Jump to content

chances14's Photo


Member Since 19 Jun 2011
Offline Last Active Apr 12 2015 12:06 PM

#2332164 Sacrifice the full season to guarantee Bettman's removal?

Posted by chances14 on 18 October 2012 - 07:50 PM

It shouldn't matter if they thought that there might be trouble down the road, fact is the players signed binding contracts and should be paid for those contracts. Period

#2331924 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by chances14 on 17 October 2012 - 11:43 AM

It's a brilliant PR move by the league.

They made the deal look like they're conceding more than they actually are, tied it to salvaging the entire season, and put the ball in Fehr's court. They got their money's worth from that consultant.

Like I said in my last post, Fehr is right that everything about this deal is worse for the players. And there's not really irrefutable evidence like there was in 2004. The reality is though people don't care. We just want hockey. 50/50 sounds simple and easy, even if that's not the actual percentage because of adjusting HRR.

fehr let this play right into the owners hand by refusing to come up with another proprosal. now fehr and pa have to work with the owner's offer and face public backlash

#2331859 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by chances14 on 16 October 2012 - 10:56 PM

Yay a start point and a good one at that. I am sure Fehr will offer an untouched UFA; ELC, status and a higher contract cap 5 years is just ridiculous.

why is that ridiculous? the nba has a 5 year max for players signing with their returning teams and 4 year max if they sign with another team during free agency

#2331774 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by chances14 on 16 October 2012 - 01:38 PM

here's another little detail that was included in the owners new offer

"Players' Salaries for those NHLers playing in the AHL would be part of the cap." Now, are they formally calling this the Wade Redden Rule or not ...

no more for teams using the AHL to cover up their mistakes

#2331689 Sacrifice the full season to guarantee Bettman's removal?

Posted by chances14 on 15 October 2012 - 11:28 PM

I'm basing it more on the sum total of his career than any PR attempts by Fehr.

3 CBA negotiations. 3 lockouts.

1st major North American pro sport to lose a season due to a labor dispute. Other leagues have similar issues and problems but have managed to solve them without losing an entire season.

1,780 games lost to lockout under his watch and counting. That is by far more than any of the big pro sports.

How is that not a failure? The NHL commissioner is not just a shill for ownership, part of his job is to protect the integrity and public confidence in the league. The commissioners of other leagues have to deal with owners just like Bettman does.

7 years after losing an entire season to implement a hard cap, with an increase in revenue of 50% since the last CBA, there's no way there should be a lockout right now. Bettman and his hardliners want too much too fast. And unlike in 1995, the owners aren't going to be able to overrule him and salvage the season.

it is a failure. but the owners are just as much to blame as bettman

#2331645 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by chances14 on 15 October 2012 - 02:34 PM

I agree. Costs went up, but so did profits, so that's something to take into account as well.

Remeber though that revenue and profits are 2 different things and is something a lot of people are not understanding here. people see $3.3 billion and automatically assume that is all profit but it's not.

another issue is that for the big market teams like toronto, detroit,etc.. profits have gone up but for the smaller market teams profits have not gone up, but you can bet that the costs of running a team have gone up across the board.

but i do agree with the players in that the owners should have to honor all exisiting contracts with no rollbacks. it's the owners who gave them the contracts in the first place.

#2331568 Sacrifice the full season to guarantee Bettman's removal?

Posted by chances14 on 14 October 2012 - 01:45 PM


The owners are demanding a higher percentage of revenue and salary rollbacks and the players are saying no. How is that a demand on the players part?

you are right in that the owners are demanding salary rollbacks. but the players are demanding that there be no salary rollbacks and refuse to negotiate economic issues until that demand is met.

You can argue who's demands are more reasonable but to say that the players aren't demanding anything is false imo. the fact is both sides have demands that right now aren't being met by either side and is why we are at a stalemate with these economic issues

#2331499 Sacrifice the full season to guarantee Bettman's removal?

