CBA Update- per Eklund edit: even more news

[nyr7andcounting]

Eklund-phobes make me laugh... Seriously you bunch of whiners... don't like what the man does? Don't pay attention to him!!! It isn't hard to do.

I didn't pay attention to him, that's why I go to this site for news instead of his site for rumours. But it's not so easy to ignore now is it? Looks like every day there is going to be a thread started because Eklund says his "souces" told him "Deal is not done, "...while another added "there is a lot still to do."...things are moving along....One source said, "I really think they are gunning for that July 1st date."

There is NO news there, if there were sources he would have something better than that. I could have wrote that same paragraph, why do we need a thread about it?

 

[bcrt2000]

I didn't pay attention to him, that's why I go to this site for news instead of his site for rumours. But it's not so easy to ignore now is it? Looks like every day there is going to be a thread started because Eklund says his "souces" told him "Deal is not done, "...while another added "there is a lot still to do."...things are moving along....One source said, "I really think they are gunning for that July 1st date."

There is NO news there, if there were sources he would have something better than that. I could have wrote that same paragraph, why do we need a thread about it?

i agree, we don't need a thread, but at the same time we shouldn't blame eklund for posting that on his blog because its called a blog for a good reason

 

[Ronald Pagan]

Why do people pay attention to this clown? HF was a way better place when his POS blog was not allowed to be discussed. Good to see the admins have a spine.

 

[Larionov]

What ruined his credibility is when he blog started he claimed he worked for two NHL teams.

Didn't he also claim to have worked at NHL Head Office as well? I've noticed that in recent months he seems to have quietly abandoned those claims. Now, he is just claiming some vague "entertainment industry" background, at least while he was on the Jim Rome Show...

 

[oildrop]

Bob M seems to be the most relible source in the media. I watch his opinion the most.

We sure haven't heard much from him lately, unfortunately. We haven't heard much from anyone, it's frustrating.

 

[Slats432]

I understand, but respectfully disagree.
So he was wrong, a lot of media been wrong..
He was wrong, but now has sources, those are two facts.
The ones that deny it with the "you are all being fooled, he is an idiot and has no sources" arguement are the ones that I would say if not jealous, then not paying attention. You decide

EDIT: I do agree with bcrt above about posting his stuff in MDT though

I didn't want to get into this debate, but this "jealousy" thing really peeves me. I don't have any want to be like Eklund, want to have what he has, etc etc. Isn't that what jealousy is?

Mike Modano will go down for the rest of his career based on one stupid comment about dog food as a selfish jerk. Well as far as credibility Eklund has to build that back up with some people who question him.

I want Eklund to be honest. I want Eklund to be responsible. I wouldn't mind if he used a real name instead of some psuedonym to make him seem more important than he really is.

I want Eklund to quit treating the whole CBA thing as if it is a big conspiracy and he is Deep Throat. I want him to stop posting nothing when he has nothing to say rather than say "I don't have nothing...more to come."

I don't expect any of this to come true, and those who have problem and issues with Eklund have a right to question legitimacy. If a guy is full of fecal matter, hundreds of intelligent, articulate posters on HF are going to call them on it. That is why we are the best on the net. The most intelligent insightful people are right here.

We want people who suggest they are credible media and complain loudly on their site when HF rules block their usage, but when push comes to shove, they hide behind the guise of anonymity.

I am not jealous of Eklund.....I want the truth....

"You can't handle the truth"- Colonel Jessup.

 

[Beauty eh?]

Bob M seems to be the most relible source in the media. I watch his opinion the most.

 

[19nazzy]

I didn't want to get into this debate, but this "jealousy" thing really peeves me. I don't have any want to be like Eklund, want to have what he has, etc etc. Isn't that what jealousy is?

Mike Modano will go down for the rest of his career based on one stupid comment about dog food as a selfish jerk. Well as far as credibility Eklund has to build that back up with some people who question him.

I want Eklund to be honest. I want Eklund to be responsible. I wouldn't mind if he used a real name instead of some psuedonym to make him seem more important than he really is.

I want Eklund to quit treating the whole CBA thing as if it is a big conspiracy and he is Deep Throat. I want him to stop posting nothing when he has nothing to say rather than say "I don't have nothing...more to come."

I don't expect any of this to come true, and those who have problem and issues with Eklund have a right to question legitimacy. If a guy is full of fecal matter, hundreds of intelligent, articulate posters on HF are going to call them on it. That is why we are the best on the net. The most intelligent insightful people are right here.

We want people who suggest they are credible media and complain loudly on their site when HF rules block their usage, but when push comes to shove, they hide behind the guise of anonymity.

I am not jealous of Eklund.....I want the truth....

"You can't hand the truth"- Colonel Jessup.

Post of the year

 

[Large_Farva*]

Post of the year

Agreed Nate Dogg

 

[bcrt2000]

I didn't want to get into this debate, but this "jealousy" thing really peeves me. I don't have any want to be like Eklund, want to have what he has, etc etc. Isn't that what jealousy is?

Mike Modano will go down for the rest of his career based on one stupid comment about dog food as a selfish jerk. Well as far as credibility Eklund has to build that back up with some people who question him.

I want Eklund to be honest. I want Eklund to be responsible. I wouldn't mind if he used a real name instead of some psuedonym to make him seem more important than he really is.

I want Eklund to quit treating the whole CBA thing as if it is a big conspiracy and he is Deep Throat. I want him to stop posting nothing when he has nothing to say rather than say "I don't have nothing...more to come."

I don't expect any of this to come true, and those who have problem and issues with Eklund have a right to question legitimacy. If a guy is full of fecal matter, hundreds of intelligent, articulate posters on HF are going to call them on it. That is why we are the best on the net. The most intelligent insightful people are right here.

We want people who suggest they are credible media and complain loudly on their site when HF rules block their usage, but when push comes to shove, they hide behind the guise of anonymity.

I am not jealous of Eklund.....I want the truth....

"You can't hand the truth"- Colonel Jessup.

have you ever considered that maybe eklund is in a position where it might affect his current or future career if he let his real identity be known? the truth is, is that it doesn't make eklund more or less accountable if he had his real name attached to it, because his identity "eklund" is enough for us to point fingers at when we dislike what he says. When we mention "eklund" everyone knows who that is. It wouldn't matter if his name was pee-wee herman, because what really matters is what he says and how we react to it.

 

[19nazzy]

have you ever considered that maybe eklund is in a position where it might affect his current or future career if he let his real identity be known?

Seems like every other individual reporting on the CBA can let their identity be known.

 

[Dr Love]

have you ever considered that maybe eklund is in a position where it might affect his current or future career if he let his real identity be known?

Yes, it could ruin it. And if he's fully legit, then he's got nothing to hide.

 

[Lard_Lad]

have you ever considered that maybe eklund is in a position where it might affect his current or future career if he let his real identity be known? the truth is, is that it doesn't make eklund more or less accountable if he had his real name attached to it, because his identity "eklund" is enough for us to point fingers at when we dislike what he says.

Of course it makes him less accountable. As long as he's "Eklund", it's possible for him to write something completely dishonest and unethical, then walk away from the pseudonym if he gets caught. All he has to do is disappear and go back to whatever he was doing before. Not much of a risk there. But if Bob McKenzie or Kevin Dupont got caught doing something shady, their careers would be shot. *That's* accountability. I'm very curious to see which media outlet has agreed to host his stuff, and whether or not they'll insist he use his real name.

 

[bcrt2000]

Yes, it could ruin it. And if he's fully legit, then he's got nothing to hide.

actually it does make a difference... first off, some of the stories that eklund posts is definately NOT stuff that Bob McKenzie or anyone else would publish because it could be deemed as propoganda, and he could end up getting blacklisted and having no one talk to him... the fact that eklund is anonymous probably gives people a little more confidence to tell him stories

secondly, he can gain nothing by letting his name known except more harassment

 

[bcrt2000]

Of course it makes him less accountable. As long as he's "Eklund", it's possible for him to write something completely dishonest and unethical, then walk away from the pseudonym if he gets caught. All he has to do is disappear and go back to whatever he was doing before. Not much of a risk there. But if Bob McKenzie or Kevin Dupont got caught doing something shady, their careers would be shot. *That's* accountability. I'm very curious to see which media outlet has agreed to host his stuff, and whether or not they'll insist he use his real name.

Eklund runs a rumor blog, its not a fact page, he just pretty much says whatever he comes across, he doesn't filter out things... at least we get some flow of information.

Yes Bob McKenzie and Kevin Dupont usually give us substantiated info, but thats because they don't run rumor sites, and they filter out all of the info from their sources

And if he writes something totally dishonest then we'll stop reading him, and sources will stop being his sources, and thats the end of that

I think most of us are just grateful that there is an outlet out there for the buzz thats going around the league that we can tap into, otherwise some of us would go insane without any hockey talk/rumors at all

 

[Lard_Lad]

Eklund runs a rumor blog, its not a fact page, he just pretty much says whatever he comes across, he doesn't filter out things... at least we get some flow of information.

Yes Bob McKenzie and Kevin Dupont usually give us substantiated info, but thats because they don't run rumor sites, and they filter out all of the info from their sources

So you agree, then, that Eklund really shouldn't be calling himself "a legitimate news source"?

 

[Dr Love]

actually it does make a difference... first off, some of the stories that eklund posts is definately NOT stuff that Bob McKenzie or anyone else would publish because it could be deemed as propoganda, and he could end up getting blacklisted and having no one talk to him... the fact that eklund is anonymous probably gives people a little more confidence to tell him stories

secondly, he can gain nothing by letting his name known except more harassment

If you have a piece of information regarding the CBA talks and you think that people should know about it, there should be no thought about going to a guy like Bob McKenzie, where more people are going to see it and more people are going to believe it than a guy like Eklund.

 

[bcrt2000]

So you agree, then, that Eklund really shouldn't be calling himself "a legitimate news source"?

i'm not sure what eklund has claimed or not claimed, but what i do agree is that:

1) don't slag on him for posting rumors.

2) we don't need a new topic every time eklund posts something that doesn't have much substance.

3) he has legitimate sources, and his rumors are legitimate, but that doesn't mean that the rumors are true always.

4) even if he sounds like a broken record sometimes, at least we kidna get the the feeling of where the talks are at the moment.

5) some people who read his blog can't seperate a) eklund's opinion/projections, b) the opinion/projections of eklund's sources, and c) the true facts/projections based on facts from his sources. This is probably the biggest cause of discontent with Eklund, because while most reporters only report c), eklund will report his opnion and the opnion of others. theres nothing wrong with that, because after all, it is a blog.

 

[bcrt2000]

If you have a piece of information regarding the CBA talks and you think that people should know about it, there should be no thought about going to a guy like Bob McKenzie, where more people are going to see it and more people are going to believe it than a guy like Eklund.

Bob McKenzie doesn't have the same sources as Eklund, who doesn't have the same sources as Larry Brooks, who doesn't have the same sources as Brian Burke, who doesn't have the same sources as Bill Watters, etc, etc.

 

[blah]

lol Eklund

 

[Lard_Lad]

i'm not sure what eklund has claimed or not claimed

Well, what I quoted is right there on his front page. The Thursday, 7:18 AM post. So do you think he should he be calling himself a "legitimate news source" or not?

 

[LPHabsFan]

If you have a piece of information regarding the CBA talks and you think that people should know about it, there should be no thought about going to a guy like Bob McKenzie, where more people are going to see it and more people are going to believe it than a guy like Eklund.

Do you honestly think that Bob Mckenzie is publishing everything that he knows? If you do then I feel sad for you. It is the fact that Bob Mckenzie is on air and in public that limits his ability to publish all he knows. If i were to make a guess, 75% of what Bob hears from people in the negotiations do not get published. The fact that Eklund is anonomous gives both him, and his sources, the comfortability to let information leak because there isn't that fear of being caught. You all talk about him not having any credibility but my god, if we measured credibility based on who got what right, then every single member of the media would have absolutely no credibilty. And there is also the checking of sources, imo that is complete BS. If people in the media had to confirm their sources with members of the broadcast company, wouldn't that defeat the purpose of "anonomous (sp?) source"?

P.S. To Bob Mckenzie, I apologize for using you as an example in this, and I feel bad that you are always used in these type of Eklund debates. I guess that just goes to show the respect and popularity you have.

edit: And I really wouldn't be surprised to see Eklund picked up by TSN because of the hockey publicity he has generated. I'd laugh my ass off to see a blacked out Eklund on the CBA panel talking with Healy and Mckenzie.

 

[bcrt2000]

Well, what I quoted is right there on his front page. The Thursday, 7:18 AM post. So do you think he should he be calling himself a "legitimate news source" or not?

Eklund said: "I also want to thank HFBoards.com for sanctioning the blog as a legitimate news source, and allowing discussion of it intheir forum"

so I guess you'd have to go to what Buffaloed said:
"Blogs must be hosted by an established media outlet,..."

"I'm amending this to state that a confirmed offer to be hosted is the same. I have confirmation that Eklund has received such an offer to be hosted so his blog now meets our requirements."

I don't think I need to add anything to that.

 

[Dr Love]

Do you honestly think that Bob Mckenzie is publishing everything that he knows?

Where did I say anything that would lead you to reasonably infer that? I very clearly said info that "you think people should know about." Bob has plenty of info that he hasn't shared. I love it when people infer something and then pose a question that has little to do with the discussion at hand to try and defeat the other person by making it sound like they said something that they never said.

You all talk about him not having any credibility but my god, if we measured credibility based on who got what right, then every single member of the media would have absolutely no credibilty.

That point has already been driven into the ground. It's not that the rumors are wrong. It's the incredibly horrific batting average they have.

P.S. To Bob Mckenzie, I apologize for using you as an example in this, and I feel bad that you are always used in these type of Eklund debates. I guess that just goes to show the respect and popularity you have.

And that he's gracious enough to post here. Thank you Bob.

edit: And I really wouldn't be surprised to see Eklund picked up by TSN because of the hockey publicity he has generated. I'd laugh my ass off to see a blacked out Eklund on the CBA panel talking with Healy and Mckenzie.

Nah, it'll be FOX and a blue dot that will change colors depending on his meter.

 

[Lard_Lad]

Eklund said: "I also want to thank HFBoards.com for sanctioning the blog as a legitimate news source, and allowing discussion of it intheir forum"

so I guess you'd have to go to what Buffaloed said:
"Blogs must be hosted by an established media outlet,..."

"I'm amending this to state that a confirmed offer to be hosted is the same. I have confirmation that Eklund has received such an offer to be hosted so his blog now meets our requirements."

I don't think I need to add anything to that.

Help me out here, can you point out where in there Buffaloed is "sanctioning the blog as a legitimate news source"? He's saying that it's OK to post links to Eklund's stories and discuss them, but I don't see the endorsement of Eklund's credibility that you and Eklund seem to think has occurred.