I think blaming holland / babs for hypothetical situations that you made up in your head could be classified as insanity as well
I don't see how this is good for the wings. We have to wait until training camp conditioning to see if he can play? Meanwhile there's $9 million left to spend (after RFAs are signed) and we are in sore need of a couple key positions, Alfie is set to take half that, so there's only $4-5 million left on the table... Alfie is a good guy, he tried this season but it didn't work out. It's time to move on and make some long term moves to help this team rather then sign a guy with one foot in the old folks home that is only good for one season.
They'll sign Alfie and Cleary and there's only $3 million left. Meanwhile every team is wheeling and deeling and Holland is still convinced this no longer happens in the new NHL, that there are no more marquee players left...yet big names are all over the place.
Babs / Holland your time is up. Just resign Sammy, Bert, Cleary and Alfie and call it a day, it's obviously too dificult for your guys to get creative and bring in some fresh blood. I wish Mr. I was a few years younger...
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."
- LetsGoWings.com Forums
- → Viewing Profile: Likes: Buppy
BuppyMember Since 14 Feb 2009
Offline Last Active Today, 03:21 PM
- Group Silver Booster
- Active Posts 2,049
- Profile Views 6,426
- Member Title Hall-of-Famer
- Age Age Unknown
- Birthday Birthday Unknown
Posted by wingsfan4795 on 27 June 2014 - 10:38 PM
Posted by rrasco on 28 May 2014 - 06:36 PM
Isn't it ironic that technology is the medium in which we are reading about this story yet somehow it has generated some kind of fear about how tech is taking work away from real people and diminishing history? Technology will always replace people, it has for a hundred years. I'm sure the tone of the article is bringing about this fear, but holy smokes people, calm down.
Point I as making if you state something back it up with a link as I don't know every single rule of the CBA and thank you for the info; guess sit back and see how this plays out
Or you could just read the OP where it was clearly stated.
Posted by 55fan on 26 April 2013 - 10:33 AM
It depends on how serious your relationship is. Have you met her parents?
I'm one of those old fuddy-duddys who think that octi should be reserved for the playoffs, but since this is as close as Dallas will get this year, it's kind of you to give them at least a taste of the playoff experience.
If you're really nervous about getting caught- wear a Stars jersey (get a cheap one at a thrift store) over a Wings t-shirt. If the jersey is white and the t-shirt red, you might need a white t-shirt over the red one to camo the red. Then once you get inside, give the Stars jersey to an underprivileged child (one whose parents haven't raised them as a Wings fan), ditch the white t-shirt (they're cheap at thrift stores) and wander about proudly wearing the Wings colours.
Or spend the game in a Stars jersey and when security asks who threw the octo, just shrug and ask them to explain icing.
Posted by Crymson on 17 January 2013 - 04:49 PM
Newsflash to everyone: it's POSSIBLE that ANY team might not make the playoffs. The sheer amount of whining over the fact that the playoffs are no longer a guaranteed thing is sickening. Welcome to the standard state of affairs for fans of any other team in the league. Get used to it. Maybe now you'll appreciate the 20 years of success more.
I thought it was a possibility every season. Or did Wings have a guaranteed spot in the past? Oh well, fire Holland already. I think it's time. We have almost played one game this season.
<blockquote class='ipsBlockquote'data-author="kipwinger" data-cid="2340950" data-time="1358448568"><p>
The Wings got worse on defense but improved their forward units and goal tending. I'm not so sure they "got worse" as you'd suggest.</p></blockquote>
The Flyers/Penguins method of winning 6-5 didn't work out too well and the Red Wings can't match either of those teams firepower up front.
The drop on defense is significant. The goaltending duo is improved, but can they steal games with this defense likely needing that?
News: the Wings also don't have horrific goaltenders. Howard would never let in the habitual stinkers that Bryzgalov and Fleury allowed.
Straight up. If we had a full season this year and missed the playoffs, a lot of blame would have been on Holland, and rightly so. But with this shortened season he kinda has an excuse if they miss the playoffs. A lot of bad teams will be making it, and a lot of good teams will be missing it. Sprint.
He has more than an excuse; he has 14 years of success behind him. If every GM who failed to make the playoffs got fired, we'd be seeing a ludicrous turnover in general managers. But it doesn't work that way. Fans of the Wings have simply grown to believe that making the playoffs is something that they deserve. It's sad to see such a spoiled, unappreciative state of mind.
Posted by sleepwalker on 14 November 2012 - 04:45 PM
Some people just can't stand success I guess.
Hell, if I had the opportunity he had, I would be working out and pushing myself to be the best damn hockey player I could. Drinking? Maybe after I turn 21. What a dumbass.
I can say that too as an adult and with the "wisdom" that comes with age, but if I am being honest with myself, I would almost assuredly still do stupid s*** occasionally, like all kids do. Additionally, that last part is just silly, like drinking at 20 or whatever is horrible and will destroy your career and/or body, but at 21 it magically won't.
