View Single Post
10-26-2012, 03:53 PM
Registered User
Krishna's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,156
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
Starting negotiations earlier =/= earlier deal.

There was always going to be a lockout with this level of NHL demands on a range of issues because the players weren't going to accept the massive cutbacks / new restrictions being demanded of them without the pressure of lost paychecks.

As to your point, I can't imagine that the owners are either that dumb or that petty, but who knows anymore. The players have every right to demand their share of that money / refuse to play a "free" year later so that the owners can pocket double their share now. If we get to the point where there's a deal in place, I can't imagine the NHL drawing a line there--it would be an insanely stupid PR move. the place that overrun with trolls, because that's absurd.

That logic literally dictates that the players take whatever the owners decide to offer them. What's too low? A 20 percent share? After all, they'd still be making well above the average income. Maybe 15 percent?

On the other hand, as long as the owners can pocket $6 million a piece for the next decade without playing a period of hockey, there's no reason for half the owners to take a deal.
It's become pretty unreadable recently with everyone coming and jumping into the conversation without knowing anything

Krishna is offline