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

#2761 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,475 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 16 November 2012 - 06:29 PM

For anyone who missed Pierre LeBrun's blog, here's what other fans are saying:

Giving the fans a voice in the CBA talks


I vented on Twitter Friday morning that it’s utterly insane that this lockout is still happening.

The league says Don Fehr refuses to make a deal. The NHLPA says Gary Bettman is intent on crushing the players’ union, not making a fair deal.

Enough already.

Let’s focus on the people that really matter in this ridiculous labor impasse: those who foot the bill year in and year out.

This blog is dedicated the folks who haven’t been invited to CBA meetings and who don’t get to voice their opinion on TV.

The fans get a voice here:


@real_espnlebrun I don't plan on purchasing tickets whenever the season starts. Probably won't next season either....— Blues Hockey Podcast (@BluesHockeyPodc) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I have given @nhl and @nhlpa until Dec 1 to get a deal done. If not, I will never watch hockey again. It will hurt. A lot.— Jason Cassidy (@jaybone1978) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I have a black and orange ribbon on my car that says "Save my hockey!" from the last lockout, I am about to take it off.— John Laconca (@Laconca) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun fans are middle fingers with small wallets and long memories.— Arlin Ginther (@ArlinGinther) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun will never pay to go to another game— GJ Courville (@GJCourville) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun2b honest, when hockey finally comes back I'll watch on tv. Will NOT buy anymore tix, jerseys or merch tho. Not after this— Dammit (@DogmataDeke) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I just canceled my season tickets and I will not get them again. I wish others would do the same and stick it to the league— Steve Cassel (@cassel191919) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun My anger was replaced by apathy long before this latest outrage. #notmissinghockey #formerdiehard— David Coffey (@Dtcoff) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun here's the thing: my heart wants to come back. my head doesn't. I am going to really let my head have a go at it this time.— curtisandrews (@curtisandrews) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I feel like a toddler who is upset but they just can't verbalize it so they sit there even more frustrated. #imisshockey— Thomas Scott (@scottischicago) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I removed my name from the pens season ticket list. Pens say a lot are. Don't Want to got thru this every 6 years— Jim (@jssst12) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun as a moderate fan of the game (and the Caps), I've become so turned off that I don't know if/when I'll be interested again.— S. Biscuit (@StankyBiscuit) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I think both parties under estimate how quicky people move in this day and age— Steve N (@KINGS1973) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun what I fear is that everytime a new CBA needs to be done there's going to be a lockout.— Amber Reynolds (@ZijaFanatik105) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I'll watch on TV when they come back - but buy tickets?Not for a long long time.— Russ Andolina (@rjandolina) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun told all my family NOT to buy me anything NHL related for Christmas.#SocksForTheWin— Ferg(@Ferg__) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun Called yesterday and took my name off of the Hawks season ticket waiting list.#notgettingmy$$— Steve Racine (@poker_hockey) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I know I'll come back to it in time, but no season this year means I won't buy anything NHL in 1st season back. #NHLboycott— Kyle Ailinger (@KAilinger) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun i say thank you pierre for finally seeing it from a fans eye view, this time its not going to be easy to forgive & forget— enio bisecco (@Bisecco11) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun You can't expect fans to keep coming back to a league that has a lockout everytime it's CBA is up— Robert Schneider (@SchneiderSez) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun If the season is lost...so is my 2300 per season...forever maybe— Tony Flores (@JDandTurkelton) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun Will rebound here in MTL/Tor. What about Fla,Nash,Tpa or Columbus. Missing it but not craving it. Life goes on.— J.B. (@montreal57) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun Amen to that! I am really peeved this time. I don't want a watered-down season. My kids are confused & missing it. Sad— Dan Levine (@DBL1216) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun The last lockout was hard for me to get through...This time, I really do not care... #NFLSalute— MMarcelloni (@MMarcelloni) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun $650m lost so far. At what point in the lockout do both sides lose more than the difference they'refighting over?— Tim Horton (@timothy_horton) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun It will be exponentially worse this time around. I'm a hardcore fan and I'm boycotting when (if?) it starts up #fanlockout— Cory Ingjaldson (@cory_ingjaldson) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I know a few people that really jumped on the #NYR playoff bandwagon last spring. They could care less now. #LostMomentum— Chris Gatti (@cwgatti) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun As a die hard #RedWings & @nhl fan of 30 years I'm disgusted &done. I can't support them or spend $ on this league anymore.— TRV (@xTRVx) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun US economy is a lot worse then it was 7 years ago. The average fan cant afford to go to a game, they will spend $ elsewhere— Tristateconcerts.com (@tristateconcert) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I'm gonna watch my Sens, but there is NO WAY I'm paying for anything. Ever. No jerseys. No hats. No NHL Network. Nothing.— Eamon O'Flynn (@EamonOFlynn) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun It's also more frustrating this time because with social media we are constantly reminded. Permanent damage has been done.— Jim Patrick (@jjfitz77) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun Already canceled 2 of 4 @nyrangersseats, questioning the other 2 and really has me thinking on how long I may stay away— Michael Mazal (@Michael99420) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun they are alienating the hardcore fans this time. We accepted it last time. Not again.— Dudgee (@Dudgee) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun lockout is like pausing a videogame w/o saving, sooner or later the power will go out and you have to start over— Rockford White(@RockfordWhite) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun 35 years of being an NHL fan, in several markets, from Dionne to Stamkos. I may very well not come back after this.— Peter Gilson (@Gilsonhockey) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun so true. I'm a young fan, grew to love the Blackhawks in 08/09. Can't promise I'll come back w/ same enthusiasm.— Benjamin Garmoe (@bengarmoe) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun devil season ticket holder since 93. im done with the nhl. ill just go watch local youth hockey.— Phil Osophy (@Phillip_Osophy) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun Full season lockout = lose me as a fan.— Brian Georgievski (@brimau5) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun I'm a Blackhawks fan in DC. I'm going to Chicago in two weeks and will be buying zero NHL merchandise. I have self-respect.— RollingDoughnut (@RollingDoughnut) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun last time I couldn't wait to come back. This time ill come back, but with a newfound resentment for the league and players.— Benjamin(@BENT0B0X) November 16, 2012


