View Single Post
12-07-2012, 01:45 AM
Fugu's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 36,745
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
These four owners were only involved to see if with another dynamic in the room there could be some progress. They never planned to sit in on the regular meetings with Bettman and Fehr.

So yes, these owners would only continue if there was no Fehr and it was clear from the start. It was a given in the initial owner-player meeting proposal.

I think the reason why they wanted to just have players and owners talking was to open new lines of communications and by all accounts they did that Tuesday. Crosby respects Burkle and St Louis respect Winik. They tried to see if something would come of this.

Of course these owners realize that the players would run everything by Fehr anyway, so anyone claiming they were trying to sneak a new CBA in behind Fehr's back or anything is nonsense.

I don't see what the big deal is. They tried and it worked ok. The players didn't want to continue after Wednesday which is their full right.

Did you miss Bettman's speech? He took everything off the table. They rejected the PA's proposal and we're back to .... not sure which square.

This piece is getting overlooked, from a Sharks writer:

Couture sent this out to his 120,735 followers on Twitter. (I read that “if” as a typo, by the way, with “of” the intended word):
“100 percent in agreement with our @NHLPA leader for all if you asking”

Boyle also doesn't say the PA is completely opposed to term limits, but makes it sound like 5 yrs may not be the number they'd like.

Anyway, I tire of all of this and find it very bizarre. YMMV.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote