Sunday articles

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by John Flyers Fan, Feb 20, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Strachan - Catering to the wrong crowd
    http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/2005/02/20/936911-sun.html

    Brooks - Injustice League
    http://www.nypost.com/sports/40877.htm

    Stephen Harris - NHL now playing games with fans: B's owner may have had hand in rejection
    http://bruins.bostonherald.com/bruins/view.bg?articleid=69490

    Bill Plaschke - Good Guys Lose More Than Season
    http://www.latimes.com/sports/hocke...1,5244297.column?coll=la-headlines-sports-nhl

    ADRIAN WOJNAROWSKI - Bettman must go after destructive act
    http://www.bergen.com/page.php?qstr...lRUV5eTY2NTYxODMmeXJpcnk3ZjcxN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2

    J.P. GIGLIO - GM: Canes here to stay
    http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/story/2144001p-8525707c.html

    George Vecsey - Cancellation of Season Shouldn’t Be Wake-Up Call
    http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/20/sports/hockey/20vecsey.html?

    Refund Policy Strikes A Chord With Bolts Fan
    http://sports.tbo.com/sports/MGBU1YTLE5E.html

    Johnette Howard - Take your silly negotiations and please keep out of touch
    http://www.newsday.com/sports/print...69feb20,0,4497978.column?coll=ny-sports-print

    Kevin Paul Dupont - This union could use a few more 'yes' men
    http://www.boston.com/sports/hockey...2/20/this_union_could_use_a_few_more_yes_men/

    Phil Sheridan - Don't ridicule effort to get hockey going
    http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/sports/10947558.htm

    Damien Cox - Loyal fans get cross-check
    http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Co...970081593064&DPL=IvsNDS/7ChAX&tacodalogin=yes

    Mike Ulmer - Bob 'n' Gary closer to door
    http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/NHL/2005/02/20/936915-sun.html
     
  2. likea

    likea Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    599
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    thanks John
     
  3. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    The key paragraph in all the articles I've read this morning: from KPD.

    "I thought [$42.5 million] was a figure we could live with, but we were stretching," said Jacobs. "And I know there are teams in this league that cannot survive at [$49 million]. Even at $42.5 million, there are clubs that would still be in peril, definitely. To make that work, we'd still have to take money from other clubs to support them."

    Jacobs wants the cap low enough to he doesn't have to share a dime.
     
    Last edited: Feb 20, 2005
  4. sundstrom

    sundstrom Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2005
    Messages:
    144
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    New Jersey
    Home Page:



    This viewpoint by Jacobs could derail the whole thing. Why is revenue sharing good enough for EVERY other major sport but hockey?
     
  5. BLONG7

    BLONG7 Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2002
    Messages:
    20,231
    Likes Received:
    2,013
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    Home Page:
    Revenue sharing has to be part of the solution for sure, and maybe Jacobs selling of the Bruins and Wirtz of the Hawks...
     
  6. Jaysfanatic*

    Jaysfanatic* Guest

    Jacobs is as much to blame for this whole mess as anyone.

    *cough* Marty LaPointe *cough*

    I liked Damien Cox's article the best though.
     
  7. mooseOAK*

    mooseOAK* Guest

    I think that he is just ponting out that it would need to be done, Betman said that revenue sharing was part of every proposal they made.
     
  8. FLYLine27*

    FLYLine27* BUCH

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Messages:
    42,410
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    PO
    Location:
    NY
    Wonder where all the Pro-owners fans are today to try to attempt to back up there owners after the stunt they pulled yesterday.
     
  9. nomorekids

    nomorekids The original, baby

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2003
    Messages:
    33,375
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    Home Page:

    Stunt? So you really think there could have been a deal...based on a system in which linkage existed, only in an upward manner? The rumors that "one or two small market teams effed it up for everyone" are bunk. The league had heard rumors of this marvelous proposal the players were working on..and in fact, they had none.

    I have no problem backing the owners on that one, no.
     
  10. go_leafs_go02

    go_leafs_go02 Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2004
    Messages:
    7,340
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    London, ON
    Home Page:
    I've lost faith in not only the players, but the owners. I've switched positions drastically from being in support of mainly the owners to now leaning a bit more in the players favour. They seem to want to compromise a whole lot more than the owners will (particularily the non-traditional markets)

    Please, let this be over.. I seriously am thinking of giving up on the NHL for a very long time, but if i said that yesterday, you would have thought me to be highly insane.

    Thanks NHL for treating the fans like nothing.
     
  11. Evil Sather

    Evil Sather YOU KILL THE JOE

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2003
    Messages:
    2,039
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    YOU MAKE SOME MO
    Home Page:
    If Larry Brooks and Kevin Paul Dupont were put in the same room the universe might collapse upon itself.
     
  12. FLYLine27*

    FLYLine27* BUCH

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Messages:
    42,410
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    PO
    Location:
    NY

    How can you say that? They had called the press conference. The deal was THERE. The owners F'ed it up for everyone by pulling something stupid out at the last second. Did you read what the NHLPA put on there site? If you think that the reason there was no deal is because the NHLPA wanted linkage that only worked in there favor then your pro-owner blinders are on 2 tight. The Players gave up so much all they wanted in return was linakge that helped in there favor IF revenues went up. The NHL blew this one...they blew it for everyone.
     
  13. RangerBoy

    RangerBoy TRUST THE PROCESS

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2002
    Messages:
    38,537
    Likes Received:
    2,077
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    New York
    Home Page:
    What are you talking about?Both sides blew it.The players are getting a better deal than the current deal being offered.You have been reading too much of Larry Brooks.Both sides refused to move from their original positions
     
  14. FLYLine27*

    FLYLine27* BUCH

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Messages:
    42,410
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    PO
    Location:
    NY
    Players were willing to go to 45 mill...from there 52 million...how did they not move?? Owners moved from 40 to 42.5 and stopped. Seems like your reading to much Burke.
     