@real_espnlebrun The holidays keep people busy thru new years and then there is superbowl and spring training. love hockey but wont miss it— Jaclyn Renee (@dubnoxious) November 16, 2012


I understand the complexities of this negotiation. And I get both sides’ positions. But there also has to be a reality check. This league cannot afford another year without hockey. But the players better know the league will in fact do it again unless there's a deal owners can live with. The long-term damage from this lockout is already bad enough. It’s time for a true, meaningful negotiation. Stop the bleeding.


Source: http://espn.go.com/b...ce-in-cba-talks
  • 1
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2762 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 70,456 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:15 PM

NHLPA wants to resume CBA negotiations next week:

NHLPA special counsel Steve Fehr and NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly talked briefly today, but they didn’t schedule a new meeting. All the same, the union hopes to resume negotiations next week, according to RDS’ Renaud Lavoie.


That’s in contrast to NHL commissioner Gary Bettman recently proposed two-week moratorium on CBA talks.


If the NHLPA gets its way and talks resume soon, there will still be a slim chance for a Dec. 1 season opener. The next round of cancelations aren’t expected until mid-week. At the same time, the two sides might still have a massive gap to close.


Based on the NHL’s charts, the latest NHLPA proposal would potentially provided the players with over $1 billion more than a 50/50 split over five seasons.


The main reason for that is because the union is seeking a guaranteed player share for 2012-13 that doesn’t factor in the lockout. For now, the union wants to focus on the overall structure of the deal before tackling the issue of revenues lost due to the lockout.


http://prohockeytalk..._medium=twitter
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#2763 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,475 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:21 PM

Vitriol overtakes hope as NHL labour talks take a vacation

Anger is the only word that describes the state of the NHL right now.

The players are angry NHL commissioner Gary Bettman’s proposal for reviving the dead labour negotiations was a two-week vacation. The owners and a lot of their general managers are angry at NHL Players’ Association executive director Donald Fehr, whom they accuse of not wanting a new collective agreement. Both men were the subjects of some nasty name-calling on Friday, as word of Bettman’s suggestion spread.

And the fans are angry with both sides, taking to social media, web sites and the radio call-in shows to say, essentially, “a pox on both their houses.”

Only Toronto Maple Leafs defenceman John-Michael Liles was able to add a little humour, although he was just as unhappy as his colleagues that Bettman wanted to take a break from even trying to negotiate.

“No, Gary, you can’t have [two weeks] off to go to Hawaii and bodysurf,” Liles posted on his Twitter account Friday afternoon.

A tweet from Edmonton Oilers defenceman Ryan Whitney conveyed more of the anger many players were feeling: “So the NHL wants to take a [two-week] break from negotiating. Not even just [one], let’s take [two]. Makes sense. What’s the rush? ... WTF?!”

There was some contact between the sides Friday, as NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly and NHLPA special counsel Steve Fehr had a brief telephone conversation. But no meetings are scheduled and Friday night marked one week since the owners and players broke off their last lengthy bargaining session with an exchange of harsh words.

Daly, who said Thursday he was more discouraged with the state of the labour dispute than at any other point, was not as bleak Friday. Then again, it was only by comparison, as the most positive thing he could say was that personal rancour had not taken over among the negotiators.
“I think what you have seen is disappointment with where we find ourselves in the process,” Daly said. “I don’t think it’s a case of personal animosity.”

Conversations with people on both sides of this impasse Friday showed the mood to be so bleak as to be reminiscent of the many low points of the 2004-05 lockout, when the entire season was lost. Where there were always optimists on both sides until this week, now there are many who think this season could be lost as well.

Even though Bettman did not officially cancel the 2004-05 season until Feb. 16, 2005, the owners and GMs consulted think it could happen sooner this time. Those who hoped a full 82-game season could be squeezed out of a late November start are now fretting even a season of 68 games or fewer is in jeopardy.

What also emerged from both sides were questions about how much support Fehr and Bettman actually have from their constituencies. However, no players or owners expressed doubt about their own leadership.

Indeed, Bettman angered several owners with his last offer. But the owners, who are prevented from speaking publicly by a gag order imposed by the commissioner, remain behind him. Bettman was told by some owners that his offer, which was rejected by the players, of a 50-50 split of league revenue with the owners putting at least $215-million (all currency U.S.) toward eventually paying existing player contracts in full, went too far.

Two owners described that offer as Bettman’s best and final shot at making a deal. They say they need all of the things demanded in that deal, from five-year limits on contracts (one argument is owners cannot insure player contracts for more than five years) to limiting the yearly salary increases to raising the age of free agency in addition to cutting the players’ share of NHL revenue to 50 per cent from 57.

One owner said he is willing to risk cancelling the season rather than sign what he considers a bad collective agreement. He is well aware he is losing fans every day, the owner said, but simply cannot agree to a deal he thinks would make it impossible for him to turn a profit.

At this point, there is no indication when talks will resume, hence the gloom around the league. Donald Fehr told Hockey Night In Canada Radio his response to Bettman’s suggestion of a two-week break was, “I didn’t think that was a good idea.” He also said, “we’ve been prepared to meet every day.”

However, Fehr also rejected the notion put forward by the owners, that they have made lots of concessions thus far and the players are being unreasonable.

“The only way the owners have made a concession is if you treat seriously their notion we made a first proposal which was horrible, terrible and miserable,” Fehr said, “and our second proposal was only horrible and terrible so we moved in your direction.”

Source: http://www.theglobea...article5399489/
  • 1
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2764 Nuck_Family_in_SD

Nuck_Family_in_SD

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Joined: 05-June 11

Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:30 PM

Well, we're just a regular ol' family that loves hockey. We don't care much for all the politics of late, including holding the fans hostage while a bunch of people with too much money already don't know the definition of compromise. It's becoming blindingly obvious to us that the sport itself is no longer what matters, it's money. We already don't watch NFL or NBA or MLB because the sports have been bought out by greed. We were innocent in thinking hockey was different.

We've pretty much written off this season (which is unfortunate as we have REALLY been looking forward to the start of the season since summer). As a family, we're lost. Sure, we find other things to fill our nights, but huddling around the TV to follow the Canucks and Sharks and Ducks isn't one of them. We miss them. BUT, we decided to cut our losses and not support the decisions of the greedy. While we're just a grain of sand on a mile long beach, our dollars we normally spend on NHL Center Ice package is going elsewhere this year. We cancelled our CI and if (or when) this CBA gets solved, we'll just catch whatever we can on whatever channels we already get. We won't be buying any NHL goodies this year either, or going to any Ducks/Canucks games (the only times we get to see the Canucks in person is when then come down to Anaheim).

It's just sad it has to come to this.
  • 1

#2765 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,964 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 16 November 2012 - 09:55 PM

nice, thanks for posting that poetica. I hit my limit for G&M articles (stupid paywall).
  • 0

#2766 Gumballthechewy

Gumballthechewy

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,905 posts
  • Joined: 18-April 11

Posted 16 November 2012 - 10:00 PM

While we're just a grain of sand on a mile long beach, our dollars we normally spend on NHL Center Ice package is going elsewhere this year. We cancelled our CI and if (or when) this CBA gets solved, we'll just catch whatever we can on whatever channels we already get. We won't be buying any NHL goodies this year either, or going to any Ducks/Canucks games (the only times we get to see the Canucks in person is when then come down to Anaheim).

It's just sad it has to come to this.


Join the cause! Fan lockout!

Edited by Gumballthechewy, 16 November 2012 - 10:05 PM.

  • 0

Don't take anything I say seriously! EVER!


#2767 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:12 AM

Ian White calls Bettman an idiot and goes on to say .... It only takes 7 owners to have something pass...it's not democratic. LOL what a moron.

In reality It's 8 owners votes to turn down a deal, not 7 votes to have something pass.

Great example of an uneducated hockey player, no wonder half these guy couldn't understand the concept of escrow when they started seeing escrow deductions on their paychecks after last lockout. LOL He doesn't even know this simple fact even I know as a fan who's not losing millions due to this lockout.

http://www.sportsnet...aining_lockout/

When it comes to dissent on the owners' side, Bettman only requires the support of eight teams to veto any proposal from the NHLPA


26 seconds
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-068Z9eo1w

Edited by WHL rocks, 17 November 2012 - 01:18 AM.

  • 0

#2768 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,216 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:18 AM

Ian White calls Bettman an idiot and goes on to say .... It only takes 7 owners to have something pass...it's not democratic. LOL what a moron.

In reality It's 8 owners votes to turn down a deal, not 7 votes to have something pass.

Great example of an uneducated hockey player, no wonder half these guy couldn't understand the concept of escrow when they started seeing escrow deductions on their paychecks after last lockout. LOL He doesn't even know this simple fact even I know as a fan who's not losing millions due to this lockout.

26 second mark.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k-068Z9eo1w


Why are you so Pro-Owner?
  • 1

zackass.png


#2769 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:28 AM

I'm not pro owner. I'm pro me.

In my view if owners get a good deal NHL will be a healthy league in the future. If owners make more money I will benefit by being able to enjoy a stable league with some teams in nontraditional but large American markets. Most importantly as a Canadian i'll be able to enjoy teams in Edmonton, Winnipeg and Ottawa and hopeful Hamilton and Quebec in the future.

I want to see a profitable league. I'd like to see Coyotes stay in PHX while teams like Winnipeg and Edmonton become contenders. As it is the Jets will be very hard pressed to compete in payroll.

I am also old enough to remember when the CAD was worth .65 cents and Canucks were one of the Canadian teams on the NHL's welfare program. This was not a long time ago, only a few years.

Edit. And Of course I think most players are uneducated jocks who barely have high school education. Completely no clue even about the simple and basic parts of CBA. I think 50-50 Should be enough for them.

Edited by WHL rocks, 17 November 2012 - 01:51 AM.

  • 0

#2770 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,216 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:55 AM

I'm not pro owner. I'm pro me.

In my view if owners get a good deal NHL will be a healthy league in the future. If owners make money or more money then they make now I will benefit by being able to enjoy a stable league with some teams in nontraditional but large American markets and most importantly teams in Edmonton, Winnipeg and Ottawa and hopeful Hamilton and Quebec in the future.

I want to see a profitable league. I'd like to see Coyotes stay in PHX and Winnipeg and Edmonton to become contenders. As it is the Jets will be very hard pressed to compete in payroll.

I am also old enough to remember when the CAD was worth .65 cents and Canucks were one of the Canadian teams on the NHL's welfare program. And this was not a long time ago, only a few years.

Edit. And Of course I think most players are uneducated jocks who barely have high school education. Completely no clue even about the simple and basic parts of CBA. I think 50-50 Should be enough for them.


I see.

I think some of those markets could potentially work but to me Phoenix has to go.

No one wants to own them there, I don't know the state on the Jamieson situation, but if his bid for the team falls through I would just look at relocation. The only reason Bettman continues to allow that organization to stay put without an owner is because he wants to justify all the work he has done to keep them there, and he can't accept the fact that they have chosen another bad spot to have a team (and of course because the city is willing to keep covering the losses for whatever reason)

I dont understand why in places like this they continue to have the teams there when they just continue to lose money and the fans continue not to care, especially when there are places like Quebec, Seattle and Hamilton that would love to have a team and would be very profitable. But instead they just keep pouring money into it that they will never get back.

And in terms of the CBA negotation I am obviously biased towards the players, I am willing to admit it, but it's only because the league keeps screwing around, it took them 2 months to actually start negotiating on the same planet as the PA, and all along they have been more concerned with there image than getting a deal done, not to mention that they have refused talks at times and now for whatever reason when we are as close as ever, they decide to take 2 weeks off.

It's like they dont want to end this, or maybe Bettman just wants to go on Vacation or something, after all he does still collect his 8 Million. I really just don't understand the NHL/Owners thinking process right now.
  • 0

zackass.png


#2771 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,964 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:56 AM

I might not share your viewpoint WHL, but I do appreciate that you participate in the discussion, answer questions lucidly, and do it without being a condescending umbrella.

edit - umbrella ... interesting choice of word replacement. I'm gonna leave it as is for the surrealism.

Edited by The Bookie, 17 November 2012 - 01:57 AM.

  • 0

#2772 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,964 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 01:59 AM

As to the two week hiatus Bettman proposed ... I'm at a loss, really. I can't think of why he would do it. Or even suggest it. It's a terrible PR move, a worthless negotiation tactic. Even Daly seems confused by it. Oh to be a fly on the wall of the Owners' underground bunker right now.
  • 0

#2773 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:13 AM

Here's the think about PHX Kass. NBC just signed a $2 billion deal with the NHL. Something that the NHL wanted desperately over the past several years.

NBC did not sign this deal to show Winnipeg vs Quebec games. If the NHL wants to be considered a premiere sports league in N.A. they must have teams in major US markets. PHX is a major US market, this is why the NHL has put so much money and time trying to save the Coyotes.
  • 0

#2774 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,216 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:25 AM

Here's the think about PHX Kass. NBC just signed a $2 billion deal with the NHL. Something that the NHL wanted desperately over the past several years.

NBC did not sign this deal to show Winnipeg vs Quebec games. If the NHL wants to be considered a premiere sports league in N.A. they must have teams in major US markets. PHX is a major US market, this is why the NHL has put so much money and time trying to save the Coyotes.


I also agree with Bookie, even though I don't entirely agree, I appreciate that you actually participate and have logical response, unlike some other people on these boards. *Cough* (King of ES) *cough*

But the thing is the people in Phoenix don't care, and do you think other people from other cities want to watch Coyotes games desperately? Not likely. And it wouldn't make a difference to fans of other teams if they are playing the coyotes or a team in Quebec.

Plus does it really make a difference to NBC if one unsuccessful team is moved? Again it's not like they are a major NHL market for NBC anyways if the majority of the fans dont care, where as if the league moved they would be making loads of money in a city that wants a team like Quebec or Seattle.


And Seattle is a pretty big US market, and given that the fans there would actually love and embrace hockey unlike in Phoenix, it would be a much better spot for NBC.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 17 November 2012 - 02:26 AM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#2775 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,964 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:35 AM

NBC did not sign this deal to show Winnipeg vs Quebec games. If the NHL wants to be considered a premiere sports league in N.A. they must have teams in major US markets. PHX is a major US market, this is why the NHL has put so much money and time trying to save the Coyotes.


Maybe. NBC only scheduled 4 Coyotes games for the season - 3 road games, all on Tuesday nights, and 1 Saturday home game against the Sharks.
  • 0

#2776 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,216 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:43 AM

.. That kinda killed his arguement.
  • 0

zackass.png


#2777 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,964 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:47 AM

no, not necessarily. It's a complicated subject, and I don't know what goes on behind the scenes at a major network. I feel like an important component for them is covering as much of the map geographically as possible, in major markets, regardless of local interest. Advertising takes this into consideration, plus there's the added incentive of pleasing other teams in the area, developing rivalries, etc. It's the kind of thing I'd love for someone more qualified to weigh in on, but I'm not sure we have anyone like that on the boards.

Edited by The Bookie, 17 November 2012 - 02:48 AM.

  • 0

#2778 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:54 AM

Maybe. NBC only scheduled 4 Coyotes games for the season - 3 road games, all on Tuesday nights, and 1 Saturday home game against the Sharks.


Yes, thats because they will be airing games on Sunday, Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday.


http://ca.sports.yah...02212--nhl.html

Throughout the season, NBC Sports Group once again will offer hockey fans in the U.S. more than 100 games across NBC and NBC Sports Network. NBC Sports Network will air NHL games three consecutive nights each week on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. Wednesday nights will be exclusive, and in January, NBC Sports Network will add a second exclusive night on Sundays, giving NHL fans four straight nights of hockey action. The network will include a live pre-game (NHL Live™) and post-game (NHL Overtime™) show before and after every telecast. NBC Sports Network also will televise NHL All-Star Weekend live from Columbus, Ohio, Jan. 25-27, 2013. Coverage includes the NHL All-Star Player Fantasy Draft™, NHL All-Star Skills Competition™ and the NHL® All-Star Game.
For the second consecutive season, NHL on NBC broadcast coverage launches on Thanksgiving Friday, with the 2012 Discover NHL Thanksgiving Showdown™ featuring the Boston Bruins playing host to the New York Rangers at 1:00 p.m. ET. NBC will follow up that broadcast with the 2013 Bridgestone NHL Winter Classic® on Tuesday, Jan. 1, at Michigan Stadium on the campus of the University of Michigan, before airing the weekly "Game of the Week" beginning Jan. 20. On Feb. 17, Hockey Day in America will be expanded to a triple-header, with two afternoon games on NBC followed by evening game on NBC Sports Network.



And how many games will they air showing Vancouver, Edmonton, Calgary, Winnipeg and Ottawa? ZERO.

Edited by WHL rocks, 17 November 2012 - 03:06 AM.

  • 0

#2779 WHL rocks

WHL rocks

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,615 posts
  • Joined: 09-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 02:57 AM

.. That kinda killed his arguement.


Hardly, if anything it proves my point. 4 Nationally televised games for PHX and ZERO for Canucks, Oilers, Flames, Sens and Jets.

http://ca.sports.yah...02212--nhl.html

Anaheim Ducks: 1
Boston Bruins: 17
Buffalo Sabres:: 15
Calgary Flames: Zero
Carolina Hurricanes: 1
Chicago Blackhawks: 14
Colorado Avalanche: 6
Columbus Blue Jackets: 1
Dallas Stars: 8
Detroit Red Wings: 17
Edmonton Oilers: Zero
Florida Panthers: 3
Los Angeles Kings: 9
Minnesota Wild: 10
Montreal Canadiens: 5
Nashville Predators: 3
New Jersey Devils: 8
New York Islanders: 1
New York Rangers: 13
Ottawa Senators: Zero
Philadelphia Flyers: 13
Phoenix Coyotes: 4
Pittsburgh Penguins: 17
San Jose Sharks: 7
St. Louis Blues: 12
Tampa Bay Lightning: 7
Toronto Maple Leafs: 4
Vancouver Canucks: Zero
Washington Capitals: 12
Winnipeg Jets: Zero

Edited by WHL rocks, 17 November 2012 - 03:05 AM.

  • 0

#2780 Smashian Kassian

Smashian Kassian

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,216 posts
  • Joined: 10-June 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 03:02 AM

Hardly, if anything it proves my point. 4 Nationally televised games for PHX and ZERO for Canucks, Oilers, Flames, Sens and Jets.

Anaheim Ducks: 1 (6)
Boston Bruins: 17 (14)
Buffalo Sabres:: 15 (11)
Calgary Flames: Zero (Zero)
Carolina Hurricanes: 1 (4)
Chicago Blackhawks: 14 (11)
Colorado Avalanche: 6 (9)
Columbus Blue Jackets: 1 (2)
Dallas Stars: 8 (7)
Detroit Red Wings: 17 (14)
Edmonton Oilers: Zero (Zero)
Florida Panthers: 3 (1)
Los Angeles Kings: 9 (6)
Minnesota Wild: 10 (9)
Montreal Canadiens: 5 (6)
Nashville Predators: 3 (2)
New Jersey Devils: 8 (7)
New York Islanders: 1 (1)
New York Rangers: 13 (16)
Ottawa Senators: Zero (Zero)
Philadelphia Flyers: 13 (11)
Phoenix Coyotes: 4 (4)
Pittsburgh Penguins: 17 (14)
San Jose Sharks: 7 (5)
St. Louis Blues: 12 (8)
Tampa Bay Lightning: 7 (11)
Toronto Maple Leafs: 4 (2)
Vancouver Canucks: Zero (2)
Washington Capitals: 12 (14)
Winnipeg Jets: Zero (1)


4 and 3 were Road games, compared to other big markets with passionate fans, thats nothing and the only reason there were any is probably because of the other teams being important markets.

It also doesn't surprise me at all that no canadian team other than Toronto and Montreal got nationally televised games in the US, after all it is an American network, I don't understand the correlation between not televising Canadian teams and not televising a big US market as you say.

Edited by Smashian Kassian, 17 November 2012 - 03:03 AM.

  • 0

zackass.png


#2781 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,964 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 03:26 AM

What are the numbers in brackets?
  • 0

#2782 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 17 November 2012 - 08:45 AM

I also agree with Bookie, even though I don't entirely agree, I appreciate that you actually participate and have logical response, unlike some other people on these boards. *Cough* (King of ES) *cough*

But the thing is the people in Phoenix don't care, and do you think other people from other cities want to watch Coyotes games desperately? Not likely. And it wouldn't make a difference to fans of other teams if they are playing the coyotes or a team in Quebec.

Plus does it really make a difference to NBC if one unsuccessful team is moved? Again it's not like they are a major NHL market for NBC anyways if the majority of the fans dont care, where as if the league moved they would be making loads of money in a city that wants a team like Quebec or Seattle.


And Seattle is a pretty big US market, and given that the fans there would actually love and embrace hockey unlike in Phoenix, it would be a much better spot for NBC.

Sometimes it comes down to timing. PHX is a bigger USA media market than Seattle. I agree that Seattle makes more sense but that doesn't mean that at the time they put a team in PHX that there was a potential ownership group interested in Seattle. Now there is and I would be estatic if they moved PHX there.

The NHL committment to major USA media markets has been long term. Their business model is predicated on eventual success. The NBC contract was a break through but not anywhere near the size of what the big three get (MLB, NFL, NBA). Hockey fans in Canada are to a degree hung up on the 'gate' driven revenue model. It works in Canada because the fans are prepared to fork out big bucks to go. PHX is a long way from $250 tickets.

The glimmer of hope that PHX can take away from last year was that in playoffs their attendance was pretty decent. A talented team might actually build on that. However, to a certain extent, as long as the PHX's in the NHL are not losing big time money it makes no difference. American viewers do not know Canadian cities other than TO and maybe Van from the Olympics. Potential American fans of the NHL might be attracted by transferring allegiances from other sports like baseball, basketball or football. ie PHX Cardinals vs the CHI Bears.

Reverting the NHL business plan to a 'gate' driven revenue model will not create the dollars needed to support the cost structure they are experienceing. Media revenue expands beyond the arena limits of 20,000 fans to millions of fans.
  • 0

#2783 Stickhead

Stickhead

    K-Wing Regular

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts
  • Joined: 12-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 09:19 AM

tired of waiting , i think it's time to renovate the house and forget hockey for a while . Im finding the lack of movment or flexability to get a deal done agrivating .
  • 0

#2784 Boudrias

Boudrias

    Canucks First-Line

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

Posted 17 November 2012 - 09:24 AM

I'm not pro owner. I'm pro me.

In my view if owners get a good deal NHL will be a healthy league in the future. If owners make more money I will benefit by being able to enjoy a stable league with some teams in nontraditional but large American markets. Most importantly as a Canadian i'll be able to enjoy teams in Edmonton, Winnipeg and Ottawa and hopeful Hamilton and Quebec in the future.

I want to see a profitable league. I'd like to see Coyotes stay in PHX while teams like Winnipeg and Edmonton become contenders. As it is the Jets will be very hard pressed to compete in payroll.

I am also old enough to remember when the CAD was worth .65 cents and Canucks were one of the Canadian teams on the NHL's welfare program. This was not a long time ago, only a few years.

Edit. And Of course I think most players are uneducated jocks who barely have high school education. Completely no clue even about the simple and basic parts of CBA. I think 50-50 Should be enough for them.


Well put!

Questioning the players approach does not automatically discount the opinion. A healthy NHL should benefit both players and ownership. Anything less will harm the game. You might notice that I didn't include fans who will continue to pay outrageus prices. :(

I have questioned the players approach from the beginning because their negociating position does not deal from strength. After the last two disputes it was incumbant on the NHLPA to develope an alternative strategy. I have suggested a collegial approach which would have stressed the mutual advantage to growing the business to benefit both parties. Many view this dispute as a labour vs management conflict and it has become that. IMO it was in the players interest to make this a business with business enterprise. Similiar to a franchise concept where the NHL provides a venue for franchisees like Sid Crosby to prosper. It would hopefully allow players to deal directly with ownership as partners and in the process build relationhips. Failing that, there will always be intermediaries like Fehr and Bettman who might have personal agendas.

If it is a question of trust by the players and even ownership then I suggested that people who have experienced both sides of the equation could be consulted. Lemieux, Gretzky, Davidson and Espo have been there. The previous ownership in TB. The Ontario Teacher's Pension Fund owned the TO Laffers. Who better to consult about missing HRR revenues or off loaded operating expenses. Build a mutual verification structure that survives multiple CBAs!

To an extent I agree with WHL that NHL players develope an exaggerated self worth. It is not unique. I am sure it extends to both sides. The bottom line is that an NHL player only has so much time to capitalize on a career that has been a 'crap shoot' from the beginning considering how many young players start that trek. For the vast majority most fans won't remember their names after they left the game. Their imperative is to secure their future as best they can with the time they have in the game. Establish relationships and expand their opportunities in the game or in the business communities they played in. Educate themselves or there will always be another Eagleson to take advantage of them.
  • 0

#2785 Li'l Fra

Li'l Fra

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,655 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 07

Posted 17 November 2012 - 09:33 AM

Good gawd!

A two week break?

I just read the Larionov piece in the Sun and it hit home...again. Did these players have to defect or struggle in an abnormal way for there "hard-earned" money? Nope, sorry...how many millions per year do you need?

I just read Derek Sanderson's book and it hit home...again. You think you deserve to make 100 times what Bobby Orr was making? Forget it.

As for the owners: Back in the day if you didn't run your team like a business, there was no one to cry to. You went OUT of business!

Sorry, Bettman, it's your job to find a solution to your mess, not continue to flush properly managed teams' money down the toilet!

The money owners and players are making now is ridiculous; completely out of whack with reality.

That's why most of us are so frustrated. What are these idiots fighting about?

