View Full Version : NHL Agreement
CMJ
Jul 13th, 2005, 12:58:58 PM
It looks like the 2 sides have agreed in principle. Let's hope the entire union ratifies. Good b-day present. :)
JMK
Jul 13th, 2005, 01:13:05 PM
This has got to mean the end of Goodenow. He himself was swearing up and down that they would NEVER ever ever in a million years take a salary cap. He had his constituency spewing the same crap, and believing it too. The players were offered deals of 45 million and then 42 million as an upper cap, both of which were summarily dismissed. Goodenow promised them he'd get them a better deal. In the end, the ONLY thing he got in his favor is a clause that says this new deal is unsuccessful they can reopen negotiations after the 4th year. I don't know who's going to define 'not successful', so that should be interesting.
As an aside, I don't know if anyone heard what Chris Chelios said about Gary Bettman, but it wasn't very smart to say the least.
Chelios said that Bettman, who is of jewish descent, should 'get the gas' when the negotiations were done. Nice work Chris. Very sensitive.
But at least we get the game back now. I can't wait till next week to see how the draft lottery pans out, and what the new rule changes will be. If Sidney Crosby ends up in New York or in Toronto I'll kill myself.
CMJ
Jul 13th, 2005, 01:16:31 PM
Originally posted by JMK
Chelios said that Bettman, who is of jewish descent, should 'get the gas' when the negotiations were done. Nice work Chris. Very sensitive.
Rocker has nothing on him. ;)
Originally posted by JMK
If Sidney Crosby ends up in New York or in Toronto I'll kill myself.
Isn't it assured he'll be a Ranger. >D
JMK
Jul 13th, 2005, 01:28:05 PM
Yeah, Rocker is still the modern day king of ignorance, but Chelios has put himself in the same conversation now. Idiot.
You know what I can't stand? When a sports league comes out and basically says it needs market X to be healthy (in most cases New York) in order to be successful. The CFL did it recently (again) with reference to Toronto. It doesn't play well in my mind. It sort of tells me that the league will rig things to a certain extent to give their larger, more important markets more advantages.
CMJ
Jul 13th, 2005, 01:32:13 PM
Which is why I think NY will win the draft "lottery". Heaven forbid if Buffalo did. :p
JMK
Jul 13th, 2005, 01:56:51 PM
I guess it can be put into the 'conspiracy theory' bin, because no pro league will ever admit to giving a team a clear cut advantage but I'm so afraid that NY or Toronto will win.
Personally I'd like to see him end up in a place like Vancouver (which would suck for us easterners, and thus won't happen), Montreal (duh!), and Boston. It hurts me to say that, but he would revitalize that lagging franchise. Joe Thornton hasn't done the job yet and having Crosby there would be great for them.
Ryan Pode
Jul 13th, 2005, 03:35:00 PM
Originally posted by JMK
I guess it can be put into the 'conspiracy theory' bin, because no pro league will ever admit to giving a team a clear cut advantage but I'm so afraid that NY or Toronto will win.
That's only true in finacially weaker leagues. For instance the Major League Lacrosse (has 6 teams), nearly all the best players are either on the Long Island team or Baltimore team who are like 6-1 and 7-0 respectively. The stronger more powerful leagues, i.e. MLB and NFL and even the NBA really don't pick certain areas to win. But Hockey is weak in America and Football is weak in Canada so they have to try to make the strong markets stronger then build the bottom up.
Darth McBain
Jul 13th, 2005, 03:36:30 PM
That's awesome news. Here's hoping we have a season this year!!!
Jedieb
Jul 13th, 2005, 05:41:50 PM
Damn, it's about time! The Lightning we're getting tired of dragging the Cup through the streets of Ybor City.
http://home.ntelos.net/~eltemmorejon/jedieb/lightning.jpg
# REIGNING STANLEY CUP CHAMPIONS BIATCHES!!!
:crack
CMJ
Jul 13th, 2005, 11:44:34 PM
I'm gonna be interested to see where all the free agents go too. Especially with the hard cap in place.
jjwr
Jul 14th, 2005, 08:21:56 AM
The players definetly took it in the rear on this one, they held out and the owners called their bluff and got what they wanted.
I'm really curious what rules changes will be made, I've heard some suggestions about wider goal, less pads on goalies, etc which I would rather not see. That would be like making a basketball hoop wider or bringing in the outfield bleachers(oops!)
As a non hockey fan though what exactly is this "Red Line" and why would removing it improve the game, or at the very least scoring?
Also the whole clutch & grab thing? Anyone car to explain that as well.
CMJ
Jul 14th, 2005, 09:15:59 AM
Wider goal should not be made. On the other hand goalies' equipment has gotten larger over the last 15 years because officials have been lax in enforcing the size.
The red line is the center ice line. Removing it would decrease of 2 line pass infractions, hence creating a more wide open game(in theory).
Clutching and grabbing of players WITHOUT the puck really affects wide open play too. Basically the NHL and NBA got into a similar mode(at roughly the same time) as defenses became stouter and everyone tried to adapt to that style of play. And just like the NBA, the NHL is trying to counteract that with rule changes.
JMK
Jul 14th, 2005, 09:30:43 AM
Coaches would employ a style of defensive play that bent the rules to the point that it made the game sick. It's easier to play this way because ANYONE can play this way. Coaches had a fear of losing their jobs, and their job is to win. Since it's much easier to coach in this lazy, lame system, 2-1 boring wins were almost the norm in the NHL.
Lesser players would 'clutch' and 'grab' star players, be it with their hands or sticks, and essentially hitch a ride to the other end of the ice. As one might imagine, it can be hard to skate and stick handle with another human trying to drag you down.
In theory removing the red line will open up the game and give skilled players the room they need to make plays. I really hope they also institute an illegal defense rule. Because teams are just going to have all their defensemen back across their blue line and not let guys in. It will also in theory nullify forechecking unless they create some sort of illegal defense penalty.
Jedieb
Jul 14th, 2005, 07:18:36 PM
I don't pretend to completely understand the Red Line rule, but I don't know if I want to see it go. Now the clutching and grabbing has to be eliminated. But I'll tell you this, they can promise all the rule changes they want, but if the refs do their usual job of swallowing their whistles come playoff time then what's the point?
JMK
Jul 14th, 2005, 08:44:42 PM
Yeah, that has to change and I think it will. I believe the NHL will come to make the refs and linesmen accountable for their calls. They've been just brutal in the past when told to enforce obstruction calls, only to go back to their old ways by mid season.
vBulletin, 4.2.1 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.