NHL 2011 PLAYOFFS

fife

lukin2006 wrote:

metsfan wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I miss old time hockey...now the NHL is watered down and some of these players should be in the minors.

every player on every 4th line is a minor leaguer. i wish they'd do away with having goons and roll out 4 true lines. i really don't wanna see a guy like boogar or gillies or anyother goon get a useless 4 minutes a night. least the 4th liners in the old time days could actually play.

The league needs to shrink to 24-26 teams...they have an opportunity to start now with Phoenix..imo

dont fool your self, the players wont be happy about that either.

lukin2006

metsfan wrote:

Big Drop wrote:

Salary cap.

Funny how third line defencemen aren't goons, just fourth line forwards. It is what it is, i guess.

and thusly why i dislike it but can see why it's good for the game

At first I thought the salary cap was going to be good and the great equalizer...but all it does it put a max that teams can spend, however I think their is a minimum. The cap has closed the gap but their are still far too many teams with low revenue stream. I doubt it will ever have the same effect as the cap has in football and basketball where they generate far more revenue from TV. Under the cap system Phoenix was losing 30+ million per...wow.

But with Donald Fehr the head of the NHLPA is he going to try to get the cap removed?

lukin2006

fife wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

metsfan wrote:

The league needs to shrink to 24-26 teams...they have an opportunity to start now with Phoenix..imo

dont fool your self, the players wont be happy about that either.

Where did I say the players would be happy...the fans would be though...pre 1990 the NHL rocked, not just in the playoffs but all season.

fife

lukin2006 wrote:

metsfan wrote:

Big Drop wrote:

Salary cap.

Funny how third line defencemen aren't goons, just fourth line forwards. It is what it is, i guess.

and thusly why i dislike it but can see why it's good for the game

At first I thought the salary cap was going to be good and the great equalizer...but all it does it put a max that teams can spend, however I think their is a minimum. The cap has closed the gap but their are still far too many teams with low revenue stream. I doubt it will ever have the same effect as the cap has in football and basketball where they generate far more revenue from TV. Under the cap system Phoenix was losing 30+ million per...wow.

But with Donald Fehr the head of the NHLPA is he going to try to get the cap removed?

their is a min that you must spend with the cap. The players made sure of that. I dont see Fehr going after the cap, i see him going after the escrow and maybe fighting the term limits of contracts

81

I like caps in sports. The nba cap was terrible. Nfl had it right until this year. Nhl might have the best labor situation going right now as mlb is fucked

Break The Sky

lukin2006 wrote:

metsfan wrote:

Big Drop wrote:

Salary cap.

Funny how third line defencemen aren't goons, just fourth line forwards. It is what it is, i guess.

and thusly why i dislike it but can see why it's good for the game

At first I thought the salary cap was going to be good and the great equalizer...but all it does it put a max that teams can spend, however I think their is a minimum. The cap has closed the gap but their are still far too many teams with low revenue stream. I doubt it will ever have the same effect as the cap has in football and basketball where they generate far more revenue from TV. Under the cap system Phoenix was losing 30+ million per...wow.

But with Donald Fehr the head of the NHLPA is he going to try to get the cap removed?

I don't hate the cap, I guess I just don't really remember how hockey worked before the cap that well.

fife

dont fool your self, the players wont be happy about that either.[/quote][/quote]

Where did I say the players would be happy...the fans would be though...pre 1990 the NHL rocked, not just in the playoffs but all season.[/quote]

sorry i didnt want to make you feel you said that. sure the fans would be happy but lets be honest if both the nhl and its players saying no then it wont happen

lukin2006

fife wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

metsfan wrote:

At first I thought the salary cap was going to be good and the great equalizer...but all it does it put a max that teams can spend, however I think their is a minimum. The cap has closed the gap but their are still far too many teams with low revenue stream. I doubt it will ever have the same effect as the cap has in football and basketball where they generate far more revenue from TV. Under the cap system Phoenix was losing 30+ million per...wow.

But with Donald Fehr the head of the NHLPA is he going to try to get the cap removed?

their is a min that you must spend with the cap. The players made sure of that. I dont see Fehr going after the cap, i see him going after the escrow and maybe fighting the term limits of contracts

Fehr never excepted 1 in baseball

fife

their is a min that you must spend with the cap. The players made sure of that. I dont see Fehr going after the cap, i see him going after the escrow and maybe fighting the term limits of contracts[/quote][/quote]

Fehr never excepted 1 in baseball[/quote]

i might be wrong and if i am im sorry but did baseball ever have a cap. I dont think so but again i could be wrong

lukin2006

fife wrote:

dont fool your self, the players wont be happy about that either.

[/quote]

Where did I say the players would be happy...the fans would be though...pre 1990 the NHL rocked, not just in the playoffs but all season.[/quote]

sorry i didnt want to make you feel you said that. sure the fans would be happy but lets be honest if both the nhl and its players saying no then it wont happen[/quote]

It's not up to the players...they don't own the franchise...the NHL owns Phoenix, they can fold Phoenix if they choose...the players probably aren't happy about the prospects of moving to Winnipeg either...that's just to bad, hockey doesn't work in the southern states and I'm skeptical that it'll work in Winnipeg. It would have worked with Jim Basille...he's loaded...that would have been an expensive toy for him.

lukin2006

fife wrote:

their is a min that you must spend with the cap. The players made sure of that. I dont see Fehr going after the cap, i see him going after the escrow and maybe fighting the term limits of contracts

[/quote]

Fehr never excepted 1 in baseball[/quote]

i might be wrong and if i am im sorry but did baseball ever have a cap. I dont think so but again i could be wrong[/quote]

No it never had a cap but the owners wanted 1.

