Jump to content


drwscc's Photo

drwscc

Member Since 28 Sep 2005
Offline Last Active Jan 06 2013 10:38 PM
*----

#2335771 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by drwscc on 10 December 2012 - 11:31 AM

Anyone find it the least bit odd that the league keeps shooting down the NHLPA's proposals with lightning speed?

http://www.mlive.com...ry_fears_s.html

Methinks this lockout is not about what we think it's about, but rather, Something Else....


Yeah, interesting how the owners can identify that something specific is not included in the offer, and reject it based on that. That'd be like going to buy a Ferrari at the Ferrari dealership, and the salesman said "Here is a great Volkswagen." You mean you'd need a day or two to discuss the Volkswagen with everyone you know before saying "Uh. I asked for a Ferrari. No Volkswagen."


#2335562 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by drwscc on 07 December 2012 - 09:27 AM

Donald Fehr in a rare candid photo from his presser yesterday.
Posted Image


#2334980 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by drwscc on 29 November 2012 - 05:58 PM

Posted Image


#2334852 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by drwscc on 28 November 2012 - 10:33 AM

I really hope they do decertify the union. Just blow everything up, and take it to the courts for years and years. You want to talk about some rancor between the players and ownership now? Just wait until the 3rd and 4th liners get released when they get hurt, or take below current league minimum since that will be gone, because you know they're not going to have the pull a Crosby or a Datsyuk has, and 3rd/4th line talent is everywhere.

Ryan Miller is a star, so of course he'll be fine. But Justin Abdelkader is going to have to be very careful under that system.

However, I think it's really moot. The league will just argue that the players are doing it for leverage, and the courts will throw it out. You can't be a union when it suits you, and then not be a union when it gets tough. Plus, as soon as the lockout ended, they'd just reform the union. It's posturing.


#2334340 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by drwscc on 20 November 2012 - 10:15 AM

Man, the level of vinegary Summer's Eve in this thread is astounding. Acting like Gary Bettman (Buttman Midget hurr hurr hurr) is the sole cause of this lockout is so stupid as to border on mental disability. Even Ryan Lambert admits that Bettman has been good for the game, and hasn't ruined everything,

Is Bettman (Troll Dwarf idiot cancer durr durr durr) doing a great job in selling the lockout? No. Is the Players' Bettman doing a good job with the PR war? Absolutely, as evidenced by all the paint chips eating responses in this thread, and others around the boards. Everyone is white knighting the players side like they are absolutely blameless in this whole mess. Just like the BCTWGMIU is completely blameless for the death of Hostess.

At this point, I really fail to care about the NHL anymore. Both sides have demonstrated multiple times that they are petulant children who don't want to share their Legos. If neither side is willing to budge, there's no way to move forward. BOTH sides are at fault. Keep on believing that if the owners would just fire Bettman and bring on Bob Goodenow that everything would just move along nicely.


#2334157 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by drwscc on 16 November 2012 - 09:58 AM

Lets put it this way....

If the shoe was on the other foot, and the players were making 43% while the owners were making 57%, how many people would be crying foul if the players went on strike in an attempt to get an even split of revenues? The ownership in that case would not be gaining anything either.


You take your logic elsewhere, good sir. There is no place for that here. This is a "Buttman is eeeeevil hurr hurr" board.


#2333937 Russians Possibly Staying In KHL After Lockout

Posted by drwscc on 13 November 2012 - 09:42 AM

OMG dude. Buttman?? Hahahahaha. That is so awesome. Where did you come up with that? You should do standup. Hahahha. wow.


#2333606 Sacrifice the full season to guarantee Bettman's removal?

Posted by drwscc on 06 November 2012 - 02:34 PM

Still elitist, but good try,
---
Lets use your logic and talk about the teams that have been losing money (looks to be about 18 of them according to Forbes.) Screw all the teams that aren't able to make money. "They can put an NHL team anywhere they want as long as they can support themselves" So, goodbye to:

Phoenix, Florida, Nashville, Columbus, Carolina, which would make you happy. However, you also lose St. Louis, Winnipeg, NYI, Buffalo, Tampa Bay, New Jersey, San Jose, Anaheim (don't you live in the CA area? Would suck to lose your opportunity to go see games, no?) Washington, and the Cup Champion LA Kings. Man, what a great league with lots of exposure that would be./s

Revenue sharing is something built in to the league. All of the major sports league incorporate it. Most of the teams I listed would take advantage of it if they were able. However, there are restrictions that prevent some teams from utilizing the program, which would help them at least break even. Not every team can be the Wings or the Leafs with so much tradition that you have a built in fanbase, no matter how the team performs. It takes time, and lean seasons sometimes, to build up the tradition.

But, what do I know? I'm just one of the fans that could have given a crap about hockey growing up, due to no teams even remotely close to me, but became a rabid fan once hockey became available to me.


#2333103 Ryan Suter pissed off

Posted by drwscc on 31 October 2012 - 09:04 AM

So what you're saying is that at the end of the day it was more important for Mike Illitch to have a good working relationship with other owners than it was to make the fans happy, the players happy, and uphold the integrity of the game and league we all love? I agree.


What does that mean? If you're going to lose anyway, why wouldn't you try to preserve a good relationship with the other teams? You don't think the owners know how the vote is going to turn out before they have it. If Illitch found 2 or 3 other folks on his side, and the other 26 owners were all in favor, it doesn't make sense to shoot yourself in the foot going forward to no purpose.


#2333054 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by drwscc on 30 October 2012 - 04:55 PM

"At every opportunity we have continued to state that we are ready to meet and willing to discuss all open issues, including the owners' last offer," Fehr wrote.


"Nonetheless, to date, their group has declined to commit to a meeting unless it can dictate what the agenda is. We will update you further as soon as there is anything more to report. Regards, Don."

What does that even mean? What other agenda is there aside from "Let's Make a Deal?" Sounds like more PR garbage, and lack of urgency.


#2332771 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by drwscc on 26 October 2012 - 01:45 PM

Ian White picture accompanying quote.

Posted Image


#2332693 Sacrifice the full season to guarantee Bettman's removal?

Posted by drwscc on 25 October 2012 - 01:16 PM

Personally I'd rather have a league with fewer teams, no salary cap and no work stoppage every 5 years.

Well they've lost money because of the on ice product and owning a hockey club is a longtime investment. You don't see a guy like Pegula whining...

The NHL could just wipe out the floor or make it 26 % so the so called poor teams can wont be forced to overspend but the problem is Bettman and his stupid parity illusion.

You think an original 6 matchup would have had such terrible ratings? I highly doubt that.

Ok the southern teams are a neccessary evil then don't cry about losing money, because there are better options.

The NHL and Bettman created these problems so it is on to them to fix it with their own money. How about the midget paying 50 % of his salary to help out his mickeymouse clubs? The bastard would move them asap before accepting well not surprising if you think about his background.
Sent from my BlackBerry


I sure am glad you're not the Commissioner. I can't imagine how many people who love hockey would never be exposed to it because of where they were born or grew up. What an elitist attitude. "You're from Texas/Florida/California, you don't deserve exposure to hockey."
  • Nev likes this


#2332601 Sacrifice the full season to guarantee Bettman's removal?

Posted by drwscc on 24 October 2012 - 09:25 AM

How did I know you'd go to the "Well, those other guys only murdered a few people, Bettman murdered way more!" argument

You people are ridiculous and blind. It doesn't matter if it's Gary Bettman or Wayne Gretzky. If the owners want a lockout, that's what's gonna happen. You want to rail against something, rail against the owners. It makes me laugh that you really think this was a cabal of 7 owners. ALL of the owners are rich men, and they didn't get rich by not taking advantage of situations when they had an opportunity. Mike Illitch is not sitting there going "C'mon guys. I really want to lose money, so let's just let the guys play." The owners are not in this to lose money; they are going to make as much as they possibly can. Sounds just like the players, but the players are good, and the owners are bad.

There are *no* good guys in this situation. The owners voted for a lockout, and the players hired their own Bettman to fight the real Bettman. Instead of someone who might be willing to negotiate, they decided to hire the most contentious and litigious labor negotiator around. What does that tell you? Hell, most of the players even understand that the Fehr brothers could care less about hockey.

But, keep on believing that the players are operating in good faith, and that the poor owners like Mike Illitch and Terry Pegula are being thwarted in their quest to lose money for your benefit by an evil Commissioner and an Illuminati of 7 owners. Oooh Booga Booga


#2332594 [Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Posted by drwscc on 24 October 2012 - 08:45 AM

The NHLPA hired him [Fehr] to be their Bettman.


Nail. Head. The NHLPA brought in their own Bettman, and are *shocked* that it's come to this. They are like a couple of 3 year olds at a daycare, and a deal is never going to get done.


#2332500 Sacrifice the full season to guarantee Bettman's removal?

Posted by drwscc on 23 October 2012 - 01:47 PM

I believe this is true but regardless of whether its is, if the owners werent happy with Bettman they can have him replaced. The fact that they havent speaks as to whether they are behind him.

I dont think removing Bettman would solve much of anything but he doesnt do himself any favors. That being said he comes across as such a weasely jerk that absolutely no one likes him. Just haveing a somewhat likeable commisioner probably wouldnt hurt.


Name the last likeable commissioner in any sport. They all suck, and always have. It's the nature of the beast.