.
For someone on the roster all season, you’re right, it’s not that big a deal. The players themselves didn’t gripe about it when given the chance, and as one agent noted, it’s not unusual for athletes to pay taxes in a dozen states or more over the course of a season.
More fun than a stick to the face!
On the Forecheck is SB Nation's blog covering the Nashville Predators. Catch me on Twitter at @Forechecker.
The difference between the Tennessee tax and the taxes levied in the other 17 states is that players can’t claim that they’ve paid Tennessee income tax (which all of the other jock taxes are) and use it as even a partial write-off on any other tax form they file.
Also, Jason Arnott made $4.5M in 2009 and was asked to weigh in or complain about the tax 8 days after it went into effect. We’re five years removed from the current CBA and there are still people that don’t have a problem with the revenue-sharing system or the cap floor.
Brian Rafalski had an opportunity to complain about the tax in 2010 and he used that chance. The players tend to have all different opinions, just like us fans.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 10:14 AM CDT up reply actions
Of course the flip side was
pro athletes playing in Tennessee paid no taxes there previous to this.
Could they find a happy medium and not exempt NFL players? Absolutely.
www.stlouisgametime.com
point 3
I dont think he was in anyway shape or form trying to say we are better then you type thing. I got out of it as he was trying to stick up for the athletes and game. Its called individual liberty, its their money let them keep it no matter how rich they are.
Point 4 will never feel bad for a professional athlete for the taxes he has to pay. Ever. While paying $7,500 a year sucks for those guys, they still make a minimum of $500,000, they still get per diem, they’re not paying for equipment.
- if you are that bitter about their payroll why support them? The point is its their money and its being taken away for absolutely no reason…. its almost corrupt… Im not loaded by all means but damn, they have no right to dip inside anyones pockets.
I wouldn't say I'm bitter
Get paid what you can get paid. It’s the American way. But don’t think for an instant that taxes aren’t part of the same deal. My wife and I have worked hard for a good living. And we pay for it. Same goes for athletes. That’s reality. That’s also the American way.
If you’re anti-tax, that’s fine. But to say the government has no right to dip inside anyone’s pockets is not founded in the real world.
www.stlouisgametime.com
OH! I almost forgot...
No good Preds/Wings debate is complete without this gem.
And….scene.
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
/sobs uncontrollably
On the Forecheck: preaching the Predators' gospel to the unwashed masses.
by Chris Burton on Jul 27, 2010 10:52 AM CDT up reply actions
Haha!
I forgot that was against the Predators.
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 27, 2010 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions
The bench was worse
They could barely stand they were laughing so hard.
by handsomerob1 on Jul 27, 2010 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions
Didn't mean to ruffle feathers?
Please dude. It’s obvious that was well part of your intent. You sure you aren’t JJfromCanada? Seriously tho, you’re right Nashville isn’t perfect. Maybe your drive is better served figuring out how to lower Detroit’s off the charts crime rates, or maybe you can help put people there back to work. Just let us toothless folks gnaw on our TooToo whistles and really go to work helping YOUR community.
hahahaha
again you have no legitimate argument about your pathetic excuse for a hockey franchise so you turn to the economy…. original.
Really?
If you consider Nashville a “pathetic excuse for a hockey franchise” then you know little about hockey. It’s ok if this JJ guy wants to write about the tax issue but it’s an entirely different animal when you inject cheap shots as he did. If that’s his game then fine. Don’t expect Nashville fans to simply take it.
Maybe you should read the entire thread
before running off at the mouth and making yourself look like a fool.
by handsomerob1 on Jul 27, 2010 7:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh well
Good try, JJ. You attempted to make a good point about a complex issue, but were defeated (apparently) in the end by those that were too touchy about the team involved to view the bigger issues involved.
Maybe if you use the Panthers as an example for your next article, no one will notice.
by Big Z in Orlando on Jul 27, 2010 3:26 PM CDT reply actions
One day on the job and already ruffling some feathers
This is why we can’t have nice things.
Back off man, I'm a scientist
Winging It In Motown
and SB Nation Detroit --SB Nation's regional hub for all your Detroit sporting needs
Twitter
I'm so glad you guys got more writers.. your last chick was hot.
This one whines a lot about nashville.
After 5 No-Dozes I feel great.. only except that i can hear my ears.. and I believe that toenails are the funniest thing I have ever seen.
Come Root on the blues at
www.stlouisgametime.com
Guess it's just not Tennessee huh?
"Income earned within the state of Michigan is subject to income/withholding tax, at the flat rate of 4.35 percent. This includes athletes, entertainers and any and all other occupations," wrote Terry Stanton, public information officer for the state Treasury, in an e-mail to Crain’s. "The vast majority of income tax revenue collected by the state is remitted through the employer withholding process (just as income taxes, federal and state are withheld from your pay by an employer)."
So not only does Michigan do the same thing, they do it to everyone from the the players, to the coaches, to the support staff, right down to the bus driver.
Your topic actually carried some weight until you took it into the typical “move a southern team to a more worthy Canadian city”. Two of which had teams and lost them and one that will never get one because Toronto won’t allow it.
That's been established
Yes, Michigan is another state that charges a specific tax. I’ve stated that there are 18 of them in total.
The difference is that this tax is considered an income tax while the Tennessee tax is not. Most states allow you to at the very least lower your reportable income by some amount when you pay income tax in another state. Since they have no regular state income tax (except for income earned through investment dividends and capital gains), Tennessee charges this as a privilege tax, which does not allow a person to consider this as income tax paid elsewhere, giving them no tax relief elsewhere. This is the entire reason the Tennessee tax is unfair and the other 17 states’ taxes are not unfair.
I’ve said before that if Nashville stays put, then I’m ok with that, since there are other markets in significantly more trouble than the Preds. Whether or not Toronto wants something to happen doesn’t matter to me. I realize that they’ll fight tooth-and-nail to keep a competing team out of their market, but if we’re talking about what SHOULD happen, then there absolutely should be a team in Hamilton, which is only an hour’s drive from Toronto and would give Maple Leafs fans up there another option, lowering overall prices for all of the fans while increasing overall league revenues (while hurting Toronto’s revenues as an individual team).
by J.J. from Kansas on Jul 28, 2010 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions
Preds moving again???????
It is funny how this article came out about 2 weeks after the owner of the Predators told the fans that they are staying for many years to come. I guess they have ran out of reason why the Preds should leave, attendance is growing, fan support is up, owners are becoming more finacially stable, so I guess they have to use this tax reason.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Winging It In Motown
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Latest Puck Daddy - NHL from Yahoo! Sports
- Penguins, Bruins face their challenges in Eastern Conference showdown
- Olli Jokinen’s slump-buster is a Big Mac meal from McDonalds (Video)
- Friday’s Three Stars: Brassard wins it for Blue Jackets in overtime; Halak blanks Kings
- Puck Previews: Blues host Kings in first game after break; Blackhawks’ road struggles
- Best barometer of the St. Louis Blues’ success? Gifts from political lobbyists
Latest stories and headlines from NHL.com
- WHL Roundup: A look at Friday's games
- Gabriel and Leipsic two goals each as the Winterhawks defeat the Silvertips 7-3
- Feser solidifies Americans win with two empty-net goals against the Thunderbirds
- Holberg scores winner in shootout as the Chiefs beat the Royals 6-5
- Brown makes 26 saves to lead the Rockets over the Cougars 2-1
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
