codswallop
yes, i am an alcoholic
OlTimeHockey said:The owners, BTW, put out a proposal that is guaranteed to allow every team to exist, and have moved away from it only in the hopes for a settlement. Strict as it may seem, it is the only thing I've seen that produces a meaningful prevention of $12M Yashins and Tkachuk's in the future, which would only further ruin this sport.
I don't support either side because both sides ruined the game. I only support the one logical plan that makes fiscal sense.
The edge goes to the owners, but the reality is that both sides are losers.
Gimpy, blowhard, worthless losers.
I've been trying to say the same thing for months. I couldn't give a feck who theoretically wins or loses. But like you alluded to, the obvious fact is that both sides have already lost a great deal. Too many people get wrapped up in supporting one side or the other. If the world and/or the world of business were that black and white, it would be so much simpler. But it rarely, if ever, is.
The health and stability of the league as a whole is what matters. Nothing more, nothing less. I'm all for a plan that gets as close to that as possible (nothing can ever be perfect, right?). Don't give a damn who or where it comes from.
But, it seems unless you're confrontational and/or implore some far-fetched theory regarding business practices, you rarely get noticed around here. It's a pity really, but not unexpected.
Last edited: