RangerBoy said:The only people who really what is going on is the people in the room and they are not talking
They damn well better be talking.....to each other at the very least
RangerBoy said:The only people who really what is going on is the people in the room and they are not talking
scaredsensfan said:And by the way, if your teams had trouble competing under the previous CBA, it is because they had poor or mediocre management, and nothing to do with the CBA. It would seem that a simpleton would blame the CBA on their team's shortcomings, rather than manager incompetence.
As a Sens fan I do not find comfort in a CBA that is trying to create an idiot proof/management immune system where the cap can limit those who manage too well, and also reward those who can't manage at all.
JWI19 said:No a maroon would assume they went bankrupt solely because of the cba.
Absolutely - there were a raft of factors.JWI19 said:No a maroon would assume they went bankrupt solely because of the cba.
Pepper said:Yes, that's why nearly 70% of the cups during the previous CBA were won by teams with Top10 payroll.
Every single of your feeble arguments have been shot down several months ago, why do you expect anyone to believe that crap this time??
RangerBoy said:Most of the stuff reported by these radio stations and websites about the status of the talks is mostly BS.The only people who really what is going on is the people in the room and they are not talking
scaredsensfan said:Maybe I should have limited my comments to smart fans, not fans in general. Because as has become clear throughout the lockout, the majority of fans are either naive, uninformed or misguided when the 'business of hockey' is the topic of discussion.
And by the way, if your teams had trouble competing under the previous CBA, it is because they had poor or mediocre management, and nothing to do with the CBA. It would seem that a simpleton would blame the CBA on their team's shortcomings, rather than manager incompetence.
As a Sens fan I do not find comfort in a CBA that is trying to create an idiot proof/management immune system where the cap can limit those who manage too well, and also reward those who can't manage at all.
Beukeboom Fan said:1) So it was the Oilers fault they had to move every decent player approaching UFA status, or someone else would offer Luke Richardson or Todd Marchant $3M? I'm not saying the team is blameless, but name me a small market team that was able to match the contract offer from a big spending on a true impact player?
2) So the proposed CBA will save the Islanders from overpaying Alexi Yashin? Or the Bruins from overpaying Martin Lapointe? Or the Habs from overpaying Czerkawski and McKay? I don't think so. As I see it, it hopefully allows all of the teams at least a chance to consistently compete. Even more so, I think it will be better for teams with smart management because it will penalize the teams that make really bad contractual mistakes (Wings w/ Krupp, Rangers with Kasparitis, etc).
Montrealer said:As a fan of a team that went bankrupt during the old CBA?
What a maroon!
hubofhockey said:Is a maroon anything like a merlot, or more like a cabbaghead savignon?
kpd/hoh
hubofhockey said:And I would submit, all these months later, that even the people in the negotiating room don't know what was going on! If they did, it wouldn't be June 3, with no deal done.
History will not be kind to either side, but it will be especially harsh on labor's side, for one simple fact--in the end, they got EVERYTHING they didn't want. EVERYTHING!
Short of the PATCO employees all getting fired, and baseball umpires quitting, it's the most botched show of labor force that I can remember. And in so many ways, its roots trace back to long ago, when labor leadership actually colluded with owners. Ah, irony, so sweet
kpd/hoh
RangerBoy said:Have Trevor Linden and Mike Gartner pushed Bob Goodenow to the side?That is what everyone says
I've always had a soft spot for that Wascally Wabbit.Larionov said:Tsk, tsk -- someone doesn't know their Bugs Bunny lingo!
RangerBoy said:Have Trevor Linden and Mike Gartner pushed Bob Goodenow to the side?That is what everyone says
hubofhockey said:Frankly, I find absurd the notion that one or two players have shoved him into a corner, tied him to a rickety wooden chair, and they are now running the show.
kpd/hoh
Mr Sakich said:as a sens fan, you should be gratefull that the team managed to steal a bunch of pensioner's money or else they would have been forced to move. It is rich to hear a sens fan talking down to other small market teams's fans when, the only reason your team exists is because of thier incredibly shady ownership history.
I am a tax payer and have had the priveledge to support your team. SHow me a little more respect.
edit - IMO, Senator fans should sit on the sidelines when it comes to all things related to finances and the NHL.
PeterSidorkiewicz said:I don't care what anyone says, the reason the Senators were able to compete with anyone is because of their excellent management because they had no finances. If it wasn't for great team management they wouldnt have grown at all, because of their financial situation. We'll never get to see them work under a billionaire owner because of the cap now, but they've been capped their entire franchise, not only them but other teams as well. I think the Sens ran their team to perfection before Melnyk and you couldn't ask much more of them as a franchise to field the teams they have.
And IMO, We ALL should sit on the sidelines when it comes to finances and the NHL, because as I know of right now you and me both know crap about the NHL's true finances, unless of course you work for the NHL and have a say in its finances, do you? Or are other fans more knowledgeable when it comes to finances? Your opinion makes no sense.
PeterSidorkiewicz said:I don't care what anyone says, the reason the Senators were able to compete with anyone is because of their excellent management because they had no finances. If it wasn't for great team management they wouldnt have grown at all, because of their financial situation. We'll never get to see them work under a billionaire owner because of the cap now, but they've been capped their entire franchise, not only them but other teams as well. I think the Sens ran their team to perfection before Melnyk and you couldn't ask much more of them as a franchise to field the teams they have.
And IMO, We ALL should sit on the sidelines when it comes to finances and the NHL, because as I know of right now you and me both know crap about the NHL's true finances, unless of course you work for the NHL and have a say in its finances, do you? Or are other fans more knowledgeable when it comes to finances? Your opinion makes no sense.
hubofhockey said:I can't shake the suspicion here that there will be at least one last brick tossed thru the window.
kpd/hoh
Registrations Now being Accepted For First-Ever Hockey Fest At Savvis Center!
The St. Louis Blues today announced that the club will host the first-ever Hockey Fest at Savvis Center from June 22-25. During the event, Savvis Center will open its doors to all full-season ticket holders, suite holders and several sponsors for free skates on the official NHL ice. In addition, local ice hockey players of all ages will be given the chance to learn from some of the best minds in the game. The event will include three days of low-cost instructional clinics conducted by St. Louis Blues Head Coach Mike Kitchen, other members of the Blues coaching staff, and former Blues players such as Bob Plager and Kelly Chase.
"We are very excited to announce Hockey Fest 2005 this summer at Savvis Center. Our primary goal is to extend a sincere 'thank-you' to many of our loyal fans and business partners," said Blues President & CEO Mark Sauer.
Instructional clinics will be held beginning Wednesday, June 22 at
11 a.m. and will conclude Friday, June 24 at 10 p.m. The registration fee for youth clinics is $35 per player, while adult seminars vary between $50 and $75. For more information about registering, please contact the Blues Youth and Amateur Hockey Hotline .
Yeah, I'd say it's about saving face and trying to make sure there's still gonna be season ticket holders come fall.NYRangers said:That means nothing. Ranger fans had a Q&A session with Maloney and Renney and time to skate at MSG during the lockout too.
slats432 said:Negotiators get deals, not years off of work.
If either of these "leaders" were good negotiators we wouldn't be talking about this right now, it would have been over before the 2004-05 season.
I have maintained that with some creativity, this could have been solved.
One thing I learned early in business is that you never let your emotions or personalities influence business. Deadline negotiators need out strategies. Goodenow had none. I knew from day one that Bettman was serious. I knew that he would cancel a season to get a workable deal. I knew that ultimately a system would have been in place that provided...cost certainty.
Rather than negotiate, Bettman chose to invest in PR to gain public support. Bettman chose to ram a hard cap down the throats of people who are not likely to back down from a fight. Bettman chose totalitarianism over partnership. Bettman chose to look at his opponent to BEAT him and his strategy which was two years in the making has made his constituency's sport a small blip on the radar.
By not making a deal before last season, they both hurt the sport.
Good negotiators get deals done, bad negotiators don't.
gary69 said:I agree that this has been argued ad infinitum, but the question still remains: which is the cause and which is the effect.
BobMckenzie said:Someone asked on yesterday's MDT whether I would be concerned about a guy like Crosby not playing in the NHL for a rookie cap of 500K. Here's my answer:
I would be concerned about Crosby not playing in the NHL...if the rookie cap were 500K, but I have reason to believe this figure isn't accurate.
Lots of figures being passed around right now as to what's in the deal. Some of them may even be correct but I'll wager much of the stuff being floated right now is perhaps only partially true. No sense getting all worked up about a 500K rookie cap if it doesn't exist.
Remember something else about collective bargaining. When we say it's not done until it's all done, take that literally. Hypothetical example, let's say the NHL and the PA agree today on precise numbers on linkage, floor, ceiling, range etc. They both agree today on what that is going to be. Word leaks out and everybody starts reporting it. Whatever. Then tomorrow they start in on all the other issues. After they finish arb, ELS, QO's, FA etc. etc., the PA looks at it and says, you know, we didn't get as much as we thought we would on those systemic issues, so let's go back to that linkage figure, let's change the percentage number, let's move around the range.
Collective bargaining is not a checklist thing, where you tick off one item and move to another. They're all related. And it's a good thing, too, because the leverage both sides have is that they can re-open or re-visit covered ground at any time. Both sides know that so it drives them closer together on the small issues, realizing if they're not fair with each other, one side will go back and blow up the big issue.
So while the tidbits being floated around as to what's in the deal are interesting, forgive me if I just wait to see what's actually in there when it's really done.
There, if I post another 100 plus times today and KPD is too busy to post, I'll have a shot at equaling his impressive output.