View Single Post
11-17-2012, 03:34 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montreal
Posts: 1,420
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to LPHabsFan
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
There's nothing idiotic about, just highlighting how transparent it is that you've adopted the NHL's tactic of framing the discussion. It really is about where you decide to start and stop the discussion.

I guess if you feel all of those 14 points are of equal value to what the players have given up.

Would you personally trade those 14 points for a higher share for the players, say keeping it at 57% but they get none of those 14 items?

Me neither.

I'm not pro-PA, but anti-Gary's (and Jacobs') NHL. For example, I wouldn't mind seeing contraction and I can see a case for term limits on some reasonable basis (7-10 yrs, but early UFA) and maybe lack of fully guaranteed contracts, either building in incentives or some disincentives if you can keep it clear of abuse of intent; which may mean no guarantee after some specified period of time... 3, 5, yrs, for example. I'd actually make that trade for lower UFA age especially. I personally would like to see more player movement.
I'm framing the question as "who gave up more?". I'm not exactly sure how you think I'm framing the question to I assume support my argument. As far as I see it you either start with the previous CBA as a starting point (as I'm doing) or everything is negated and then no one is giving up anything because they don't have anything to start with.

And no I wouldn't trade those because that would mean there would be no reason for the lockout because the old CBA was working. It was not.

[MOD] The frustration with the PA lies in their seeming unwillingness to negotiate, yes, off of the last CBA. You can argue all you want about why the cap should or shouldn't be set in stone but it is and nothing will change that.

What the fans want is for the PA to simply bring down the demands of the NHL by using the same framework rather than say "no" and "i don't know where to go from here".

But back to my point, what you put in that last paragraph were actual sugesstions that seem plausible and somewhat fair. But I don't believe that is the impression that you give and I know I don't see it.

Last edited by Fugu: 11-17-2012 at 06:03 PM. Reason: addressed it, and it should be by PM next time please
LPHabsFan is offline   Reply With Quote