Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
- - - - -

Are you going to be boycotting the NHL?


  • Please log in to reply
232 replies to this topic

#151 Hugemanskost

Hugemanskost

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,380 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 09

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:18 AM

My daughter wears my Kurtenbach 40th anniversary jersey as a nightgown.


My dad, who wears a 46th Anniversary California Seals jersey, could beat up your dad, Mr. Pfffft.
  • 0

webkit-fake-url://D8829558-F65F-49B9-9829-A7DFC7F2E6E4/application.pdf


:towel: :canucks:


#152 Blackberries

Blackberries

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,351 posts
  • Joined: 30-August 07

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:44 AM

so .................................in conclusion?

Also I really think that this whole lockout was as a result of 8 hardline teams that forced everyones hand.

Jeremy Jacobs you Mitt Romney loving douche Im looking at you.


I don't believe the canucks were one of those teams.

Thus u should not boycott the canucks.
Not to mention the twins donating to childrens hospital.
Bieksas buddies charity game.
Kesler and Bieksas street hockey game.
Players taking less on the team to make it stay competitive.
Rather than taking an easy paycheque in Europe the majority of players on the team stayed together here in Vancouver to practice together
The players on this team are not a bunch of Kovalchuks and Parises, except Luongo and he's on the way out.
  • 0
Posted Image
Movember Kassian

#153 Dumb Nuck

Dumb Nuck

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 99 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 13

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:50 AM

You're making sh!t up, at best it could be a 45th anniversary, some canucks an you are.


My dad, who wears a 46th Anniversary California Seals jersey, could beat up your dad, Mr. Pfffft.


You're making sh!t up, at best it could be a 45th anniversary jersey, some canucks fan you are.

Edited by Dumb Nuck, 09 January 2013 - 12:51 AM.

  • 0
There's always next year.

#154 HockeyHobo73

HockeyHobo73

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,519 posts
  • Joined: 25-July 10

Posted 09 January 2013 - 01:23 AM

Why would you ask that question here? I would assume if people are checking the Canucks' forum, they intend to actually watch the games as well...
  • 0

#155 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,008 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 09 January 2013 - 02:27 AM

That's what I like about the idea of everyone boycotting the first game, not to hurt the NHL financially but if it happened league wide it would be a great statement that fans do matter.

Maybe something like everyone showing up topless to the first game would be more doable but it would take someone with more influence than an average fan to happen.


I'm 100% behind this if the crowd is at least 80% female.
  • 0
Posted Image

#156 kacvan

kacvan

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,850 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 08

Posted 09 January 2013 - 03:19 AM

I as a fan am pissed that the nhl and nhlpa did not once think about us the fans during the lockout, it is for that reason and the fact that they expect us to come back with open arms and forget about the last four months is why I am going to boycott the nhl (no hockey league) this year. I will return to the nhl and the Canucks in septmber. However I will think about watching hockey this year if the nhl do something worth of having the fans return be it if the Canucks drop ticket prices etc. I will think about returning if not then I will not be watching any hockey till next september when the preseason starts.

Edited by kacvan, 09 January 2013 - 03:20 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image

Keep The Faith The Canucks Will Win!!

#157 Russ

Russ

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,376 posts
  • Joined: 29-June 06

Posted 09 January 2013 - 03:34 AM

I won't boycott, but I just won't be spending time infront of the TV. If I happen to be bored I will watch, I just wont make it a priority to go out and watch games anymore.
  • 0
Xbox Live - Lenerdosy
PSN - Lenerdosy

Interested in a game of NHL or BF3? Send me a friend request and lets play.

#158 Red Light Racicot

Red Light Racicot

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,465 posts
  • Joined: 28-June 10

Posted 09 January 2013 - 06:54 AM

They didn't treat the fans like anything. It wasn't about the fans nor did it cost us anything. It was a labour dispute and that is all. When two sides are too far apart in negotiations the only way to settle it is by forcing the other side through a work stoppage.That's life.

If you are a true NHL fan then you are actually punishing yourself more than the Canucks. And if you think costing the league money will make it so they never do this again you're wrong. When the CBA ends if teams are losing money there will be yet another lockout to again reduce the players share of the pie.

