alecfromtherock
Registered User
- Feb 2, 2004
- 507
- 0
ScottyBowman said:Why do you people jump to conclusions? Goodenow knows more about contracts and negotiations than everyone on these boards combined. Its people like you who are DESPERATE for hockey that start saying a bunch of crazy things to make yourself feel better. The best things come to those who wait. Goodenow knows that the owners are going to have a tough time fielding replacement players in Canada. The owners are going to cave in.
How would the Canadian NHL teams have a hard time icing replacement players?
The strict labor and civil laws Canada has(noting each province has different labour laws)??
Take for instance the Government of Quebec who does not recognise the NHLPA as an official union, therefor repayment players will have no problem suiting up.
Dat1guy said:I also wanted to add, Crazy Lunatic, your "$2 billion salary-lost-over- two-seasons" crutch, seems grossly overstated. Where are the numbers to back this up?
Here is a site with NHL salaries 2003-2004 and the top 25 player salaries.
Using a spread sheet and the ever-useful QuickSum function I got $1,332,974,890
Based on 2003-2004 another full season cancelled would be close to $2,700,000,000 loss in player salaries.
Vs the $454,766,890(first capped season) they would have lost with a $30 million cap or the $191,101,590 players would have lost with a $45 million cap(using both as the extremes)
If a cap was implimented the first year would be the only big loss for the players, after that its the staus quo.
Last edited: