View Single Post
03-07-2013, 06:10 PM
Registered User
BobbyClarkeFan16's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: London Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,371
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by WeekendAtBernies View Post
Pretty sure BobbyClarkeFan16 is totally wrong about this trade proposal, or his "source" is totally wrong, whichever way you want to take it.

Paying for Briere's kids/wife to constantly be on the road with him would absolutely be in violation of the NHL CBA and there's no work-around for it. Unless Briere is paying out of his pocket (which would require no negotiation with the Bruins), it's a clear-cut CBA violation as it falls under impermissible player benefits.

Now maybe I'm just jumping to conclusions, but I would assume the Bruins GM and Briere's agent are both well informed on the CBA terms, so if BCF16's "source" really had a pulse on things, I wouldn't expect him to say something silly like "Briere wants them to cover travel expenses". Suffice it to say that I will be shocked if this trade or a trade of Laughton materializes before the deadline.
Actually, what Briere is asking for falls under Section 26. Circumvention Description - 1. Things Of Value. Briere can argue that having his kids is a benefit for the player. Now, before anything can be done, the league needs to be petitioned for that. Sheldon Souray went through something similar with his ex-wife Angelica Bridges and that the league also stepped in and allowed his team at the time (Edmonton) to help out with his situation with his wife.

BobbyClarkeFan16 is offline   Reply With Quote