pei fan
Registered User
- Jan 3, 2004
- 2,536
- 0
Just prior to cancelling the season the NHL took a huge advantage in negotiations
with the NHLPA dropping their resistance to a salary cap,thus their "matter of
principle" and "philosophical differences".Everyone expected NHL to play hardball
but actually they seem to have become more accomadating and imo a major
breakthrough came when Bettman came out with a statement that they
wouldn't be looking at replacement players and wanted to negotiate with the
NHLPA.Now it looks like they might be the ones giving the most ground to the
NHLPA.
My question is did the NHL not really want to get a deal done for a shortened season and actually preferred to lose a whole season as opposed to play
a 25-30 game season.Does the timing of when the salaries come in factor into
it?(meaning although it would be a shortened season it would still start the
inflation process by one year). What about the Crosby factor? Shortly after
Bettman started talking softer he floated the idea of every team getting
a shot at Crosby.(something he couldn't have done if there was a shortened
season).I never really believed the "Crosby to New York" conspiracy
theory but I'm starting to wonder. Also the Memorial Cup saw more NHL
brass then ever including Bettman at a Rimouski game and soon after that
the NHL is doing some serious testing about rule changes to open up the
game more to show off the more skilled players.Anyway it looks like the NHL
is serious about wanting to play hockey this year and last year it looked like
they weren't in a rush. Are there any other reasons in this sudden shift in
posture?
with the NHLPA dropping their resistance to a salary cap,thus their "matter of
principle" and "philosophical differences".Everyone expected NHL to play hardball
but actually they seem to have become more accomadating and imo a major
breakthrough came when Bettman came out with a statement that they
wouldn't be looking at replacement players and wanted to negotiate with the
NHLPA.Now it looks like they might be the ones giving the most ground to the
NHLPA.
My question is did the NHL not really want to get a deal done for a shortened season and actually preferred to lose a whole season as opposed to play
a 25-30 game season.Does the timing of when the salaries come in factor into
it?(meaning although it would be a shortened season it would still start the
inflation process by one year). What about the Crosby factor? Shortly after
Bettman started talking softer he floated the idea of every team getting
a shot at Crosby.(something he couldn't have done if there was a shortened
season).I never really believed the "Crosby to New York" conspiracy
theory but I'm starting to wonder. Also the Memorial Cup saw more NHL
brass then ever including Bettman at a Rimouski game and soon after that
the NHL is doing some serious testing about rule changes to open up the
game more to show off the more skilled players.Anyway it looks like the NHL
is serious about wanting to play hockey this year and last year it looked like
they weren't in a rush. Are there any other reasons in this sudden shift in
posture?