Dear Stupid, I mean... Dear Kris Draper

Status
Not open for further replies.

CorneliusBennet

Registered User
Nov 29, 2004
114
0
Jag68Vlady27 said:
Answer: A HANDFUL of owners in the NHL. NOT ALL, but a handful. If they ALL did it, nobody would even know how to spell lockout right now because we'd be playing hockey. AND, if they were all spending that kind of money, hockey would be more visible than Seinfeld reruns in the U.S.


yes you are correct AN OWNER OFFERED HIM THE MONEY. He didn't extort it from anybody. Now the owners want to players to save the owners from other owners. This is pathetic. The owners can go (expletive deleted) themselves. Quit making apologies for a group of men who need to be saved from themselves. NHL owners are a friggen' joke.
 

SwisshockeyAcademy

Registered User
Dec 11, 2002
3,094
1
Visit site
CorneliusBennet said:
yes you are correct AN OWNER OFFERED HIM THE MONEY. He didn't extort it from anybody. Now the owners want to players to save the owners from other owners. This is pathetic. The owners can go (expletive deleted) themselves. Quit making apologies for a group of men who need to be saved from themselves. NHL owners are a friggen' joke.
Yes they need to be saved from themselves but it would probably not look much different no matter what group of owners you had. It is a high pressure environment and the weight of losses on the ice can be heavy. It leads to big mistakes which throw the pay scale out of whack. Martin Lapointe 5million, is an example. I like Lapointe, i think he's valuable but there are many like him where the price gets driven up into the realm of ridiculous. It needs to be controlled. Cornelious you must be a player. Which one are you? Jay McKee?
 

CorneliusBennet

Registered User
Nov 29, 2004
114
0
" Cornelious you must be a player. Which one are you? Jay McKee?"

It's been great chatting with all of you. Really it has. And I'm not Jay McKee. But I am outta here. I'm sorry that all of you have such hatred for the players but I know that when this is resolved and the resentment fades you'll be back cheering for (them) again, because (they) are the face of the game, not the owners.
 

SwisshockeyAcademy

Registered User
Dec 11, 2002
3,094
1
Visit site
CorneliusBennet said:
" Cornelious you must be a player. Which one are you? Jay McKee?"

It's been great chatting with all of you. Really it has. And I'm not Jay McKee. But I am outta here. I'm sorry that all of you have such hatred for the players but I know that when this is resolved and the resentment fades you'll be back cheering for (them) again, because (they) are the face of the game, not the owners.
Sorry Cornelious, i don't hate the players but something has to be done and its the players that must give in.
 

MacDaddy TLC*

Guest
Dear Bauerkraut,

your post is almost word for word the same as an email I received from a friend yesterday. I completely agree with both of you.
 

Scheme

Registered User
Feb 14, 2003
284
0
Vancouver
Visit site
Tom_Benjamin said:
Coaching and GM contracts are guaranteed as well. All contracts in every industry are guaranteed. That's why they call them contracts.
You can fire these guys. Every industry? I don't know what world you're living in, but the one I work in, you can be fired at any time. Players? You can't fire them for poor performance. They'll always get paid - traded or not.
Tom_Benjamin said:
If you aren't going to give players a raise every year or arbitration, what do you give them in exchange for them agreeing to a system where they are giving up basic rights - to work for whoever they want to work for? Nothing?
What basic rights? No other industry I know of gets guaranteed 10% raises a year. The original point was talking about accountability. Team presidents, GMs and coaches can be fired for poor performance. Can players? No - they get all of the reward and none of the risk.
 

Scheme

Registered User
Feb 14, 2003
284
0
Vancouver
Visit site
JWI19 said:
Sorry but the Yanks and Sox payrolls has no effect on the reasons why the Tigers have sucked for the last decade. Here's the reason...
Here are their 1st round picks since 1992 to 2002

True, the Tigers' drafting has sucked. But if the MLB had a hard cap, the Bo Sox and the Yankees would not be in the running pretty much every time, so other teams would have a better chance just from that (regardless of drafting).
 

jcpenny

Registered User
Aug 8, 2002
4,878
0
Montréal
Visit site
Something for the players to think about...

Players are talking like its easy for a owner not to give too much money. First of all theres free agency which is just like a bidding market, theres no way a player comes out of it with less than he should. Then you have the owners that have all the money in the world and do not care about their spendings. So they would want him to be more careful with his money? Since when a owner of a company cares about another company? Players dont understand its not that simple. Some owners give 9 mil to bobby holik cuz he has lots of money and thinks that it will help him win a cup. Should he think about what the Hurricanes will say about that? NO. Thats why they want a cap. The cap is to protect owners from themselves and not to protect themeselves from the players. They need to control the money and quick.

Theres the players and agents in there too. " You don't want to give me 10 mil? I will hold out" So you are a owner and you know that this player will bring you a cup, fans and great marketing to the team and plus You have the money to afford him. Do you pass on him because the other teams would be mad at you for giving him the money? Hell no! Players dont get it its not that easy to be a Owner or GM cause they cant be unified like players can. You think of your company first and the others come second. When i hear the players say that the owners have to fix their mess it makes me angry. I'd like to see them in their shoes and its not like they are helping either...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->