View Single Post
Old
11-10-2012, 07:16 PM
  #841
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DownieFaceSoftener View Post
No, what happened is that a poster assumed that Bettman was the cause of numerous lockouts and instead of looking at the situations he was in, you made a baseless claim about owner's motivations -- that they care about the bottom line instead of the sport.

I pointed out it is both.

You jumped on someone's comment to make a real point: They believe he is serving their interests.

Then stuck a speculative barb in about the nature of those motivations. "Bettman's job isn't to protect the sport, its to protect the owners' bottom line."

C'mon brutha. It's a dig and completely unable to be proved. Hallmark of nonsense -- and dishonest people. It's also dishonest that your claiming your legitimate point was the only comment you made. I mean, c'mon, how could I be upset with your reasonable point... as if that is where your commenting ended.
I don't really see you're point, to be honest. I'm trying, but I can't. Perhaps it was buried underneath the insults. Are you disagreeing with me when I say that the owners continue to support Bettman because he has served their economic interests? Is there some other consideration I've missed?

Anyway, I guess we just disagree. I believe that Bettman's principle responsible is to protect the owners' interests, and that those interests are, above all, economic. "Bottom-line" seemed like a reasonable short-hand for that. He's not invested with something so grand as stewardship over the sport, and whenever he (or the NHLPA, to be fair) claims so, it strikes me as dishonest.

I don't dispute that the owners care about the sport of hockey--most people don't invest in athletic clubs solely for the potential profits involved. They care about the sport, but not to the point of sacrificing their bottom lines. Otherwise, we'd be seeing pucks right now, no?

Similarly, the players care about the sport, but not to the exclusion of their own economic situations.

Anyway, no reason to hijack this thread by trying to resolve (identify?) whatever your issue is with me. (I'm always "good for rhetoric?" )

If you care to, I'm happy to take it up via PM. Otherwise, let's just agree to disagree, on whatever it is that we are agreeing or disagreeing about.

Jack de la Hoya is online now