Two questions:

#1 - Did the lockout cost you your job?

#2 - Did you sit in front of your TV on what should have been game nights staring at a blank screen for 3 hours?

If your answer to both of those questions is no, then the lockout had no actual effect on your life at all and you're crying for no reason.


Well, Im thinking since the NHL owes its existence to the fans then the least they can do is start the season on time. I dont think its too much to ask in return for our committment to them.

I would be a lot more understanding if the league had excusable financial problems, but they boasted record revenues. Lack of money was not the problem, it was much moreso incompetence. Im proposing that we give them the incentive to run their league competently from now on.
  • 0

#159 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,464 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:35 AM

..
I don't believe the canucks were one of those teams.

Thus u should not boycott the canucks.
Not to mention the twins donating to childrens hospital.
Bieksas buddies charity game.
Kesler and Bieksas street hockey game.
Players taking less on the team to make it stay competitive.
Rather than taking an easy paycheque in Europe the majority of players on the team stayed together here in Vancouver to practice together
The players on this team are not a bunch of Kovalchuks and Parises, except Luongo and he's on the way out.


While I'm definitely still sticking to my no merchandise promise for this season, I do think you have a point. I think all in all the Canucks came out of this looking more like victims from both the players' and owners' side since none of them were the ones running their mouths on Twitter or spearheading draconian rules against the players. Both sides continued their charitable actions, not just the players that you mentioned above. If I remember correctly, the Canucks did some stuff for Raise a Reader and Canucks Place during the lockout.

Don't get me wrong, I still completely understand some of the money given to the Canucks goes to the NHL and I absolutely want them to feel fan rage over this lockout. So, whether or not the Canucks are to blame my money's staying in my pocket. But, I do take comfort in the fact that we happen to be fans of one of the best teams in the league on and OFF the ice!

Edited by poetica, 09 January 2013 - 11:36 AM.

  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#160 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,464 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:44 AM

They didn't treat the fans like anything. It wasn't about the fans nor did it cost us anything. It was a labour dispute and that is all. When two sides are too far apart in negotiations the only way to settle it is by forcing the other side through a work stoppage.That's life.

If you are a true NHL fan then you are actually punishing yourself more than the Canucks. And if you think costing the league money will make it so they never do this again you're wrong. When the CBA ends if teams are losing money there will be yet another lockout to again reduce the players share of the pie.

Two questions:

#1 - Did the lockout cost you your job?

#2 - Did you sit in front of your TV on what should have been game nights staring at a blank screen for 3 hours?

If your answer to both of those questions is no, then the lockout had no actual effect on your life at all and you're crying for no reason.


Does other people's choice of how to spend their money:

#1 - Effect you in the slightest?

#2 - Alter what you can do with yours?

If your answer to both of those questions is no, then other people's decision to not give the NHL any of our money this season has no actual effect on your life at all and you're worrying about it for no reason.

There is absolutely a way for fans to punish them without punishing ourselves and that's what many hope to accomplish by choosing not buying merchandise. We can easily live without more logo'ed stuff, but that's a big part of their bottom line. We still get our hockey, but they get a lot less revenue.

Maybe you're right and any attempt at a boycott will fail to prevent another lockout in the future, but at least we care enough to try and that's more than some people can say.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#161 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,008 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 09 January 2013 - 11:46 AM

Well, Im thinking since the NHL owes its existence to the fans then the least they can do is start the season on time. I dont think its too much to ask in return for our committment to them.

I would be a lot more understanding if the league had excusable financial problems, but they boasted record revenues. Lack of money was not the problem, it was much moreso incompetence. Im proposing that we give them the incentive to run their league competently from now on.


Every business owes it's existence to somebody. It doesn't stop labour disputes from happening and that's all this was. If it didn't cost you anything the dispute had no real affect on your life. Unlike many labour disputes, it likely saved you money. So why the bitterness?

