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

Status
Not open for further replies.

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
186,993
39,072
Because Gary Bettman won't throw his players a bone. As Stephen A. puts it.
 

habfan4

Registered User
Jul 16, 2002
8,423
0
Deus Amat Pretzel
Visit site
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)
 

Jobu

Registered User
Nov 17, 2003
3,264
0
Vancouver
Visit site
habfan4 said:
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)

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.
 

habfan4

Registered User
Jul 16, 2002
8,423
0
Deus Amat Pretzel
Visit site
Jobu said:
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.

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.
 

ti-vite

Registered User
Jul 27, 2004
3,086
0
Jobu said:
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.

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..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad