NHL rejects NHLPA's cap - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Ace_O_Spades · 02-15-2005, 11:41 AM

This is out of hand... the players balked and offered a cap, and the league rejects it:

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=114925

Quote:

NHLPA offers cap, NHL rejects it

Canadian Press

2/15/2005

NEW YORK (CP) - The No. 1 issue that has plagued the NHL lockout went out the window Monday night when the NHL Players' Association offered a deal that included a $52-million US salary cap.

But the deal was rejected by the NHL.

The surprising move was made by NHLPA senior director Ted Saskin during his secret meeting with NHL executive vice-president Bill Daly in Niagara Falls, N.Y.

According to an NHLPA statement, Daly began the process Monday by offering a $40-million salary cap without ''linkage'' - a fixed link between player costs and league revenues, which has long been the centrepiece of the NHL's bid for cost certainty.

The union counter-offered with the $52-million team-by-team salary cap. The players' proposal also featured more aggressive payroll tax thresholds and tax rates on team payrolls.

''It is indeed unfortunate that with the major steps taken by both sides today we were unable to build enough momentum to reach an agreement,'' Saskin said in a statement released early Tuesday morning.

The union's offer also included the 24 per cent salary rollback on all existing contracts.

These latest developments came as the NHL announced a news conference for Wednesday at 1 p.m. EST in New York when commissioner Gary Bettman is expected to announce the cancellation of the 2004-2005 season.

While no talks were planned for Tuesday, the fact that both sides made dramatic moves from their longstanding positions Monday night could spur on more last-ditch efforts to save the season.

As it stands, the players have finally accepted a salary cap for the first time in their history while the league gave up on linkage. Now the two sides are separated by $12 million on their cap figures. And with the rollback, two-thirds of the league's teams would be under $40 million.

But is it too late?

Earlier on Monday night, the league sent out a statement saying talks between Daly and Saskin produced ''no progress.''

Bettman's news conference was originally slated for Tuesday, according to a source, but pushed back a day as Daly and Saskin met late into the night.

It all made for a roller-coaster day.

''I've said all along, until someone tells me it's over, it's not,'' Devils GM and CEO Lou Lamoriello said from his New Jersey office Monday. ''It's too easy to be negative.

''There's no question we have something scheduled at this point for Wednesday. It's looking very bleak right now but it's not over.''

The Devils boss also offered some advice.

''To me, let's get rid of all these buzz words (salary cap, luxury tax) and get something done that works for everybody,'' he said.

Should the worst happen Wednesday, the NHL will become the first major professional league in North America to cancel an entire season from start to finish. But Bettman says the damage the NHL will suffer as a result is worth it in order to get ''cost certainty'' for his owners.

''I'm extremely concerned,'' Flyers captain Keith Primeau told The Canadian Press from Philadelphia. ''The biggest thing that disturbs me is everyone's true misunderstanding of the fan base. You hear how certain people believe that the hard-core fan will definitely return, that the damage isn't irreparable.

''I think that's a huge miscalculation or judgment in error of who and what your fan base is. That, I think, is going to alarm a lot of people when the doors are re-opened.''

The NHL and the union met for more than five hours with U.S. federal mediators in Washington on Sunday but still could not make any progress. Bettman and NHLPA executive director Bob Goodenow were not at the meeting. Daly, the NHL's executive vice-president and chief legal officer, and outside counsel Bob Batterman represented the league while Saskin, the NHLPA's senior director, and outside counsel John McCambridge were there for the union.

So much of the season has already been scrapped. Through Monday, 824 of the 1,230 regular-season games have gone by the wayside.

If an agreement can still be reached, the league has a shortened schedule ready to go that would see teams play 28 regular-season games, playing only within their conference. The playoffs would stay the same and consist of four rounds.

the_marq · 02-15-2005, 11:49 AM

Well I guess that's that then.

I am consoling myself with this thought:

"The loss of the NHL is not the loss of Hockey."

lunchbox · 02-15-2005, 12:07 PM

If they don't agree on a deal today...this is absurd. if you can't talk through a gap of just 12 million dollars with - at the time of this post - 22 hours to go, you're not trying.

I already want Bettman and Goodenow's jobs for this farcical negotiation process. If the NHL and NHLPA won't STFU and bargain their way through this then I say screw them and start broadcasting AHL games, they've got a better working on ice product from the looks of it anyway.

Ace_O_Spades · 02-15-2005, 02:53 PM

yeah, 12 million dollars difference isn't enough to force a cancellation of a season.

total bullshit

silent_jay · 02-15-2005, 04:00 PM

Cancel the season, these talks are only for show anyway, make it look like each side has actually tried.

I'm sick of the NHL soap opera cancel the damn thing already. I'll just have to check out some 67's games I guess, oh well at least the kids still love the game, not like the over payed babies in the NHL.

djtestudo · 02-15-2005, 04:51 PM

According to the increasingly larengytis-afflicted EJ Hradik, they are VERY close, and basically this money is all the difference in the deal, and if they get closer could push the 1 PM deadline back a little more.

Stan Fields · 02-15-2005, 04:53 PM

The league's final offer is on the table and the NHLPA has until 11 a.m. to accept or reject it. Either way, I personally can't wait to see what happens.

BRING ON THE NEWS CONFERENCE!

Serpent · 02-15-2005, 05:47 PM

42.5 million, only 8 teams were over the 40 million cap with the 24% rollback, i can't imagine the players getting a better deal then the 42.5 million take it or leave it.. Probably brings teh teams over the cap down to 6 or so, anyone have the payroll figures?

Cowman · 02-15-2005, 05:55 PM

whaat
why not just go with the 52 million cap
I think that's totally reasonable
the smaller market teams can easily afford 35-40 million, so they wouldn't really be that far behind, a star or two, and 52 million keeps things interesting come free-agent/trade deadline time

Cowman · 02-15-2005, 05:58 PM

http://www.forbes.com/2004/11/10/04nhland.html has got payrolls

Serpent · 02-15-2005, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cowman

http://www.forbes.com/2004/11/10/04nhland.html has got payrolls

after looking at the payrolls there, the 42 million would shake up about 7 teams. (they would be 20 million over the cap!!) holy shit man.. Most teams are well under the 40 million a year cap.. Should be interetsing to see how they will sort things out once the cap is in place (since it seems it will) i don't really see how they could play this year even if they settled tommrow.. Finaces would be a mess for the rangers. detroit.. and some of the other teams.

lunchbox · 02-15-2005, 06:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serpent

after looking at the payrolls there, the 42 million would shake up about 7 teams. (they would be 20 million over the cap!!) holy shit man.. Most teams are well under the 40 million a year cap.. Should be interetsing to see how they will sort things out once the cap is in place (since it seems it will) i don't really see how they could play this year even if they settled tommrow.. Finaces would be a mess for the rangers. detroit.. and some of the other teams.

I can see the NHL (being the asshats that they are) forcing the teams who are over the cap to either restructure deals or to cut their teams so that they're under the cap. I hate to see it happen, but at least its hockey.

Spartak · 02-15-2005, 07:21 PM

Detroit aren't in that bad shape really... in the short term anyway. Hull is out the door, CuJo can probably be waived, guys like Chelios and Yzerman are close to retirement anyway and would probably accept less money. Replacing them on the other hand...

lunchbox · 02-15-2005, 07:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spartak

Detroit aren't in that bad shape really... in the short term anyway. Hull is out the door, CuJo can probably be waived, guys like Chelios and Yzerman are close to retirement anyway and would probably accept less money. Replacing them on the other hand...

Cujo should have never been signed to begin with, he's only shaken Legace's confidence. Chelios can be replaced by Niklas Kronwall (AHL) he's PHENOMENOL. He made the AHL all-star game and he plays sweet defense and has a better offensive up-side than nick lidstrom.

the big cap problems are people like Hatcher and Lang (hatcher i think is 5 years 55 million, lang gets 5 mil a season because of the huge contract washington gave him).

Serpent · 02-15-2005, 07:43 PM

players have offered a 49 million cap.. i think it will be a done deal (not saying it will be 49 m) by the deadline tommrow..

djtestudo · 02-15-2005, 07:52 PM

I'll guess they'll come together in the $45-46M range

lunchbox · 02-15-2005, 07:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Serpent

players have offered a 49 million cap.. i think it will be a done deal (not saying it will be 49 m) by the deadline tommrow..

if the NHL comes back and says "46m" its a deal and if its not, you won't see the nhl play again until the owners use scabs.