  15. bcrt2000

    bcrt2000 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    no where does it say the players put $45M on the table
     

  16. Correction: Owners moved from 31 at the beginning of the lockout to 42.5, WITHOUT linkage. We know you are pro-player, you don't have to show it everywhere.
     
  17. The Maltais Falcon

    The Maltais Falcon Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    1,156
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    Al Strachan threw the $45 million number out there, not the players. Strachan is the one who brought it up at Wednesday's press conference. He said "people" (i.e. himself) were hearing that number being thrown about. The only thing he was hearing were the voices in his combed-over head.

    The owners went to the highest level they felt they could afford, not the level that "made sense" to Joe Public. Brooks, Strachan, you, and many others seem to be adhering to this faulty logic that sides are supposed to meet in the middle in negotiations. What a load of bunk. Sides meet where there is benefit for both sides and neither one loses its shirt. 45 million isn't as close to 42.5 as everyone makes it out to be. If it were, the players would gladly go to that level to get the season under way.

    Using your logic, if the owners countered the players' offer of 52 million with an offer of 10 million, then the players would have been obligated to settle at 31 million, right? Conversely, if the owners offered 40 and the players countered with 100, the owners would be obligated to agree to 70?
     
  18. nomorekids

    nomorekids The original, baby

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2003
    Messages:
    33,375
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    Home Page:

    And hopefully when all is said and done, we'll be right back at 31, and it will be "paycut or go home" for a lot of the bums in the league :yo: :handclap:
     
  19. London Knights

    London Knights Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2004
    Messages:
    831
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Obviously you don't have access to Canadian sports coverage otherwise you would have heard the number 45 enough to make your head explode on that Wednesday leading up to 1:00PM.
     
  20. guymez

    guymez The Seldom Seen Kid

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    21,683
    Likes Received:
    1,012
    Trophy Points:
    170
    Location:
    Alberta
    If it's just their little universe, I am okay with that.
     
  21. free0717

    free0717 Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,393
    Likes Received:
    20
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Location:
    Old Bridge, NJ
    Bottom line

    Owners called the meeting and should have put 45 mill offer on the table take it or leave it right now.

    That wasnt done. The small markets and hawks dominate the owners ranks and the rangers, flyers, red wings, stars, blues, avalanche and leafs suffer. These are the teams that bring the major revenues into this league. These are the teams that are the earners. I know it wont happen, but the above teams should at this point cecede from the NHL and start a new super league. Leave the pipsqueaks out. Gary Bettman should be fired for not coming out this weekend w/o a deal.

    Bettman is not qualified to be commisioner. The reason the common league revenues decreased were "ALL" his fault. Jaques Lemaire ruined the sport in 94 by introducing this Sport killing system called "The Trap". And all the years since 94 Bettman has done nothing to increase flow and goal scoring. Now he starts talking about new rules. What the hell were you doing for the last 11 years Gary.

    For years Bettman dreamed of this moment, to destroy the Union. If Gary was a hockey man instead of being a lawyer, maybe the new "rules" would have been in effect 10 years ago and this game would be much more popular and have larger national revenue streams. But all Gary did in his tenure is to recruit markets that have no right being in this league(Nashville?, Columbus?, Atlanta?). Any idiot in a new market that could come up with the 50-80 million dollar expansion fee was given a franchise. Where was the Marketing research that showed that Columbus had the wearwithall to compete with New York!! or Nashville with Detroit!!! Or Atlanta with Toronto!!!

    Now all the Big Markets are being dragged down by the weak sisters in a watered down league.

    Owners, take some responsibility and get this done. The 2.5 million extra on the cap isnt going to make that much difference and no matter what Ted Saskin says, The players would have accepted a 45 million dollar flat cap over 6 years.
     
  22. I can't help but agree.
     
  23. mooseOAK*

    mooseOAK* Guest

    If the NHL wants a system that helps well run teams compete that don't happen to be in the largest markets then how is this helping "losers"?

    TB just won the Cup and therefore can't be classified as "losers" but they can't afford to pay Lecavalier, St. Louis, Richards and Khabibulin all the money that they would want in the future under an uncapped system or one set at $50 million.

    Montreal said that they can't live with a cap higher than $42.5 million. "Losers" again? A franchise that the league should get rid of because they can't compete financially with Toronto?
     
  24. djhn579

    djhn579 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tonawanda, NY
    I could be mistaken, but did the rangers, flyers, red wings, stars, blues, avalanche vote to allow expansion over the years and happily accept money from these other teams, essentially allowing them to be come full partners in the league?

    If any of these teams decides to leave the league and form their own super league, it will be many years and many legal battles before this new league would possibly be able to play for the Stanley Cup. Also, these teams would have to take on entirely new names and personanlities since the current names are property of the NHL.

    I'm sure that is all Bettman has been dreaming of...

    How many expansion teams were added by Bettman?

    Once again, all the teams in the league were happy to vote in favor of expansion and accept the entry fees. Now your saying that these teams that were allowed to join should not have an equal say in how the league is run?

    Everything I read says that the players would only accept the cap under their terms, which included raising the cap and there were a few other issues involved as well...
     
  25. CarlRacki

    CarlRacki Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2004
    Messages:
    1,438
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hard to take a post seriously when it's based on a false premise. Common revenues grew from $1.3 billion in 1997-98 to $2.23 billion last year, according to Forbes.

    But you're right ... what kind of idiot would suggest a league where Green Bay competes with New York? Where Charlotte competes with Chicago? Where Buffalo competes with Boston? It would never work. It's madness, I tell you!
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"