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

#511 Profanity

Profanity

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 09

Posted 29 August 2012 - 07:22 PM

Oh so on top of relocating 10+ teams you are in favour of contraction or how you would say "shutting down". Are you sure you are on the players side?

Instead of asking the players to sign an agreement that reduces their share of revenue by a few percentage points you would rather many players to lose their jobs? Because that's what happens when you "shut down" teams. I'd love to know what players think of this idea.

You still haven't said how you would go about relocating 10+ teams. Do you have a plan for this or are you randomly throwing out ideas?

What would you do about Arena lease agreements that lock in franchises to multiple years. Just answer this one question and the rest we will worry about later.

Edit: prospective market sizes, availabilty of suitable venues (18,000 + seat Arenas) and so on can be talked about later.


Once again, you are missing the point, and your reading comprehension is no better than a 1st grader. Relocation takes time, and no one is asking the league to relocate 10+ team all at once, but things need to be changed, and Bettman's personal agenda should be set aside instead of hindering the franchises. I have said it a good number of times that, you don't go and ask players to take a 20% paycut when the business is profitable and revenue is rising. Poor business decision such as adding or moving teams to unmarketable location is not the fault of the players. Shutting down 1 or 2 teams that should've no business in this league will no doubt means some not too talented players will have to go play in another league, but that would also boost the quality of current teams, while cutting dead weights that hinder the growth of the league as a whole.

As for the lease agreement, is it the players fault that the idiot owner decided to sign a 20 years lease for a franchise that has been losing money like a waterfall? The right move is to stop the bleeding, negotiate a buy out of the lease, and move to a more profitable location. Just because the people in Glendale think they deserve a hockey team, that doesn't mean they should get one if they have to use their tax money to keep the team afloat.

Rebuttal? I merely asked for some info on your claims. You brought up inflation as part of the reason players might leave to go to Russia.

I'm just asking you to tell me about this inflation you speak of. What does inflation have to do with players not leaving for Russian 4 years ago but they will today? What is the inflation rate over the past 4 years? Are you aware of the numbers?

I can tell you Canadian inflation rate was approx 2.9% in 2011. Hardly make me want to move to Russia where the inflation rate was approx 8.46% in 2011 and averaged 13+ % for 2008 and 2009.


Do you have any knowledge of economics at all? You seem absolutely clueless when it comes to numbers. The buying power of 50 mil from 4 years ago is a lot more than what you could get 50 mil nowadays. That is inflation. Comparing Russia's inflation with Canada's means you have zero idea what the argument is about. KHL is already the next best league in the world right now, and some players are already planning to join KHL in the upcoming season if there is a lock out, so I am not sure why you think it is a wild thought for players to jump to KHL if NHL screws up once again with the new CBA.

I am going to ask you this again, are you Bettman? :bigblush:

Edited by Profanity, 29 August 2012 - 07:25 PM.

  • 0

#512 canuckbeliever

canuckbeliever

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,911 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 07

Posted 29 August 2012 - 07:29 PM

And my point is, the owners are not one person but a group. And it takes only one rich owner to decide he wants to spend more than the cap for the system to be tested, and the exisiting CBA failed to contain smart GMs. So the owners as a group wanted to control spending, yes, but within that group there are some that can and want to spend more, and if they find a way, the others that have the means and want to stay comptetitive HAVE TO follow. If you can find any stupidity in that, it's in that they could not come up with a bullet-proof CBA- but that is very hard to perfectly limit the human ingenuity. The true stupidity is to talk of `the owners`as one homogeneous and perfectly united group. If you can`t understand that owners are both one group yet competitive within that group, you totally misunderstand the situation.


Yet all of them voted the 2005 cba through to reduce spending. How does that make any sense? They all voted to reduce spending and instill a cap which would help achieve that goal yet the majority of them increased spending through there representatives after the CBA was passed.

That to me is pretty stupid.

All of the owners were perfectly united in the situation as all of them voted what was the "current CBA" through.

Also, I am done with this conversation from this point forward as I do not know how to explain it more because frankly you are not truly understand my argument despite the fact I have explained it to you in 4-5 different ways and overall your point is absurd.

