Why Can't we Do 2 years each at 42.5, 45, 47.5?

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by Jobu, Feb 16, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
View Users: View Users
  1. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    94
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    Why not?
     
  2. Lobstertainment

    Lobstertainment Oh no, my brains.

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    Messages:
    11,785
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Burger Flipper
    Location:
    Toronto
    isn't that 3 years?

    and why not?

    I guess because it would make sense. we can't have that.
     
  3. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    140,713
    Likes Received:
    2,558
    Trophy Points:
    232
    Because Gary Bettman won't throw his players a bone. As Stephen A. puts it.
     
  4. oil slick

    oil slick Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2004
    Messages:
    7,593
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Creative thinking... I like it.
     
  5. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    94
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    I meant, go for two seasons each at those numbers for a total of 6 years.
     
  6. habfan4

    habfan4 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,423
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Systems Analyst
    Location:
    Deus Amat Pretzel
    Home Page:
    In which direction?

    I think the owners might bite on 47.5, 45 then 42.5 to close out the contract (only if the 24% rollback is still on the table and the numbers are hard cap)
     
  7. Lobstertainment

    Lobstertainment Oh no, my brains.

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2003
    Messages:
    11,785
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Burger Flipper
    Location:
    Toronto
    oh my mistake.

    that works out even better >_>
     
  8. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    94
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    Quick, send it to Bob and Gary's Blackberries! :yo:
     
  9. Motown Beatdown

    Motown Beatdown Need a slump buster

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,572
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    Home Page:

    that makes to much sense my friend, and when dealing with the NHL and NHLPA common sense just doesn't work most of the time.
     
  10. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    94
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    I don;t think it matters. After 6 years, the number would be rengotiated anyway. Going down would probably work as it would mean for less purging for season one.
     
  11. habfan4

    habfan4 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,423
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Systems Analyst
    Location:
    Deus Amat Pretzel
    Home Page:
    That's what I was thinking. With the rollback the big spenders would have the cap space time to pair down their payrolls, if the deal was front end loaded.
     
  12. ti-vite

    ti-vite Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    94
    In six years we will hear Brain McCabe say:

    'I will never ever play without linkage! Even if they offer a 100M$ cap, I wont play, my kids wont play. Ever. We nedd Linkage, and we are resolved. Gary sucks.'

    Or somethig like that..
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"