Suprise, you get to pick the New Comish/PA head..
- Thread starter Drury_Sakic
- Start date
- Status
it's not a good thing, over expansion is one of the factors that led to this lockout, plus the talent is diluted, that's why the quality of play is so bad. He's also sat idly by while clutch and grabbing ran rampant and goalies beefed up.
blamebettman said:
More PA rhetoric that has zero foundation. The talent level is at the highest it has ever been. All it takes is watching a couple of "vintage" games to see that there are no weak skaters in the game these days and that ALL players are more fit today than the best were in the past. All the players execute the systems so effectively that mistakes are kept to a handful during a game rather than the three or four that took place on ever shift 20 years ago. Those that say the talent level is diluted don't have a clue and are saying so because they are probably too young to remember the real discrepancy in talent that there was. Brad Marsh wouldn't get a look in today's NHL and he was once considered a pretty good defenseman to many teams.
If you are looking for a reason as to why the NHL is in the state it is in from a quality of play issue look no frther than coaching. The teams are so systemized that players don't dare use their own natural ability and creativity. The coaches won't allow for it. In the 70's & 80's there was one solitary with maybe an assistant or two that lingered around in the background. Now the coaching staff is five or six deep and you have three guys on the bench giving specific instructions. The players are over-coached and the creativity is stifled from the game. Add in referees that are intimidated to make calls and you have a game where clutching and grabbing is en vogue and effective.
I'm not sure how the commissioner is at fault for this aspect of the game. The commissioner is not responsible for the on ice product. Accountable, yes. Responsible, no. That is delegated and those people (Colin Campbell and Co.) that look after those aspects have allowed the game to slide. That is not really something you can pin on Bettman any more than you can pin the Bertuzzi incident on Goodenow.
Finally, the NHL clutch and grab is nothing comared to Europe. If you want to see what clutch and grab and hack and slash hockey is all about, watch some European hockey for a while. And if that isn't convincing enough, ask Vinny Lecavalier what he thought of the play in the RSL this past winter. He says he will never compain about the NHL again.
topshelf331
Registered User
me2
Go ahead foot
blamebettman said:
Why would Goodenow accept 54% linkage from Daly but not from Bettman? Heck, Daly has been up to eyeballs in the deal making and nothing got done.
me2 said:
Daly would have made more moves in other areas to apease the Union...
Plus, I think with Daly,
A) Talks would have started earlier from the NHL's side
B) They would have done the No-Linkage but Hard Cap trade-off sooner.
C) The End of Each meeting would not have been a ***** Session
D) Bloody Sat. would have resulted in a Deal, rather than the death of the season..
Perhaps the PA would have pwoned Daly, I don't know....but if you are a player on the fence, trying to decide to take an offer of 42 million to save the season.... the personality of Daly would have made that offer much more attractive, rather than the harsh Bettman and the players revolt that was rumored would have become realtity...
What motivation did/do the players have (on a personal level) to work with the man they have grown to hate in Bettman?
me2
Go ahead foot
Drury_Sakic said:
The NHL has been trying for years.
But from the NHLPA side? There was "NO CAP" until the NHLPA cracked, why would they have accepted it in September or earlier when they expected to win?
Daly would be carry the offers the owners gave him permission to carry. He doesn't have authority to ram a deal down the owners throat, he would be their pawn and messenger boy. Goodenow/union wouldn't take what was being offered and vice versa.
Goodenow's plan is always to outwait the opposition. He's used it to bust unions, he's used it bust the NHL. He's used it to stonewall negotiations prior to this CBA. The idea he'd change just because its Daly and not Bettman isn't particularly believable.
Who cares, they want to get paid and that overrides any of the grossly overexagerated dislike of Bettman.
Regarding Bettman to the basher do remember, that he does answer to the owners.
Think about that article on Bettman talking to the Leafs and owners on Revenue Sharing. If he could have gotten any deal through with owner approval, why is he talking to NHL teams about Revenue Sharing now? Wouldn't he just sign a deal and tell the owners later that it has substantial revenue sharing.
Much of the problem Bettman has always faced is that the commissioner only has as much power as the owners choose to give him.
No other person as the commisioner could do an absolute change of the game or negotiate that much easier.
Perhaps they have have more people liking them and that would make some things better, but until owners and players are willing to move neither the NHL or PA can move. After all you look like a total idiot if you agree in a meeting to a deal and then when you take it back to your side they reject it on you. That would have pissed the PA off a lot to think they had a deal and then Bettman had the deal rejected on him because the owners weren't ready to take that deal
Think about that article on Bettman talking to the Leafs and owners on Revenue Sharing. If he could have gotten any deal through with owner approval, why is he talking to NHL teams about Revenue Sharing now? Wouldn't he just sign a deal and tell the owners later that it has substantial revenue sharing.
Much of the problem Bettman has always faced is that the commissioner only has as much power as the owners choose to give him.
No other person as the commisioner could do an absolute change of the game or negotiate that much easier.
Perhaps they have have more people liking them and that would make some things better, but until owners and players are willing to move neither the NHL or PA can move. After all you look like a total idiot if you agree in a meeting to a deal and then when you take it back to your side they reject it on you. That would have pissed the PA off a lot to think they had a deal and then Bettman had the deal rejected on him because the owners weren't ready to take that deal
Habsfan 32
Registered User
Bob Gainey and Lou Lamoriello would make a deal in a matter of minutes. It would be fair for both sides and we would be playing playoff hockey at the moment.
I have to disagree there, as much as I hate the constant labour stoppages, the league is much better off without Eagleson.PecaFan said:
Alot of these problems would have been worked out earlier with a more satisfactory result if Eagleson weren't screwing the players. The NHL and PA probably wouldn't have such a poisonous relationship.kruezer said:
PecaFan
Registered User
kruezer said:
You misspelled "players".
The *league* was far better off with Eagleson. What are we up to now, three labour stoppages in a little more than 10 years since he's gone, and zero in the 23 years he ran the PA?
For all his faults, at least Eagleson wanted to get deals done, unlike the adversarial nature of today.
DevilsFan38
Registered User
Exactly, Eagleson could have gotten the players far better deals and much of the mistrust from the players side wouldn't have had to boil over like it did in the early nineties.Hasbro said:
If your willing to overlook Eagleson's faults thats fine, but I still think hockey (read: the league and players) are much better off without him, they are still working out the kinks after his fall from grace IMO.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
“They’ll blow it in the playoffs. “ Edmonton Oilers 2 vs LA Kings 3. Part Twa!!!!- Latest: Peter James Bond II