Edited by canuckbeliever, 29 August 2012 - 07:32 PM.

  • 0

#513 canuckbeliever

canuckbeliever

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,911 posts
  • Joined: 05-February 07

Posted 29 August 2012 - 07:35 PM

To all the folks that are saying we need more Canadian teams, in the long run we actually do not. Yeah in the present if a team relocated to Canada it would be great but there is a lot more potential in the States to make a lot more money. The NHL will make the most amount of money in the long run in the United States due to better TV contracts, a higher population in the States/etc. I am as a Canadian as anyone but the last thing I want is another franchise to be relocated to Canada. Economically, it makes 0 sense in the long run. Especially when the US dollar gets stronger and the Canadian dollar dips.

Edited by canuckbeliever, 29 August 2012 - 07:35 PM.

  • 0

#514 Ghostsof1915

Ghostsof1915

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 24,017 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 07

Posted 29 August 2012 - 07:58 PM

Who's threatening to shut down the league with a lockout? Owners.
Who rolled back salaries last lockout, and won last time? Owners.
Who has been signing off on GM's offering long term contracts to circumvent the cap? Owners.
Who's approved Bettman putting teams in markets that don't support hockey? Owners.
Who keeps raising the salary cap? Owners.
Who keeps raising ticket prices? Owners.
Who won't give a true account of revenues for the league on all sources of revenue? Owners.

The players have said they will play even without an agreement. I have no problem with the owners trying to get the players to a 50/50 split of revenue. I'm sure they can even work out the contract lengths. But it's the owners and GM's that have been shafting each other. Not the players. We the fans are the ones that "pay the freight" and our reward? Yet another work stoppage.

Get an arbitrator, get a 2 year deal, and next time start negotiations right away instead of waiting for the last minute to get a deal.

Fire Bettman because the NHL won't have fans the way he runs the league into the ground.
  • 3
GO CANUCKS GO!
"The Canucks did not lose in 1994. They just ran out of time.." Barry MacDonald Team1040

Posted Image

#515 Sully2Cool

Sully2Cool

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,551 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 11

Posted 29 August 2012 - 09:31 PM

Posted Image
  • 0
Posted Image

#516 ajhockey

ajhockey

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,502 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 10

Posted 29 August 2012 - 10:45 PM

Also, I was wondering this.

Does a year still tick off a player's contract even if they entire season is locked out?

Therefore, if the season is locked out, did the Stars sign Jagr for nothing? Was is a complete waste of time?

Edited by ajhockey, 29 August 2012 - 10:46 PM.

  • 0

14ndb35.jpg
Credit to -Vintage Canuck- for the awesome sig!

"Gino, Gino, Gino, Gino!"
Rest In Peace, Rypien, Demitra, and Bourdon


#517 Wh!stler R!der

Wh!stler R!der

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,059 posts
  • Joined: 14-January 09

Posted 30 August 2012 - 06:03 AM

If anyone saw any video today of Bettman notice his left eye (viewers right) and see that it looks like Gary has pink eye lol!
  • 0
This city deserves a championship. This is the best era in Canucks history, keep bleeding blue n green always!
Win it for Ripper, Luc and Demo.

#518 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 72,500 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 30 August 2012 - 01:21 PM

NHLPA to respond Friday:

The NHL Players' Association will take another day before responding to the league's latest labor proposal.


The union is expected to issue a response to the NHL's second offer when the two sides reconvene for labor talks Friday in Manhattan.


Although NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr said Wednesday he was "optimistic" the sides would meet Thursday, the union asked for an additional day before countering the league's proposal, submitted Tuesday.


"We're hopeful that it's a meaningful proposal that we can continue to make progress from," NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly said. "We feel like we made a good step in that direction earlier this week and we hope that they would take a step forward as well."


The NHL's latest offer featured concessions from its initial proposal -- made July 13 -- although the two sides don't seem to agree on how significantly it deviates from the original one.


NHL commissioner Gary Bettman called the new proposal a "meaningful" move, although the NHLPA insisted that the suggested financial concessions, albeit different from the original requests, still require the players to undertake too hefty of a burden.


By the NHL's calculations, the latest offer represents a concession of $460 million from the league, although the sides still have not agreed on a definition of hockey-related revenue, among other things.


The league's original proposal asked for a decreased players' share of revenue from 57 percent (where it currently stands) to 43 percent. According to the NHLPA's calculations, the latest proposal features a cut to 46 percent.


The league's second proposal also didn't ask for any salary rollbacks. However, it likely would result in a significant increase in escrow. The union projects that escrow would rise to 15-20 percent; the NHL projects it would rise to 12-13 percent. The players paid 8.5 percent in escrow in 2011-12.


Daly did not know whether the NHLPA's proposal will be based on the league's latest proposal -- the NHL based its on the union's last submission -- but said format wasn't an issue.


"We're not married to the structure," Daly said. "If it's a good proposal and it takes a different route, we're open to that."


With a little more than two weeks until the collective bargaining agreement expires, the core economic issues still present the most significant philosophical and practical road blocks to a new deal being reached. The league already has stated its intent to lock out the players if a deal isn't reached by Sept. 15.


"Obviously, the clock is ticking," Daly said. "We're almost into September now. I would say the positive thing is that both parties are committed if there are reasons to meet, to continue to move forward, to meet as often as it takes to get it done.


"But obviously every day that goes by, it's less and less likely that we'll be able to come to closure on all the issues we need to come to closure on."


http://espn.go.com/n...-labor-proposal
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#519 wtpasc

wtpasc

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,084 posts
  • Joined: 12-March 10

Posted 30 August 2012 - 03:03 PM

I hate that the latest proposal gives me hope. I'm stuck at 50% hopeful, 50% pessimistic now. I keep fantasizing that they will come to some last minute deal and the season will start as scheduled.
  • 3

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image


#520 SamJamIam

SamJamIam

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,029 posts
  • Joined: 27-November 11

Posted 30 August 2012 - 05:54 PM

I hate that the latest proposal gives me hope. I'm stuck at 50% hopeful, 50% pessimistic now. I keep fantasizing that they will come to some last minute deal and the season will start as scheduled.


At the rate they're going, they still have time. Negotiations only started in mid August. We've got until Sept 15 for the current CBA to expire but really the date that matters is early Oct since that's when the season actually starts. That's pretty far off in the future when they're meeting every couple of days
  • 0

#521 Garrison

Garrison

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 851 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 12

Posted 30 August 2012 - 06:14 PM

I feel like it will be a 60 games schedule. They will come to their senses at the end of October than have like 3 pre-season games and than start the season. No training camps though.
  • 0

#522 wtpasc

wtpasc

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,084 posts
  • Joined: 12-March 10

Posted 30 August 2012 - 06:32 PM

At the rate they're going, they still have time. Negotiations only started in mid August. We've got until Sept 15 for the current CBA to expire but really the date that matters is early Oct since that's when the season actually starts. That's pretty far off in the future when they're meeting every couple of days

ok 51% hopeful now
  • 0

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image


#523 coastal1

coastal1

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 729 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 12

Posted 30 August 2012 - 09:59 PM

Yet all of them voted the 2005 cba through to reduce spending. How does that make any sense? They all voted to reduce spending and instill a cap which would help achieve that goal yet the majority of them increased spending through there representatives after the CBA was passed.

That to me is pretty stupid.

All of the owners were perfectly united in the situation as all of them voted what was the "current CBA" through.

Also, I am done with this conversation from this point forward as I do not know how to explain it more because frankly you are not truly understand my argument despite the fact I have explained it to you in 4-5 different ways and overall your point is absurd.

So you know for a fact that all owners suported the 2005 CBA? Hard to believe given what followed.
  • 0

#524 coastal1

coastal1

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 729 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 12

Posted 30 August 2012 - 10:05 PM

Once again, you are missing the point, and your reading comprehension is no better than a 1st grader. Relocation takes time, and no one is asking the league to relocate 10+ team all at once, but things need to be changed, and Bettman's personal agenda should be set aside instead of hindering the franchises. I have said it a good number of times that, you don't go and ask players to take a 20% paycut when the business is profitable and revenue is rising. Poor business decision such as adding or moving teams to unmarketable location is not the fault of the players. Shutting down 1 or 2 teams that should've no business in this league will no doubt means some not too talented players will have to go play in another league, but that would also boost the quality of current teams, while cutting dead weights that hinder the growth of the league as a whole.

Have you heard of a company called Electro-Motive in Ontario, it was in the news last winter (not the sports news). Electro-Motive is owned by Caterpillar which had record profits last year and they came into the negotiations asking for a 50% pay cut. So to say that you just don't ask players (employees) to take a pay cut when business is profitable and growing is just not the case. Electro-Motive was an extreme example, but as Fehr has said himself, any employer, at any time, would like to pay his employees less. Now the question is can they get away with it? Time will tell.But you know that the owners can miss a year of hockey a lot easire than players can.






  • 0

#525 Profanity

Profanity

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 92 posts
  • Joined: 19-April 09

Posted 30 August 2012 - 10:21 PM

Have you heard of a company called Electro-Motive in Ontario, it was in the news last winter (not the sports news). Electro-Motive is owned by Caterpillar which had record profits last year and they came into the negotiations asking for a 50% pay cut. So to say that you just don't ask players (employees) to take a pay cut when business is profitable and growing is just not the case. Electro-Motive was an extreme example, but as Fehr has said himself, any employer, at any time, would like to pay his employees less. Now the question is can they get away with it? Time will tell.But you know that the owners can miss a year of hockey a lot easire than players can.


Hence they are on the news for bad management practice.
  • 0

#526 Neufy161

Neufy161

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
  • Joined: 01-August 11

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:23 AM

Dear god,

Please let the NHLPA's counter-offer to the NHL's latest counter-offer to the counter-offer be the counter-offer that gets the ball rolling. I promise to eat all my vegetables, and do nice things. Today we will hear the NHLPA's counter proposal and I pray that it give the entire process a bit of optimism.

There are only 2 weeks left and I'm beginning to tremble.

Thank you God,

Sincerely CDC
  • 1

Oh hello Alain Vigneault, I see what you did there... good one.

Posted Image

Signature by (>'-')>


#527 Mike Versace ESQ

Mike Versace ESQ

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,668 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 08

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:52 AM

My open letter to Mr Gary Bettman


Hey Gary, old buddy old pal.


I'll be 100% honest. I'm not going to make an empty threat saying if there is a work stoppage that I will never watch NHL hockey ever again. We all know that if one would take the time to write an open letter to you about their love of NHL hockey, it would be safe to assume that they appreciate the game too much to walk away from it completely. I will always love NHL hockey and I will always watch NHL hockey. But I can promise you this. I will NEVER spend one more penny on merchandise, tickets, parking, food etc and that is a promise I CAN keep.

Hockey is more than just a sport or a game to its fans, especially its Canadian fans. It is a passion. It is a special part of our lives. Even when the pressures of life, the stress of relationships, the aches and pains of a hard day at work are making you unhappy, as fans of this beautiful sport we all have a common bond with each other. We can turn on the game and temporarily forget all those problems and just watch hockey. Gary Bettman, you are 100% correct when you say The NHL has the world's greatest fans. I understand that above everything else the NHL is a business and that's fine. I have no problem with both sides wanting a fair share of hockey related revenue. I know how negotiating works. But what you are prepared to do is very risky. To subject your fans, the same ones who pay to make both the owners and players (and yourself) obscene amounts of money, to a 3rd work stoppage in less than 20 years is a giant slap in the face to the millions of people who love this game. You may as well walk up to TV camera, look directly into it, raise your middle finger and and yell "f@%k you hockey fans"

The owners clearly won the last time around and got the deal they wanted. They claimed it was a deal they desperately needed to fix a broken NHL and they were willing to throw away a whole season to get it . This deal which radically changed how the NHL was run, creating parity and making it more difficult for the richest teams to throw whatever money they wanted to available free agents did in fact create a better NHL product. Was the deal perfect? Of course not. Can there be some changes made to make it more fair for both sides? Absolutely. But for the owners to say that they can no longer do business under the current agreement that they fought so hard to get is complete (pardon my language) bullsh!t and the fans know this. The owners got the deal they wanted and still found a way to mess it up.

It is the owners who have caused whatever problems they claim to have with the current agreement. It is a product of their mistakes, their overspending, their egos and once again they want the NHLPA to fix it for them. For what? So in 5-10 years they can mess it up again and threaten their employees with another lockout and their fans with another slap in the face?

I want the NHL to thrive. I want the NHL to be successful in all of its 30 markets. I know a financially healthy NHL makes for a better product on the ice. That's why I support tweaking the current agreement. What I don't support is you and the owners bragging every year that NHL attendance and revenues are hitting record numbers in one sentence, complaining how they can't continue to operate this way in the next sentence and announcing that if the NHLPA doesn't bend over once again to fix the problems that the owners have created, that they will punish their fans by taking away from them the game that they love.

I don't care how it's done, just resolve this before Sept 15th. Like I stated, if there is in fact another lock out, YES I will return as a fan and I will always love my NHL, but you won't get another dollar from me. I will no longer buy tickets. If I receive tickets for a game, i will not buy beer, nachos, peanuts, pizza or any other overpriced food or drink that the owners make an excellent profit from. I will no longer buy my favourite teams jerseys, hats, t-shirts, car flags or any other merchandise with an NHL or NHLPA logo attached to it. I will no longer buy the products that your sponsors pay good money to try to sell me.

Simply put, I will no longer be taken for granted as a fan of this wonderful sport. A simple "Thank You Fans" written on the ice just inside the blue lines will not change my mind this time around.

Of course, if a deal can be reached before any part of this season is lost, I as a fan would feel that I mattered and the NHL truly appreciated me.

Please don't take away part of what makes me Canadian.

I just want to watch hockey.

Sincerely

Mr Soprano

Edited by Mr Soprano, 31 August 2012 - 02:08 AM.

  • 4

Posted ImagePosted Image


FOLLOW @MikeVersace1

#shapcrew #membersonly

credit to CanucksHD for the avatar


#528 Mike Versace ESQ

Mike Versace ESQ

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,668 posts
  • Joined: 07-September 08

Posted 31 August 2012 - 02:01 AM

If anyone saw any video today of Bettman notice his left eye (viewers right) and see that it looks like Gary has pink eye lol!


Donald Fehr must have bare-back farted on Gary's pillow
  • 0

Posted ImagePosted Image


FOLLOW @MikeVersace1

#shapcrew #membersonly

credit to CanucksHD for the avatar


#529 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,546 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 31 August 2012 - 08:12 AM

To all the folks that are saying we need more Canadian teams, in the long run we actually do not. Yeah in the present if a team relocated to Canada it would be great but there is a lot more potential in the States to make a lot more money. The NHL will make the most amount of money in the long run in the United States due to better TV contracts, a higher population in the States/etc. I am as a Canadian as anyone but the last thing I want is another franchise to be relocated to Canada. Economically, it makes 0 sense in the long run. Especially when the US dollar gets stronger and the Canadian dollar dips.

Potential doesn't pay the bills, look how many US locations with potential are bleeding red ink, you don't develop a love for a sport by joining a league or watching on TV, you do that by playing with your friends as a kid, Hockey is popular in places like Canada, Russia, Sweden, Finland, and northern states like Minnesota and Michigan because climate allows kids to just play with their friends on a public rink or one that little Johnny's dad built in the back yard. Sports are a cultural thing, and you are not going to reverse 200+ years of culture. The NHL is heading down the same road as NASCAR, they tried to go big time, had the sport invaded by suits and yuppies, alienated much of their core audience, abandoned loyal markets to appeal to the yuppie fad, before this you couldn't get a ticket to the Bristol races, now you can walk up to the gate 1/2 hour before green flag and buy a ticket, ratings are dropping like a rock, followed by constant rule changes in a desperate attempt to stop the bleeding, this is what the NHL will be facing in short order when the yuppies find a new thing, and the suits follow, and the fans that they built the sport on are not around because they can't afford their prices.
  • 0
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal

#530 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 72,500 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 31 August 2012 - 11:28 AM

Player agent Pat Brisson who also represents Patrick Kane and Jonathan Toews says that they too will be interested in playing in Europe.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#531 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 72,500 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 31 August 2012 - 11:50 AM

In the NHLs most recent proposal, they made some changes to Hockey Related Revenue:

1) In the existing CBA, teams can deduct the cost of doing business from HRR. But there are limits. For example, deductions from preseason games or “special games” such as European openers, “shall not in the aggregate exceed fifteen (15) per cent per League Year on a League-wide basis” of the revenues. You can find all of the examples, if you wish, in Article 50 of the current document. The NHL is arguing that costs far exceed these caps.


2) One area of HRR the NHL cannot deduct ANY costs from is luxury suite sales (e.g., paying people to sell them). Everything must be thrown into the pot. Mistake, oversight, whatever - the league would like a re-do.


3) Lightning owner Jeff Vinik spent $35 million US last summer to upgrade The Tampa Bay Times Forum. Meanwhile, Rangers owner Jim Dolan committed an estimated $977 million to a massive renovation of the Madison Square Garden. (Say what you want about Dolan, but doing that without public funding is extremely impressive.) As it stands, teams receive no financial credit for that. The league would like that changed. The model is probably the latest NFL CBA, which allows the league the option of taking 1.5 per cent from the NFLPA’s 47 per cent share to build new stadiums. Larger revenues from newer buildings, the reasoning goes, benefits the players, too.


4) When players on one-way deals like Wade Redden or Jeff Finger are sent to the minors, their salaries no longer count. Not only is the NHL trying to eliminate this loophole from the salary-cap portion of the discussion, it is trying to make those contracts tied to HRR, too.


http://www.cbc.ca/sp...ignificant.html
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#532 playboi19

playboi19

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,524 posts
  • Joined: 15-August 08

Posted 31 August 2012 - 12:44 PM

Lockout is going to happen.

NHL CBA MEETINGS RECESSED; NO FUTURE TALKS PLANNED FOR NOW
The NHL Players' Association and the National Hockey League have wrapped up their collective bargaining meeting for the day - and for the forseeable future.
NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr told reporters after Friday's session that talks are recessed for now and no further meetings are scheduled at this time.


http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=404230

Too little time. The September Camps will be cancelled at the least, delaying the season.

Edited by playboi19, 31 August 2012 - 12:45 PM.

  • 0

#533 TheRocket18

TheRocket18

    Comets Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 277 posts
  • Joined: 20-December 09

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:06 PM

ARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
  • 0

#534 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 72,500 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:08 PM

Lockout is going to happen.



http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=404230

Too little time. The September Camps will be cancelled at the least, delaying the season.


It has already been a long off-season with the Luongo rumours and the Doan saga. Now most likely we won't have hockey for a whole year.

:sadno:
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#535 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

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

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:12 PM

December is still my guess for season start
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#536 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 72,500 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:15 PM

For those who have been on CDC for at least 7-8 years. How was CDC like during the 2005 lockout?
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#537 McMucus

McMucus

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 391 posts
  • Joined: 21-May 10

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:18 PM

This is ill news!
  • 0

#538 CanuckianOne

CanuckianOne

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,592 posts
  • Joined: 02-December 11

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:45 PM

The worst news we could have gotten today...This sucks
  • 0

#539 wtpasc

wtpasc

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,084 posts
  • Joined: 12-March 10

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:53 PM

please no!
  • 0

Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image


#540 canuck_trevor16

canuck_trevor16

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,657 posts
  • Joined: 15-January 07

Posted 31 August 2012 - 01:55 PM

FIRED BETTMAN NOWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW
  • 0

One day some of us will look back on the year and look at the chicago, and most of us will realize that it was a small bump in the road to the cup


WIN THE CUP FOR SALO CAMPAIGN




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.