View Single Post
11-04-2012, 09:42 PM
Rowdy Roddy Peeper
Rowdy Roddy Peeper's Avatar
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 41,452
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Why would the owners agree to go on and play a season with the current CBA, knowing full well what Fehr has done in the past with his unions?
It would be idiocy.
(Please don't make me defend either of these sides - I can't stand the crap both of them are making us fans deal with. Again).
Well, there would certainly be a lot more hockey this year if they had, for one. And as I pointed out, there were extenuating circumstances in the MLB strike that aren't in play for the NHL.

In the end, the people who actually initiate the stoppage are the ones who should be held accountable.

Originally Posted by hockeydoug View Post
Of course there would be. By the end of the 2010 season the owners didn't want to play under the CBA because it heavily favored the players the last 2 years. It's similar to saying there would have been a whole season in 95' if it were up to the owners.

Neither side would agree to extend an agreement that wasn't working for one side for more than 2 years previous.
Benefits the players a little too much for the owners' liking, anyway.

Rowdy Roddy Peeper is online now   Reply With Quote