Share the pie. Or...Seriously...F....OFF!
  • 1

#2786 Hobble

Hobble

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 15,659 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 07

Posted 17 November 2012 - 10:38 AM

If they wanted to keep a team in Phoenix, they shouldn't have built their arena 30+ minutes away from their fans. Few Phoenix fans are die-hard enough to make the drive. Right now, a few thousand fans from Phoenix get to enjoy the team, while Glendale tax-payers have to carry the burden.
  • 0

#2787 theminister

theminister

    Head Troll

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,395 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 17 November 2012 - 11:27 AM

Is Flyers' Snider helping thaw NHL talks?


Frank Seravalli, Daily News Staff Writer
POSTED: Saturday, November 17, 2012, 12:58 AM


On the surface, prospects for an end to the NHL's 2-month lockout took a nosedive this week, when commissioner Gary Bettman proposed a 2-week moratorium in talks after bargaining reached yet another standstill.


Behind the scenes, there seems to be a seismic shift going on among the NHL's Board of Governors, also known as the group that Bettman answers to collectively.


And Flyers chairman Ed Snider may be the big mover-and-shaker behind it all.


Multiple sources confirmed to the Daily News on Friday that Snider, once seen as a supporter of the Bettman's push to rein in the players' share of revenue, has soured on the process after it became apparent that a deal would not be brokered in time for a Dec. 1 puck drop.


Put simply: Snider and the rest of the NHL's owners were promised a big win by Bettman, with player concessions on revenue division and contracting rights. The best they'll get now is a small win in revenue split - coupled with a demoralized fan base and all-important corporate sponsors that are ready to quit.


A source familiar with Snider's thinking characterized it as: "If this is the deal we are going to get, what's the point of dragging this out?"


Neither Snider nor team president Peter Luukko has publicly addressed the lockout since it began on Sept. 16, for fear of a $1 million fine from Bettman.


Snider, 79, is the NHL's longest-serving governor and serves on the board's executive committee, which helps steer policy. A backroom wheeler-dealer, Snider can make his moves in a practical way via the board's numbers.


When it comes to labor negotiations, league rules require a a vote of 75 percent of governors to oppose the commissioner's recommendation. That means Bettman has absolute power, so long as he has eight out of 30 owners to block any hostile movement against him. Bettman actually needs only seven owners to support him, since the league owns the Phoenix franchise


There have been many educated guesses over the last few weeks as to which franchises are a part of this "hardline" bargaining group of Bettman's staunchest allies, but my list first included Boston, Minnesota, Calgary, Washington, Dallas, Philadelphia and Anaheim, in addition to Phoenix.


Others did not have the Flyers originally among that hardliners list. But the Flyers' original thinking, at least in terms of what this reporterhad learned, was that they were pro-lockout on Bettman's conditions. They trusted him. They made huge money after the 2004-05 lockout, when their payroll dropped from $71 million in 2003-04 to the capped $39 million number in 2005-06. They also participated in two Winter Classics, hosting one at Citizens Bank Park, and a Stanley Cup final without reaching their previous payroll level in seven straight seasons.


Bettman and Snider have worked well together over the years - and Bettman is well aware of Snider's power, sensing a need to keep the Flyers' owner in his pocket in times like these. For Bettman, the Flyers are a linchpin.


To be sure, Snider and Co. were not against the lockout. Some in the media pegged the Flyers during this process as "middlers," or those that wanted to play but were interested in results.


That all has changed. On Friday, multiple sources indicated Snider's "strong discontent" for Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs, a big-market owner who has been one of the lockout's ringleaders.


Despite their on-ice rivalry, there seems to be some thinking that the Flyers are interested in teaming up with the midmarket but high-revenue Pittsburgh Penguins to sway more governors toward a swift resolution. The Rangers are also viewed as anti-lockout.


At the very least, if the Flyers are changing their view, two important questions arise: Which other teams have shifted? Where is this whole thing heading?


While some of the smaller-market teams have been interested in a greater percentage of "hockey related revenue" to help get back in the black, there is a growing sentiment that any lingering effects from this lockout could wipe out a franchise in Columbus, Florida, Nashville or Tampa Bay entirely.


According to a source, the Flyers' top-level executives presented their own proposal for the collective-bargaining agreement nearly 3 weeks ago. It remains unclear whether their proposal was the engine behind the league's progress last week, when they strung together lengthy bargaining sessions in 7 out of 9 days.


The Flyers have also proposed the use of a high-profile mediator to help smooth things out. Former President Bill Clinton's name has been kicked around, which does not make a whole lot of sense, though, given Snider's conservative political ties. Neither side has officially asked for the use of a mediator.


When Bettman proposed the 2-week moratorium in talks this week, which would cause the players to miss their fourth of 13 paychecks, perhaps he was hoping they would get antsy and ask for a vote to end the lockout. Now, with the way things are going, Bettman is likely just hoping it doesn't result in a vote in his own boardroom.


" @DNFlyers


Blog: philly.com/FrequentFlyers


http://www.philly.co...NHL_talks_.html

Edited by theminister, 17 November 2012 - 11:31 AM.

  • 1

Posted ImageNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEPosted Image


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#2788 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,964 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 17 November 2012 - 12:17 PM

Help us Ed Snider, you’re our only NHL lockout hope

In case you were worried you hadn't seen everything in this preposterous lockout, worry no more: Philadelphia Flyers owner Ed Snider could be the hero that helps end the work-stoppage.
Frank Seravalli of the Philadelphia Daily News reported on Saturday that Snider has soured on the lockout as it's dragged on through what he hoped would be a Dec. 1 start to a truncated season. With labor talks at a stalemate and NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman offering a two-week moratorium on talks, that target date is looking mighty bleak.
From the News:


Put simply: Snider and the rest of the NHL's owners were promised a big win by Bettman, with player concessions on revenue division and contracting rights. The best they'll get now is a small win in revenue split - coupled with a demoralized fan base and all-important corporate sponsors that are ready to quit.


