JWI19 said:
JW,
The contentious part of Messenger's claim was that Goodenow's contract was running down, not suspended.
Meeting Day Thread: 6/3
- Thread starter GKJ
- Start date
- Status
JW,
The contentious part of Messenger's claim was that Goodenow's contract was running down, not suspended.
There are too many quotes of players citing differences to enumerate here. This "split" has been present for months, as evidenced by said quotes.EndBoards said:
As to the imminent firing of Goodenow, I believe that has been clearly stated to be an opinion of what will happen. In my opinion and of many others.
Regarding Goodenow's salary, there is no basis for even attributing validity to a "rumour", as there is no one who would constitute a credible source. AS to the other items you mentioned, the opposite is true, since the parties in question are clearly leaking it on purpose - IN MY OPINION.
The question of Goodenow's salary and terms and conditions of his contract are facts. There is no opinion about it. Quoting a newspaper article that quotes rumors is inadequate - IN MY OPINION.
Are you clear on this?
As well, I take issue with the size of his supposed salary and his termination conditions ("golden handshake", if you like).Thunderstruck said:
No one has any basis to speak authoritatively on that.
Cawz
Registered User
Why did you diguise your usual rant as a question?scaredsensfan said:
What are you basing this on? Last I checked, the nhl has been anything but fan friendly for the last few years. Your Sens have been bucking the trend, which is great for Sens fans, but not for fans in general. Are you are unable to see outside your existance. Just because it was great for you (a fan, singular) it wasnt great for fans (plural).scaredsensfan said:
There is a reason why you are the minority on here. If it was great for the fans previously, that would not be the case.
By the way, any news yet? Anyone? So far theres just a bunch of *****ing about Goodenows salary in the update thread.
I remember Bob mentioned in an article of his that he finally got the sense they were "neogtiating" for the first time since this process began. My question is, what the Ef were they doing in all those meetings before this? I mean, what a joke, seriously.
Would they just sit in a room and say "Cap?" "No cap." "Cap now?" "Umm.. no cap now..no." "Ok, how about a cap?" "Uh, no cap." "Cap cap cap?" "No."
This should have been done LOOOOOOONG ago, but.. you all know this.
Would they just sit in a room and say "Cap?" "No cap." "Cap now?" "Umm.. no cap now..no." "Ok, how about a cap?" "Uh, no cap." "Cap cap cap?" "No."
This should have been done LOOOOOOONG ago, but.. you all know this.
Cawz said:
Correct, i dont think one system is more fan friendly than an other. It probably just depends on which team you like and on the status of the team. Under the old CBA it was a good time for big market teams and their fans because any given year one or 2 new stars arrived at their team while small market team fans had a good time
when their club was on the rise, the problem was it just lastet till they were ready to make the last big step. Then they got tripped because they couldnt match the salaries of the big teams. Teams like Vancouver and Ottawa may had a chance to make a run but only because of outstanding management and/or a very rich owner.
The new CBA with linkage and a cap will at least guarantee the CHANCE for every team to compete therefor more fans will be happy. The downside however is that we could see way more player movement due to cap-restrictions. So for the casual fan it might be more difficult to identify with the team.
Lowetide
Registered User
- Feb 27, 2002
- 13,281
- 11
This is way too late in the discussion to really bother with, but I'm constantly amazed at the anger toward Goodenow. If he WASN'T the hardass he clearly is, he would be replaced. His job is NOT to worry about what the owners have done in the past, nor is it his concern what Bettman has promised to his small market owners.
Rather, his job is to represent his side as best he can, and to ensure that the NHLPA gets the best deal possible even in difficult circumstances. In the very narrow view (the one that pertains to doing his job), Bob Goodenow has done what anyone would: measure the opponent, and take the best plan of action.
Those who say he's already lost have short memories. The report card for both sides will roll out for several years before we can really know who won this thing.
Based on past performance, I know who I'm betting on.
Rather, his job is to represent his side as best he can, and to ensure that the NHLPA gets the best deal possible even in difficult circumstances. In the very narrow view (the one that pertains to doing his job), Bob Goodenow has done what anyone would: measure the opponent, and take the best plan of action.
Those who say he's already lost have short memories. The report card for both sides will roll out for several years before we can really know who won this thing.
Based on past performance, I know who I'm betting on.
Mothra
The Groovy Guru
Lowetide said:
The best deal possible was likely passed up right before the season was canceled......yes, his job is, as you say, "ensure that the NHLPA gets the best deal possible".....do you think that the eventual outcome will be better than the last offer given by GB before cancellation? I do agree time will tell....but.....he needs to realize when he is fighting a losing battle and take what he can get when he can...that, IMO, would have been the best deal possible for the PA
MarkZackKarl
Registered User
Cawz said:
Maybe I should have limited my comments to smart fans, not fans in general. Because as has become clear throughout the lockout, the majority of fans are either naive, uninformed or misguided when the 'business of hockey' is the topic of discussion.
And by the way, if your teams had trouble competing under the previous CBA, it is because they had poor or mediocre management, and nothing to do with the CBA. It would seem that a simpleton would blame the CBA on their team's shortcomings, rather than manager incompetence.
As a Sens fan I do not find comfort in a CBA that is trying to create an idiot proof/management immune system where the cap can limit those who manage too well, and also reward those who can't manage at all.
scaredsensfan said:
Even under a cap system "good management" will still prevail. No system will be idiot proof. The fact is under a system where it is more or less equal for all 30 teams we will then see who has the best managemnt team.
gary69
Registered User
gscarpenter2002 said:
While I don't know for sure who Messenger is, even if he had info on Goodenow's contract and would be able to prove it, I believe he would have his reasons (and he'd be smart enough) not to post it here.
I don't think a lot people visit these boards looking for definite proof on anything or take other anonymous posts as proof of anything, really. Just food for thought.
Scaredsensfan my man, you gonna have to accept the fact that things are going to chance in the new NHL. The old CBA is history so forget about it. Now it's a brand new ball game my friend deal with it.scaredsensfan said:
Digger12
Gold Fever
Lowetide said:
Exactly....and it is his apparent gross miscalculation in the measuring of his opponent's resolve that many will remember him by. Also, his 'no cap' hardline stance didn't stand the test of time.
What he did was a well thought out strategy...if this were 1994, with the owners from 1994.
Didn't work so well 10 years later.
Cawz
Registered User
I agree, but if we are talking about people on this board, many have been informing themsleves for a couple yearsnow. But you are blinded by your frustration that your Sens put together a great team under the last CBA, that you cant see that they are the exception rather than the rule.scaredsensfan said:
Many fans are misguided. You are as well, just to the other extreme.
You still truely believe this, mr flat world? Nothing to do with the CBA? The CBA had no ill effect on any teams?scaredsensfan said:
Either the whole world is misguided or your stubborness/frustration is clouding your view. Take your pick.
Pepper
Registered User
- Aug 30, 2004
- 14,693
- 269
scaredsensfan said:
Yes, that's why nearly 70% of the cups during the previous CBA were won by teams with Top10 payroll.
Every single of your feeble arguments have been shot down several months ago, why do you expect anyone to believe that crap this time??
Timmy
Registered User
- Feb 2, 2005
- 10,691
- 26
Digger12 said:
If you learn more from your defeats than your victories...
Goodenow assumed this ownership bunch was the same as ten years ago. With some notable exceptions, they are not. Deadline hunting backfired on him, as his members lost a years' income to get a worse deal than what probably could have been agreed upon before anything more than a couple of preseason games were cancelled.
He still felt fresh from his victory in 95, didn't recognize the seriousness of imbalance of revenue to expenses, and continued to swing for the fences in the worst possible environment.
Bettman got hosed in 95. He knows it. He can still taste it. He's (hopefully) learned from the mistakes he made, the loopholes they left in, etc. Now he wants ironclad salary-related cost certainty, with a fixed salary/revenue maximum ratio.
This is not a free market, this is a league, with clubs who agree to play each other under a common structure. Any restrictions placed on salaries has to be agreed upon by the players. Nobody is sending the players back to the Dark Ages of serfdom, the owners simply want their league to break even or even, *gasp* get a slight return on their investment.
Bettman wants to see this league, and the thirty owners he represents, survive.
So do I.
It doesn't make me pro-owner, it makes me pro-NHL hockey, which I would like to see survive past this generation. If players do not wish to accept over half the revenues as their salary, they are free to collectively refuse any proposals put forth. I would rather see a longer holdout with the right deal, than one that has not been properly agent-proofed.
Once the deal is signed, if any players feel victimized, they can go to Europe and play there for a different league-this is a global free market. Hopefully their agents can get them more money, benefits, and exposure than they would get in the NHL, although I find that highly unlikely.
hyena
Registered User
RangerBoy
Dolan sucks!!!
hyena said:
I'm with this guy
Anyone hear anything about the meeting.
*crosses fingers* having hockey back would be the best birthday present ever
Montrealer
What, me worry?
Leafer4Life
Go Leafs Go!
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
RangerBoy
Dolan sucks!!!
pjbth said:I'm with this guy
Anyone hear anything about the meeting.
*crosses fingers* having hockey back would be the best birthday present ever
Most of the stuff reported by these radio stations and websites about the status of the talks is mostly BS.The only people who really what is going on is the people in the room and they are not talking
- Status
