View Single Post
Old
11-15-2004, 01:26 PM
  #2
Son of Steinbrenner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Tromelin
Posts: 9,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue
ESPN the Mag states that a management source said that the league's proposals (the 6 salary cap proposals that all centered around the same thing, just the penalties differed) were put forth solely so that the league can state that they are bargaining in good faith. The league thought that if they show to an arbiter that they put forth proposals, it would allow for someone to judge that they are bargaining in good faith.
If it was not for that, there would be no proposals from the league.
It is as I said all along, Bettman had no plan that included a season for the current year. However, if his impasse is not allowed, his entire plan collapses like a house of cards. Remember, if found that he is not bargaining in good faith, he does not get his impasse.
As time goes by, I beleive that more and more reports will show two things:
1. That the league's purported loss of $223 is hyper-inflated.
2. That Bettman has not been bargaining in good faith.
1. if forbes is right the nhl is still losing over a 100 million dollars
2. how many nhlpa proposals have there been? one in october 2003 and one over the past summer that from what i read was the same proposal that was put on the table in october 2003.

both sides are at fault and i don't think its going to be hard to declare an impasse when the players have made one proposal over a year.


Last edited by Son of Steinbrenner: 11-15-2004 at 01:33 PM.
Son of Steinbrenner is offline