View Single Post
11-26-2012, 01:29 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,699
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by zx81 View Post
Let's be realistic. Players will not win.
It's unfortunate but unavoidable.

Do you think that decertification, the so called "nuclear" option will lead to a peaceful agreement in favor of the players?

No way.
You drop a nuclear bomb on a powerful country, you can expect a reply.

Decertification will only cause endless legal battles that will ultimately make the players lose a lot of money.

Are they willing to lose millions of $ to break the lockout cycle ? I don't think so.

I understand the need to break that cycle but you have to evaluate the price you're willing to pay.
Decertification isn't about pragmatism or peaceful agreements, it's about forcing the NHL into a corner so they have to make concessions. Of course, you wouldn't do such a move unless you were certain that it would work. If it doesn't work, then we're talking about a scenario where, indeed, the players would probably lose a lot of money. A scenario where the NHL would hold all the cards, as the lockout really could hold out indefinitely.

However, if the lockout were deemed illegal post decertification, that would be a huge blow to the NHL. Monumental. Multiple hundreds of millions of dollars in anti-trust and collusion law-suits which would make the difference in "make-whole" provisions seem like childs play. If there's a favorable chance that the NHL would lose a lawsuit post decertification, they would be wise to settle somewhere nearer to the NHLPA's last proposal.

NotProkofievian is offline