View Single Post
11-11-2012, 01:06 PM
semantic romantic
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 24,988
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by shortshorts View Post
Dates in which the league approached the NHLPA a year ago, only to be refuted, needs to be added to that list. Gives more context to the scenario.
It's a lockout not a strike.

The context of the matter is the players were willing to operate under the previous CBA while continuing to negotiate a new CBA.

The league and it's owners (teams) continued to operate under the Old CBA right up until Sept 15th, signing players to long term contracts the day before crying poor and locking out their players (and fans).

- bob Mackenzie has a decent article on the "make whole" provision that describes it for whoever was looking for the definition above.

I find the "make whole" provision to be laughable.

Yes you'll slow the rate of getting to 50-50, but the contracts these owners signed "in good faith" will probably be irrepapareably lessened by the HRR loses incurred due to the owners lockout.

If the owners sign a contract to a player for a set rate should owe hat player all his money - the rollbacks are a joke.

I don't think they are close to a deal at all.

arsmaster is offline