Doctor Zoidberg
Registered User
- Feb 16, 2005
- 70
- 0
Reilly311 said:no it doesn't
Doctor Zoidberg said:No what doesn't? If you read this article and not just the headline, they report that a deal has been reached.
Reilly311 said:no it doesn't
... always thinking like an attorney ...Jaded-Fan said:I was just going to say that. It is basically the same report as has been all over the place. It also seems to imply in one place, ominously, that even if a deal is reached a season may not happen until next year. Reading between the lines, it seems if anything a figure, $45 million, may have been agreed to in principle (several deny this as well, including the NHLPA), but lots of other details remain to work out. Nothing at all about that clause #7, revenue sharing, what happens if a certain number of teams hit $45 Million (if anything), a luxury tax, a floor, etc, etc.
Reilly, ever get a gut feeling in your life and run with it? I mean what is yours telling you right now? Because mine told me this was happening this morning, forget about now.Reilly311 said:*reads article*
no it doesn't
Lou is God said:Reilly, ever get a gut feeling in your life and run with it? I mean what is yours telling you right now? Because mine told me this was happening this morning, forget about now.
What else are you looking for?
Reilly311 said:*reads article*
no it doesn't
Reilly311 said:I'm looking for the ESPN article that says it's a "done deal".
Why the hell ESPN of all people? Just wondering...Reilly311 said:I'm looking for the ESPN article that says it's a "done deal".
jacketracket said:... always thinking like an attorney ...
Doctor Zoidberg said:"an agreement in principle with a $45 million salary cap IS IN PLACE, confirms ESPN The Magazine's EJ Hradek."
Get out your glasses, gramps.
EJ Hrade3k does NOT work at the Hockey News. This is a second source.
Reilly311 said:"Agreement in principle" does not equal "done deal". Sorry.
You, too.Jaded-Fan said:Hey, if I am destined to burn in hell anyways for it, why not use it? . . . Good seeing you again btw.
[Fire Sather] said:Actually, it does... in a way.
[Fire Sather] said:Actually, it does... in a way.
Jaded-Fan said:No, it does not. They could have in theory have agreed in principle to the $45 million figure . . . and that article aslo has quotes from sources such as the NHLPA that deny that as well . . . but for arguments sake, let us say for this moment the agreement in principle at $45 million is real. If the other details, luxury tax, floor, caluse #7, and on and on and on are still left, how in hell is it a 'done deal'?
jacketracket said:You, too.
With Lou posting in this thread, it's like 'Old Home Week' for the political forum.
Reilly311 said:"Agreement in principle" does not equal "done deal". Sorry.
Jaded-Fan said:No, it does not. They could have in theory have agreed in principle to the $45 million figure . . . and that article aslo has quotes from sources such as the NHLPA that deny that as well . . . but for arguments sake, let us say for this moment the agreement in principle at $45 million is real. If the other details, luxury tax, floor, caluse #7, and on and on and on are still left, how in hell is it a 'done deal'?
Doctor Zoidberg said:It does too. It's a deal in principle, but that deal in principle is done. Anyway, ESPN has altered their story. No longer does it say EJ Hradek confirms there is a deal in principle. This is not good news.