Except the bulk of that record revenue is five teams. With more than half the teams losing money something had to be done. Unless of course you'd prefer a six team league again. Something neither the players nor owners want. The sport itself will never grow with a six team league.

It's not truly incompetency that's the problem. It's the loopholes that rich team are taking advantage of that's the real problem. That's really what the lockout was about. The cap circumvumvention contracts drive player prices upwards. Of course the players didn't want limits on their contracts. But if half the league will never be able to compete nor make a profit because of player cost, what's the point in having those teams that are giving players jobs?
  • 0
Posted Image

#162 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,008 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:08 PM

Does other people's choice of how to spend their money:

#1 - Effect you in the slightest?

#2 - Alter what you can do with yours?

If your answer to both of those questions is no, then other people's decision to not give the NHL any of our money this season has no actual effect on your life at all and you're worrying about it for no reason.

There is absolutely a way for fans to punish them without punishing ourselves and that's what many hope to accomplish by choosing not buying merchandise. We can easily live without more logo'ed stuff, but that's a big part of their bottom line. We still get our hockey, but they get a lot less revenue.

Maybe you're right and any attempt at a boycott will fail to prevent another lockout in the future, but at least we care enough to try and that's more than some people can say.


No to both questions. I'm simply pointing out the stupidity of it. As I said, if the lockout had no actual effect on your life (as in it didn't actually cost you anything) why are you having this temper tantrum? Labour disputes happen. I understand the reason for the lockout and it had to be done. I had no problem at all finding other forms of entertainment to occupy myself in the meantime. I figure the lockout actually saved me from $500 to $800 at this point (the games I would have been to) and now I'll now happily go back to business as usual following my favorite sport. You go ahead and enjoy your tantrum.
  • 0
Posted Image

#163 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,464 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:44 PM

No to both questions. I'm simply pointing out the stupidity of it. As I said, if the lockout had no actual effect on your life (as in it didn't actually cost you anything) why are you having this temper tantrum? Labour disputes happen. I understand the reason for the lockout and it had to be done. I had no problem at all finding other forms of entertainment to occupy myself in the meantime. I figure the lockout actually saved me from $500 to $800 at this point (the games I would have been to) and now I'll now happily go back to business as usual following my favorite sport. You go ahead and enjoy your tantrum.


You think my message obviously designed to mimic your own message means I was having a temper tantrum? *lol*

If you understand the reason for the lockout, you may be alone. Those of us who followed it closely and were very informed on everything going on, including many sports writers, are unsure of the reasons.

Either way, I was simply noting the pointlessness of telling people what they should or should not do with their own money. If people want to punish the NHL by not giving them any money this season that's their right to do so and doesn't effect you any more than you say the lockout effected fans.

Edited by poetica, 09 January 2013 - 01:19 PM.

  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#164 KILLER

KILLER

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,328 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 03

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:46 PM

I would have had they cancelled the season. But now that they'll play and we don't have to suffer the doldrums of a 10 month season...this maybe the best season ever, We'll have to see if this shortened season helps older clubs achieve more success.
  • 1
Death awaits you all with nasty big pointy teeth!
Posted Image

#165 D-Money

D-Money

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,851 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 09 January 2013 - 12:55 PM

I'll be watching.

In fact, this will be the first time in ages that the season won't seem waaaay too damn long.
  • 0
Posted Image

#166 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,008 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 09 January 2013 - 03:28 PM

You think my message obviously designed to mimic your own message means I was having a temper tantrum? *lol*

If you understand the reason for the lockout, you may be alone. Those of us who followed it closely and were very informed on everything going on, including many sports writers, are unsure of the reasons.

Either way, I was simply noting the pointlessness of telling people what they should or should not do with their own money. If people want to punish the NHL by not giving them any money this season that's their right to do so and doesn't effect you any more than you say the lockout effected fans.


I find it hard to believe there is anybody out there that doesn't understand why the lockout occured. Head in the sand maybe? Half the teams losing money. Lifetime contracts to circumvent the cap. Player contracts once again getting out of control. Teams unable to keep their talent or compete. Any of these ringing a bell? The CBA needed to be fixed.

I'm not saying they have no right to "punish" the NHL, I'm simply pointing out the stupidity of this perceived need to "punish" the NHL. Did it cost you money or your job? No. Did you find other forms of entertainment to occupy your time? Yes. Then there was absolutely no adverse effect on your life. Why are you punishing the NHL for having no adverse effect on your life? You don't see the childish stupidity in that? For those of us that actually go to games it saved us money. Well now there's a reason to be mad and punish them. lmao. I went to more movies during the lockout which was considerably less expensive than going to a hockey game. The NHL is a business not an entitlement. Labour disputes happen, it's part of life. And when does happen and it doesn't adversely affect your life be thankful. Because most labour disputes adversely affect far more people in a far greater way than one that involves entertainment.
  • 0
Posted Image

#167 panelguy

panelguy

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 603 posts
  • Joined: 31-December 05

Posted 09 January 2013 - 04:19 PM

If the NHL is really sincerely sorry and not just lip service , they would offer NHL Center Ice free this season.
The NHL needs to win back fans and that would be a gesture that covers the whole leagues fans.
If not then it's just a money grabbing greedy organization , not worthy of fan support.
  • 0

#168 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,464 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 09 January 2013 - 04:48 PM

I find it hard to believe there is anybody out there that doesn't understand why the lockout occured. Head in the sand maybe? Half the teams losing money. Lifetime contracts to circumvent the cap. Player contracts once again getting out of control. Teams unable to keep their talent or compete. Any of these ringing a bell? The CBA needed to be fixed.


You really should dial back on the sarcasm and do a little reading instead. The now-closed CBA negotiations thread is a good place to start as it contains links upon links for articles looking at the CBA in depth, including all of the ways it absolutely fails to address the needs of poor teams who could be spending as much as they were last season as soon as the first full season back thanks to revenue growth at the projected level and changes to the cap system to disallow bonuses in reaching the floor.

And by the way, owners didn't need a CBA to stop cap circumventing contracts or "out of control" contracts. They just needed to behave like responsible business owners and not give out contracts they thought were bad for business.

I'm not saying they have no right to "punish" the NHL, I'm simply pointing out the stupidity of this perceived need to "punish" the NHL.


You just flippantly toss out such judgmental words but don't see how they apply to you, do you? If other people feel the need to punish the NHL, what business of yours is it? You're telling people (rather rudely) that it's "stupid" to feel the way they do because you don't share that feeling. You point to the fact that they didn't lose their job or otherwise have their lives effected (which really isn't for you to determine) to call other people childish for taking action in accordance with their feelings. Well, pot, meet kettle. What other people feel about the NHL or the lockout or what they do with their money has no effect on you whatsoever. So, if you really think it's "childish stupidity" to get mad about something that doesn't directly effect you, why are you worrying about it? Why bother to write multiple rude messages aimed at belittling those people? Who are you to tell other people they're stupid for how they feel or because of what they want to do (or not do) with their money?

The NHL is a business not an entitlement.


Exactly, the NHL is a business. As such, it has customers. And as customers we have a right to express our displeasure with how a business operates. It's called customer service/feedback, not a sense of entitlement.

Edited by poetica, 09 January 2013 - 04:48 PM.

  • 3
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#169 Scoobydooby

Scoobydooby

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,388 posts
  • Joined: 17-January 08

Posted 09 January 2013 - 05:17 PM

Lol @ scoobydooby. For a guy who is boycotting the Canucks now, you sure seem to visit their website quite a bit. You've been visiting here several times a day since the lockout ended... I think I'm calling your bluff.


Fyi the games haven't started yet. See how much I'm around once this pathetic season starts up.

And Its not the Canucks I'm boycotting, its the league. Yes, I'm aware that by my participation in this forum it is indirectly supporting the league which is why once the season starts up I will be offline.

Lastly, you can think whatever you want to think.. I love the Canucks but I'm completely sick of the league they play in.

Edited by Scoobydooby, 09 January 2013 - 05:22 PM.

