sleepwalker

Whats your point? That doesn't have anything to do with what I said that you quoted, and I doubt Illitch could care less if the NHLPA members are out of a job if the teams that need to fold do. He is a business man, as I said. He didn't get to be as rich as he is worrying about things like that.

Why are you complaining to me about it? I didn't make the rules. Bettman put that rule in place, so blame him if you don't like it.

What Devallano did was completely retarded. This whole lockout is about the owners claiming they are poor and need more money, and Devallano goes off on his rant anyway knowing damn well it was going to cost the Wings organization a ton of money in fines. What an idiot. Devallano has been worse to Illitch thus far in the lockout than the union has. One dumb comment by Devallano, and it cost Illitch a $250,000 fine.

Did you actually hear that from a credible source or just as baseless fan talk on hockey forums, like the rest of us have? I doubt Illitch is against the lockout, he is a business man, and the lockout is to get the owners more money. Plus, the longer the lockout goes on, the greater the chance that the bottom feeding welfare teams will go under, and owners like Illitch will get to stop spending their money to support them.

Lol, I was going to post the same thing.

Huh? Are you suggesting that if he signed with the Wings, that somehow the lockout wouldn't have happened?

Ok, I'll give you an answer, but you probably won't like it. You asked: Maybe things are different over there, but on this side of the pond, a lot of parents choose to be honest with their children and let them know that while violence should be an absolute last resort, and you shouldn't use violence to solve your problems, sometimes in hockey, (as in life) violence is inevitable. If someone attacks you, you defend yourself.

Not to mention the two main "father figures" as it were, other than the actual parents that children have is their country and religion, and both, no matter where you are, have throughout history and to this day use extreme violence, death, and destruction to "solve" most of their problems. Not that I condone violence, but you can preach non-violence all you want, but it is really just "do as I say not as I do" type thing.

It always amazes me reading some of the comments people leave to articles like this. One of the comments I read on that article by some GM slappy, was saying that Bettman should just bring in a bunch of scab players to play the season, since it won't matter anyway since all the fans support the team, not the actual players on the team. Uh...yeah.

Not all people on both sides. Despite the emotional based rhetoric from fans about how they think Illitch is against the lockout, and wants to get back to hockey asap, blah blah blah. The reality is, Illitich HATES the fact that he has to support the s***ty welfare franchises and has made it clear multiple times that he feels this way. The longer the lockout goes on, the better chance there is that those welfare teams fold, and owners like Illitch won't have to foot the bill any more. I am willing to bet Illitch hopes the lockout goes far past one season, so the teams that deserve to fold, do, and he and the other owners like him can finally stop supporting the bottom feeders.

Or a throwback to the Storm days. Anyone remember this one? One of the greatest hockey fights ever, perhaps?

Why should they change their name? They are called the New York Islanders, not the Long Islanders. If you look at a map, Brooklyn is part of the island. Then you've got the logo, much like the Wings, that is easily recognizable and unchanged. (except for that brief stint in the mid-90s) It wouldn't any make sense to change the name.

Agreed. Like has been pointed out in this thread a few time before though, its like the two sides in power in politics. Neither cares about the people whatsoever. Thats not the point. Its a power/money game.

True. But the devil was already in this fight. And he is a hateful, mean, vindictive devil who hates the players with a passion and would never negotiate in good faith no matter what the circumstances. So the players had no choice but to bring in a "devil" of their own to help even up the fight, lest their souls be devoured and they lose everything to the original devil, dark lord Bettman.

Agreed. But at the same time, it also pretty much guarantees that this will drag out for a lot longer now, which sucks. The fact that over the last week the NHL has tried shady underhanded stunts to try to bypass the NHLPA and influence players and/or possibly attempt to get insider union info from them, and rejected the NHLPAs proposals in mere minutes, without even giving them any consideration is not only a further huge wedge between the players and NHL, but even a lot of the players who were holding out some hope, now have likely lost what little trust they had left in the NHL after this past week and the events that have transpired.

Thats what I said. The only way to do it is for the owners to pay out of pocket, which they won't. Or to ramp down to 50/50 over a few years.

Yeah, that is the point I am getting at. You keep knocking the union proposal for the specific reason that it didn't immediately offer a 50/50 split out of the gate. I am saying, I don't think it is possible to go 50/50 out the gate and still honor existing contracts. It would have to ramp down to 50/50 over time. It seems you are starting to see that now...

My thinking is, that if it was at all possible, then it would have happened by now. I mean, wasn't that the entire point of the players union putting out the "3rd" proposal for an immediate 50/50 division, if the owners would honor all contracts? To show everyone that while technically possible, it would require the owners to take a hit themselves, which we know would never happen, and they proved would never happened by dismissing the offer, quite literally, immediately upon it being presented to them.

How would you suggest they go about getting to 50/50 right out of the gate AND honoring of all current contracts at the same time? (which you say you are in favor of)

Yay! I know myself and several of my friends have emailed FSD letting them know how disappointed we were that they weren't airing any Griffins games. So you guys can thank us for this.

The two divisions in the east would have 7 teams each, the two divisions on the west would have 8 teams each. The top 4 teams from each make it to the playoffs. Its not rocket science to see that the teams in the east would have had a very clear and pretty significant advantage in making the playoffs. Edit: Didn't see Jedis post there, looks like he beat me to it.

The players didn't reject it as a "bargaining chip" as you say. In case you forgot, the NHL proposed realignment was completely uneven and gave Eastern Conference teams an almost 10% advantage in making the playoffs versus the Western Conference teams. THAT is why the players rejected it, like anyone else would have.

Agreed.

Is it 8? Has anyone actually figured out what happens to the Phoenix vote? Does Bettman get to cast it himself? If so, I imagine it is actually 7 owners, not 8, as Bettman wouldn't vote against himself.

Yup. Also, its pointless empty speak. We are all going to be right back watching and supporting the NHL after this is all over. Both the players and NHL know this.