Ace_O_Spades · 02-15-2005, 08:51 PM

NHL rejects NHLPA's 49m.

Boourns. This is total bullshit.

I want hockey

djtestudo · 02-15-2005, 08:58 PM

Quote:

From ESPN article
"If every team spent to the $49 million ... total player compensation would exceed what we spent last season," NHL commissioner Gary Bettman said in his second letter of the day to NHLPA executive director Bob Goodenow. "We cannot afford your proposal."

Then don't spend to the fucking $49M limit asshole.

spongy · 02-15-2005, 09:29 PM

I find it incredibly frustrating that the NHL isn't playing right now because the owners lack the discipline to enforce a salary cap on their own by not offering such high contracts.

If the owners truly cared about the league that much, they would offer better revenue sharing. Yes, the Rangers for instance get more in TV revenue than the Canucks, but the rangers get no money without the other team playing.

I think at least one third of all revenue from the home team should go to the visiting team. Or at least a way to keep the league closer to parity salary wise. If there is a salary cap, there should be a salary floor, so that there is a minimum team salary too, so that owners don't just rake in the $ by taking the shared revenue and not investing it in the team.

But that's just me.

lunchbox · 02-15-2005, 09:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spongy.

If there is a salary cap, there should be a salary floor, so that there is a minimum team salary too, so that owners don't just rake in the $ by taking the shared revenue and not investing it in the team.

But that's just me.

there is, I think its something like 29 or something to that effect.

Antikarma · 02-15-2005, 09:39 PM

AAAAAND the NHLPA has officially said "You will get nothing else from us"

And there's the fat lady singing

Spartak · 02-15-2005, 09:45 PM

It's all posturing, I think. To get Bettman to move from that $42.5m figure. If he gives a shit about the stupid expansion teams he created HE DAMN WELL BETTER MAKE AN IMPROVED OFFER.

Serpent · 02-15-2005, 09:47 PM

would really suck if the difference was 6.5 mill.. they have halved it once, do it again!..

Antikarma · 02-15-2005, 09:49 PM

You know Spartak, I honestly believe that too. If Edmonton or Calgary were to falter at this point, I think we would see Canadians step in to help, in some manner. Theres TWO disgruntled ownership groups in Vancouver and one in Winnipeg that I can think of, and I'm not the hockey guru I pretend to be. When teams start folding, its going to be the Yankee expension teams. Its a bummer, but its true.

Serpent · 02-15-2005, 09:57 PM

i hear all this expansion teams are bad for hockey and such and think its some nonsense, when this situation isn't caused by the expansion teams, but the established teams with huge budgets, and the ones that aren't making money.. the expansion teams seem to do ok (hurricanes having alittle trouble), i think because they know they can't risk spending too much, otherwise they'd be in trouble if the team sucked that year.. (which in some cases it does)

Spartak · 02-15-2005, 10:13 PM

But teams not in hockey markets are going to be hurt by the lockout the most, the casual fans will think: "You know what, after all this bullshit I'd rather go to a basketball/baseball game than a hockey game". And I doubt the 30 game season is going to get them pumped.

spongy · 02-15-2005, 11:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spartak

I doubt the 30 game season is going to get them pumped.

Dunno about that.. the beauty of the NHL is the Cup Playoffs. a 30 game season and full playoffs means a team will possibly win only a few more reg season games than the 16 it takes to hoist the Cup (which I have kissed).

Imagine if they expand the playoffs this year and let all teams in adding a round.. then it would be 20 wins.

keeb · 02-15-2005, 11:16 PM

the whole thing is stupid and crazy. bettman should never have been put in as the commisioner of the league. along with that some of the expansion teams imo didnt need a team (no offense to the teams or their fans that im about to list) for example atlanta, florida could do with only one team california doesnt need 3 teams, new york could possibly get by with 1 team instead of 2 and nashville wasnt ready for hockey. again no offense to the fans or the teams mentioned.

just my 2 cents.

edit:

Quote:

Imagine if they expand the playoffs this year and let all teams in adding a round.. then it would be 20 wins.

if they did i think they should just go straight into the format and not even play the 28 games. if each series would be the standard 7 games it could be a long time depending on how many games it takes for teams to win.

lunchbox · 02-16-2005, 04:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by keeb

the whole thing is stupid and crazy. bettman should never have been put in as the commisioner of the league. along with that some of the expansion teams imo didnt need a team (no offense to the teams or their fans that im about to list) for example atlanta, florida could do with only one team california doesnt need 3 teams, new york could possibly get by with 1 team instead of 2 and nashville wasnt ready for hockey. again no offense to the fans or the teams mentioned.

just my 2 cents.

edit:

if they did i think they should just go straight into the format and not even play the 28 games. if each series would be the standard 7 games it could be a long time depending on how many games it takes for teams to win.

new york has three teams, remember. Buffalo, nyi, and nyr.

as for the others commenting about expansion teams not hurting the league well it goes like this: its been projected that even with a cap teams like: phoenix, florida, carolina, anaheim, nashville, ottowa, buffalo and maybe even san jose could go under even WITH a salary cap. stop for a second, and look at all of those teams outside of buffalo and ottowa, what do they have in common? they have no business being in hockey.

Serpent · 02-16-2005, 10:05 AM

season is canceled, no deal..

keeb · 02-16-2005, 10:07 AM

yup =( they were getting so close too

lunchbox · 02-16-2005, 10:12 AM

I love how he's taking this opportunity (the press conference) to offend the players and paint them as the bad guys. He's such a jackass. they're both in the wrong and he won't even acknowledge that.

lunchbox · 02-16-2005, 10:18 AM

roflmao

"you've heard no finality from us (the NHL)"

does anyone else recall: "this is our final offer" "this is our last offer there is no time for negotiations"? that sounds a WHOLE lot like finality.

the_marq · 02-16-2005, 10:18 AM

It's over: http://tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=115107&hubName=nhl

Fuck you Bettman.

Quote:

From this moment on, the 2004-2005 NHL season will be marked with an asterisk and caption that reads "Season Cancelled."

Stan Fields · 02-16-2005, 10:27 AM

I know things have been bad all along but I can't believe they actually did it.
No season, no playoffs, no Stanley Cup winner? Maybe by this time next year they'll be close to playing again

blitz.fenix · 02-16-2005, 11:12 AM

I'm excited at the prospects of a stronger 05/06 season. This cancellation was necessary, and as Bettman says if the NHLPA caved earlier we would have had a deal by now.

Ace_O_Spades · 02-16-2005, 11:16 AM

Fuck the players. I'm totally sided with the owners now.

You greedy bastards said you would NEVER accept a cap? Then at the 11th hour you say "oh yeah, here's our cap proposal" When there is absolutley no time left to do proper negotiations.

WHERE THE FUCK WAS THAT LAST SUMMER!?!?!? ARGHHHHHHH

silent_jay · 02-16-2005, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ace_O_Spades

Fuck the players. I'm totally sided with the owners now.

You greedy bastards said you would NEVER accept a cap? Then at the 11th hour you say "oh yeah, here's our cap proposal" When there is absolutley no time left to do proper negotiations.

WHERE THE FUCK WAS THAT LAST SUMMER!?!?!? ARGHHHHHHH

I have to agree Ace, and some of the players are asking the same thing, if a cap is acceptable now why not 8 months ago? Personally I still blame both sides, but the players lost some respect with their throwing the cap up in the eleventh hour

keeb · 02-16-2005, 11:22 AM

bettman as the comissioner should have offered 45m at the end he said that he was tired of reaching out. as the comissioner he should have done everything possible to save the season. his comment that the union needed to reach out this late just improved his jackass rating.

Quote:

You greedy bastards said you would NEVER accept a cap? Then at the 11th hour you say "oh yeah, here's our cap proposal" When there is absolutley no time left to do proper negotiations.

at least it was a try, more than the league had done. it showed that the players wanted to get a short season going this year.

02-15-2005, 11:49 AM	#2 (permalink)
the_marq All hail the Mountain King Location: Black Mesa	Well I guess that's that then. I am consoling myself with this thought: "The loss of the NHL is not the loss of Hockey." __________________ The Truth: Johnny Cash could have kicked Bruce Lee's ass if he wanted to. #3 in a series

02-15-2005, 12:07 PM	#3 (permalink)
lunchbox Thank God hockey is back Location: Deeeeeetroit	If they don't agree on a deal today...this is absurd. if you can't talk through a gap of just 12 million dollars with - at the time of this post - 22 hours to go, you're not trying. I already want Bettman and Goodenow's jobs for this farcical negotiation process. If the NHL and NHLPA won't STFU and bargain their way through this then I say screw them and start broadcasting AHL games, they've got a better working on ice product from the looks of it anyway. __________________ A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

02-15-2005, 02:53 PM	#4 (permalink)
Ace_O_Spades The Death Card Location: EH!?!?	yeah, 12 million dollars difference isn't enough to force a cancellation of a season. total bullshit __________________ Feh.

02-15-2005, 04:51 PM	#6 (permalink)
djtestudo Baltimoron Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD	According to the increasingly larengytis-afflicted EJ Hradik, they are VERY close, and basically this money is all the difference in the deal, and if they get closer could push the 1 PM deadline back a little more. __________________ "Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen." --Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

02-15-2005, 05:55 PM	#9 (permalink)
Cowman Psycho	whaat why not just go with the 52 million cap I think that's totally reasonable the smaller market teams can easily afford 35-40 million, so they wouldn't really be that far behind, a star or two, and 52 million keeps things interesting come free-agent/trade deadline time __________________ You don't like my point of view..but im insane

02-15-2005, 04:00 PM	#5 (permalink)
silent_jay Her Jay Location: Ontario for now....	Cancel the season, these talks are only for show anyway, make it look like each side has actually tried. I'm sick of the NHL soap opera cancel the damn thing already. I'll just have to check out some 67's games I guess, oh well at least the kids still love the game, not like the over payed babies in the NHL.

02-15-2005, 04:53 PM	#7 (permalink)
Stan Fields Upright Location: Ontario	The league's final offer is on the table and the NHLPA has until 11 a.m. to accept or reject it. Either way, I personally can't wait to see what happens. BRING ON THE NEWS CONFERENCE!

02-15-2005, 05:47 PM	#8 (permalink)
Serpent Insane Location: florida	42.5 million, only 8 teams were over the 40 million cap with the 24% rollback, i can't imagine the players getting a better deal then the 42.5 million take it or leave it.. Probably brings teh teams over the cap down to 6 or so, anyone have the payroll figures?

02-15-2005, 05:58 PM	#10 (permalink)
Cowman Psycho	http://www.forbes.com/2004/11/10/04nhland.html has got payrolls __________________ You don't like my point of view..but im insane

02-15-2005, 07:21 PM	#13 (permalink)
Spartak Bang bang Location: New Zealand	Detroit aren't in that bad shape really... in the short term anyway. Hull is out the door, CuJo can probably be waived, guys like Chelios and Yzerman are close to retirement anyway and would probably accept less money. Replacing them on the other hand... __________________ I can read your mind... looking at you... I can read your mind...

02-15-2005, 07:43 PM	#15 (permalink)
Serpent Insane Location: florida	players have offered a 49 million cap.. i think it will be a done deal (not saying it will be 49 m) by the deadline tommrow..

02-15-2005, 07:52 PM	#16 (permalink)
djtestudo Baltimoron Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD	I'll guess they'll come together in the $45-46M range __________________ "Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen." --Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

02-15-2005, 08:51 PM	#18 (permalink)
Ace_O_Spades The Death Card Location: EH!?!?	NHL rejects NHLPA's 49m. Boourns. This is total bullshit. I want hockey __________________ Feh.

02-15-2005, 09:29 PM	#20 (permalink)
spongy Psycho	I find it incredibly frustrating that the NHL isn't playing right now because the owners lack the discipline to enforce a salary cap on their own by not offering such high contracts. If the owners truly cared about the league that much, they would offer better revenue sharing. Yes, the Rangers for instance get more in TV revenue than the Canucks, but the rangers get no money without the other team playing. I think at least one third of all revenue from the home team should go to the visiting team. Or at least a way to keep the league closer to parity salary wise. If there is a salary cap, there should be a salary floor, so that there is a minimum team salary too, so that owners don't just rake in the $ by taking the shared revenue and not investing it in the team. But that's just me. __________________ The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed. Stephen King

02-15-2005, 09:39 PM	#22 (permalink)
Antikarma Psycho Location: Yellowknife, NWT	AAAAAND the NHLPA has officially said "You will get nothing else from us" And there's the fat lady singing __________________ "Whoever you are, go out into the evening, leaving your room, of which you know each bit; your house is the last before the infinite, whoever you are."

