View Single Post
Old
10-28-2004, 12:02 PM
  #4
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 15,973
vCash: 873
his first quote was

"I don't want to spend however long my career lasts playing here in the American Hockey League (with Lowell), so I think whatever it takes. It's got to be give and take on both sides, not one side can be making all the money. But if (a salary cap is) what it takes -- the sport has to go on -- so I'm going to say, yeah.

That to me is saying yes to a cap.


TB, you also have stop harping on the 31 million dollar cap. It's a number thrown out by Bettman. The only real item he is truly worried about is getting a cap on salaries.

Once they get the YES to that demand 2 things will be most evident 1) the owners will feel like they won this "fight" and 2)the cap itself will be anywhere between 10-15 million higher with a demand from the players of a floor of no less than 20-25 million.

The league wants salaries to tie into revenues, the 31 million is an average that the league came up with but takes nothing else into consideration. That's the ideal solution for the owners, we all should know by now that if if's and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry christmas. The league will get their cap, the MAJORITY of players are starting to speak their minds, here's an example and this should not be overlooked one bit.

"I don't think it's being handled well at all. The thing is, you look at the PA and who's in charge ... it's all the guys that have made $30 million playing this game. If there's never another game of hockey ... and they don't make another cent playing in the NHL, they're gonna be all right.

"Sure, they have their views but I think, as far as guys in charge of the PA, there should be people in my situation so they get everybody's perspective. There's lots of guys in my shoes that if we miss a couple of years, that's a huge deal."

pld459666 is offline