Eck not that you read any threads on your site other then your own. But here goes anyways. Any deal that is struck that is 5-6 years is just another slap in the face of the players and more of another slap in the face to the fans. The reason why is we were just at this same point 6 years ago during that lock out, we are here again now and in 6 years from now we will be back at square one again. If the deal is not at least 10 years long, they can expect the revenue to climb 2-3 years after this lockout when all of the fans start to come back once they forgot about this lock out. Then the lockout will happen again and all of the fans will say hay didnt this just happen twice already oh yea the nhl is a joke. The nhl wonders why they do not get any espn time or major tv network coverage it is because the people who run the league are retards.

I did my own poll on hockeybuzz. Question asked was who do you support, players or owners. 80% of respondents said players.

When will the NHL realize the majority of us support the players?
- Scooby_Doo

umm, no.

Who is watching MNF?
- Cheeseballin

Yup, Pats showing Texans who's boss.

Yup, Pats showing Texans who's boss.
- As_I_See_It

Texans and Falcons should have a 1 game playoff for most overrated team in the league.

1 reason why the PA shouldn't accept 5 year deals and more importantly 5% variance with the salary cap.

It destroys all negotiating power when trying to get a new contract either as a RFA or UFA.


It's not about how many players get what, it's about negotiating power. Allowing that many limitations gives owners/teams all the power. Players most likely wont, and they shouldn't accept something like that. 8 year deals with a larger variance or another way to get rid of back loading? Sure. But players shouldn't be punished for something that owners do to each other. That's stupid logic.

Texans and Falcons should have a 1 game playoff for most overrated team in the league.
- eichiefs9

I don't believe that either team is for real either.

I don't believe that either team is for real either.
- As_I_See_It

Their schedules are a joke. They're both good, but not even remotely as good as their records would indicate.

I did my own poll on hockeybuzz. Question asked was who do you support, players or owners. 80% of respondents said players.

When will the NHL realize the majority of us support the players?
- Scooby_Doo

What he didn't tell us was he surveyed 5 people.....

Their schedules are a joke. They're both good, but not even remotely as good as their records would indicate.
- eichiefs9

I think Denver has a good chance of going deep in the playoffs. Seattle is a dark horse too lol.

I assume you own a business. That's a very small percentage of people. MOST of us (like 99%) work for someone else for a living. And yes, we do expect to earn some money for it. Not entitled to the money, but at the same time, we're not going to slave for free. This is as true in the NHL as it is any profession.

I'm a computer programmer. The same idea applies. If I worked for Google (I wish), I'd be making a ton more than I do right now working for a small shop for doing the exact same job. Why is that? Because they only hire the best and they realize that to hire the best requires the most amount of money. And they have it to spend.

So in hockey... you want the best players in the world? You must pay them as though they're the best players in the world.

This is why whenever someone mentions replacement players I laugh. Would I go to NHL games if there were scrubs playing instead of the world's best? Probably. But I certainly wouldn't pay the same ticket prices that I pay right now. Not even close.

You say entitled as though the players don't work for their wages. The players put behinds in seats. This isn't welfare - this is a salary for doing a job. A job that brings the owners TONS of money. And if it doesn't bring in enough to make the payments they've "guaranteed" to the players via contract, maybe they shouldn't sign such large contracts.

You know... just like how the rest of the world lives. I can't afford a Porsche, so I don't buy one. That simple. I can't go to my mortgage company and tell them "hey, you are going to accept less money from me every month so that I can buy a Porsche". I signed a contract with that mortgage company at a certain rate and they expect that for the life of the contract.
- lifexkills

Listen, I don't have any problem at all with someone getting paid a healthy wage in accordance with what they do, and generalizing doesn't really do my point any justice, but it's a simple starting off point that most can relate to. My main point is I keep seeing these posts that more or less say these guys are somehow entitled "because they're pro athletes". Yes, they're entitled to a certain level of money, but to act like somehow this group of individuals should be excused from being bankrupt after making tens and sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars over a career and having nothing left a few years after they retire is complete hogwash.

Read the quotes of one poster under my Avatar. It's ridiculous! They have a lifestyle they need to live? Moronic at best.

These players are entitled to exactly what Donald Fehr and PA bargains for them, not a cent more. So guys like MJL who keep complaining that the players are losing money can continue to try and argue that point, but it simply isn't true.

By those results, you have a pretty small poll.
- sloppyseconds2

Yes, he's trying to convince everyone that the majority of posters in here are pro-PA.

What he didn't tell us was he surveyed 5 people.....
- Giroux_Is_God

What he didn't tell us was he surveyed 5 people.....
- Giroux_Is_God

Himself, Canada cup and MJL 3 times...

These players are entitled to exactly what Donald Fehr and PA bargains for them, not a cent more. So guys like MJL who keep complaining that the players are losing money can continue to try and argue that point, but it simply isn't true.
- MnGump

I agree 100%. But I'll add to that. They are entitled to the contracts they signed, subject to whatever is negotiated and agreed to in the new CBA. Whether that involves escrow, a rollback, reduce revenue percentage, whatever. No doubt about it.

But to state that it isn't true that taking a lesser share going forward isn't losing money. Is completely false. No matter how you spin it. And if you could argue that successfully, you would. But that's impossible. Unless you invent nonsense such as the CBA is expired and the players have nothing. And pretend like the past never happened.

And to add to your other point. If players foolishly blow their money and don't plan for the future. That's their fault.

You should be doing sports for Fox News. It is so hard to tell what side you are on.... then again.... an american 'news' station covering hockey... laughable.

I would have thought this survey of players would have benn national headline news.... why is it not?

Himself, Canada cup and MJL 3 times...
- MnGump

Thanks, now he's here.

Thanks, now he's here.
- sloppyseconds2

- cabin

You wanna put that tongue to good use?

- eichiefs9

RICHARD DAWSON IS THE MAN.

BEST FAMILY FEUD HOST AND IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE.

BEST MATCH GAME CELEB.

CAPITAL LETTERS, YO

Tom Brady

- buffalofan19

What is happening here??

1) Talbot and Moen don't come close to that term if the max length is 5 years. They'd be lucky to get 3 year deals then. Its relative. If Shea Weber can only get 5 years do you think Jason Garrison or Dennis Wideman can get anywhere close to 5 as well? Nope. 3 year deals.

Also, 100 players "lost" their jobs because of natural transition and it had 2 years of retirees. Is their out rage when prospects usurp old players during non lockout seasons?

2) This is stupid. You listed 2 players. One a veteran bound by blood to his team, and a young player in his 2nd season in the NHL. Basically every star player in the league is on a deal longer than 5 years.

3) The more FA years a player signs away the more leverage they have to get more dollars. This is a common talk all the time and you even touch on it regularly when RFA's are in extension talk and say how it makes sense.

4) You more or less just proved a point against your own argument.

What is happening here??
- Giroux_Is_God

That's what she said.

Tom Brady
- Deadmau55

Just tuck it up under your waistband.