View Single Post
08-21-2012, 08:57 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 850
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by bidzey View Post
the difference is that the owner and the league need to have the players on the ice for that money to be made. NOT SO for unions. They enventually need to have them play, but meanwhile carreers and lives are being ruined.
I think you are over-stating that careers and lives would be ruined. What would happen if there was let's say a 6 month work stoppage in junior hockey?

NHL teams would end up taking more flyers on kids they have less knowledge on? Some kids that would have been drafted would be free agents? Sounds like the OHL draft where people "sympathize" with draft favours by claiming free agents just have to work harder and would have their pick of which team to go to. Here's a thought, perhaps the NHL pushes that draft class out a year? Who does that hurt?

P.S. You don't think that if there were a CHL work stoppage the Tier 2 leagues on down wouldn't become more "popular?" Where there's a will there's a way. The junior players in my mind are in a much better situation that the ageing pro who loses a year of pro hockey in that income is lost forever and skills are diminished when age is catching up to them. Junior aged players don't have to worry about age-related regression.

Crottenham is offline   Reply With Quote