The sponsorship issue is becoming more prominent for the NHL the longer the lockout goes.
COO John Collins had been tasked with keeping the League's benefactors in line early in the process, and it was a significant task: The number of high-profile sponsors paying large sums to partner with the NHL has dramatically changed since the 2004-05 work stoppage. The stakes are higher now among sponsors, as they are for a League that has an American television deal it didn't have seven years ago.
When the CEO of Molson Coors is openly talking about reparations from the NHL after beer sales plummeted in Canada during the lockout, it echoes through ownership.
So can Ed Snider be the driving force to end the lockout?

From Seravalli, here's what is at stake:


While some of the smaller-market teams have been interested in a greater percentage of "hockey related revenue" to help get back in the black, there is a growing sentiment that any lingering effects from this lockout could wipe out a franchise in Columbus, Florida, Nashville or Tampa Bay entirely.
According to a source, the Flyers' top-level executives presented their own proposal for the collective-bargaining agreement nearly 3 weeks ago. It remains unclear whether their proposal was the engine behind the league's progress last week, when they strung together lengthy bargaining sessions in 7 out of 9 days.


Snider's always been a odd one to pin down in these talks. He's been seen as a Bettman loyalist, but he's also one of the primary violators of the spirit of the previous CBA with some of the Flyers' contracts. He's been viewed as part of the NHL's hawkish owners, but Mark Spector of Sportsnet recently explained why he's a dove:


Snider (79), like Ilitch, wants to play, but insiders say he won't buck the large group. As chairman of Comcast Spectacor, this lockout will adversely affect Comcast Sportsnet (which has a handful of regional NHL deals) as well as NBC Sports Network (formerly Versus), which also falls under the Comcast umbrella. NBC Sports Network must still pay the NHL $200 in rights fees this year, but will get an extra year tacked on to the back end of its 10-year contract (it was to start this season) for free. On the ice, the Flyers are well over $100 million in revenues, with relatively little debt servicing. They're a money machine that won't churn until Bettman and Donald Fehr reach an agreement.


As Seravalli explained, the Flyers are keen on teaming up with "the midmarket but high-revenue Pittsburgh Penguins" in an attempt to end the lockout, and that makes sense: There are teams that are thriving right now that don't want to spend months on the sidelines watching a CBA war that isn't producing their desired results.
What this comes back to is something we've discussed on the Marek Vs. Wyshynski podcast on several occasions: Can Gary Bettman survive this lockout as commissioner?
There's already a sense that he'll have to be sacrificed in order to soothe relations with the players, who are now simply calling the man an idiot during media scrums. But if a loyal owner like Snider sees Bettman as having failed at the primary function of his job — maximizing the earnings for the owners and diminishing those for the players — would they opt for someone else after this CBA negotiation is over? Or is Snider always, in the end, going to back Bettman regardless of the lockout's conclusion?
Of course, that's getting ahead of ourselves. The CBA negotiation has to end first.
Help us Ed Snider … you're our only hope!
(Up is down, left is right, hamburgers eat people, dogs and cats living together … mass hysteria.)


  • 1

#2789 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,475 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 17 November 2012 - 12:24 PM

Ian White calls Bettman an idiot and goes on to say .... It only takes 7 owners to have something pass...it's not democratic. LOL what a moron.

In reality It's 8 owners votes to turn down a deal, not 7 votes to have something pass.

Great example of an uneducated hockey player, no wonder half these guy couldn't understand the concept of escrow when they started seeing escrow deductions on their paychecks after last lockout. LOL He doesn't even know this simple fact even I know as a fan who's not losing millions due to this lockout.


From the article theminister posted above:

When it comes to labor negotiations, league rules require a a vote of 75 percent of governors to oppose the commissioner's recommendation. That means Bettman has absolute power, so long as he has eight out of 30 owners to block any hostile movement against him. Bettman actually needs only seven owners to support him, since the league owns the Phoenix franchise.


That means as long as Bettman has 7 owners with him, he can do whatever he wants and the other owners can't do anything about it. So, technically, that means it currently only takes 7 votes to pass something that Bettman recommends.

Guess that jock wasn't a dumb as you thought.
  • 2
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2790 theminister

theminister

    Head Troll

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,395 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 17 November 2012 - 12:44 PM

Haven't you heard? The players have no power what-so-ever.... :rolleyes:

There is the very real possibility, in my mind at least, that the same ability to threaten the players with a take it or leave it scenario is as likely to unfold among the ownership themselves.

Just as the owners could conceivably say to the player that they must take this deal or guaranteed contracts are off the table, there could be a revolt among the wealthy teams to say to the lower revenue teams "Take what we can now or revenue sharing is off the table." If the season ends and the game is adversely affected I can imagine the Leafs, Flyers, Habs, Wings, Canucks, Red Wings, Pens and Rags (8 Teams) will not want to give more money away as they are already losing.

See, the 8 team veto is a dangerous prospect going forward both ways. The only way the NHL can go forward with that BOG rule in place is with a virtual consensus.

Edited by theminister, 17 November 2012 - 12:46 PM.

  • 0

Posted ImageNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEPosted Image


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS





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.