View Single Post
Old
09-13-2012, 11:35 AM
  #25
squidz*
dun worry he's cool
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: South of the Border
Country: United States
Posts: 11,897
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bozak911 View Post
I started feeling this way a few weeks ago, when it was stated that what the NHLPA "countered" with was merely a list of suggestions.

Although, I'm still enough of a stickler on contracts to think it is pretty ****** for the owners to say "we want to reduce your contract terms". Once you sign a document, unless both parties are willing to renegotiate, you honor the contract, no matter how unsavory it is...
I guess I can see that a little, but the way I look at it, both sides agreed to the specific out clause in the 2005 CBA, so it's kind of hard for either side (especially the players who more desperately wanted that clause in the first place) to claim that either side is reneging on the deal. If they wanted the out so bad in 2005, they can't complain that the owners used it in 2012.

squidz* is offline   Reply With Quote