Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
6226 replies to this topic

#2971 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,476 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:54 AM

The morning session is over. Parties said to be meeting again at 1pm ET. (Source: TSN)
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2972 rotiman187

rotiman187

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,296 posts
  • Joined: 23-October 09

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:58 AM

Ian Mendes ********@ian_mendes
Fehr: "We've moved far more than halfway. Our expectation is the NHL is going to be willing to meet us if they want to reach an agreement."
  • 0
Posted Image

#2973 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:13 AM

Fehr: "We've moved far more than halfway. Our expectation is the NHL is going to be willing to meet us if they want to reach an agreement."


Reminds me of the statement from Bettman in mid-Oct (?) when they moved to 50/50 split and he said it was significant and the NHLPA said no thanks.
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#2974 Dogbyte

Dogbyte

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,779 posts
  • Joined: 31-March 07

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:15 AM

Now Fehr has sent a letter to the canadian government whining and complaining . The union has made a horrible mistake in bringing Fehr on board.

The union has no hope of getting any kind of good deal, and they have lost a lot of money in salary they can never recover. The NHL will not give them even a fair deal as they blame the union for having them in this situation.

I would have offered the players 50/50 in return for 5 year max , higher UFA , easier ability to send players down to the minors, and other adjustments.

The union has not had a formal offer and now Bettman has them backed into a corner. All that is left is public perception. Bettman has played this one beautifully. He is forcing the union to put down a ridiculous offer on paper to discredit them, or an offer that is so modest the NHL accepts it and the union ends up with nothing.

Like him or not, there is a reason why he has been NHL commissioner for 20 years.

And in the end, I am on the fans side, and this idea that the union can just go get hired guns to BULLY the very league they play for has got to END.

From now on, let a panel of 3 federal judges hear the union and owners arguments.

Two from the US and one from Canada in an international court. Both sides have to agree to the ruling for 5 years.


Help me get this straight.

Do you like Fehr or not? Can't really tell, you haven't clarified.

Edited by Dogbyte, 21 November 2012 - 10:19 AM.

  • 0

"What players need is the right kind of strength and power. That includes learning to understand that leverage and positioning can be just as important as raw strength when it comes to winning battles in the game. It's more about timing and athleticism --and avoiding injury--than it is about how much you can bench press. I don't know how many times I've seen a guy with the physique of a defensive end line up a guy half his size, only to bounce off when he connects. Sure, there is room in the game for big guys who can throw their weight around. But for the most part, players are smart enough to see them coming--and strong enough to protect the puck when they arrive. There are trainers out there who know how to devlop hockey-specific strength--though a trainer can help only if a player follows the program. All too often, I've seen players sign up with the best trainer, but not show up for their workouts and never to reap the benefits."

 

Bobby Orr - ORR MY STORY Viking 2013


#2975 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,162 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:15 AM

I haven't read Drybone spouting any idealogy in this discussion. My take is he is questioning the fundamental negociating power of the NHLPA. His position might be considered extreme but does lie in the realm of possibility. 2004 was a capitulation by the union but the result, although very beneficial for the union, was not an industry solution. In a union vs ownership scenario I wonder if there ever will be a solution. Settlement yes, solution no.

This relationship should be a partnership but it will always be caste as the union being a junior partner. The NHL simply brings more to the table than players who will always be faced with the reality that their time is limited. This does not have to be a negative. The NHL has a history of players who move on to management positions and even some into ownership. This is something that should be matured into a strength in the relationship.

Well, that's an optimistic view of what he means by his posts. His stance is the players have absolutely no power and the owners all of it. If that was the case, the players wouldn't have gotten any concessions in the last CBA - unless the owners were giving them 54-57% revenues and beneficial contracting rights out of the goodness of their hearts.

As far as the players moving into ownership, it was talked about a few pages back and they don't have any sort of strong representation in that group. It might be good if they did and perhaps some players will consider it, but they'll always be a minority. In a perfect world, it wouldn't require players to be involved in every position possible, the people holding those positions now should have the health of the game and the league itself at heart first and foremost.

Edited by elvis15, 21 November 2012 - 10:17 AM.

  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2976 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,827 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:42 AM

Reminds me of the statement from Bettman in mid-Oct (?) when they moved to 50/50 split and he said it was significant and the NHLPA said no thanks.


Except that the players have ACTUALLY made concessions? :lol:
  • 2
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#2977 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 21 November 2012 - 10:55 AM

Except that the players have ACTUALLY made concessions? :lol:


Yet the rhetoric from both sides remains the same.

(which is actually the point I was trying to make)
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#2978 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,827 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:00 AM

I know. Just adding to your comment that while the rhetoric is similar, the situations behind it are not.
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#2979 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:04 AM

I know. Just adding to your comment that while the rhetoric is similar, the situations behind it are not.


From where I sit there is only one situation - two parties that can't agree.

And when I attack the rhetoric it is more from a position of tempering optimism than attacking either side.

I remember the excitement when Bettman made a similar statement in October..........I caution those who want to get excited about anymore statements like that.

And if I am wrong.............awesome ::D
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#2980 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 70,540 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:04 AM

100th page!
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#2981 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 70,540 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:05 AM

@TSNBobMcKenzie: So, to review, NHLPA is prepared to go to 50-50 immediately, but wants $393M over four years as part of so-called "Make Whole."
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#2982 Gerbera

Gerbera

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 410 posts
  • Joined: 26-February 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:21 AM

@TSNBobMcKenzie: Only system issue addressed is back-diving contracts (cap hit penalties for retired players) but not 5 per cent variance rule or term limits

What does this mean? it means PA allows this or put a counter proposal for this?

Edited by Gerbera, 21 November 2012 - 11:22 AM.

  • 0

#2983 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,471 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:24 AM

Now Fehr has sent a letter to the canadian government whining and complaining . The union has made a horrible mistake in bringing Fehr on board.

You're not totally off on any of this but you have added your own spin to everything. It's hyperbole at its best.

The union has no hope of getting any kind of good deal, and they have lost a lot of money in salary they can never recover. The NHL will not give them even a fair deal as they blame the union for having them in this situation.

Actually the union has a very good chance at getting a good deal. It may not be everything they want but the NHL certainly isn't going to be getting everything they want either. I'm glad you've stopped with the "NHLPA has no power" but you should get away from this winning and losing thing as well. A deal will be made and we've already seen/heard from both sides that many concessions have been made. We may be a day, a week or a month away from a resolution but if winning means getting what you want then both sides have lost. However if winning means everyone comes out of this happy then I think both sides will win.

I would have offered the players 50/50 in return for 5 year max , higher UFA , easier ability to send players down to the minors, and other adjustments.

That would be a good offer imo. I'd be interested to hear a more detailed version of it but overall I agree.

The union has not had a formal offer and now Bettman has them backed into a corner. All that is left is public perception. Bettman has played this one beautifully. He is forcing the union to put down a ridiculous offer on paper to discredit them, or an offer that is so modest the NHL accepts it and the union ends up with nothing.

The union hasn't had a formal offer? And no Bettman hasn't and really Bettman has played this one just as well as Fehr has. It's funny how Fehr in your eyes is a bully but then you go on to talk about Bettman backing people into a corner. I have to say your last comment is extremely puzzling to me.

Like him or not, there is a reason why he has been NHL commissioner for 20 years.

He makes them money which from an owners perspective is a very good thing. Personal opinions of the man don't matter but the bottom line is that under his tenure the NHL has done very well for itself.

And in the end, I am on the fans side, and this idea that the union can just go get hired guns to BULLY the very league they play for has got to END.

There is that bully word again. Perhaps the league bully wants to be the only one on the block but then again there is absolutely nothing to substantiate your claims other than you saying it over and over again. You maybe on the fans side which essentially means you're on your side but you're also very clearly anti union; you just seem afraid to admit to that. Perhaps I'm wrong though but I have to say your posts throughout the board are pretty telling.

From now on, let a panel of 3 federal judges hear the union and owners arguments.

Two from the US and one from Canada in an international court. Both sides have to agree to the ruling for 5 years.

Never going to happen nor should it.

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 21 November 2012 - 11:24 AM.

  • 1
Posted Image
Posted Image

#2984 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,238 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:41 AM

good to see them not negotiating in the media (not). funny how every detail is being leaked just like the NHL's offer in october. cant help but think this just for optics to get the fans on the players side.
  • 0

#2985 Lui's Knob

Lui's Knob

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,795 posts
  • Joined: 13-May 10

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:44 AM

Help me get this straight.

Do you like Fehr or not? Can't really tell, you haven't clarified.


More on the "state of the union" here - yikes....http://t.co/qceW8FQB (audio)
  • 0

#2986 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,330 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:45 AM

@TSNBobMcKenzie: Only system issue addressed is back-diving contracts (cap hit penalties for retired players) but not 5 per cent variance rule or term limits

What does this mean? it means PA allows this or put a counter proposal for this?


It's been mentioned that the NHLPA has proposed that the back-diving 'retirement' penalty is only for NEW contracts that are over 9 years (i.e. any contract signed after THIS CBA is agreed to)
  • 0
Posted Image

#2987 J.R.

J.R.

    Rainbow Butt Monkey

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,827 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 11:47 AM

More on the "state of the union" here - yikes....http://t.co/qceW8FQB (audio)


Summary?
  • 0
"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

Posted ImagePosted Image

#2988 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,238 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:19 PM

http://espn.go.com/b...ffer-to-the-nhl

here is the complete offer from the PA, on paper it looks amazing. a difference of 182million sure seems silly seeing as how the NHL stated they lost 100million from the Pre-season.
  • 0

#2989 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,197 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:20 PM

Now Fehr has sent a letter to the canadian government whining and complaining . The union has made a horrible mistake in bringing Fehr on board.

The union has no hope of getting any kind of good deal, and they have lost a lot of money in salary they can never recover. The NHL will not give them even a fair deal as they blame the union for having them in this situation.

I would have offered the players 50/50 in return for 5 year max , higher UFA , easier ability to send players down to the minors, and other adjustments.

The union has not had a formal offer and now Bettman has them backed into a corner. All that is left is public perception. Bettman has played this one beautifully. He is forcing the union to put down a ridiculous offer on paper to discredit them, or an offer that is so modest the NHL accepts it and the union ends up with nothing.

Like him or not, there is a reason why he has been NHL commissioner for 20 years.

And in the end, I am on the fans side, and this idea that the union can just go get hired guns to BULLY the very league they play for has got to END.

From now on, let a panel of 3 federal judges hear the union and owners arguments.

Two from the US and one from Canada in an international court. Both sides have to agree to the ruling for 5 years.

Hold on a minute, appointed judges? Judges are mostly political hacks. If I was either party there is no way I would allow politicans into the equation. Particularly the owners who would/should question any decision making that might be influenced by public sentiment.
  • 0

#2990 250Integra

250Integra

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,130 posts
  • Joined: 07-March 06

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:21 PM

I feel the rejection
  • 0
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
Thanks for the Memories Canada!!!
Thanks for everything Naslund!
Original creator of the WWE and the Rate my sig / Showoff thread

#2991 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,878 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:25 PM

http://espn.go.com/b...ffer-to-the-nhl

here is the complete offer from the PA, on paper it looks amazing. a difference of 182million sure seems silly seeing as how the NHL stated they lost 100million from the Pre-season.


Looks like a player gave this to ESPN. That 393m is pretty significant but if the owners want 50% right away and want to start in 2012, this is what they'll take. All kinds of player concessions here, especially in arbitration and negotiating rights - I mean teams can just walk away from players but not qualifying them. I think contracts in the minors over 1m hurts both sides if that were to impact the salary cap. A lot of these propositions seem like small market teams trying to hinder the cap of larger markets.
  • 0

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#2992 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,330 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:27 PM

I feel the rejection


The good sign is that they are still meeting currently.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2993 Blackberries

Blackberries

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,406 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 07

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:29 PM

so where do we stand now? Is the league reviewing?

Praying for a miracle.

Probably more likely the Giants will make the playoffs...


  • 0
Posted Image
Movember Kassian

#2994 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,197 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 04

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:34 PM

Ian Mendes ********@ian_mendes
Fehr: "We've moved far more than halfway. Our expectation is the NHL is going to be willing to meet us if they want to reach an agreement."

I am always hearing dollar figures from the NHLPA and not % of revenue. I also see Fehr wants a guarantee on the $1.88 billion moving forward along with incremental increases. That might work but what if revenue does not grow as anticipated? I am sure that is why the NHL wants to deal in % of revenue.
  • 0

#2995 Ossi Vaananen

Ossi Vaananen

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,878 posts
  • Joined: 25-April 12

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:37 PM

The immediate reduction to 50% would occur this year, meaning the players would take a hit as well. The 182m upfront would help lessen this burden, but it appears that the PA is coming towards the NHL's side in willing to split the cost of the games already lost. NHL should take it.
  • 0

2d7ye0p.jpg

 

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#2996 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,238 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:50 PM

i see a negotiation on the makewhole happening and the $ figure in year 1 being shifted to year4 11million? why even include it unless that is your tactic just seems like an accounting nightmare for such a small amount of money.
  • 0

#2997 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:52 PM

This proposal by Fehr is a joke. It does nothing in the slightest. Its just the same finger pointing .

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409992

Fehr's ego is now way beyond the players interest. Fehr could never get over the fact he does not have equal power with Bettman or the owners.

This is the downfall of union. They honestly thought they own 50% of the NHL and the owners have to give them 50% concessions.

I guess Fehr is hoping his WHINING letter to the Canadian Parliament is going to somehow SPIN public opinion , when in fact it just turns everyone off.

If you told the union 2 years ago Fehr would be in this position and the players locked out, they would have NEVER hired the guy.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2998 stexx

stexx

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,238 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 08

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:56 PM

I am always hearing dollar figures from the NHLPA and not % of revenue. I also see Fehr wants a guarantee on the $1.88 billion moving forward along with incremental increases. That might work but what if revenue does not grow as anticipated? I am sure that is why the NHL wants to deal in % of revenue.


thats what this offer changed, they no longer are going for a fixed $ amount, its 50/50 and the only fixed $ amount is the makewhole of 393mil$.

quote from fehr:
"Our players’ share proposal is identical to yours in all material respects except for the amount of the transition payments added to the 50% share. There are no guarantees or fixed targets, other than a requirement that, beginning with the second year of the Agreement, players’ share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season."
  • 0

#2999 Squeak

Squeak

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,330 posts
  • Joined: 21-April 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:59 PM

Worth a read:

http://www.theglobea..._medium=twitter

there is a chart... but can't really format it.

The NHL asked its players to present a detailed proposal on Wednesday morning, and they certainly delivered.

The six-page document prepared by executive director Donald Fehr outlines seven key areas that could form the foundation for a new collective bargaining agreement: revenue sharing, pension plan, discipline, player contracting and system issues, players’ share, term of CBA and transition rules.

It is by far the NHLPA’s most detailed offer yet, and it moves the two sides within less than $200-million of each other.
Whether or not it can result in a shortened season starting in the near future remains to be seen.

The key details
The main thing to take away from what’s there is that the players have accepted a 50-50 share of revenues plus the “make whole” amount.

The make whole amount in this offer is $393-million in total, with $182-million of that payable in Year 1, $128-million in Year 2, $72-million in Year 3 and $11-million in Year 4.

There is no make whole for the fifth year of the deal as it will have been phased out.
To determine what percentage of revenues the players’ share would be in each year, I’ve used the NHL’s projected revenues of $2.9-billion in a lockout shortened season for this year, then a 2.5 per cent increase in 2013-14 and a 5 per cent increase in each season after that.

I consider these to be pretty conservative revenue projections given hockey-related revenue has grown at a rate of 7.2 per cent a season the past seven seasons.

All figures are in millions of U.S. dollars:

The NHL to this point has offered a straight 50-50 split as well as $211-million as part of the “make whole,” putting them that $182-million apart I mentioned above.
Overall, what the players have proposed would likely give them roughly a 52 per cent share over the life of the deal, which is probably a little too high for the league’s liking.
Splitting the difference to take them to $300-million in the make whole may ultimately be the final solution.

Other issues
Here things are trickier. The players rejected all of the league’s proposals on contracting rights except for attempting to eliminate “back-diving” contracts like the ones given out to Ilya Kovalchuk and Roberto Luongo in recent years.
The PA proposal there would only apply to new contracts that are nine years or longer and would involve penalizing a team against the cap if the player retires before the end of the deal.

The NHLPA also proposes a salary cap of no less than $67.25-million in any year and a floor and cap that will function as a 20 per cent range from the midpoint.

(The midpoint for a $67.25-million cap in this system would be roughly $56-million, with the floor at closer to 45-million. The previous system had a range of $16-million between the cap and floor, which caused issues for poorer clubs attempting to reach the floor.)

The fine print

One other sticking point may be this line from the proposal: “There are no guarantees or fixed targets, other than a requirement that, beginning with the second year of the Agreement, players’ share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season.”

That type of safety measure wouldn’t likely come into effect unless overall revenues cratered, something we haven’t seen in the NHL in more than a decade. But it’s still likely to draw the ire of owners who want to guarantee the player share is as close to 50-50 as possible every season.
You can read the NHLPA’s full offer here.


Edited by Squeak, 21 November 2012 - 01:01 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#3000 The-Impersonator

The-Impersonator

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,727 posts
  • Joined: 05-July 03

Posted 21 November 2012 - 01:00 PM

This proposal by Fehr is a joke. It does nothing in the slightest. Its just the same finger pointing .

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409992

Fehr's ego is now way beyond the players interest. Fehr could never get over the fact he does not have equal power with Bettman or the owners.

This is the downfall of union. They honestly thought they own 50% of the NHL and the owners have to give them 50% concessions.

I guess Fehr is hoping his WHINING letter to the Canadian Parliament is going to somehow SPIN public opinion , when in fact it just turns everyone off.

If you told the union 2 years ago Fehr would be in this position and the players locked out, they would have NEVER hired the guy.


Did Fehr still your kids lunch or something? ....oh wait your still in grade 10.
  • 1




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.