Owners or Players??
View Single Post
09-11-2004, 10:46 PM
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Huntsville, Al
Originally Posted by
No what I'm getting at it is the like 4 or 5 owners that have essentially driven the salaries up and some teams are trying the best they can to keep up and are losing the fight.
It does no good if you even manage to get 25 GM's to try and keep salaries reasonable if the 5 remaining ones will sign anything that moves.
For example look no further than the Flyers giving a kid who hasn't played in two years a million dollar deal and the Rangers bidding against themselves for the umteenth time.
So tell me, if you're Edmonton what exactly do you do?
I thought all the owners were in this together?
If I'm Edmonton, I get in Bettman's face and tell him to start folding teams and make hockey more exciting instead of diluting the talent pool and making hockey as boring as possible (ie by not MAKING the refs enforce more holding and hooking calls, repealing the stupid instigator) and working on things that way. As far as I'm concerned hockey is in the state it is because of one man, not an owner not a player but Mr. Bettman himself...he has no one to blame but himself...now wanting to regulate all salaries himself haha he's insane (seriously) this isn't the MLS.
As far as offering a player 1 mill that hasn't played before....look at football...hard cap and still players like Manning get payed what they do before they even set foot on the field.....the NFL has a hard cap and that still happens so as far as I'm concerned that arguement is bunk.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by LiquidClown