Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Motown Beatdown, Jan 28, 2005.
I dont put much into, but he has a point about revenue sharing.
I definitely lean towards the owners side in all this but fully admit that they've been lame on meaningful revenue sharing so far. The rich teams don't want to share any of their gate revenue which I think is fairly short sighted. Sure they might make less at this point but as the league (with the proper cba system in place) continues to grow they'll see the pay off, IMO.
i don't believe much in eklund's rumors..but hey...it's fun to read them...isn't it?
We also learned not to make **** up and correct your mistakes. Even if he's not making **** up, he's got a boadload of mistakes that need to be corrected.
Why are Eklund posts not instantly locked?
I explained fully "who" is he as much as anyone knows in a recent post.
He's a total crack pot that's been spamming flyersphans.com and before that philly.com for years with his total BS.
When I get a 2 hour heads up from someone with connections it gets locked. Even though it's been shown to be true in the past. But Eklund posts aren't locked?
Makes no sense to be honest. Just because he has a blog doesn't mean he isn't a total crack head that is so insistant on being believed to be an insider that he's spammed the same forum for years with 1000's of craptastic BS rumors that weren't even close to the truth. Do yourself a favor here and hold his BS crap-log to the same standard you hold other "unconfirmed" rumor-mongerings.
Yes it is. I cant help myself LOL!
I have wondered and asked the same thing as well.
Well, if anything, he gave us some hope and good cheer for a few days. I won't lose any sleep over it, if he's a fraud as you claim. Deep down, those who, like myself, wanted him to be right, see the hand writing on the wall now. Just took a few of us a lot longer than the rest of you to throw in the towel, I guess.
I don't know why they are not locked. There is some fascination with this character who has provided us with absolutely nothing noteworthy or useful.
Eh... it's something to read.
I'll stick with my guess... that there is a reasonable chance this is the little nephew of some middle manager in the Flyers organization... he hears a few things at family events, and has taken on the persona of an 'insider'. Just a guess however, but it seems to match his psychiatric profile from what I can gather.
That being said... I do enjoy reading it.
His update today also included a thank you for clicking on his google ads, which by the way is against Terms of Service with google.
When his blog was first discovered by people here, I mentioned the only reason why he created the blog was to make $$$. Looks like I may have been correct.
I'd personally like to see anything to do with this fraud being taken off this board. This is no better than the old days when everyone had "inside sources"
there is no reason for it to be blocked, people read them - and the conversation on it is as hot as on any thread usually. most of it eklund haters, or course. i dont put much stick in it myself, but its still good to read.
There is every reason because HF has rules about posting "rumors" from non-credible sources. Why Eklund's and not everyone elses? The rule exists for a reason and it's a good one IMO. Because rumors would be rampant on a site like this without the rule.
Basically an exception has been made for Eklund-rumors even though it is 100% known that this dude is a total whackjob and a fraud.
Why does Eklund have no credibility? Because some of the stuff he has posted hasn't come true?
If that's the case then TSN, Sportsnet, ESPN, and countless radio and newspaper publications have no credit as well because not everything they have reported has been true as well.
To stop posting stuff written by Eklund would mean you would have to stop posting anything written by the major news outlets because those are rumors as well. If we base what we can post based on what has been rumored correctly then we can throw out almost everyone. Noone is always right about rumors.
No, because none of it has.
As I've explained elsehwhere here, Eklund has been spamming flyersphans.com and before that philly.com for *years* (LITERALLY YEARS) with his garbage crap. Until this lockout all his crap was horrid trade rumors. Now, it's been CBA crap because trade rumors are not en vogue during lockouts.
You can pretend Eklund is anything more then a lunatic with a huge desire to be seen as an *insider* but is isn't anything more then that. You all have been dealing with him for a short time with CBA stuff. I've seen his garbage for years.
makes him the same as brooks or strachan to me.
Nope, cuz Brooks doesnâ€™t post BS rumors, he posts his opinions.. Which most of you may not agree with. He doesnâ€™t write up articles about how there is a deal in principle and to get ready because hockey is coming back. His rumors are actually rumors...some of them come true and some of them donâ€™t. Eklund rumors(bs) never come true.
whoa. did you just say brooks doesnt print bs rumours? every trade rumour he has ever printed was bs, and during a regular season he has at least one a week. as for the lockout, he puts bs rumours about whats being offered on the table in literally every article. he does exactly the same thing eklund does, just the other side of the spectrum. your upset that eklund says its almost over, but you have no problem with brooks saying the owners have absolutely no interest in playing and have already cancelled the season? whats the difference? its equally unfounded and unproven - just from opposite ends of the story. brooks was saying that three months ago, im not talking about last week.
if anything eklund is more believable (if not, just more readable) just because he isnt on either side. brooks hasnt said even one nuetral comment yet.
you need to point to one brooks rumour that has come true - i dont believe it till i see it.
I dont follow what Brooks saids really durning the lockout so i cant comment on that. I follow what he saids durning the season. He has rumors at the bottom of his articles that are a sentence long which is why I dont really dont give it much thought...some of his trade rumors did come true though last season when he was saying who on the Rangers would be getting shipped off and he was on the money on those (telling us Barnaby was most likely going to be traded a week and half before he did..thats the only one I can remember off the top of my head).
well. im talking abo-ut the tkachuk for nedved, primeau for nedved, anyone for nedved type of rumours. during the last month before the deadline - if you named a ranger vet - and said this guyis going for picks or prospects, you were right. ill give him credit for calling one of those trades - even if its by default.
no offense, but you cant call what eklund says about the lockout bs, then defend brooks saying what he prints isnt bs, then say....well i havent really read what brooks has said about a lockout - i cant really comment on that. you just did comment on that - not trying to be a jerk, but you did. im just saying that brooks and the other guys bring nothing but bs rumours to print all the time, and they have no backround in printing anything other than bs rumours as it is....so why is eklund any more bs than that? its all bs. no one other than the guys at the table really know - so we cant say that anyone has credibility on these issues.
Brooks, even though an idiot and someone that does write a bunch of garbage most of the time, is still a paid professional and someone that has contacts and is able to get *some* inside information.
You can't compare a professional journalist, with contacts and some inside information, who writes a ton of speculative articles with a total nutjob on the internet who's goal in life is to have people believe him be an insider.
We all know to treat what Brooks says with a grain of salt most of the time. But to compare him with Eklund outside of hyperbole is just absurd.
well, to be honest, i dont think people like brooks get the jobs because they know all that much about hockey or have tons of contacts. i think the move up[ the ladder because they are great writers, and are great journalists in general - not because of any hockey connection. i know 2 avs writers - and neither of them had even written about hockey at all before they got those jobs, and they work for the top papers in the area. one of them now writes for a different nhl team - and that person really doesnt know all that much about hockey, just a great writer. the only difference between what someone like eklund does and brooks is an education and a bunch of experience in journalism - anyone of us could have the connections he has (brooks or eklund). im not trying to give eklund credibility, just putting it into perspective how much credibility the "pros" have.
and dont get me wrong - when brooks or one the other guys writes a piece analyzing whats going on during a losing streak or something else going on day to day with the team - you see why they are pros, they are insightful and can really put into words what goes on behind the scenes, these guys are great writers, but when it comes to issues speculative in nature (trade rumours/ lockout) - anyone listening to conversations on the lower level at the rink (anyone who works the games from game staff to reporters), or eavesdropping at the bar everyone goes to post game knows just as much info generally as the guys we're making such a fuss over.
I'm not going to start a new thread, but E posted again this Sunday and I thought it was the best one yet, just when he was starting to fade a bit. The use of Betty was a nice touch, and the start date (Feb. 14 - a Monday of all things for the NHL and NHLPA to become lovers again) was one of a bunch of extra E details. Anyway you know where to find it, and how to react to it, but just wanted to say it does make for some interesting reading from time to time, much like the "Russian Intelligence" reports at the start of the Iraq war.