  • 1

Posted Image


#170 TheCammer

TheCammer

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,597 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 08

Posted 09 January 2013 - 05:27 PM

I have seasons tickets so I won't be boycotting but I did tell my kids to plan on eating at home before games and no trips to the Team store. I will also endeavour to lay off the ridiculously priced beer.
  • 0
Posted Image

#171 Mr. White

Mr. White

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,554 posts
  • Joined: 22-May 12

Posted 09 January 2013 - 05:52 PM

Nope
  • 0
Posted Image
^VanCauck93^

#172 RAMBUTANS

RAMBUTANS

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,410 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 06

Posted 09 January 2013 - 06:04 PM

They didn't treat the fans like anything. It wasn't about the fans nor did it cost us anything. It was a labour dispute and that is all. When two sides are too far apart in negotiations the only way to settle it is by forcing the other side through a work stoppage.That's life.

If you are a true NHL fan then you are actually punishing yourself more than the Canucks. And if you think costing the league money will make it so they never do this again you're wrong. When the CBA ends if teams are losing money there will be yet another lockout to again reduce the players share of the pie.

Two questions:

#1 - Did the lockout cost you your job?

#2 - Did you sit in front of your TV on what should have been game nights staring at a blank screen for 3 hours?

If your answer to both of those questions is no, then the lockout had no actual effect on your life at all and you're crying for no reason.


1. Yes. Got laid off. I work in a bar.

2. Yes. I stared on a black TV on a game night for more than 3 hours after I got fired.
  • 0
Mr. Reputable of the HFBoards

#173 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,008 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 10 January 2013 - 03:01 AM

You really should dial back on the sarcasm and do a little reading instead. The now-closed CBA negotiations thread is a good place to start as it contains links upon links for articles looking at the CBA in depth, including all of the ways it absolutely fails to address the needs of poor teams who could be spending as much as they were last season as soon as the first full season back thanks to revenue growth at the projected level and changes to the cap system to disallow bonuses in reaching the floor.


What revenue growth. You're all boycotting remember?

And by the way, owners didn't need a CBA to stop cap circumventing contracts or "out of control" contracts. They just needed to behave like responsible business owners and not give out contracts they thought were bad for business.


That's like saying we don't need laws against murder as people should know better. The have owners wanted expansion, they wanted to go into new markets, then they turn around and do everything possible to screw those teams. There's huge money to be made in this league and winning is a big part of it. The have owners will exploit every avenue to do so as they have for the last few decades.

You just flippantly toss out such judgmental words but don't see how they apply to you, do you? If other people feel the need to punish the NHL, what business of yours is it? You're telling people (rather rudely) that it's "stupid" to feel the way they do because you don't share that feeling. You point to the fact that they didn't lose their job or otherwise have their lives effected (which really isn't for you to determine) to call other people childish for taking action in accordance with their feelings. Well, pot, meet kettle. What other people feel about the NHL or the lockout or what they do with their money has no effect on you whatsoever. So, if you really think it's "childish stupidity" to get mad about something that doesn't directly effect you, why are you worrying about it? Why bother to write multiple rude messages aimed at belittling those people? Who are you to tell other people they're stupid for how they feel or because of what they want to do (or not do) with their money?


As I've said you can do what you want with both your time and your money. But this is a public message board. If you don't want differing opinions or criticism don't make yours public.

Exactly, the NHL is a business. As such, it has customers. And as customers we have a right to express our displeasure with how a business operates. It's called customer service/feedback, not a sense of entitlement.


You certainly do. Just as I have the right to say the notion of punishing the NHL for a labour dispute that had no actual effect on your life is childish.

Edited by Baggins, 10 January 2013 - 03:05 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#174 Baggins

Baggins

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,008 posts
  • Joined: 30-July 03

Posted 10 January 2013 - 03:02 AM

1. Yes. Got laid off. I work in a bar.

2. Yes. I stared on a black TV on a game night for more than 3 hours after I got fired.


1. I somehow doubt it.

2. I somehow doubt it.
  • 0
Posted Image

#175 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,804 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 10 January 2013 - 03:26 AM

Where does this word 'punish' keep coming from? Honestly, I'm trying to track it back in this thread. It seems to stem from someone on the front page saying they are NOT going to punish themselves, but still want to make their voice heard. And of course people pile on and it mutates.

