Posted by stevkrause
on 07 October 2012 - 12:12 AM
Flat out, anyone who uses the "Bettman is doing what the owners want and working for them" defense of him is just proving the point of why he should be removed. A GOOD commissioner of any league does what is the best for the league and makes the hard stances AGAINST the owners when need be, they do not just give the spoiled brats whatever they want, whenever they want and be a yes man. A commissioner works for the league, not the owners. Bettman is a spineless yes man that bends over at all of the bog's whims and never tells them no, even when it's what is best for the LEAGUE.
More games lost than ALL of the other 3 major sports combined under Bettman's watch... Tell me again how he is doing a good job...
The NHL needs a leader and a visionary, not a spineless weasel that won't stand up to the owners in the best interest of the league when he needs to... and to put it quite bluntly, if you disagree with this post, then you are beyond logic and not worth debating with anyway.
Honestly, I was hoping for a more of a $1.5M Cap hit, I know he is a solid player and is good at what he does, but I just don't think he earned a raise over twice what he was payed last season...I guess we will see in 4 years if he is outplaying this $2.1M. It's not that he isn't worth it, it's just needed cap space to make this team better... If Holland overpays Quincey, I will have an ulcer... I hope he keeps Abby at a modest pay...I am hoping for $1.1, but after this, I am seeing $1.8M... sorry guys, not being negative, it's just needed cap space, or maybe sign the big UFA's first and then pay your guys a bit of a inflated contract, thats all I am saying...of course after re-signing Bertuzzi at too much money, I should have seen this coming...
NO QUINCEY!!! NO HUDLER!!! Please God! Please Holland! PLEASE!!!!
EDIT: Also, do you now realize what it's going to take to re-sign Filppula? He will get at least $5M...that is the problem here, (and not just Holland) keep overpaying and the NHL will go belly up... I honestly see a point where the guys making $500,000 today will be at $2M within a couple of years...Hey Minny, go ahead a give Parise the world, ruin the NHL (again.)
at first i felt like it was a bit high, but considering how many bad contracts are going to happen in a couple weeks, i guess it is good to put it into context. i am also happy with the 4 year term. i think that makes the higher cap hit worth it.
Bert deserves it because of the ridickulous offer and of course because of the hit and I don't think there was any intent to injure to Naslund. The $350 000 offer was classless and ignorant, hope the Moore's get everything they're asking for
Trollin' for 4 days now. You're going to have to do better than this.
What do you mean trollin??? First time anyone has accused me of trollin Bettman changed the game so his weaker teams would have a better chance of success 96 Panthers being a perfect example. Major offensive records will never be broken. 2459 fewer goals and over 6000 fewer points scored by players were scored in 97-98 than just 5 years previously in 92-93, Bettman's first full year as commissioner and more than 2000 fewer goals last year than in his first full year. Personally I don't care too much where the game is being played or about the finances of the NHL except where it concerns the on ice product. All the obstruction that was allowed favored the trap and so did the bigger goalie equipment, you had to use some form of the trap to win. This was all manipulated by Bettman to manufacture parity by circumventing talent. His excuse initially for allowing all the obstruction is that too many penalties would slow the game down but as it has been argued then and has been proven now that the player and coaches will adapt to how the game is called. If all penalties are called all the time (when humanly possible, of course a ref may miss some if his view was obstructed and of course we all mistakes) the players, coaches and fans would know what to expect. His excuse for the goalie equipment is that players are bigger and stronger with harder shots and that they need the bigger equipment to protect themselves. At the all-star games they record speeds of slap shots, rarely do they post times higher than Al MaCinnes or Al Iafrate used to post back in the eighties. Back in the seventies Bobby Schmautz shot the puck right through the net a few times. When a goalie played the puck before Bettman was commissioner the players could check him where they can't touch the goalies anymore. So why do they need the extra equipment? I work out with a 20 lb. vest and i could put a regular sized jersey over it and I can't even notice in the mirror and I am sure it would offer more protection than all that big huge padding that they are wearing. It is not protection but puck stopping equipment. On Hockey Night in Canada, Ron MacLean once put Grant Fuhr's entire catching glove into a catching glove goalies use today to demonstrate the great difference in size. The bigger goalie equipment benefited the trap style of play and Bettman allowed both so he indeed can get blamed for it. His underlying motive for allowing obstruction and the bigger goalie equipment was to manufacture parity. As I have shown the goalie equipment need not be any bigger to protect in fact they are more protected by the rules and with the development of technology I am sure they can produce goalie equipment just as big as it was in the eighties that is be much more protective as well. And now that they have instituted the "new rules" it is proven what a joke "calling all the obstruction would slow the game with too many penalties" excuse is. I think it is so funny when the NHL refers to the adjustment they finally made after the last lockout as "new rules". Excuse me but interference, hooking, tripping, holding, have always been rules the only difference is how often they are to be called. If they don't reduce the goalie equipment to the size it was before Bettman was commissioner major offensive records will never be broken. It always creates a lot of excitement and media attention when someone is going for a record. I think hockey is more entertaining to watch when there is not such a strict emphasis on defense
The bleacher report is the biggest joke to begin with, not to mention as stated earlier the article is from 2009. It's poorly written and overall is a horrible article. I'm overwhelmed at your standpoint on this article also, next time we pull some articles from years in the past, atleast state some type of ground for conversation instead of, "BETTMAN RUINED HOCKEY, GO."
As long as Bettman is still commissioner the article is pertinent. Why are you overwhelmed by the article too difficult for you to comprehend?