Posted by chances14 on 13 October 2012 - 01:03 PM


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.

#2331323 Z basically says Bettman should be fired

Posted by chances14 on 11 October 2012 - 02:15 PM

i have to agree that i think the players should keep their mouths shut, just like the owners should and have.

nothing good comes from either the players or owners bashing each other through the public. i don't know about anyone else but i am tired of going to mlive and every day it seems there's a new article with zetterberg quotes criticzing the league and the owners. we get it, you don't like or agree with the owners. repeating it dozens of times to the media isn't going to solve anything.

#2331251 Our friend @HockeyyInsiderr lists anti-lockout teams...

Posted by chances14 on 10 October 2012 - 10:33 PM

this video was brought up in the old lockout thread. i think it speaks to boyle's quotes about how the owners are not all on the same page.

#2331250 Our friend @HockeyyInsiderr lists anti-lockout teams...

Posted by chances14 on 10 October 2012 - 10:23 PM

Lest we also forget, all 30 owners voted in favor of a lockout...

i think the owners that are against the lockout didn't want to appear to the union as not being unified, so they voted for it knowing that since only 8 are needed to approve lockout, their vote would be useless

#2331007 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by chances14 on 08 October 2012 - 11:16 PM

I saw the headline and assumed it's an old article. It's not. When the two sides meet later this week, they once again won't be discussing the central issue that is holding up the season.

Fehr insists it's good the two sides are still talking even if it's not about the main issue. I guess it is better than nothing, but still seems kind of absurd.


I figured that since both sides urged each other to produce new proposals at last weeks meetings that they would have begin talking about economics this week but I guess not. Ridiculous.

So I assume that neither side is willing to move even a little bit so that they can even being to talk about economic issues. And this is where both sides are at fault. No urgency to get this deal done

#2330833 Z basically says Bettman should be fired

Posted by chances14 on 06 October 2012 - 11:56 AM

Remember how most people kept saying the initial offer was just an usual lowball one? Well looks like the players saw it as an invitation for war.

This time it is not just about money it is also about staying up to your principles. Some guys girls might believe, the PA hasn't learned from the last lockout, I disagree.

Look at their comments and how everyone mentioned that they are prepared for MULTI year long lockout. They do have leverage here the midget does risk the future of teams like Anaheim here. You know teams with a small fanbase which need the casual fan in droves.

I am pretty sure the players are as sick as the fans of this 6 years and no they don't owe me anything.

Sent from my BlackBerry

you have only been hearing that from the players that have already accumulated millions of dollars throughout their career and can afford to sit out. what about those 3rd and 4th liners?

just like i believe that the owners aren't unified on this lockout, i also think the union isn't as unified as they want you to believe, judging by some of the recent comments i have been reading by players

#2330797 Z basically says Bettman should be fired

Posted by chances14 on 05 October 2012 - 05:09 PM

Nobody cares about the fans. They all want money. They want as much as they can get, both sides. If it was Bettman or Selig or Shanny up there, it'd be the same story. But keep believing that if Bettman magically disappeared that Jeremy Jacobs and Mike Illitch would stop caring about money.

exactly. if either side cared about the fans, this lockout would have already been over

Any player that wants Bettman fired is a fool. The current lockout is based on the fact that the players want to retain a high percentage of the revenue that Bettman is largely responsible for creating. No reasonable player has any intention of going back to the "good" old days.

Edit: As evidenced by the fact that the players' whole position in these negotiations has been to keep everything exactly the way it is right now.

it is quite ironic how the players are fighting tooth and nail to keep a system that they lost a whole season trying to fight against 8 years ago.

#2330575 ESPN-KHL Deal in the Works?

Posted by chances14 on 03 October 2012 - 11:47 AM

All I see on ESPN 3 is soccer. The game should be on now, is anyone watching it?

just go to this site to watch the KHL games http://www.laola1.tv...ideo/224--.html