Jump to content

NHL owners pondering new league


RowdyFan42

Recommended Posts

http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen...da-ac11dfe49c67

NHL owners pondering new league: source

Broadcast News

Friday, August 27, 2004

OTTAWA - National Hockey League team owners are now seriously considering forming a new league.

A team owner, who was speaking on condition that his identity was not divulged, says it might come as early as January.

Under the structure of the NHL, it has the ability to shutdown and begin in a new way, if extended negotiations with the players' union fail to reach a deal.

According to the owner, this possibility has become greater following fruitless attempts to reach a deal during contract bargainning with the players' association this week in Ottawa.

Ironically, the players have been considering the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it!!! Why not do it?

The problem is that this has to be a lock-out, not a strike. You can't bring in replacement players.

Start a new league, complete with a salary cap and all the rest AND LET THE PLAYERS DECIDE WHERE THEY WANT TO PLAY. You can play in this new league, you can play in Sweden, you can play in Switzerland.

Screw the CBA negotiations... give me some hockey. I don't care if it is called the NHL, the WHL (world hockey league - national never did make much sense given that there has always been 2 nations) the CSUHL (completely screwed up hockey league), NSL(No-scoring league).... I don't care. So long as they are competing for the Stanley Cup... go for it.

Of course, this means we'd have to redisperse players and get totally new teams, but meh.... give me Lou trying to build a team for a Stanley Cup and I'm there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like it!!! Why not do it?

The problem is that this has to be a lock-out, not a strike. You can't bring in replacement players.

Start a new league, complete with a salary cap and all the rest AND LET THE PLAYERS DECIDE WHERE THEY WANT TO PLAY. You can play in this new league, you can play in Sweden, you can play in Switzerland.

Screw the CBA negotiations... give me some hockey. I don't care if it is called the NHL, the WHL (world hockey league - national never did make much sense given that there has always been 2 nations) the CSUHL (completely screwed up hockey league), NSL(No-scoring league).... I don't care. So long as they are competing for the Stanley Cup... go for it.

Of course, this means we'd have to redisperse players and get totally new teams, but meh.... give me Lou trying to build a team for a Stanley Cup and I'm there.

My bet is Brodeur, Madden, Brylin, Pandolfo, Rheumea all wind up on the same team under Lou...

It would be interesting to see which groups sign where... Just think about it: Kariya/Selanne team hunting could happen with a lot of people... But Id bet a reconizable core winds up signing to the same team... I mean Madden was a well sought after free agent who didnt bother entertaining ideas; just used it to determine his price according to his agent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i agree don, close up shop and start a new. i think we are passed the point of trying to put a bandaid on a severed arm. if both sides are going to be so stubborn about everything let a new league arise (not the silly WHA). the owners are the ones with the money and the name recognition im sure they could pull it off....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a new league, we would have new teams.

Do we get a new name and logo? New Jersey Jets? New Jersey Warriors? DM will have change the colour scheme.... and the url for that matter.... We'll all have to get all new gear. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL... they can't be serious. They would have zero credibility left.

And I would not watch. These idiots forget that the players are what make the product interesting. Without the talent, nobody will watch or attend these games for the prices they charge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me guesses that the law suits would just be endless...

Union busting, unfair competition, breach of contract, anti-trust... just to name a few.

Remember, it always gets ugliest before the end.

Union busting...

We aren't breaking the union; the union can decide not to join the new leaugue... it happens all the time when contracts are given to different companies...

Unfair Competition...

There are other sources of competition internationally; as demonstrated by the players....

Breach of Contract...

The agreement expired; the whole reason for this mess...

Anti-trust

On the international level there are several leagues that players can join...

They aren't clean cut; but Im sure the legal hurdles could be jumped... its also a good hand to lay down to make the players union blink. The new leauge will definetely have a cap; prolly 31million... if they negotiate a salary cap; they can prolly boost that by 10million so both sides seem to give in...

The problem is the union went public with the "NEVER ACCEPT A SALARY CAP"... The owners left the door open by never using that term... they use "COST CERTAINTY"; so when the players give in; the system will resemble a salary cap; but wont be called that... they will prolly wind up giving in to one of the 6 plans; or variation of such... but not until January or next September.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL... they can't be serious. They would have zero credibility left.

And I would not watch. These idiots forget that the players are what make the product interesting. Without the talent, nobody will watch or attend these games for the prices they charge.

I think the talent WOULD be there. Because the players have a choice. Play on a NNHL (New National Hockey League) team that has a cap of $45M, or play in the WHA with a $10M cap, or play on a Swedish team where they would make, oh, $1M tops.

The issue is how to get a cap in place. The owners want one. The players say they won't play with one. So fine. Owners decide to disolve the league. Works for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me guesses that the law suits would just be endless...

Union busting, unfair competition, breach of contract, anti-trust... just to name a few.

Remember, it always gets ugliest before the end.

Union busting...

We aren't breaking the union; the union can decide not to join the new leaugue... it happens all the time when contracts are given to different companies...

Unfair Competition...

There are other sources of competition internationally; as demonstrated by the players....

Breach of Contract...

The agreement expired; the whole reason for this mess...

Anti-trust

On the international level there are several leagues that players can join...

They aren't clean cut; but Im sure the legal hurdles could be jumped... its also a good hand to lay down to make the players union blink. The new leauge will definetely have a cap; prolly 31million... if they negotiate a salary cap; they can prolly boost that by 10million so both sides seem to give in...

The problem is the union went public with the "NEVER ACCEPT A SALARY CAP"... The owners left the door open by never using that term... they use "COST CERTAINTY"; so when the players give in; the system will resemble a salary cap; but wont be called that... they will prolly wind up giving in to one of the 6 plans; or variation of such... but not until January or next September.

agreed that the law suits could all probaly be won, but that would essentially tie up any new league from operating for years.

..and that's why a new league with a new union is not a real threat... and the owners know it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the talent WOULD be there. Because the players have a choice. Play on a NNHL (New National Hockey League) team that has a cap of $45M, or play in the WHA with a $10M cap, or play on a Swedish team where they would make, oh, $1M tops.

The issue is how to get a cap in place. The owners want one. The players say they won't play with one. So fine. Owners decide to disolve the league. Works for me.

They're not going to cross the union for some stupid second rate league. Because that's what it would be. The NHL is in a tough spot now and nobody seems to care on either side. Doesn't that worry you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the talent WOULD be there. Because the players have a choice. Play on a NNHL (New National Hockey League) team that has a cap of $45M, or play in the WHA with a $10M cap, or play on a Swedish team where they would make, oh, $1M tops.

The issue is how to get a cap in place. The owners want one. The players say they won't play with one. So fine. Owners decide to disolve the league. Works for me.

They're not going to cross the union for some stupid second rate league. Because that's what it would be. The NHL is in a tough spot now and nobody seems to care on either side. Doesn't that worry you?

they will cross for a stupid second rate league if they're is no first rate league to play in....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man what a stupid 6 months for Stevens to pick to have PCS :rolleyes: jackass... <_< now I'll NEVER see him play again. :angry: YES I WAS still holding out hope he'd return... :angry:

He can play for the Halifax IceBreakers!! We'll welcome him with open arms!!! :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think this would work. More bullsh!t in a different league. I do agree that the NHL needs an overhaul though and one way to start besides ass-whipping the pansy players with a salary cap is to get rid of some of the teams. The sport is going on a downward spiral quickly. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NHL, the WHL (world hockey league - national never did make much sense given that there has always been 2 nations)

For the first 7 years of the league there were only Canadian teams.

Aye. I just did a search and confirmed that... original NHL teams were the Canadiens, Wanderers, Senators and Arenas. No wonder yer the trivia champ. :)

So "national" in National Hockey League is Canada. Learn somethin' new every day.

Edited by Don
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NHL, the WHL (world hockey league - national never did make much sense given that there has always been 2 nations)

For the first 7 years of the league there were only Canadian teams.

Aye. I just did a search and confirmed that... original NHL teams were the Canadiens, Wanderers, Senators and Arenas. Know wonder yer the trivia champ. :)

So "national" in National Hockey League is Canada. Learn somethin' new every day.

what about the national league in baseball then? of NBA?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.