2012 CBA/Lockout talk, It's not looking good VI
View Single Post
12-14-2012, 10:33 AM
Pass me another nail
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Erotic Fantasies
Originally Posted by
Oh my good lord, semantics. The players balked at the hard cap, it cost us a year of hockey, they ended up having to agree to one anyway and it helped them tremendously. Better?
Players have a tendency to not be able to see for the forest for the trees, and the mean nasty business owners tend to make the better decisions that positively affect the sport.... cause they're mean nasty business owners.
No. Not semantics. What they balked at included no provisions to make the hard cap palatable. What they ended up agreeing to together was a contract with significant give and take from both sides and the idea that everyone would work together for the betterment of the NHL.
Hardly "semantics." It's synecdoche, it's inaccurate and it's unfair.
Your argument of "positively affect the sport" is one that you've used to support the owners this whole time. How about a 35M cap? Would that positively affect the sport? Lots of money for the owners that way... A quick rollback in salaries makes it easy for every team to be profitable, provides an attractive player cost for expansion and still maintains the NHL as the highest-paying league in the sport. Would that be something you'd support?
View Public Profile
Mr. Make-Believe's albums
Find More Posts by Mr. Make-Believe