HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Islanders
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2012-13 CBA Discussion Thread *NHL/NHLPA Please do Something!!*

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-25-2012, 07:18 PM
  #301
JKP
Registered User
 
JKP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by *********** View Post
Meh. Likely an intentional leak to try to scare the crap out of the players and make them think they'll lose a year's salary.

The players are going to lose. It's clear. The owners killed a season last time and the game (and money) came back.

The biggest fear factor the players ever had over the owners is gone and thus the players have no leverage anymore. It's just a question of whether they lose a year of irreplaceable salary in the process of losing the deal simply to make a point and show some solidarity.

Overall, I still think they get this done fairly soon. Fehr has to know he can't win and he just needs to show enough toughness to get the best deal he can to justify keeping his job.

Curious to see how the rhetoric changes on both sides when they start killing games.

JKP is offline  
Old
09-25-2012, 07:20 PM
  #302
original islander
Registered User
 
original islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 965
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by *********** View Post
I'm not a big Larry Brooks fan but this is an excellent article. Thank you for posting it.


Last edited by original islander: 09-25-2012 at 11:23 PM.
original islander is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 06:50 AM
  #303
Chapin Landvogt
Hockey's Future Staff
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Germany
Posts: 12,266
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
Your reasoning depends crucially on the existence of the league as a monopoly, i.e. without rivals for talent. Given that, the blase attitude you express about what the owners are doing almost seems like you're asserting a monopoly's right to trample labor.

This is one area where I feel that most fans miss the significance of what is going on out of sheer ignorance. It's not like these sports leagues are *mere* monopolies. Rather, the NHL, like most sports leagues, is a monopoly that depends on public subsidies and specially constructed infrastructure to exist. When they negotiate in bad faith and fire their employees, they break the faith of the people who make their operations possible. This just isn't a situation where you can trot out the business case as if it is morally neutral.

The NHL has a duty to negotiate a labor agreement with players that is sustainable for its franchises. If that's what this is about, it would be one thing. Yet, you concede that this is not their sole motive (if so, they could do the reasonable thing). Whether the players ultimately decide to live with that is one thing. Whether people who finance and subsidize their facilities and infrastructure do is another thing. Whatever the case, we can be sure they won't lower ticket prices.

Which brings me round to complete the point: we wouldn't subsidize the owners w/their arenas, etc. if it weren't for the players. Think about this. They come as a package deal. The owners wouldn't have access to these additional revenue streams if it weren't for the players. (Unless, of course, the arena is where it is primarily to serve as a venue for other sports, like basketball).

Sports franchises aren't like other businesses, not even like other monopolies. It's ridiculous to argue as if they are.

Sports franchises are abusing both the trust of their labor and their public. This is now becoming glaringly obvious in the NFL. It would be in the case in the NHL, but - frankly - nobody cares.

In fact, if your argument reflects the views of Islanders ownership (and it probably does), they can move to Kansas City for all I care. I'm not a Nassau resident. I would've voted Yes to the arena initiative before this lockout. Now that I see how the owners are with this lockout, I'd vote a resounding NO every single time.

Cheers,

Dan-o
Great stuff Dan. Of course, we're not talking about the players as factory laborers who earn 35'000 a year. That certainly won't be the case either if the player's union takes the suggested payment cuts the owners are asking for.

To be clear, my last post was not so much my opinion on 'how' things should be, but rather on what the apparent reality of the situation ios as I think most ultimately see it - if and once they're honest with themselves. I.e. the players need the NHL more than the owners do. So who folds? It's not like the players or the player union will be broken or go hungry. Again, the reality has always been that the owners will find ways around their own CBA methods and players will again find themselves being the crown jewels of bidding wars.

I ultimately do not know to what degree sponsors, fans and even the taxpaying public subsidies play a role in this all. It's not something I hear being talked about as a decisive factor to any degree, although obviously alone the buildings and their employees are losing work - big time. Most of the buildings are not owned by the hockey team or its owner. I do not know who is held accountable or even how accountability for a work stoppage can be laid at the feet of the owners and/or player's union, at least not in a legal capacity?

All this said, I personally side with the players this time around as the issues that have arisen from the last CBA are, essentially, owner-designed. They're so busy competing amongst each other and sidestepping their own initiated structures that it's downright unbelievable that they are asking to players to sacrifice because of the discovered ills of their own practices.

It's just that in the long run, the players simply can't really afford to allow the NHL to not be up and running. They simply have too much to gain, even with cuts and delimitations, and - as you allude to in your first sentence above - there isn't currently any league on the planet that can compete with the NHL, no matter what the KHL is attempting. Even the KHL wouldn't be able to house more than a dozen or so players at anything close to the paychecks they're earning at the NHL level. As such, the reality is the reality, no matter how much principle and right might be on the side of the NHLPA this time around.

And by the by, in general, an NHL lockout really messes up the European leagues and the way they do business. When those clubs start doing their planning and acquiring players up to a year before the actual season, everything goes down the drain when a few teams can either muster the sponsoring money to grab a couple of stars or the Euroboys go back to their hometown teams and play 'for free' like, for example, Christian Erhoff is doing in Krefeld. Sure, the leagues knew this might be coming and a lot of teams left a spot or two open just in case, but a new flooding of the market at a time when the leagues are already up-and-running and in light of the fact that most teams aren't really capable of even gaining the necessary insurance policy coverage ultimately creates a distortion of competition.

It's also a ridiculous statement of sorts by the NHL guys to go play somewhere for a mere fraction of what they'd earn at the NHL level while also grabbing spots that would otherwise go to players who can only dream of ever stepping onto NHL ice.

Quote:
In fact, if your argument reflects the views of Islanders ownership (and it probably does), they can move to Kansas City for all I care. I'm not a Nassau resident. I would've voted Yes to the arena initiative before this lockout. Now that I see how the owners are with this lockout, I'd vote a resounding NO every single time.
And don't be surprised if the team does land elsewhere.

As I understand it, Wang has essentially said to the governing factors that:
1) He'll build the arena privately or
2) They can build an arena for Long Island or
3) He and the local government can build the arena together and share profits accordingly

Regardless of which party was in office or what referendums were being held, it's ultimately the local government that has not shown any readiness to build the necessary facility - as if it simply isn't necessary. It makes you wonder how much they value the importance of having an NHL team in the community whatsoever?

If I'm the owner, I have no choice but to look elsewhere - and the loss of the team would be a HUGE financial hit to Nassau county and Long Island in general, much less to the businesses around the area. Any politician in office - regardless of party affiliation - would be throwing away his/her career if such a loss were to happen under their watch, or so one would think.

But I wouldn't put it past any of them anyways...

Chapin Landvogt is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 08:09 AM
  #304
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKP View Post
You're missing the point.

The point is not what he's doing, but how he rationalized / justified it in the media.

My question is would Crosby still tell the media that "hockey players need to play" regardless of taking someone else's job away if was his job being taken away?

If you'd seen the press conference, his demeanour was very much, "well, tough for those dudes, but we're players and we need to be playing, so I'll play wherever I can".

If the situation was that dude whose job he's supplanting applied the exact same philosophy and took Crosby's job in a strike, would Crosby still support his own philosophy and say, "well, he's a hockey player and hockey players need to play, so he'll play wherever he can"?

Of course he wouldn't.

He's just a greedy, overpaid mercenary, just like the owners. He wants his couple million in Europe even though he's got lots already and even if it costs some other poor schmuck his job. But if it was the other guy coming for his job, he'd be pissed.

He's a hypocrite.

They all are. Solidarity for the "players". They mean the "overpaid mooching NHL players", not "pro hockey players", who they are just as happy to screw out of a livelihood as the owners are to screw them.

Just be a man and say, "Yeah, I'm a greedy dude and we're going to screw some guys out of 20% of their lifetime earnings because we have opulent lifestyles that we need to keep up, cash we're losing in the lockout and because we can, so it's every man for himself."

There's no moral high ground in this fight, but the cattle are more greedy.
Does Crosby need to explicitly explain that he needs to go find somewhere to play because he's being locked out? Does he have to assume that we're all blithering idiots? Come on, that's pure manufactured garbage.

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 08:41 AM
  #305
JKP
Registered User
 
JKP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
Does Crosby need to explicitly explain that he needs to go find somewhere to play because he's being locked out? Does he have to assume that we're all blithering idiots? Come on, that's pure manufactured garbage.

Cheers,

Dan-o
He doesn't NEED to play anywhere. He WANTS to go play. And by doing that he's taking the job of a guy who really does NEED to play to feed his family because he spent his whole life trying to be a hockey player and has no other skills.

The point is the NHL stars are selfish and greedy. They yak about player solidarity, that this is for the players after them and about all of them being paid "fairly".

But the truth is they're just as happy to go screw their far less well off pro hockey brethren out of what could be a guy's only shot at having enough cash to put his kids through college just because they WANT to play - not need. NHL stars don't need jobs in Europe.

JKP is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 08:43 AM
  #306
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chapin Landvogt View Post
It's just that in the long run, the players simply can't really afford to allow the NHL to not be up and running. They simply have too much to gain, even with cuts and delimitations, and - as you allude to in your first sentence above - there isn't currently any league on the planet that can compete with the NHL, no matter what the KHL is attempting. Even the KHL wouldn't be able to house more than a dozen or so players at anything close to the paychecks they're earning at the NHL level. As such, the reality is the reality, no matter how much principle and right might be on the side of the NHLPA this time around.
I'm certain Fehr is arguing the opposite: if there is no principled basis upon which the owners are forcing their hand in negotiations, there will be no principled ground to stop the owners from getting even greedier next time.

Quote:
Great stuff Dan. Of course, we're not talking about the players as factory laborers who earn 35'000 a year. That certainly won't be the case either if the player's union takes the suggested payment cuts the owners are asking for.
Yeah, sure. But you can't train new replacement hockey players in 3 weeks. So, that's completely irrelevant. BTW, I'm not sure that you know this, being in Germany and all. But in at least half of the US states, standard labor unions for factory workers are either busted or a shell of their former selves. The claim that we'd care more if this were about factory workers is demonstrably false. No, we want cheaper cars. We don't give a crap about factory workers. We call teachers and cops who make 50K coddled.

Quote:
They're so busy competing amongst each other and sidestepping their own initiated structures that it's downright unbelievable that they are asking to players to sacrifice because of the discovered ills of their own practices.
Firming up the cap by limiting burying players in the AHL, or setting new rules on cap-avoidance is not what is derailing these negotiations. So, I agree with you, but it's irrelevant. It's not the practices of owners that are derailing the negotiations - it's the growth of revenues, and the inequality of distribution of those revenues among the franchises. The NHL wants the CBA such that even their weakest franchises are guaranteed to turn a profit without revenue sharing. This is the only issue in the CBA. Everything else is a distraction.

Quote:
It's also a ridiculous statement of sorts by the NHL guys to go play somewhere for a mere fraction of what they'd earn at the NHL level while also grabbing spots that would otherwise go to players who can only dream of ever stepping onto NHL ice.
They're obviously worried about their skills diminishing, and they're also addicted to competition. I find it ironic that fans love players who always compete and never take shifts off, but complain when these same players feel the need to find a place to compete at a high level during a lockout. The same character trait that produces Crosby's compete level requires him to find competition in the face of a lockout. It's not so hard to understand.

As a fan and a taxpayer, there's some benefit to me subsidizing risk-taking, because there are ample disincentives to risk-taking, but also the possibility of a lot of economic benefit. However, I have no benefit subsidizing sports franchises that are completely insulated from risk who can cut off the economic benefits of their existence if things aren't exactly to their favored risk-averse terms.

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 08:49 AM
  #307
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JKP View Post
But the truth is they're just as happy to go screw their far less well off pro hockey brethren out of what could be a guy's only shot at having enough cash to put his kids through college just because they WANT to play - not need. NHL stars don't need jobs in Europe.
They need to do this because competition is what they do. You are, in essence, attacking them for having the competitive characters of professional athletes.

If they thought the way you do, they wouldn't be good (or great) professional hockey players.

If Crosby thought the way you think he should, he'd be more like Michael Grabner - chillin' and waiting. Just like on the ice.

Again, the idea that people care about how much people make in unions is a complete joke. It's an utter falsehood. Look at Wisconsin - that whole flap didn't involve millionaires. I'm not saying that that is wrong or right, I'm just saying that the salary level argument is pretty obviously a load of bunk.

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 09:00 AM
  #308
TeamKidd
Registered User
 
TeamKidd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,674
vCash: 500
I have bled blue and orange my whole life. I have watched every game I could possibly watch. and i have to say, shutting down the season may do irreparable damage. Hockey is already relegated to professional bowling status....players are already deciding to play in europe or the KHL full time over the NHL....why would a russian ever play here again?

...and yet the elite argue over a single percentage point.

Newsflash boys, argue all you want over a single point, but guess what? while you argue, you are shrinking the pie!

dumbasses. the lot of them. and i could barely care less.

TeamKidd is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 10:32 AM
  #309
IslesNorway
Registered User
 
IslesNorway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Country: Norway
Posts: 2,805
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
They need to do this because competition is what they do. You are, in essence, attacking them for having the competitive characters of professional athletes.

If they thought the way you do, they wouldn't be good (or great) professional hockey players.

If Crosby thought the way you think he should, he'd be more like Michael Grabner - chillin' and waiting. Just like on the ice.

Again, the idea that people care about how much people make in unions is a complete joke. It's an utter falsehood. Look at Wisconsin - that whole flap didn't involve millionaires. I'm not saying that that is wrong or right, I'm just saying that the salary level argument is pretty obviously a load of bunk.

Cheers,

Dan-o
If their competitiveness and desire to play were bigger than their want to get paid a lot of money this lockout would never have happened.

It's not their fault they're well paid, and in many cases rightly so, but it all boils down to the desire to do your job versus the want to make loads of money.

IslesNorway is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 10:49 AM
  #310
Fantom
Registered User
 
Fantom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamKidd View Post
I have bled blue and orange my whole life. I have watched every game I could possibly watch. and i have to say, shutting down the season may do irreparable damage. Hockey is already relegated to professional bowling status....players are already deciding to play in europe or the KHL full time over the NHL....why would a russian ever play here again?

...and yet the elite argue over a single percentage point.

Newsflash boys, argue all you want over a single point, but guess what? while you argue, you are shrinking the pie!

dumbasses. the lot of them. and i could barely care less.
I dont think its over the %. I THINK the players are ok with having 50/50 split. However they are not ok with taking pay cuts on current deals

Fantom is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 11:23 AM
  #311
Renbarg
Registered User
 
Renbarg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 8,907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantom View Post
I dont think its over the %. I THINK the players are ok with having 50/50 split. However they are not ok with taking pay cuts on current deals
How are you going to get to 50/50 without taking a cut?

Renbarg is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 11:27 AM
  #312
Fantom
Registered User
 
Fantom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renbarg View Post
How are you going to get to 50/50 without taking a cut?
How can you not get to 50/50
new contracts would fit the bill to be the lower "cap"

Fantom is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 11:30 AM
  #313
scott99
Registered User
 
scott99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 6,559
vCash: 500
I read an article in today's Newsday (sorry I don't have a link, read it on the Newsday App), that states that ALL of the other issues, except the % issue, have been agreed upon. So I think 2 weeks solid of negotiations can get this lockout settled. Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but my worst case scenario (No season), now I feel worst case scenario is a January start, and best case, November start. I don't think either side wants to lose a whole season again. The main problem, unfortunately, is you have Fehr and Bettman are running the show, and both are hardheads. If Fehr was running the show in 2004, we might have lost TWO seasons. I still think an agreement gets done, just need to lock them up in a room, and get to work.


http://www.newsday.com/sports/hockey...iday-1.4037522


Last edited by Homeland Security: 09-26-2012 at 12:04 PM. Reason: Link added.
scott99 is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 12:44 PM
  #314
xECK29x
Moderator
 
xECK29x's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Coram, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 4,903
vCash: 500
I'm confident the season will start close to or on-time because of three letters.

N.B.C.

xECK29x is online now  
Old
09-26-2012, 12:56 PM
  #315
original islander
Registered User
 
original islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 965
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xECK29x View Post
I'm confident the season will start close to or on-time because of three letters.

N.B.C.
Great point. Definitely a factor that wasn't there in 2004.

original islander is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 12:58 PM
  #316
Fantom
Registered User
 
Fantom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by original islander View Post
Great point. Definitely a factor that wasn't there in 2004.
I do not see how that factors in at all.

Fantom is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 01:08 PM
  #317
ferrisUML
Registered User
 
ferrisUML's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
They need to do this because competition is what they do. You are, in essence, attacking them for having the competitive characters of professional athletes.

If they thought the way you do, they wouldn't be good (or great) professional hockey players.

If Crosby thought the way you think he should, he'd be more like Michael Grabner - chillin' and waiting. Just like on the ice.

Again, the idea that people care about how much people make in unions is a complete joke. It's an utter falsehood. Look at Wisconsin - that whole flap didn't involve millionaires. I'm not saying that that is wrong or right, I'm just saying that the salary level argument is pretty obviously a load of bunk.

Cheers,

Dan-o
I agree with much of what you said in your earlier posts, but I don't agree with competive nature as a legitment excuse for compromising your ideology. I don't doubt that his competitive nature has contributed to him being better than his peers, but I don't think that gives him the right to be hypocrytical in his stance.

ferrisUML is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 01:36 PM
  #318
original islander
Registered User
 
original islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 965
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fantom View Post
I do not see how that factors in at all.
Winter Classic.

original islander is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 02:25 PM
  #319
Moosie
Registered User
 
Moosie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,010
vCash: 500
The PA should just agree to anything the league asks for. It will all work out in the PA's favor anyway, as the owners can't control themselves.

Moosie is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 02:45 PM
  #320
JKP
Registered User
 
JKP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Halifax, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,712
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by xECK29x View Post
I'm confident the season will start close to or on-time because of three letters.

N.B.C.
But N.B.C. is actually spelled C.O.M.C.A.S.T. And they own a team. So they're already on the inside...

JKP is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 03:48 PM
  #321
Fantom
Registered User
 
Fantom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,285
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by original islander View Post
Winter Classic.
Still do not think the league cares enough about the winter classic to make it some sort of deadline

Fantom is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 04:31 PM
  #322
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferrisUML View Post
I agree with much of what you said in your earlier posts, but I don't agree with competive nature as a legitment excuse for compromising your ideology. I don't doubt that his competitive nature has contributed to him being better than his peers, but I don't think that gives him the right to be hypocrytical in his stance.
I'm not sure I understand what's hypocritical. Is it that the charge that fellow-feeling among professional hockey players doesn't extend beyond the NHLPA? If so, I get the charge, but it's not hypocrisy. It's more like y'all are disappointed the players aren't more selfless. Umm, yeah. Ain't nothing but a load of selfish ******** involved, but that's not the issue.

Even if Crosby were hypocritical (we're all hypocrites, nearly all the time, check the social psych research), where does that give anyone the right to tell him that he can't ply his trade?

Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 04:34 PM
  #323
Dan-o16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by IslesNorway View Post
If their competitiveness and desire to play were bigger than their want to get paid a lot of money this lockout would never have happened.

It's not their fault they're well paid, and in many cases rightly so, but it all boils down to the desire to do your job versus the want to make loads of money.
Ahh, the 'they should play for free' argument. Brilliant.

Yeah, they should play for free. And we should be able to go to games for free, too. At least, if the owners are really passionate about hockey...


Cheers,

Dan-o

Dan-o16 is offline  
Old
09-26-2012, 05:02 PM
  #324
ferrisUML
Registered User
 
ferrisUML's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan-o16 View Post
I'm not sure I understand what's hypocritical. Is it that the charge that fellow-feeling among professional hockey players doesn't extend beyond the NHLPA? If so, I get the charge, but it's not hypocrisy. It's more like y'all are disappointed the players aren't more selfless. Umm, yeah. Ain't nothing but a load of selfish ******** involved, but that's not the issue.

Even if Crosby were hypocritical (we're all hypocrites, nearly all the time, check the social psych research), where does that give anyone the right to tell him that he can't ply his trade?

Cheers,

Dan-o
Nobody is saying that. What im saying is that its disingenous to bemaon the owners for locking you out then taking the job of someone else. Maybe its a trickle down argument to justify, but doesnt seem right.

Think about it another way, Crosby, Datsyk, etc...player representatives for the union have the option of playing in other leagues for a slightly reduced salary. What about the bottom half of the union? Most overseas leagues have strict limits on who can and can't be signed, so it seems the union leaders actually have the least to lose. Hence, the hypocrisy to say "players need to stand united", even within the confines of the NHLPA, when Crosby isn't sacrificing as much as his fellow players perhaps are.

Don't get me wrong, Im far from anti-union and understand both sides of the player/owner battle. I just don't think its right for state that "players must stand together", when they're really not standing together and many have more to lose than others.

ferrisUML is offline  
Old
09-27-2012, 01:55 AM
  #325
leaponover
Registered User
 
leaponover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Iskan, S. Korea
Country: South Korea
Posts: 2,557
vCash: 500
Thought this was interesting. Yakupov probably won't be able to play in Russia:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle4569115/

leaponover is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:24 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.