BigE said:
Amidst your rambling and run-ons I was left with a two part conclusion; first, you didn't read (see comprehend if you're at all unsure as to what I mean) my post and second, your own points are nothing but re-hashed rhetoric that not one single person here, hasn't heard at least ten times by now.
Actually, that would apply a great deal more to the tripe you just posted, as I will now amply prove, to reckoning's intense dislike.
In twenty years Bettman will be looked upon as the best thing ever to hit the NHL? Are you ****ing kidding me? You clearly must have misunderstood or even just skimmed right past my entire post if you aren't at least willing to back that up with any substantial support. What did Bettman do that anyone else could not have done? The answer is nothing and that is my entire point.
That is such an easy thing to say. The fact is HE did it, not anyone else, and you are hardly privy enough to any details to say whether or not it could have been done by other people. It probably could have, by some, and couldn't have by others, but regardless, Bettman DID.
He has no hockey experience
Typical "New York Lawyer" tripe from a PA zombie.
he did absolutely nothing with the opportunities presented to him after he took over as Commissioner
Elaborate? Or are you just repeating the same old baloney about how the league was about to eclipse baseball and basketball in the '90s, baloney long since shown to be nothing more than unrealistic hot air? Post proof, buckwheat.
and his ineptness only further hurt the game by not only failing to advance it but in aiding it's decline.
Yet more declarations lacking evidence.
Of course revenues are going to increase when you add four new teams to the league.
The idea that you triple revenues to date, increasing them year after year simply by adding four expansion teams is laughable in the extreme and shows your simpleminded, rather clueless approach to economics.
The TV deals and sponsorship deals were made because of predictions based on the past and what previous successes would "inevitabley" hold for the future. This was not Bettman's work, these weren't Bettman's deals. These, like I've said, were deals that were going to happen (just the same as this CBA).
Such hyp[ocrisy - those deals were "inevitable" but everything else is not? Such selective reasoning you're showing there, sport.
You're so eager to talk about revenues on the NHL side, and then shift the blame of costs to the PA. All of a sudden Bob Goodenow is the evil mastermind behind a plot to gouge the owners for every cent.
Gee, that couldn't be because player salaries had balooned to three quarters of the costs of the business? You know, the ENTIRE REASON for the lockout in the first place?
You really haven't been paying attention, have you?
Here's a little clue for you; every transaction (that means trade, signing, waiver drop) has to be sent through the NHL Central Registry and approved by the commissioner. The Central Registry has turned down trades and signings before and this right of the NHL was explicitly put into the last CBA as a check against salaries.
Here's a little clue for YOU: it is ILLEGAL for the league to refuse a contract simply because they don't like how high it is. They have to have legal reasons to stop a contract.
You have a lot of learning to do before you get up to the basic level of understanding 85% of the people here, judging from the voting numbers, are showing. Please stop posting stupidity like the above until you're at that level.
Where was Bettman when Alexei Yashin signed a 10 yr, $10 000 000 deal? Where was Mr. Bettman when Bobby Holik signed a 5 yr. $45 000 000 deal (yeah, that's right...count the zeros!!! Bobby Frickin' Holik!!)?
If you turned your brain on for one millisecond you would have figured out by now that if the league *could* have stopped those contracts, they *would* have. They didn't. Now most people with more intelligence than a slug would correctly conclude that that would mean they *couldn't*, hmm?
How come you can't? What's wrong with you? Too many paint chips as a child?
You're fooling yourself if you blame the escalating costs of this industry on the players.
I don't. I blame it on the union leadership and the complicity of those owners using more money than revenue warranted. But the result was in player salaries out of control, and therefore that's where it has to be taken back.
The NHL (that includes your savior) signed a bad deal in 94 that proceeded to **** them for ten years straight.
Another lesson for our clueless poster here - that deal was signed over Bettman's objections and he fixed that by changing the amount of support he needed to hold on to his guns. So when he got a chance to fix it, he DID. Right now. Capiche?
Not only did they fail to ensure proper language in the last CBA (see loopholes) but they failed to use the proper checks and balances in order to keep the industry above the red.
So your argument is because they blew it last CBA they should continue to blow it? Bettman, already established to not be the problem from the last CBA, is fixing it at the best time he had a chance to. He could have done so three years earlier, if he had been more willing to throw new teams under the bus with less evidence for the declining state of the system than he has now.
Good thing YOU aren't commissioner - you'd be an abject failure at it judging so far. Apparently your claim that "anyone" could have done Bettman's job does, in fact, exclude some people.
At the end of the day these owners sign the cheques and it's their choice whether or not to sign off on a contract.
Ah more simplistic reasoning from the simpleton. Ten months of lockout and you still don't understand that the problem is that a few teams can or are willing to pay far more than revenues warrant and the centralized control of contracts through the union leadership ensures that the salary structure of ALL the players is set by those contracts, regardless of the status of the other owners, leading to a salary structure based on the few richest (or most willing to pay) teams rather than the league as a whole, leading to millions of dollars in the red.
You've got a lot to learn about this lockout, and that should embarrass you. It's only been going on for months, after all...
To blame the players for taking what they've been offered is ludicrous. The players have their fair share of responsibility in this CBA matter and for reasons that I think we'll all agree are obvious. However, blaming the players for taking salaries they were offered and operating under a CBA signed IN PARTNERSHIP is another faulty point in your argument.
\
Speaking of poor reading skills...
I don't blame the players for taking the contracts offered. I blame them for not recognizing the necessity in fixing it and coming to reason earlier so we didn't have to have a lockout. And now, it looks like even some of the PLAYERS agree with me. The days of you pro-Goodenow shills is coming to an end.
Now don't get me wrong here, I'm on one side - that of the FANS. I think the actions of both parties over the past year have been dispicable but that doesn't mean honesty and the good ol' art of "calling a spade, a spade", have to be thrown under the bus.
So one of these posts will you actually post some proof of the "spade" or are you simply going to spew out the same empty accusations devoid of logic or reasoning?
Bettman was bad for this game 10 years ago, is bad for this game now and will be bad for this game until he's removed.
And one of these days maybe you'll actually come up with some evidence for it!
There isn't a person with even the lowest credentials that couldn't have gotten this deal done and that should tell you all you need to know about Bettman.
Not really. Though I do admit you have more experience with "lowest credentials" than I do.
So, in the end what are you left with? A big pile of steaming **** from 1994 and a game that's been run downhill faster than a Russian race horse with a glue truck on his ass.
And if you'll look at the REAL reasons for it, rather than your empty, baseless hatred of a commissioner because he's not a "hockey guy" (in your mind), maybe one of these days you'll understand why the game ran downhill....
I'm not holding my breath, however.