fife

It's not up to the players...they don't own the franchise...the NHL owns Phoenix, they can fold Phoenix if they choose...the players probably aren't happy about the prospects of moving to Winnipeg either...that's just to bad, hockey doesn't work in the southern states and I'm skeptical that it'll work in Winnipeg. It would have worked with Jim Basille...he's loaded...that would have been an expensive toy for him.[/quote]

it might not be up to the players but what is up to them is where they decide to play. just look at the oilers. many great players didnt want to play there and that can happen in the peg.

i actually think it can work in the peg as from what i have heard one part of the team trying to get phoenix are the thompson who are the riches people in canada. they can bring in the coporate sponsorship needed. the issue in the past with the jets was the Canadian $ who at that time was very low but things have improved.

fife

lukin2006 wrote:

fife wrote:

their is a min that you must spend with the cap. The players made sure of that. I dont see Fehr going after the cap, i see him going after the escrow and maybe fighting the term limits of contracts

Fehr never excepted 1 in baseball[/quote]

i might be wrong and if i am im sorry but did baseball ever have a cap. I dont think so but again i could be wrong[/quote]

No it never had a cap but the owners wanted 1.[/quote]

its much harder to fight a cap when there is one already as compared to when there isnt one. i might be wrong but i dont see him fighting against the cap i do see him fighting the term limits that the NHL will want at the next neg.

lukin2006

fife wrote:

It's not up to the players...they don't own the franchise...the NHL owns Phoenix, they can fold Phoenix if they choose...the players probably aren't happy about the prospects of moving to Winnipeg either...that's just to bad, hockey doesn't work in the southern states and I'm skeptical that it'll work in Winnipeg. It would have worked with Jim Basille...he's loaded...that would have been an expensive toy for him.

it might not be up to the players but what is up to them is where they decide to play. just look at the oilers. many great players didnt want to play there and that can happen in the peg.

i actually think it can work in the peg as from what i have heard one part of the team trying to get phoenix are the thompson who are the riches people in canada. they can bring in the coporate sponsorship needed. the issue in the past with the jets was the Canadian $ who at that time was very low but things have improved.[/quote]


If I was Winnipeg I wouldn't expect a team just yet. I still think Phoenix stays in the states...they have a brand new rink in Kansas City...Bettman does not want any more franchise's in Canada and he doesn't care what we think. I would not have a problem with Winnipeg and Quebec as well...but Bettman and the US owners are the problem...they became greedy with all this US expansion into non hockey markets...and now that they got this new TV contract I'm even less skeptical of Phoenix leaving, Phoenix is 1 of the largest markets in the States.

Gary Carter

lukin2006 wrote:

If I was Winnipeg I wouldn't expect a team just yet. I still think Phoenix stays in the states...they have a brand new rink in Kansas City...Bettman does not want any more franchise's in Canada and he doesn't care what we think. I would not have a problem with Winnipeg and Quebec as well...but Bettman and the US owners are the problem...they became greedy with all this US expansion into non hockey markets...and now that they got this new TV contract I'm even less skeptical of Phoenix leaving, Phoenix is 1 of the largest markets in the States.

4,865 people showed up the exhibition game between the LA kings and NY islanders few years back. they expected it to be a sell out. i don't see a team ever in KC after that and it failing once already. seattle is a rumored city to get a franchise. that city would perfect for a hockey team. they are loyal rabid fans in seattle. the seattle sounders(soccer) sellout quest field. when was the last time an american soccer team had home games that sold out?

lukin2006

metsfan wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

If I was Winnipeg I wouldn't expect a team just yet. I still think Phoenix stays in the states...they have a brand new rink in Kansas City...Bettman does not want any more franchise's in Canada and he doesn't care what we think. I would not have a problem with Winnipeg and Quebec as well...but Bettman and the US owners are the problem...they became greedy with all this US expansion into non hockey markets...and now that they got this new TV contract I'm even less skeptical of Phoenix leaving, Phoenix is 1 of the largest markets in the States.

4,865 people showed up the exhibition game between the LA kings and NY islanders few years back. they expected it to be a sell out. i don't see a team ever in KC after that and it failing once already. seattle is a rumored city to get a franchise. that city would perfect for a hockey team. they are loyal rabid fans in seattle. the seattle sounders(soccer) sellout quest field. when was the last time an american soccer team had home games that sold out?

Thats what I mean...Bettman and the US owners will look at every option before this team comes to Winnipeg and Winnipeg and Quebec are rabid hockey fans. When I say Kansas City, whats to say they don't sell the team to this guy and he moves them to KC.

Gary Carter

lukin2006 wrote:

Thats what I mean...Bettman and the US owners will look at every option before this team comes to Winnipeg and Winnipeg and Quebec are rabid hockey fans. When I say Kansas City, whats to say they don't sell the team to this guy and he moves them to KC.

idk to be honest with you. i could see bettman moving the coyotes to Oklahoma city before anywhere else seeing as how he was once an nba guy and the nba franchise in Oklahoma city is doing good.

lukin2006

metsfan wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

Thats what I mean...Bettman and the US owners will look at every option before this team comes to Winnipeg and Winnipeg and Quebec are rabid hockey fans. When I say Kansas City, whats to say they don't sell the team to this guy and he moves them to KC.

idk to be honest with you. i could see bettman moving the coyotes to Oklahoma city before anywhere else seeing as how he was once an nba guy and the nba franchise in Oklahoma city is doing good.

I never thought of Oklahoma...why not...

Gary Carter

lukin2006 wrote:

I never thought of Oklahoma...why not...

hell why not put a team in Alaska :roll: :roll:

Break The Sky

metsfan wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I never thought of Oklahoma...why not...

hell why not put a team in Alaska :roll: :roll:

You know. . . 400,000 people live in Anchorage.