Egil
Registered User
Would the players videoconference the meeting on their wesite so that players could follow along from home? Really no need to show up if you do that...
after all the talk the leagues gotten, and all the hype about the season finally, if the players vote no, they will be run out of the country. if they think fans dont like them now, do that and see what happens. have fun playing hockey in russia and such no offense to those countries, but if i were an athlete, id rather be in americaColoradoHockeyFan said:I think that's a pretty safe bet.
If this isn't ratified in a complete landslide, I'll be absolutely shocked. And by landslide, I'm talking upper 90's for a percentage.
what would that do for them? get them more sympathy, more money, more leverage on the next deal. please tell me what that would do actually? im really interested to hear it. the deal is done, they can vote yes or no, nothing is gonna change.loudi94 said:Agreed that they are not on the same page. Perhaps the best they can ask for is 25% voting no. I do feel it would be a huge mistake for the PA to ratify this deal at over 90% approval. It sends a message of utter defeat. Reluctantly accepting with many unhappy, would be a better strategy.
Cloned said:A lot of the players are in Europe. Some didn't want to go. Yet others are going to vote yes (and vice versa) no matter what is in the CBA. 230 is a little low, but it's not unexpected.Originally Posted by PecaFan
230 players? That's it? What, something more important come up?
RDriesen16 said:what would that do for them? get them more sympathy, more money, more leverage on the next deal. please tell me what that would do actually? im really interested to hear it. the deal is done, they can vote yes or no, nothing is gonna change.
loudi94 said:A high number (90%) ratifying the deal gives the perception as an association that they are happy with the deal. If a significant number of voters turn down the deal it sends a message to the league that this deal was unsatisfactory. In 4 years when the players opt to open the deal up again, theoretically the NHL should be a profitable organization. Players will have some leverage knowing the league won't want a stoppage. If the owners go into negotiations knowing that a relevant percentage of players were willing to chew their leg off the last time around when they had no leverage will have a greater impact than if they go in knowing the players had unananimously folded their cards once already. In short it may or may not prevent being bullied around the next time, but it's a better bet than bending over and taking it up the wazoo.
Timmy said:Well, then, they really ****ed up, didn't they?