187 replies to this topic

[stevkrause]

Just as the topic states - would you make that trade?

Edited by stevkrause, 13 October 2012 - 07:35 AM.

[55fan]

I think we're going to lose it anyway. Might as well get something in return for it.

[frankgrimes]

Count me in, even if its two, two 1/2 years midget needs to go.

[Hockeymom1960]

Oh at first I thought it said sacrifice Bettman to save the season

[cusimano_brothers]

[Seraph]

We're gonna have to lose more than one season before the guy goes. So might as well vote yes and cut our losses.

[haroldsnepsts]

There's really no getting around that three lockouts in a row, one (and maybe more) costing the entire season is terrible league management.

As others have said, there's a fair chance we'll lose this season. Might as well make it worth it.

[Dabura]

The owners will opt for a lockout the next time they get the chance, regardless of who's Commissioner.

Just saying.

Edited by Dabura, 13 October 2012 - 10:17 AM.

[haroldsnepsts]

The owners will opt for a lockout the next time they get the chance, regardless of who's Commissioner.

Just saying.

Possibly.

But the owners were the ones who outvoted Bettman in '95 to end the lockout and save the season, back when they only needed the majority to overrule him.

The depressing part is it would take 24 out of 30 owners to vote for Bettman to be fired.

[Dabura]

True.

Is it really 24/30? Geez.

[chances14]

Possibly.

But the owners were the ones who outvoted Bettman in '95 to end the lockout and save the season, back when they only needed the majority to overrule him.

The depressing part is it would take 24 out of 30 owners to vote for Bettman to be fired.

the problem is that those same owners allowed bettman to become virtually untouchable.

Edited by chances14, 13 October 2012 - 01:03 PM.

[cusimano_brothers]

The owners love Uncle Gary. Remember, the vote was 30-0.

[F.Michael]

The owners will opt for a lockout the next time they get the chance, regardless of who's Commissioner.

Just saying.

As long as there's "sisters of the poor" franchises - you can bet on it.

[irishock]

The owners will opt for a lockout the next time they get the chance, regardless of who's Commissioner.

Just saying.

Pretty much this.

[drwscc]

I will have a hearty laugh when Bettman finally retires, and Gretzky or someone else that everyone is sure is the savior of the game, comes in and picks up right where Bettman left off. The butthurt will be enough to fill oceans.

[BottleOfSmoke]

I will have a hearty laugh when Bettman finally retires, and Gretzky or someone else that everyone is sure is the savior of the game, comes in and picks up right where Bettman left off. The butthurt will be enough to fill oceans.

I do not look forward to taking a cruise on and/or swimming in an ocean of butthurt, thank you very much. But I fear your point is correct. No matter who steps into that role, there are going to be decisions that are made that we the fans don't agree with. However, I do think that having someone as commissioner who has a passion for the sport and an understanding of what makes it great will make a difference. How much of a difference? TBD...

But I really do hate Bettman with a fiery passion.

[haroldsnepsts]

I will have a hearty laugh when Bettman finally retires, and Gretzky or someone else that everyone is sure is the savior of the game, comes in and picks up right where Bettman left off. The butthurt will be enough to fill oceans.

Bettman is 3 for 3 on lockouts during CBA negotiations, so it would be a challenge for someone to keep up that track record.

Personally I'd rather hope the game be healthy and not lose seasons rather than have a smug laugh while Bettman's successor continues to ruin the league.

But to each their own.

[Euro_Twins]

Possibly.

But the owners were the ones who outvoted Bettman in '95 to end the lockout and save the season, back when they only needed the majority to overrule him.

The depressing part is it would take 24 out of 30 owners to vote for Bettman to be fired.

It is 23/30, only 8 owners need to side with Bettman, so 7 or less on his side overrules him

The owners love Uncle Gary. Remember, the vote was 30-0.

They do not all love gary bettman. Most sided with him because it only takes 8 owners to give him full power, so they did not want the nhl to seem weak, and like they weren't all on the same page to the pa. Many owners do not agree with the lockout, but it will take 23 owners to overrule Bettman

[haroldsnepsts]

It is 23/30, only 8 owners need to side with Bettman, so 7 or less on his side overrules him



They do not all love gary bettman. Most sided with him because it only takes 8 owners to give him full power, so they did not want the nhl to seem weak, and like they weren't all on the same page to the pa. Many owners do not agree with the lockout, but it will take 23 owners to overrule Bettman

Ah, you're right. Bad math on my part. Still a depressing number though.

And as I've mentioned, because the NHL owns the Coyotes I have to wonder if Bettman gets that vote. If he didn't then I'm not sure who would.

[Chunkylover]

What do you think would happen if the owners fired Bettman and hired someone else? Do you honestly think any commissioner, whose salary is paid by the owners, is going to side with the players? Do you really think a different commissioner will keep his job if he capitulates to the demands of the Players association?

The lockout is what everyone wants except the fans. Fans need to face the fact that they are not the owners of the team, the actual owners are. The owners have to protect their bottom line and the health of the league. Their loyalty is rightly directed to their wallet.

They also know they won't actually lose any fans as a result of their actions because fans, by definition are loyal to the team. Fair weather fans will always come and go.

Likewise the players have no loyalty to the fans, that's why they're all playing for in Europe. They sacrificed all the lazy hours you and I spent as a kids working hard so one day they might be part of the 1%.

It sucks for us but we don't really matter to any of the parties involved at the end of the day. And before anyone is tempted to judge too harshly, how would you respond is someone was trying to take more of your money?