Gag order on Roenick? Mercury News Thinks So
- Thread starter chiavsfan
- Start date
- Status
Roenick will be on 99X in Atlanta with Billy Jaffe shortly and will explain the comments. Go to www.99x.com to listen. It's an alternative rock station, btw.
chiavsfan
Registered User
I'm in the middle of work (radio station in Illinois) but like Billy Jaffe, he did some good work with the Wolves in the playoffs...any chance you can update us who can't listen?
I just think Roenick should be putting his work into getting the fans BACK, not alienating the few fans that are left.
I just think Roenick should be putting his work into getting the fans BACK, not alienating the few fans that are left.
Last edited:
GKJ
Global Moderator
- Feb 27, 2002
- 186,868
- 38,962
People are blowing this way out of proportion. Maybe people should have seen more of the press conference. He doesn't blast all of the fans like people are making it out to be. He only came out against the ones who say the only thing players care about is money, in which he was right. There's a lot of people who come out to games who could care less about hockey and more about the business function they're having.
ranold26
Tuukka likes the post...
- May 28, 2003
- 21,533
- 7,043
His comment just now about how the players won in a landslide in '94 and now it needs to balance off the other way, does it for me. That alone shows he is very aware of what has happened in the last 10 years. I will keep his Perennial All-Star plaque on my wall now instead of mailing it back to him smashed into bits. 
go kim johnsson said:
Have to agree here. His comments are no different than some of the rants seen on these boards by the fans.
chiavsfan
Registered User
If players didn't care so much about money... then what is the main argument during this entire lockout. It has been money. I'm not saying "all" players only care about money, but I would say 3/4 of the players do. Just look at the quality of the game recently, and the people with major contracts that don't even come close to delivering.
If some players cared as much about the game as they claim...I want them to show it to me on the ice next year
If some players cared as much about the game as they claim...I want them to show it to me on the ice next year
Takeo
Registered User
go kim johnsson said:
And there's also a lot of players who play the game only for the paycheck. Roenick wasn't telling the business associates to stay away, he was telling the fans that criticize the players for being greedy to stay away. The fans lost an entire season due to the greed of the player's association and the ineptitude of the owners. If that's not worthy of sharp criticism, I don't know what is. The fans are the victims here. Roenick was accurate in his attack on the representation of the player's union, but he should have got some control over his big mouth prior to lashing into the fans. The fans can say whatever they want because without them, neither the players nor the owners would be lining their pocketbooks. I'm excited about the prospects of a new season, but there's a part of me that hopes the arenas are completely empty. Roenick shouldn't be defending himself from the fans, he should be apologizing.
Jester
Registered User
chiavsfan said:
i'm very pro-owner but...
can you really tell me if your boss at work decided to impose a limit on how much you could potentially make you wouldn't be slightly peeved at him? obviously these guys make a ton of cash, but i completely understand their argument against the idea of a salary cap... i know i'd argue against one at my job.
the quality of the game is the league's responsibility through officiating and everything else. the players sole responsibility is to trying to win the game that they are playing that moment. it's not their job, or the coaches job, to make the game entertaining. they get paid to win... until you pay them to entertain, don't complain to them about the quality of the sport, it's out of their hands. if the NHL would get control of the way officials call the game you would see a massive increase in movement on the ice... look at College Hockey, from what i saw they call EVERYTHING there, which led to a lot of PP's, but also to a lot of flow throughout the game because the players knew if they touched someone they would get called. call the NHL like that and we will see a ton more speed through the neutral zone w/out having to worry about all these rule changes even.
chiavsfan
Registered User
Yes, Roenick WOULD have been a hero...unfortunately, after his season saving efforts, he went right back and toed the party line...making him a hypocrite.
HockeyCritter
Registered User
- Dec 10, 2004
- 5,656
- 0
While I understand that Roenick was responding to a very specific segment of the fan base, his lack of tact certainly did not endear him to the rest of the fan base.
To tell the truth, I find his mealymouthed suggestion that they are tryig to settle this to get the game back on the ice for the fans to be the most offputting.
They are not settling "for the fans". They are settling now because they have no choice and want to earn again.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG IN WANTING TO EARN AGAIN. What IS wrong is trying to dress up your perfectly legitimate desire to make money as some kind of altruistic motive. THAT is what is shameful.
They are not settling "for the fans". They are settling now because they have no choice and want to earn again.
THERE IS NOTHING WRONG IN WANTING TO EARN AGAIN. What IS wrong is trying to dress up your perfectly legitimate desire to make money as some kind of altruistic motive. THAT is what is shameful.
nyrmessier011
Registered User
Yea brilliant idea, put a gag order on somebody who is man enough to say it like it is. He is one of the most respected guys in hockey and has been around since I was a little kid. Most fans love JR, and his comments were exactly what I have been thinking throughout the lockout.
I guarantee none of you would like your paychecks cut 24% and to know your next contract will be about a 1/3 cut of what your last one was and at the same time ridiculed for the lockout being "your fault". It's not a strike fellas, it's called a lockout for a reason. JR says it exactly how it is, and it's sad and unfortunate that he gets mis-quoted the way he does.
Whether they were overpaid or not, they were still given that money for there service. They DID give up more than any sports union, and I really hope they run with that during the press conference. Although I'm crazy to hope for this, I also hope Bettman acknowledges it to the world.
If you are working in a mill as a laborer and getting paid $400,000 for the last 5 years, you also are being overpaid and I'm sure you would know that. But when your boss comes in one day to collectively bargain with your union, and you give up $100,000 and other restrictions which will mean your next contract will be around $250,000 (down from 400,000), I'm sure you would be pretty pissed off if newspapers write about how people are angry that they can't get any of your product because "your overpaid and greedy" for a regular laborer.
I guarantee none of you would like your paychecks cut 24% and to know your next contract will be about a 1/3 cut of what your last one was and at the same time ridiculed for the lockout being "your fault". It's not a strike fellas, it's called a lockout for a reason. JR says it exactly how it is, and it's sad and unfortunate that he gets mis-quoted the way he does.
Whether they were overpaid or not, they were still given that money for there service. They DID give up more than any sports union, and I really hope they run with that during the press conference. Although I'm crazy to hope for this, I also hope Bettman acknowledges it to the world.
If you are working in a mill as a laborer and getting paid $400,000 for the last 5 years, you also are being overpaid and I'm sure you would know that. But when your boss comes in one day to collectively bargain with your union, and you give up $100,000 and other restrictions which will mean your next contract will be around $250,000 (down from 400,000), I'm sure you would be pretty pissed off if newspapers write about how people are angry that they can't get any of your product because "your overpaid and greedy" for a regular laborer.
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
gscarpenter2002 said:
Kind of like when the owners threw out "competitive balance & lowering ticket prices" as to why they needed a cap.
It was all BS, this was nothing more than a cash grab on either side.
Actually, that is kind of false. THe league was pretty clear in saying that the lockout was happening because they were paying too much in salaries.John Flyers Fan said:
What they DID say was that competitive balance would ALSO flow out of a cost certainty system.
As for ticket prices, they said nothing about lowering them. Bettman was pretty clear that ticket prices would be set by clubs per their market. What they DID say was that cost certainty would lessen the spiral of ever-increasing ticket prices (which is kind of unproveable, as we will never know where the ticket prices would have gone in a no-cap NHL).
So it is kind of like nothing like what you said. IF the league had said that, you would have a point.
blitzkriegs
Registered User
go kim johnsson said:
Kid. Make up your mind. In the other thread, you are claiming that any news for the NHL is good news. Now, you are saying JR's comments are getting taken out of proportion.
Don't you think news outlets are going to show the juicy 'kiss my ass' comments over the 'bring the game back' comments? Why would you expect anything less.
Than you complain how ESPN only 'wanted us to hear' certain parts of JR's rant. When was the last time that ESPN didn't chop up player comments to stir controversy? They do it all the time.
Unfortunately, the only way the NHL gets press is via truly embarrasing incidents: Bertuzzi, JR comments, Cancelled season, etc.
The NHL is so out of the media realm b/c NO ONE CARES in the US besides the die-hards, that the only time it's worth showing the NHL on any highlight reel is when something negative happens.
The Nemesis
Semper Tyrannus
The problem becomes the picture that the players try to paint in defense of the anti-cap ideals. They act like they are the same as the average working class hockey fan. They aren't the simple fact is that if the players are responsible with their money in the way that a regular 9-to-5 guy/gal has to be, it wouldn't matter that there's a 24% rollback and a salary cap, because they'd still be able to live very comfortable lives.Jester said:
But this isn't the case. We get guys telling everyone they need to earn the paycheque, because they spent last year's $2 million buying a gigantic house and an excessivly ornate car.
Even at the lowest ends of the NHL pay scale, the regular NHL guys still earn more money than just about anyone who isn't an uber-lawyer, extreme specialist surgeon, or a suit at a major company. They're not poor, so they should stop acting like this whole mess is sending them to the poorhouse. I don't need Jeff O'Neill telling me that "the guys making 6 million dollars will be ok, but the ones making 3 million will have to budget" (or something like that). Geez Jeffy, if I earned $3 million per year and needed to budget because of a single year off when I knew a work stoppage was coming, then I'd probably be checking that the safe I keep my money in isn't hooked into the vacuum system. Because the only way you would need to budget is if your funds get sucked away into oblivion
This is why the comparisons to the average man don't work. Things like this need context. It would be like if Industry A mandated an increase in the work day, and the workers protested and asked for support saying "This is unfair. If the guys in Industry B were given this mandate, their work day would increase from 12 to 18 hours. Do you think that's right?". Sounds all well and good. Nobody wants to tack 6 extra hours on the work day. The problem becomes that when you apply the context of Industry A, you find out that the 50% increase in the work day moves Inudustry A from 3 hours to 4.5 hours per day. Suddenly the plight of Industry A doesn't seem so dire, does it?
Jester
Registered User
The Nemesis said:
how do you expect them to attempt to argue against it? obviously they make a ton more, but you spend money as you can... so 24% rollback affects you. we earn money to spend it, not horde it... so being "responsible" is relative to the amount that you make, so i would argue anyone taking a 24% hit is going to have to change the level of spending that is "responsible."
The Nemesis said:
read above... when your salary is X you spend based on X, not on 0. again, i'm pro owner, but this isn't really fair. any normal guy with a high-paying job would have the same exact issues...
The Nemesis said:
again... you make X dollars you spend accordingly... you buy a nice house because (shocker here) real-estate is a GOOD investment to make when you have a lot of money... when suddenly your income stream is gone, that house is a problem for you.
The Nemesis said:
we aren't talking about an increase in the work day, we are talking about a decrease in the wallet. we work to earn money... when those in charge start saying "we are going to limit what you can earn," it hits us at the very heart of the reason we work (regardless of what you are doing). the issue isn't that they are making lots of money, the issue is a group of owners telling a union, we are setting an artificial limit on what you can be paid.
i agree with the salary cap, but i do understand the player argument against it. i agree that their arguments are weak at times, but the logic in them making those arguments in the first place make perfect sense.
- Status
