Do you really need to be told about the lack of players, good players that is, wanting to sign in Edmonton as FAs?

Or how much less appealing it is to live there as opposed to many other options?

Gee lets see...New York, LA, Chicago, Boston, Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver...Nah...ill pick Edmonton!!! Woohoo a big mall and (frank) all!
- systemtool

We all know they will pick Toronto, the center of the universe and home of the super mouth - you!

That is their tactic. They can't prove you wrong. So then they just attack you personally, and just blindly state that you're wrong
- MJL

Funny thing is that you have been proven wrong in many many threads..and then just thread jump and ignore those folks...

Yes, and many teams can match Edmontons willingness to spend. History has proven this. Getting a new building is another reminder of willingness to spend.
- systemtool

And Many teams are not willing to spend. Many teams have internally set spending limits.

Well, you guys have had the same, if not more 1st overalls than them.

Also, Crosby was in the playoffs in his second year. You guys are still bottom feeders with no improvement. Not trying to knock the Oilers, but just trying to be honest about the situation.
- systemtool

Lies.

I can point to factual statistical improvements.

There is no "blueprint" here...but there is definite improvements, too many people just focus on where they were in the standings, yet ignore that they improved by 12-ish points.

What I am saying is that if you go from last in total points, to second last in total points, thats hardly an improvement or a justification that a team is on the right track. Them getting more points means little if all the teams around them got a similiar boost in points.

Dense indeed. Only in Edmonton is common sense on a mythical level as Unicorns and Leprechauns.
- systemtool

Fact being that the team won more points against the rest of the league than the years before. So that is an improvement. The 2 previous years they were teh team that was far and away the last place team...no one within spitting distance of their ineptitude. Last year they were about 12 points away from that point of the previous year. Again. Simple improvement, like I have said, that people ignore when focusing in on league placement.

My post isn't wrong at all. What information can you or Cloutier provide that states that St Louis has for the most part been kept out of the process? I have direct and well documented evidence that St Louis has not been kept out of the process. I can provide links to back that up if necessary.

I'm awaiting the evidence to the contrary. And you're also wrong in that there was never a deal agreed upon in that Owner/player meeting.
- MJL

So post your evidence that St Louis has been integral to the process. You say you have some...stfu and deliver it

I just wanted to say Thank You for an honest, non-partisan, accurate assessment of the state of affairs.
Any sports league is no different than a typical corporation (which I, unfortunately, am part of, albeit at much less fame).
You are a voluntary employee of said corporation, and for better-or-worse, subject to their rules. If you want more money, play in KHL.
I'd rather see a curtail on the Luongo/DiPietro contracts, and have a healthier league as a result. 5 yr limits seem fair, considering I could be fired at a moments notice if I fail at my fiduciary responsibilities OR (like the NHL) it is not producing the profits is anticipated.
Life, it is not fair. It is rough, it comes rife with disappointment and concessions, and often...failure. Seems Fehr is unwilling to admit defeat, along with some fringe players in court.
Seems to speak volumes that two of the steadiest and honorable players of the last 10 yrs (Iginla/St Louis), along with many of the same types from the 90's (JR, Modano et all) are being excluded. This has broke down to a pride thing, nothing more.
The owners are doing the profit sharing, producing the hundreds of jobs (per franchise) among the city revenue, and also sharing the burden of the losses. Yes, it is easy to point the finger and say SO WHAT YOU ARE RICH. But in the end, without owners, there is no NHL and no franchises.
I know it is in vogue to hate on Bettman, but his job is to make all parties (but especially, those with the most to lose) happy. He has made a myriad of errors, but as this drags on, it seems like it is not one of them. He (and the owners) seem to be in the right, in comparison with similar situations in the labor force. These players are NOT losing their job, they are asked to make concessions for the greater good of the games future. I have had my comp plan 'adjusted' a few times in my 10.5 yr career, but I continue, because if I protested I'd be out of a job.
The Union causes entitlement, misinformation, a divide, all the while eroding fanbases and the goodwill on many cities and ESPECIALLY the next generation not able to watch hockey.
I, for one, don't want to see this game fade to relative oblivion. Flame on, but Bettman and the owners are right. Cut a deal (it can't be that bad), continue to enjoy your STILL significant paychecks in the midst of the worst recession in 80 yrs, and come back to entertain us?

Thank you.
- FLflames34

I'm blown away by this. Martin St. Louis is not being excluded. He was one of the 18 players involved in the player-owner meeting. There is no evidence to suggest that any player is being kept out of the process by Fehr or the PA. In fact all the evidence suggests the opposite.

So post your evidence that St Louis has been integral to the process. You say you have some...stfu and deliver it
- OilHorse

Martin St. Louis was one of the 18 players involved in the player owner meeting. It's well documented. That is my evidence that he is not being kept out of the process.

What evidence can you provide to the contrary? .....stfu and deliver it. I'm waiting.

Martin St. Louis was one of the 18 players involved in the player owner meeting. It's well documented. That is my evidence that he is not being kept out of the process.

What evidence can you provide to the contrary? .....stfu and deliver it. I'm waiting.
- MJL

Just admit that the players are wrong and have been wrong already. You know it's true. I've provided mountains of evidence.

Martin St. Louis was one of the 18 players involved in the player owner meeting. It's well documented. That is my evidence that he is not being kept out of the process.

What evidence can you provide to the contrary? .....stfu and deliver it. I'm waiting.
- MJL

He was in one meeting. That is your proof? One meeting and then removed from the process when Fehr regripped with his Iron Fist.

How many other meetings was Iginla and St. Louis in on as player reps...proof is yours to include...cause I only know of that same meeting and none other.

I'm blown away by this. Martin St. Louis is not being excluded. He was one of the 18 players involved in the player-owner meeting. There is no evidence to suggest that any player is being kept out of the process by Fehr or the PA. In fact all the evidence suggests the opposite.
- MJL

No evidence to prove the opposite is true.

He was in one meeting. That is your proof? One meeting and then removed from the process when Fehr regripped with his Iron Fist.

How many other meetings was Iginla and St. Louis in on as player reps...proof is yours to include...cause I only know of that same meeting and none other.
- OilHorse

It is far more proof then you have provided. I have direct and documented evidence that Martin St. Louis has not been kept out of the process.

You just stated that after that meeting he was then removed from the process when Fehr regrouped with his iron fist.

Provide the proof that you have of that? provide proof that either player has been kept out of the process by Fehr.

Your failure to do so will end this conversation on my end, and constitute that it is simply more BS from you.

It is far more proof then you have provided. I have direct and documented evidence that Martin St. Louis has not been kept out of the process.

You just stated that after that meeting he was then removed from the process when Fehr regrouped with his iron fist.

Provide the proof that you have of that? provide proof that either player has been kept out of the process by Fehr.

Your failure to do so will end this conversation on my end, and constitute that it is simply more BS from you.
- MJL

Awwww is someone getting pissed at getting treated like he has treated others?

Go (frank) yourself you ignorant dolt.

Being in one meeting does not mean he has been there the whole time. Prove he was there in other meetings...you cannot, thus cannot prove he was not left on the outside during this process. While his omission, after how much of a factor in the last lockout he was, basically points to the validity of Cloutier's PoV

But in the end, go ahead and stop replying to me...make me happy...

Awwww is someone getting pissed at getting treated like he has treated others?

Go (frank) yourself you ignorant dolt.

Being in one meeting does not mean he has been there the whole time. Prove he was there in other meetings...you cannot, thus cannot prove he was not left on the outside during this process. While his omission, after how much of a factor in the last lockout he was, basically points to the validity of Cloutier's PoV

But in the end, go ahead and stop replying to me...make me happy...
- OilHorse

I don't need to prove that he was at other meetings. I've have legitimate and documented proof that St. Louis has not been kept out of the process.

What have you offered? The best you can come up with is "Go (frank) yourself you ignorant dolt."

I rest my case. I've given you multiple chances to provide proof.

I don't need to prove that he was at other meetings. I've have legitimate and documented proof that St. Louis has not been kept out of the process.

What have you offered? The best you can come up with is "Go (frank) yourself you ignorant dolt."

I rest my case. I've given you multiple chances to provide proof.
- MJL

Its the players fault. Ur dum.

I don't need to prove that he was at other meetings. I've have legitimate and documented proof that St. Louis has not been kept out of the process.

What have you offered? The best you can come up with is "Go (frank) yourself you ignorant dolt."

I rest my case. I've given you multiple chances to provide proof.
- MJL

No you have not. You are a dolt, and an ignorant one at that. I never heard him name in any other meeting, nor seen his picture at any presser. He has been excluded from meetings. There is your proof.

Case rested. Now like robinsteele says: GtFO...or something like that