View Single Post
07-02-2011, 09:13 PM
Registered User
battlingBard56's Avatar
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Union County, NJ
Country: Poland
Posts: 1,632
vCash: 500
What upsets me about it isn't as much as we were the only ones called out on it, but that most writers and media people who have twitters are refusing to acknowledge that these deals circumvent the "spirit" of the CBA like the Kovalchuk contract did. Kovy's and the most recent signings do the same exact thing; only thing different about them are the loopholes being exploited. Instead the blog and article writers and media people are saying "Oh its all legal" and not answering responses of "Umm, the Devils were penalized on the so called "spirit", not the lettering itself. These deals are legal yes, but they follow the same practice of circumventing the "spirit" of the cap."

I mean, really. When is the hypocrisy going to stop? I know Lou wouldn't risk giving Zach a deal like the most recent ones given to Ehrhoff and Richards, because he's not going to endanger the team and organization after what happened last season. But hypothetically I'd be interested to see what the hockey world's reaction would be if the Devils gave Zach the same exact contract as Richards got. See if people would be calling for the Devils to be burned at the stake again.

battlingBard56 is offline