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...
Nuclear said:but he still makes the most on his team...
Puckhead said: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.
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.
Puckhead said: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.
davemess said: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.
Digger12 said: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.
Top Shelf said: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.
ej_pens said:Niedermeyer never played in the NHL when there were only 21 teams. There were 24 his first full season.
Oops!
me2 said: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.