Formerly Allan in MD Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Who wants to bet that when it's all settled, the new NHL labor agreement will turn out to be a compromise number half-way between the two currently offerred cap figures. This, of course, could have been settled in this fashion months ago. However, Goodenow decided to play brinksmanship. The pied piper led his entire union off a cliff. They deserve to land really hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevestojan Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Who wants to bet that when it's all settled, the new NHL labor agreement will turn out to be a compromise number half-way between the two currently offerred cap figures. This, of course, could have been settled in this fashion months ago. However, Goodenow decided to play brinksmanship. The pied piper led his entire union off a cliff. They deserve to land really hard. 243721[/snapback] Goodenow is a used douchebag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Who wants to bet that when it's all settled, the new NHL labor agreement will turn out to be a compromise number half-way between the two currently offerred cap figures. This, of course, could have been settled in this fashion months ago. However, Goodenow decided to play brinksmanship. The pied piper led his entire union off a cliff. They deserve to land really hard. 243721[/snapback] I'll take that bet. NHPA was offering 50+ million NHL wanted 40 million Talks are over now. The NHL is just going to make the rules now and the NHLPA will have to deal with it. I bet the cap will be about 36 mill. This is good news for us sabres fanes since last year our team salary was ony about 33 million anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Allan in MD Posted February 17, 2005 Author Share Posted February 17, 2005 Got to believe that once this all sinks in, many players will, perhaps even publicly, begin questioning where, and how, Goodenow has represented them. This will especially be true if the owners attempt to go with replacement players next season. History has proven that pro players quickly get the message when owners decide to go that route. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfladave Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 I'll take that bet.NHPA was offering 50+ million NHL wanted 40 million Talks are over now. The NHL is just going to make the rules now and the NHLPA will have to deal with it. I bet the cap will be about 36 mill. This is good news for us sabres fanes since last year our team salary was ony about 33 million anyways. 243745[/snapback] I am more inclined to subscribe to this theory. The NHL called the players bluff and I don't see how the players have any remaining leverage. What I want to know is that if some sort of salary cap is implemented what are the teams who are way over the cap going to do? I think the Red Wings were just under $80 million for 2004-05. If there is a $36-40 million cap do they have to restructure everyone or just release players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Puhonix Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 I am more inclined to subscribe to this theory. The NHL called the players bluff and I don't see how the players have any remaining leverage. What I want to know is that if some sort of salary cap is implemented what are the teams who are way over the cap going to do? I think the Red Wings were just under $80 million for 2004-05. If there is a $36-40 million cap do they have to restructure everyone or just release players? 243899[/snapback] More importantly, the NHL can come back next year with replacement players, and the players can have no say agasint it. Why? Cause the NHL players are playing now in minor leagues, or other hockey leagues. Those are jobs they're taking away from other players. So... when other players take their jobs, they'll have no argument. But from what I understand, laws in Canada prevent the NHL from using replacement players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kasper13 Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 I'll take that bet. The NHL's best offer was $42.5 with no link to revenues. Now they will try and drive a stake through the heart of the NHLPA. Any offer will be with a link to revenue. Nobody knows what that revenue will be. My guess is the next offer from the NHL will be a hard salary cap of $30 million. I read this somewhere this AM. The NHL can declare an impasse if there is no deal and if they get a ruling in their favor can then implement their own plan AND ALL current player contracts become void and EVERY SINGLE PLAYER becomes an unrestricted free agent. I think that's what the owners are shooting for. Every contract would be ripped up and they would start over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
\GoBillsInDallas/ Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 ...from what I understand, laws in Canada prevent the NHL from using replacement players... 243928[/snapback] Labor laws in the US are mostly based at the Federal level. Labor laws in Canada are mostly based are the Provincial (State) level. Labor laws in British Columbia and Quebec PROHIBIT the use of "replacement workers". So, unless the Canadiens and Canucks move and play in other cities, "replacement players" ain't gonna happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Formerly Allan in MD Posted February 17, 2005 Author Share Posted February 17, 2005 I am more inclined to subscribe to this theory. The NHL called the players bluff and I don't see how the players have any remaining leverage. What I want to know is that if some sort of salary cap is implemented what are the teams who are way over the cap going to do? I think the Red Wings were just under $80 million for 2004-05. If there is a $36-40 million cap do they have to restructure everyone or just release players? 243899[/snapback] The Rangers and Rockies, among others, are way over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BB27 Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Labor laws in the US are mostly based at the Federal level. Labor laws in Canada are mostly based are the Provincial (State) level. Labor laws in British Columbia and Quebec PROHIBIT the use of "replacement workers". So, unless the Canadiens and Canucks move and play in other cities, "replacement players" ain't gonna happen. 244001[/snapback] I would be willing to bet it just won't happen there. The other owners are going to do something, and they won't let the entire thing not happen for two teams. I don't like it, but I bet thats what happens. These two teams sit, other teams help bail them out financially for the loss of revenue, in one year its all over and they play again.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted February 17, 2005 Share Posted February 17, 2005 Goodenow is a used douchebag. 243727[/snapback] Heard him on ESPN radio this morning. From the way he was talking it's no wonder an agreement couldn't be reached. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts