Where does Mario Lemieux stand? (Pretaining the CBA)

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Nuclear, Sep 16, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Nuclear

    Nuclear Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2004
    Messages:
    985
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    PA
    He's a player... yet an owner. Did he come out and say which side he's on? I'd have to say he sides with the owners... but he still makes the most on his team...
     
  2. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    139,774
    Likes Received:
    2,279
    Trophy Points:
    232
    and it all goes back into the team
     
  3. Puckhead

    Puckhead Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Hollywood Stuntman
    Location:
    Behind you!!!
    He would most definitely side with the owners. The same as most players who are now retired, and can look at the situation with a lot less bias. If you step back and look at the state of the league, I think it is crytal clear that the game can't possibly go on this way. I understand that the owners created these problems, but the problem won't just go away. The players are united against a cap or form there of, and have repeated over and over that if that is what the owners are selling, they are not buying. They are not looking at what is best for everyone involved, they are looking at what is best for them. The ironic part is there won't be hockey at all, so we are all losers.

    Scott Niedermeyer was on a Toronto based sports station yesterday, and he said that the owners are unified and that this is going to last a long time. When he was asked about the possibility of certain teams not being able to withstand an extended work stoppage, and that as many as 5-6 teams could fall out, he said, that when he entered the league there were 21 teams, far less problems and a much better game. He said that he would be very sorry if teams had to fold, and moreso that jobs would be lost, but ultimately it would make the game better.

    For those of you who don't want any teams to leave, I ask you this...Were you a hockey fan back when there were 21 teams? If so, try and remember what the game was like. Now I ask you that if you could wipe out the 4th line guys who are in the league today, would that not equate to a fantastic on-ice product? That way Sakic, Thorton, Iginla, Lemieux, Kovalchuk, Gaborik, Datsyuk etc. wouldn't have to be on the ice with guys like Wade Brookbank, who has no business being there.

    A player of relatively no skill would be forced out of the game and thus the game becomes a lot more exciting. A player like Petr Nedved for example would be a 2nd or 3rd line center, not a 1st. Do the math people, I just wish we didn't have to wait 18 months for it to get going.

    I feel for the franchises who will get caught up in all this, and I feel even more for the fans of those teams, but if Canada can lose teams and carry on, I think the cities in the States will have no problem. The NHL has been fighting an uphill battle trying to get the game to take root in the southern states, and have had limited to no success. Bettman won't come out and say that he made a mistake, but I think that he has put his job on the line this time. If the owners don't get a cap of some sort, Bettman is out, and while I think he should have been out years ago, I can respect this no nonsense stance.

    Life is funny, just like your local govenments who refuse to put traffic lights at a very dangerous intersection until a certain number of accidents occur and someone dies, this labour war has been in the making for about 4-5 years. Each side telling their people that we have to remain strong, we have to show resolve, we will break the other side, and they have been saving up for this rainy day in their so called war chests. The players have a hefty sum of money put aside, as do the owners. I hope for the best, but everywhere I look points to the same thing...This is going to last past January 2005, which means this season will be scrapped. Then they will go through the summer, and into next season, and I believe that all involved will come to their senses in time to salvage a 45-48 game season starting in January 2006.
     
  4. davemess

    davemess Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,582
    Likes Received:
    91
    Trophy Points:
    146
    Location:
    Scotland
    Home Page:
    This is the thing that i think should be the primary concern of the NHLPA, if the league folds 6 teams that means there are 150 guys who are suddenly out of Hockey and out of work. That is 20% of its members who could potentially be out of jobs in a years time. Shouldnt the Union be required to do its best for that 20% rather than the top 20% of its members who are trying to retain the right to make $6 mill per year instead of $3 mill.

    I always thought that Unions worked on the basis of

    1) Protect Jobs
    2) Protect workers rights and ensure a safe working enviroment
    3) Maximise Salaries

    Heres hoping the Unions we all might be in are not out their risking our jobs just to protect the money of the highest paid people in the membership.
     
  5. The Tang

    The Tang I like gooooollllddd

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2002
    Messages:
    7,394
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Pittsburgh. PA
    Home Page:
    he takes the role of the owner. he isnt allowed into any NHLPA meetings, but also keeps quiet on many ownership issues, in particular the ones that deal with the entire league and cba. i beleive he was required to take the owners role whether he wanted to or not.
     
  6. H/H

    H/H Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Personally, losing 5-6 teams would be frickin' great for this league. Think just how much deeper the talent pool will be. It would be sad if any Canadian teams would have to go, I'd personally like to see as many teams north of the border as possible.
     
  7. HughJass*

    HughJass* Guest

    I hate it when people say "it would be great to lose teams". Look back at the history of any sport: there is a drop-off for awhile but the talent pool catches up eventually. That, and I'm not sure if the league isn't as talented as it's ever been. Remember, we have the best from all over the world playing now instead of a handful when there were 21 teams.
     
  8. H/H

    H/H Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2004
    Messages:
    308
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then just imagine how deep the talent pool would eventually be with 6 fewer teams? We'd probably see an significant increase as well.

    And what's the point of having THREE NHL teams in California, two of them practically sitting in each others lap + TWO teams in Florida a rock's throw from each other?
     
  9. ej_pens

    ej_pens Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2003
    Messages:
    2,062
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    Niedermeyer never played in the NHL when there were only 21 teams. There were 24 his first full season.

    Oops! :joker:
     
  10. echosmyron

    echosmyron Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2004
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    funny how it's always a player like Modano or Niedermeyer that suggests contraction. They won't lose their jobs.
     
  11. X0ssbar

    X0ssbar Guest

    If we lose 4 - 6 teams do you think they'll take the trap with them Scott? I doubt it. That is the main problem with the on ice product IMO - not 30 teams.
     
  12. Digger12

    Digger12 Gold Fever

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    17,946
    Likes Received:
    558
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Technical Analyst
    Location:
    Back o' beyond
    Yeah, but back in the era of 21 teams you didn't have a fraction of the talented Euros and Russians that we do now...IMO the skill level now is just as good if not higher than it used to be.

    Funny how everyone's a fan of contraction, of getting rid of the deadweight, unless it's their team that's at the chop. You wanna contract? How about revoking the franchises of the teams that got the NHL into this mess in the first place?

    IMO, Niedermayer's comments only cement how hollow the NHLPA's words are when it comes to crowing about their 'unified' front...in reality, they're just as multitiered and elitist as any of the NHL owners. They have multiple agendas too.
     
  13. Puckhead

    Puckhead Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Hollywood Stuntman
    Location:
    Behind you!!!
    I take issue with that. If not for the top 20% the rest are making nothing. They are the stars, they deserve the money. The problems are the neanderthal guys who have no business being on the ice with the best in the world getting millions of dollars. Even the players agree by and large that it is the best thing for the game, they just can't come out and say it. Well it is day 1 of what should be a long lockout, and already John Madden has gone on record and said that if a cap is going to get them playing again, then let's do it already. See, here is a guy who gets it. He knows that he could POSSIBLY make more had the league tried to continue operating as it was, but he is making no money now, and that is the big picture. In most cases such as labour wars in other sports, the veteran guys usually concede on points involving the younger players. Basically the rookies and prospects get sacrificed for the greater good. Well this time the owners won't settle for that. They want a cap, and will stop at nothing until they get it. Eventually, Goodenow will call Bettman and say, "OK what about this...?" and if that is not a cap, Bettman will say "no thanks, keep trying" and hang up the phone. I am not necessarily on anyones side. The owners created this mess, and the players are to greedy to want to fix it. I am all for getting a cap and even though it pains me to go without hockey, I love the game too much to simply have some band aid solution put in place, like '94. Fix it now, and make sure that there won't be a next time.
     
  14. Puckhead

    Puckhead Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Hollywood Stuntman
    Location:
    Behind you!!!
    I can agree with the talent level being high, but you don't get to see it the way you should. These skill guys are having to put up with the clutching and grabbing of guys who can't keep up, and have to hold and cause interference to keep their jobs. It is ridiculous! If you did away with the "dead weight" as you so eloquently put it, it would open up the game, and everyone would enjoy it at every level. The owners, the players, and most of all US, the fans!
     
  15. Puckhead

    Puckhead Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Hollywood Stuntman
    Location:
    Behind you!!!
    If you look at who uses the trap, you will find that it is best used by teams who cannot compete any other way, because of a lack of talent. I understand the Devils made it popular, but the teams who lack the skill players, and still want to keep the fans interested, figure if we win 2-1 or tie 1-1 atleast our fans will see that we didn't lose and that will keep them coming back...YES, and it has worked so well up to now. Attendance is down all over the place, the on ice product sucks, and what do they talk about? Lets make the nets bigger! Lets take away the red line. Why not get rid of the crap that is taking up space on the ice. Putting a cap in place with serious taxes on those who choose to overspend, with that money going back to the lesser teams would make it a lot better. Then Nashville, or Columbus, or Washington, could add some talented players and compete with out trapping or slowing the game down. The NHL prides itself as being the fastest game, you could have fooled me. There are certain teams you couldn't pay to watch, because it is not entertainment, and if the game doesn't keep your interest you will find something else to do with your time and your money, as they will find out will be the case the longer this lockout goes. To be honest, I am not worried about the Canadian teams, even Calgary and Edmonton. The fans in Canada are so nuts for hockey, that they will come back in droves. On the other hand, the States was already a problem area, particularily in the south before the lockout, so why would those people who could basically take the game or leave it, come back? My guess is they won't, and the NHL owners know that this will cause major problems, and may set the league back 5, maybe 10 years. But if they get it right, it will work out for the best in the end.
     
  16. me2

    me2 Calling out the crap

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2002
    Messages:
    33,075
    Likes Received:
    1,136
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Location:
    Blasting the bull***
    The less teams the less the stars will make.

    If I had a $60m teams with 12 Marios, 6 Orrs and 2 Roys. Every player on that team would make $3m.

    If I have a $60m team with 1 Mario, 1 Bobby and 1 Patty, they can all make $10-12m each.

    The more teams, the more sources of income, the more salary a star can compete for. Talent dilution is their friend not their enemy. If 9 teams fold like Neids wants he'd be competing with an extra 1-2 quality Dmen for a share of his teams money.
     
  17. Puckhead

    Puckhead Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Hollywood Stuntman
    Location:
    Behind you!!!
    Actually I said when he started, I never said his first FULL SEASON. '91-'92 he played 4 games and San Jose became the 22nd team that year. So keep your oops to yourself. Besides, 24 teams was a hell of a lot better than 30!
     
    Last edited: Sep 16, 2004
  18. Puckhead

    Puckhead Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2004
    Messages:
    703
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Hollywood Stuntman
    Location:
    Behind you!!!
    Well said me2! Why is it so obvious to some of us? and the rest are so in the dark. I understand that no one wants to lose teams necessarily, especially if its your team that could be folding. But don't try to make an argument that the game is better the way it is today, then it would be with less teams and less baggage handler players clogging up the ice and keeping the stars from earning the money they deserve.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"