RangerBoy
Dolan sucks!!!
http://wfan.com/chrismikeaudio/
Pierre McGuire savaged the players during his interview.He was vicious
Pierre McGuire savaged the players during his interview.He was vicious
scaredsensfan said:Pierre McGuire? Who cares what he has to say?
WhalerBoy said:I care. thanks Rangerboy, appreciate it.
bert said:Oh you didnt know, ScaredSensFan knows more about whats going on than Pierre Mcguire........
handtrick said:McGuire and Bettman's interviews were quite good and well worth the time to listen.
Bettman is much more candid in his interviews and answers the questions asked.
Goodenow's interviews [at his PC and on Fqn590] are filled with spouting the same rhetoric and doesn't really answer the question, but more of a political answer.
I actually gained some respect for Bettman after this interview.
goodenow is working for donald fehr and really has to be careful what he sayshandtrick said:McGuire and Bettman's interviews were quite good and well worth the time to listen.
Bettman is much more candid in his interviews and answers the questions asked.
Goodenow's interviews [at his PC and on Fqn590] are filled with spouting the same rhetoric and doesn't really answer the question, but more of a political answer.
I actually gained some respect for Bettman after this interview.
WhalerBoy said:Short Recap:
The hosts dont know too much about hockey (sorry NY guys, but these guys are terrible. makes you realize how knowledgable our media is....well, maybe not all.)
Egil said:But the cap number IS a magnet.
The key is public perception of what is going on, not reality. In terms of public perception, if you arn't spending at or near the cap, you arn't trying to compete. And if your "not trying to compete", your not selling tickets at the same rate than if you "are trying to compete". You really think Philly could get away with spending 10 mil under the cap? or Toronto? You think that if Calgary trades Iginla when they are 10 mil under the cap that they will still be considered to be "competing"?
Of course not. The statement that teams will gravitate towards a cap is EXTREMELY acurate. Individual player contracts in the NBA demonstrate this perfectly. The individual caps, instead of controlling the salaries of 10 players, as made the salaries of about 50 players the same, ALL at the cap. Its now a matter of "respect" that you are paid a "max" contract. The same thing occurs with a salary cap on a teamwide basis. If you want to be considered as "trying", you HAVE to be close to the cap.
But the cap number IS a magnet.
The key is public perception of what is going on, not reality. In terms of public perception, if you arn't spending at or near the cap, you arn't trying to compete. And if your "not trying to compete", your not selling tickets at the same rate than if you "are trying to compete". You really think Philly could get away with spending 10 mil under the cap? or Toronto? You think that if Calgary trades Iginla when they are 10 mil under the cap that they will still be considered to be "competing"?
Of course not. The statement that teams will gravitate towards a cap is EXTREMELY acurate. Individual player contracts in the NBA demonstrate this perfectly. The individual caps, instead of controlling the salaries of 10 players, as made the salaries of about 50 players the same, ALL at the cap. Its now a matter of "respect" that you are paid a "max" contract. The same thing occurs with a salary cap on a teamwide basis. If you want to be considered as "trying", you HAVE to be close to the cap.
go kim johnsson said:God damn. People are acting like each owner HAS to spend $42.5M. The cap number isn't a magnet, people. If a team only wants to spend $32M that is just fine.
nomorekids said:anyone notice that Bettman didn't rule out a Draft? He said "it wouldn't be fair if we gave the first pick to the same team that had it last year, so obviously we'd have to figure out an arrangement"
interesting.
NJD Jester said:Interesting, but pointless. You cannot have a draft without a CBA in place.