Not to downplay the incident, as drunk driving is stupid as f***, but to all the people talking about alcohism and diseases and whatnot, come on... He got a DUI. I am sure almost all of here that drink have, at some point in our life, driven home from a bar/party/friends house/wedding/whatever after a couple too many. That doesn't automatically make one an alcoholic. It just makes one someone who made a stupid decision while drunk.
Posted by Nightfall on 31 October 2012 - 07:11 PM
First off, I would like to apologize for my crappy behavior. I have sent out a few parting shots at people, and this isn't the way to act on a public forum. As many of you know, I feel strongly about this situation in blaming both sides for their conduct. I also understand that I am in a forum of people who, as a majority, like the NHLPA and what they stand for. While I don't agree with everything everyone says here, there are some good points being made for the NHLPA that I acknowledge. There are also some things which I believe to be incorrect that I have tried to correct people on, but not the right way to do so. Some of the parting shots I have thrown people have not been right and I wouldn't like it if I was put in your shoes.
To put it simply, I am going to be tossing in discussion points, but I won't be engaging people in active discussion like I have been. I really have been almost emotionally involved in this discussion because of just how upset I am with the NHL and NHLPA with this whole mess. This lockout has consumed me to a certain point, and that is bad for my health. I have spent time on social networking publicly speaking about the faults of both of these sides and how upset I am with them. This is not the kind of person I am to be honest. This coming from someone who is positive, energetic, a leader, respectable, and most importantly, a real hockey fan.
To those of you who I have upset, I apologize.
To those of you who are typing up responses to things I have posted here, don't anticipate a reply.
I will still be active, but I am really going to knock things down and go low key for a while. Its time I put this lockout and the way I feel about it out of my head and concentrate on something else. Maybe computer games, work, refereeing hockey, or any one of the many things I enjoy doing. This lockout is really upsetting, but its time to move on.
Thank you all!
Posted by Nightfall on 31 October 2012 - 10:57 AM
I will say you make some valid points, especially on your method of thinking. In my mind, both parties are going to be to blame in this lockout. You say that you don't think the way you do because you support the PA. You support the PA because you think the way you do. I think the same way when it comes to my disdain for both parties and the way they conduct business. It disgusts me, and as much as it disgusts me, I know that I won't be able to change the minds who are firmly on one fence or the other.
Lastly, you're getting one thing completely backwards. I don't think the way I do because I support the PA. I support the PA because I think the way I do. It's not about what has or hasn't been done wrong on either side, it's what has and hasn't been done right. The PA making the right (IMO) offer, makes any wrongs I might have had a problem with meaningless. They can only be wrong insofar as they contribute to making the offer wrong. If the offer isn't wrong, the actions leading to the offer aren't wrong. The actions themselves are meaningless. All anyone should be concerned with is the offers. You don't agree with the offers. You have your theories on what you think has contributed to those offers (or more accurately, the lack of better ones), but don't let that confuse your true issue.
As I said before, we are going to have to agree to disagree on many of the things we discuss. This isn't a bad thing. We just have two opinions on the way that these negotiations should be run and my thoughts differ from yours. After 20 pages of discussion, this is the way it always will be from the looks of things.
With all this being said, let me throw out another thought that has to do with what you mentioned. You are right, I shouldn't expect anyone who likes apples but hates oranges to smash the apples they have. Same goes for the opposite. I mention this because you substitute the NHL for oranges and the NHLPA for apples, and you get the situation we have right here. I cannot expect you or anyone else that matter to change. You have your reasons for being where you are today, just as I do. The likelihood of us meeting in the middle or changing our minds are nill. Even though I hate the owners and the PA for their actions in this, I can't expect people firmly on one side to follow me in my thought process. There is a reason you are where you are at right now.
As a hockey fan, I hope this gets situated as quickly as possible. At the same time, my fandom of NHL hockey has taken a hit. This is coming from someone who has followed the Wings since I fell in love with the sport. Both the owners and players are not going to feel my paltry impact on the sport of hockey. $2000 a year on merchandise, tickets, travel, and so on don't make a dent in anything. At the same time, I hope that both sides hear my displeasure.
I don't expect you or anyone else to see things the way I do, and its about time I start acting like it. You and others here have done your best to make me see it from your perspective, and that isn't going to happen. I have to just be the guy here to bow out and say, agree to disagree. Don't take it personally, but its just the way that is the best for all of us.
Posted by 55fan on 10 October 2012 - 01:18 PM
Posted by Wingzman91 on 05 October 2012 - 09:36 PM
I would hope they love the game more than it's fans.
This deal also will affect hundreds of players not even in the league yet, there are more things to consider than "will fan X have something to do after work tonight?"
I want hockey back also, but in no way am I pretending I am the victim here.
The simple fact: The OWNERS locked out the PLAYERS, because the OWNERS saw a opportunity to take back guaranteed contract money and use it to subsidize teams in non-traditional markets.
I sign contracts with people all the time, never has anyone ever suggested that I take less money and do the same amount of work.
I don't know why people feel entitled to these players, they don't owe you anything, they owe their family for all the time they are gone and cutting their household income by 1/4 doesn't fly.
If Mario had to give back 1/4 of his money back in the day then there might not be a Penguins team today.
Yet now he has the balls to demand that of the people he inspired to join this profession.
Bottom Line: The league is not losing money, it is earning a profit. Some teams are winning, others losing.
The heaviest contributing factor to the losing of said teams is that they don't have a big enough fan base in their non-traditional market.
Taking money from the players allows owners to operate the flawed system longer, but does nothing to fix the problem.
If there is no problems then what will they point to next time they feel like changing all the rules because their team can not win the cup.
Posted by toby91_ca on 27 September 2012 - 10:53 AM
You do realize that's all public posturing right? The league suggesting they are willing to negotiate and any time whenever the PA is ready is no different than the PA saying they are willing to start the season under the existing CBA while a new one is negotiated. I'm not sure why either side is really all that interested in getting public support on their side though, I don't see it as having any real impact on resolving any differences they may have.
No offer was tabled, but the NHL was on record saying that they were ready to start the process in January. I remember reading about it, but I didn't find much on it other than snippets of info.
Back in January, NHL fans were assured initial negotiations regarding the next round of NHL collective bargaining would begin following the All-Star Game.
That subsequently changed to a vague point later in the regular season,to some point following the Stanley Cup Playoffs
It’s believed there’s been some quiet talk behind the scenes between the two sides , but the real negotiations probably won’t start until mid-July at the earliest, allowing time for the NHL Awards, entry draft weekend, and the opening week of unrestricted free agency.
In mid-March, NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman professed to be unconcerned (“I’m not worried. At all”) over when negotiations would start, saying his side was ready whenever the PA was ready to talk.
I'm not one of those guys that are against the players from the view that they make too much money, etc. If an owner generates $100 million profit off a player, is it fair for that player to get $5 million and the owner get $95 million? Extreme case, but some would look at the player and say "hey, you are making $5 million, how much do you need...suck it up and play".....however, I think that's hardly fair.
That said, I think it's a fine line trying to determine what is fair and what's not. I'm not sure what math is being used to demonstrate that. I am more on the player's side right now though as their proposals at least attempt to address the issues faced by the NHL. I'm not sure about the fairness of the NHLPA's numbers, but their approach at least attempts to address the issues. The NHL's proposal, whether the sharing is fair or not is plain dumb as it does not address their issues.....all it would do it make the richer teams richer and the poor teams be a little less poor in the first year or so.
My solution would be as follows:
Determine an appropriate fair profit margin to be earned by the league as a whole (based on appropriate risk weightings and market data, etc.). If overall league revenues are $3.4 billion, all other expenses before player salaries = X.....after deducting X, you can determine how much should be allocated to a player salaries while maintaining an overall profit margin of 10% for example (not sure what that appropriate number may be, but it should be easily calculated, shouldn't be a number out of the air).
In terms of then moving down to the individual teams, that's an ownership issue. You are going to having some owners profess their lack of willingness to share profits with other teams who aren't running their businesses properly, etc, which is fine, but if the league really wants parity, they have to figure out a way for the owners to share the wealth with each other......that should not be a player's concern.
Posted by LeftWinger on 03 June 2012 - 09:23 AM
- Buppy likes this
Posted by LeftWinger on 23 May 2012 - 09:28 PM
Hey, Holland is gonna do what he is gonna do...Sure Suter may hate Detroit and will take less NOT to come here, that is fine too. I just don't see why everyone is getting excited over these guys who couldn't make it in the NHL before, didn't we learn our lesson's with Leino and Brunnstrom? I guess he could pan out to be a nice #6 or #7, I just don't hear no talk from Holland about being interested in Suter, he sure talks about guys over in Europe enough, you would think that he would say something...Hey, hopefully he signs everyone he wants to and turns this team back right...
Posted by hooon on 21 May 2012 - 05:19 PM
5. I posted this on another thread as well, but needs to be repeated here. In general, men reach their physical peaks around 27. if you go look at players in every sport, they generally have their best years from age 27-32. yes you can have some freaks come along, but those are rare. Ideally, 1/3 to 1/2 of the team would be in this age group. it is hard to get to 1/2 now with the cap, because guys this age in their primes, get paid premium dollars. But a team should have 10+ guys between 27 and 32. With the balance split equally between those younger and older than this group. In a perfect world, you have 11 guys between 27-32, 6 guys 26 and younger, and 6 guys 33 and older. if things are really going well, your top 3 forwards, top 2 dmen, and starting goalie are in the group 27-32.
Honestly, nothing you've ever posted needs to be repeated here, or anywhere. Ever.