02-15-2005, 09:45 PM	#23 (permalink)
Spartak Bang bang Location: New Zealand	It's all posturing, I think. To get Bettman to move from that $42.5m figure. If he gives a shit about the stupid expansion teams he created HE DAMN WELL BETTER MAKE AN IMPROVED OFFER. __________________ I can read your mind... looking at you... I can read your mind...

02-15-2005, 09:47 PM	#24 (permalink)
Serpent Insane Location: florida	would really suck if the difference was 6.5 mill.. they have halved it once, do it again!..

02-15-2005, 09:49 PM	#25 (permalink)
Antikarma Psycho Location: Yellowknife, NWT	You know Spartak, I honestly believe that too. If Edmonton or Calgary were to falter at this point, I think we would see Canadians step in to help, in some manner. Theres TWO disgruntled ownership groups in Vancouver and one in Winnipeg that I can think of, and I'm not the hockey guru I pretend to be. When teams start folding, its going to be the Yankee expension teams. Its a bummer, but its true. __________________ "Whoever you are, go out into the evening, leaving your room, of which you know each bit; your house is the last before the infinite, whoever you are."

02-15-2005, 09:57 PM	#26 (permalink)
Serpent Insane Location: florida	i hear all this expansion teams are bad for hockey and such and think its some nonsense, when this situation isn't caused by the expansion teams, but the established teams with huge budgets, and the ones that aren't making money.. the expansion teams seem to do ok (hurricanes having alittle trouble), i think because they know they can't risk spending too much, otherwise they'd be in trouble if the team sucked that year.. (which in some cases it does)

02-15-2005, 10:13 PM	#27 (permalink)
Spartak Bang bang Location: New Zealand	But teams not in hockey markets are going to be hurt by the lockout the most, the casual fans will think: "You know what, after all this bullshit I'd rather go to a basketball/baseball game than a hockey game". And I doubt the 30 game season is going to get them pumped. __________________ I can read your mind... looking at you... I can read your mind...

02-16-2005, 10:05 AM	#31 (permalink)
Serpent Insane Location: florida	season is canceled, no deal..

02-16-2005, 10:07 AM	#32 (permalink)
keeb Tilted	yup =( they were getting so close too

02-16-2005, 10:12 AM	#33 (permalink)
lunchbox Thank God hockey is back Location: Deeeeeetroit	I love how he's taking this opportunity (the press conference) to offend the players and paint them as the bad guys. He's such a jackass. they're both in the wrong and he won't even acknowledge that. __________________ A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

02-16-2005, 10:18 AM	#34 (permalink)
lunchbox Thank God hockey is back Location: Deeeeeetroit	roflmao "you've heard no finality from us (the NHL)" does anyone else recall: "this is our final offer" "this is our last offer there is no time for negotiations"? that sounds a WHOLE lot like finality. __________________ A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams

02-16-2005, 10:27 AM	#36 (permalink)
Stan Fields Upright Location: Ontario	I know things have been bad all along but I can't believe they actually did it. No season, no playoffs, no Stanley Cup winner? Maybe by this time next year they'll be close to playing again

02-16-2005, 11:12 AM	#37 (permalink)
blitz.fenix Insane Location: Toronto	I'm excited at the prospects of a stronger 05/06 season. This cancellation was necessary, and as Bettman says if the NHLPA caved earlier we would have had a deal by now.

02-16-2005, 11:16 AM	#38 (permalink)
Ace_O_Spades The Death Card Location: EH!?!?	Fuck the players. I'm totally sided with the owners now. You greedy bastards said you would NEVER accept a cap? Then at the 11th hour you say "oh yeah, here's our cap proposal" When there is absolutley no time left to do proper negotiations. WHERE THE FUCK WAS THAT LAST SUMMER!?!?!? ARGHHHHHHH __________________ Feh.