F'ing Internet. It's not just black and white. We can still love this league and this sport, while trying to do whatever we can to ascertain that next time around, there is no work stoppage.
  • 0

#176 Common sense

Common sense

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,702 posts
  • Joined: 08-January 06

Posted 10 January 2013 - 04:13 AM

You certainly do. Just as I have the right to say the notion of punishing the NHL for a labour dispute that had no actual effect on your life is childish.


Like you said, it made no actual effect on my life. If the NHL has such little effect that missing half the season did nothing to my life (for better or worse), why should I allow myself to stagnate while I could be doing something more productive instead? There's the Saturday night HNIC, the Wednesday night NHL on TSN, as well as regular Canucks games on S-PAC. Altogether, there's about 10-15 hours of NHL that had consumed my life; take those 10-15 hours, put it to learning something new or a household DIY activity, and suddenly, the NHL is just as irrelevant as poker, the Lingerie Football League, or any other fourth-tier sport.

The NHL is a form of entertainment; if I was just as entertained while the NHL was on lockout mode, I certainty am not craving its return like a drug addict on meth.
  • 0

#177 Rusty_Element

Rusty_Element

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 69 posts
  • Joined: 03-February 10

Posted 10 January 2013 - 09:42 AM

Why would you ask that question here? I would assume if people are checking the Canucks' forum, they intend to actually watch the games as well...


My feelings exactly. I was gonna post this but you beat me to it.
  • 0

#178 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,464 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 10 January 2013 - 11:35 AM

What revenue growth. You're all boycotting remember?


Some are boycotting. Some, like me, are doing limited boycotts. And yes, I absolutely hope it does hurt their revenue. But, you think boycotts of any kind are useless and won't have any effect at all, remember?

But way to use snarkiness to deflect from the real issue, that unlike what you previously claimed this CBA does next to nothing to address the needs of money losing teams, proving that that was not the real reason for the lockout and letting them off using that excuse is shortsighted. After all, the cap floor is only dropping $4.3M for next season below what it was last season. Or, put another way, due to the changes in how bonuses are accounted for in the cap, the new cap floor is about $5M over what the Islanders spent in salary last season. And about $1M over what Colorado spent last season.

That's like saying we don't need laws against murder as people should know better. The have owners wanted expansion, they wanted to go into new markets, then they turn around and do everything possible to screw those teams. There's huge money to be made in this league and winning is a big part of it. The have owners will exploit every avenue to do so as they have for the last few decades.


Really? You think murder and bad business practices are a good comparison?

But I am glad to see that you understand the basic flaw in the NHL business model. I just wish you understood that the NHL has done absolutely nothing to correct those flaws. In fact, they didn't even really try. Despite their insistence on matching other pro sports leagues in the players' share, they continue to stubbornly refuse to follow other successful leagues' example when it comes to team revenue sharing in order to preserve the health of the league that all teams depend on.

As I've said you can do what you want with both your time and your money. But this is a public message board. If you don't want differing opinions or criticism don't make yours public.


Right back at ya. Remember, you are the one who started posting in this thread not to offer your own opinion, but simply to attack the opinion that differs from your own.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#179 goneforever

goneforever

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Joined: 28-September 11

Posted 10 January 2013 - 12:05 PM

I'm broke most of the time anyway, so, I don't usually buy much merch or Center Ice or any of that. But, I will be watching games on TV and cheering on the Canucks. Not sure how not watching games on TV is any kind of protest, unless Gary Bettman is sitting in your living room, in which case you should just smack him upside the head.
  • 0

#180 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,464 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 10 January 2013 - 01:33 PM

I'm broke most of the time anyway, so, I don't usually buy much merch or Center Ice or any of that. But, I will be watching games on TV and cheering on the Canucks. Not sure how not watching games on TV is any kind of protest, unless Gary Bettman is sitting in your living room, in which case you should just smack him upside the head.


Now that would be something worth paying for! :lol:
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(




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.