View Single Post
10-29-2012, 01:31 PM
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
haseoke39's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 7,786
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Sabretip View Post
Add Jack Johnson to the previous criticisms by Cammalleri and Suter as another outspoken player with right-on-the money assessments of the Owners' hypocrisies:

In doing so, Johnson then makes the mistake of reinforcing the belief the NHL is relying on to break the NHLPA's resolve:
"Right on the money"? How about Johnson signed a contract that was governed by the CBA, included no guarantees to a fixed dollar amount, regularly contracted to meet the amount stipulated in the active CBA, and he wanted to pretend forever that 57% was going to be the agreed amount? If the owners were trying to rip up a CBA in the middle of it, I could see him having a point. But the CBA that governed his contract EXPIRED. His contract has to be subject to new terms. There's nothing illegal, shady or under-the-table about what the owners are doing here. If JJ didn't know this was going to happen, he should've paid an agent to explain it to him.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote