PattyElias26 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 lou should already have a plan b set up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grcenter47 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 i am glad that all my friends who are rangers and flyers fans texted me with their nurturing support Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevsfn95 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 RealKyperArbitrator Bloch says " this is a retirement contract" in his report. said deal "well beyond the typical retirement age for NHL players". Well, then chop this contract by 2 years and the NHL already has Hossa and Luongo to thank for reasons they must accept this deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeDev Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 what now :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Devs Fan Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Just annoyed that there's other contracts that by the definition this arbitrator and the league probably used, already violate the cba. Seems like the league has it in for the devils/kovalchuk. This may just be me talking out of my tukus but i dont think a contract like this gets challeneged by the league if its for a canadian player. Sooner or later the league had to challenge one of these bogus contracts; the issue is why this one. Clearly something has to be done about them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'7' Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 (edited) Well the NHL decided to draw the line here despite plenty of cap circumvention before...clearly an unfair ruling. Not absolutely impossible for a guy to play until he's 44, and if he does a $500,000 (about the league min) is probably about what he'd be paid at that age. Anyway...let's get this done so we don't have egg on our face, and let's hope Bettman suffers 3 consecutive heart attacks and a stroke. Sooner or later the league had to challenge one of these bogus contracts; the issue is why this one. Clearly something has to be done about them. so do it next CBA, you shouldn't be allowed to pick and choose and change the rules as you go Edited August 9, 2010 by '7' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grcenter47 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 There is def a backup contract. It should be signed soon IMO this may be a dumb question but what does everyone think the contract will look now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 RealKyperArbitrator Bloch says " this is a retirement contract" in his report. said deal "well beyond the typical retirement age for NHL players". Not surprised, the length, age, and dollar amounts at the end always seemed to be where the problem would be Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PattyElias26 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 They just brought it up on ESPN (3 seconds long)..FML Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie McKraut Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 hahhahhahha that slogan is marketing brilliance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pattyelias Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Anyone planning on going to that guy Dagoon's bar tonight? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grcenter47 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 They just brought it up on ESPN (3 seconds long)..FML thats a lot in ESPN's standards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njdevsfn95 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Anyone planning on going to that guy Dagoon's bar tonight? he said Kovy will still be a Devil. no reason he still won't be. i find it hard to believe that ANYONE had news of this decision until close to, or after, 5pm today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrthemike Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Horsesh!t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Puddy Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Wonder if the Devils will put out a statement... if so I expect it to be a non-statement. "The Devils are disappointed that the contract and will not comment further". Waiting for the NHLPA statement... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Devs Fan Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 so do it next CBA, you shouldn't be allowed to pick and choose. The problem then is when this one expires there might be a bunch of bogus contracts on the books; realistically why wouldn't you do this as often as you can. If something is wrong - and this is clearly wrong - then you need to solve the problem, my problem is why this case was picked. If Bettman simply says 'no more' then other teams can say that isn't fair and they would be right; don't tell me the owners and players couldn't get together and solve this before the current CBA expires (yeah, I know I live in a bubble) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 That's my point exactly. The fact of the matter is, Chicago and Philly both pushed the envelope with these deals: and the NHL did nothing to stop it. Had the NHL taken a stand, said no, and took the team to arbitration -- regardless of the outcome -- that at least shows that the NHL is serious about DOING something about this blatant arbitration. Put a rule in or something, but the NHL is acting like the teacher that gives one kid detention for talking back after weeks of other disruptive students doing the same. The NHL made a big deal over the Hossa contract, way more than any other contract. Shouldn't that have let teams know to draw the line there? Then the NHL told the Devils before the deal was signed that they'd likely void it, shouldn't that have been enough to let the Devils know the league drew the line there? The NHL then voided the contract, which was worse than the last deal they made a fuss over, like the NHL said they would, and the Devils were supposed to be shocked that the NHL followed through on what they said they'd do? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thefiestygoat Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 This is bullsh!t, man am I pissed right now. I'm confident the Kovalchuk and the Devils will work something else out but I'm not happy that it probably means a higher cap hit. I understand the Devils contract was really pushing the limit on these deals but the NHL should've taken a stand on this in the past like Martyisth3b3st said. So I guess the NHL can pick and choose which teams are allowed frontloaded longterm deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maxpower Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 they did it to themselves, end of story. if that quote from the arbitrator is accurate, the league pretty much has to go after the other teams now. bet they wished they'd hired this guy full-time, now. they went for the gold in the cap greed olympics and got burned. now, they pay the price, because they pretty much have to sign him at any reasonable cost, or they shot themselves in the nuts. this is why you do not have press conferences for players that are not signed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC Devs Fan Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 Wonder if the Devils will put out a statement... if so I expect it to be a non-statement. "The Devils are disappointed that the contract and will not comment further". Waiting for the NHLPA statement... I expect Lou to call it a lower body injury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chimaira_Devil_#9 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 this may be a dumb question but what does everyone think the contract will look now I would imagine a load of worthless paper with a few squiggly signatures and a big VOID stamped on the middle of it. ORRRRR something on LA Kings headed paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Devils731 Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 This is bullsh!t, man am I pissed right now. I'm confident the Kovalchuk and the Devils will work something else out but I'm not happy that it probably means a higher cap hit. I understand the Devils contract was really pushing the limit on these deals but the NHL should've taken a stand on this in the past like Martyisth3b3st said. So I guess the NHL can pick and choose which teams are allowed frontloaded longterm deals. The NHL didn't want to take a contract, say Hossa's, to arbitration and lose. It had to get really blatantly obvious what was going on for the league to feel confident they could prove their case to an arbitrator. Kovy's contract just happened to be the one that was blatant enough for them to feel confident about, it looks like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
'7' Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 (edited) Hasn't precedent already been set though? Mark Messier, Chris Chelios (played well past 44) Tim Horton, Gordie Howe(51!), Doug Harvey, Johnny Bower, Igor Larionov...heck Claude Lemieux came out of retirement at 43! and he was pretty much finished at 37 but still made it back It is atypical for somebody to play that long, but not impossible, and Kovalchuk is in great physical condition and cannot be described as a "typical" player. If the contract went up to 49 or 50 then fine, but Bloch is an idiot. Edited August 9, 2010 by '7' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JakeDev Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 :argh: emotions of all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
puckrock Posted August 9, 2010 Share Posted August 9, 2010 I expect Lou to call it a lower body injury WIN! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts