View Single Post
12-13-2012, 11:41 AM
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 1,009
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by marcel snapshot View Post
Not true. If long-term deals exceeding 5 years are stupid and destructive, then each club can and should decide on their own not to do them. They don't need a CBA provision to exercise judgment.
This is part of the problem with the NHL's whole negotiating stance -- they don't just want a substantial win, which they're already getting from 50/50 and make-not-quite-whole on existing contracts. They want an idiot-proof CBA, so they can be saved from their future stupidity. History shows there's no such thing - but Bettman continues to make the fans suffer on the cross of a CBA that will idiot-proof the clubs against their own poor judgment.
In a system which is in essence, a competition, GM's, Owners and teams will do what they can to find any type of competitive advantage, ESPECIALLY if that advantage, can lead to more money.

All it takes is 1 guy to sign a 6 year deal, before agents and gms keep going round til they either get a 6 or 7 year deal.

As long as there are owners who can afford to be destructive, with no long term penalties, it is impossible to maintain competitive integrity in a league without forcing it down their throats.

Last edited by TMI: 12-13-2012 at 12:14 PM. Reason: flaming
EdAVSfan is offline