Because the players believe they will be playing hockey on Jan 20.
If the season is cancelled then the players will know it's true.
Bettman should announce a press conference for in like 3 days, and let it "slip out" that they're cancelling the season. I bet the PA would change their stance pretty quick
Because the players believe they will be playing hockey on Jan 20.
If the season is cancelled then the players will know it's true.
They will, and it won't.
The players don't want to miss a season, and neither do the owners. *****-waving aside, they'll come up with some compromise on Monday or something, and then we can all laugh as they try to make nice at the press conference.
If NHLPA renews the option to disclaim, they almost have to use it this time, or no court would ever see any further attempt as anything but a ploy. The longer this goes on with more hard ball from the league and with fresh recriminations taking their toll, I could easily see more and more players actively support the notion of pulling the trigger on the disclaimer. If that happens, I don't know if my sympathy will be with the players, but it certainly won't be with the owners.
Blindly following. I mean, this is how I look at it. When they fired Kelly to hire Fehr, they were all in at that point. There's no turning back after you make a big move like that.
I'm not calling Dreger a liar, I'm calling him a hack. Dreger's "sources" have always been shaky in my opinion.
I'll listen to Ren Lavoie, LeBrun and Bobby Mac. Lavoie states FACT, LeBrun is objective and Bob is plugged in like no other. Dreger states "sourced information" like it is fact without ever actually stating who the sources are OR using more than one source.
Lebrun and McKenzie are not objective. They constantly interject their own opinion into their stories.
The problem with all these "reporters" is that they haven't realized you can't dish out your opinion every 10 minutes and then turn around and have any credibility as an objective news source.
Dreger, Lebrun and McKenzie have all hurt their credibility during this lockout.
I am to the point where I want this thing blown up. Teams folding or relocating to better markets. No guaranteed contracts. No cap.
It would be very hard in the current state. But that begs the question for me. What is "protecting all the players"? If a few teams fold because they couldn't make money, is that doing what he's set out to do? Should he tell the players a few might have to take pay cuts for the betterment of the whole? What is he actually setting out to do?
Is it protecting the players if a few of the bottom feeders fold and thus the league gets higher revenue? More pie, but less people eating the pie?
Personally I just want the lockout over. At the end of the day it really doesn't effect me much what happens. I just want to be able to watch NHL hockey as all of us do.
Although part of me would love to see Fehr go through with what he's saying he may do. Would love to see how it all shakes down as scary as it'd be.
Lebrun and McKenzie are not objective. They constantly interject their own opinion into their stories. The problem with all these "reporters" is that they haven't realized you can't dish out your opinion every 10 minutes and then turn around and have any credibility as an objective news source.
Dreger, Lebrun and McKenzie have all hurt their credibility during this lockout.
And they all pander to their readers...
That honestly has to be one of the most annoying parts of all this.
Second - think for a second, as objectively as you can. The league says the changes were bolded, highlighted. Does it make any sense whatsoever to lie about something that could be disproved in a millisecond by just looking at the papers? Believe me, they haven't been discarded. If you're going to lie about something, you really should make it something that's not so easy to get caught at. And, no matter what anyone thinks about attorneys, doing what is being suggested is an offense that could get whoever wrote the document severely sanctioned and very likely disbarred. That isn't something attorneys take lightly. They wouldn't risk it.
This is what I'm thinking.
I'm just picturing Fehr arguing his case in court that he had to re-vote then file a DOI because of Gary pulling a fast one and Gary handing the judge the highlighted section of the document, lol.
I'm just picturing Fehr arguing his case in court that he had to re-vote then file a DOI because of Gary pulling a fast one and Gary handing the judge the highlighted section of the document, lol.
And Fehr hands the judge a copy where he tried to use whiteout on the highlighted parts.
Lebrun and McKenzie are not objective. They constantly interject their own opinion into their stories.
The problem with all these "reporters" is that they haven't realized you can't dish out your opinion every 10 minutes and then turn around and have any credibility as an objective news source.
Dreger, Lebrun and McKenzie have all hurt their credibility during this lockout.
And they all pander to their readers...
So what your saying is, them doing their job bothers you?
They are analysts. If you know what that means then they are doing a great job. They are not "reporters" They are hired for their knowledge and expertise not because they are journalists.
If the season does get canceled who do u guys think deserves the most blame? To me its Fehr the players aren't gonna come out and say it but id be willing to bet if u hooked the players to a lie detector atleast 90% would take what the nhl is offering but there not gonna go against there leader in Fehr. I look at the owners and i would think there prob getting alot of pressure from sponsors and tv networks to get a deal done. U would think they would have alot of motivation to get a deal, and im sure bettman dont wanna be known as the commish that had 2 canceled seasons under his watch.
I honestly can't wrap my mind around the fact that the NHL isn't saying have your $65M cap and your pensions as long as you agree to the 10 year CBA along with the 6/7 year contract limits. Both of those issues are much more important IMO than the other ones.
If the season does get canceled who do u guys think deserves the most blame? To me its Fehr the players aren't gonna come out and say it but id be willing to bet if u hooked the players to a lie detector atleast 90% would take what the nhl is offering but there not gonna go against there leader in Fehr. I look at the owners and i would think there prob getting alot of pressure from sponsors and tv networks to get a deal done. U would think they would have alot of motivation to get a deal, and im sure bettman dont wanna be known as the commish that had 2 canceled seasons under his watch.
It's equal. They all failed. I hold the owners in a little bit of a better light, but they are still at fault here too.
I honestly can't wrap my mind around the fact that the NHL isn't saying have your $65M cap and your pensions as long as you agree to the 10 year CBA along with the 6/7 year contract limits. Both of those issues are much more important IMO than the other ones.
10 year CBA is already agreed to. It's the opt out that hasn't been. League wants 8, PA wants 7. Since players agreed to the 10 year, I think the owners should bend for just that 1 year. If all is going great by that time, they may not even need to use the opt out.
Edit: As for the contract limits, the PA should just accept the 6/7. It's only a small % of players that even get those longer contracts.
If I were the NHL, I'd put a stipulation in that gives them every right to close any loopholes as they arise. Otherwise it's 8 to 10 seasons before they can fix it.
It's equal. They all failed. I hold the owners in a little bit of a better light, but they are still at fault here too.
The bolded is it for me. It's a total failure from both sides. I don't blame the owners for seeing that something needed to change. But I also don't blame the players for trying to negotiate the best deal for themselves that they can. If I was in either of their positions I'd probably be doing the exact same thing
So if they disclaim are they going to actually file antitrust? Isn't that the whole point of disclaiming? IIRC in both of the last NBA and NFL disputes the lawsuits were filed almost instantly.
So, who pays for it? Usually it's the more high-profile (and richest) players that do it. For example, Brady vs NFL.
Is there going to be a Crosby vs NHL? Really ridiculous.
A deal is there to be made, why not just drop the theatrics and get it done. Not cost a handful of guys a bunch of money to start litigation.
