Vanflyer

I forgot about that thread. Maybe I will go look it up and add some excerpts to his bio write up! ha

Thanks. I will begrudgingly add a bio later. (j/k) Just hard for me to get over how lousy he was with the Flyers. I agree with everything Jammer said regarding his play in Philly.

I would agree with that to some extent. It is interesting to see a state like Colorado which is notoriously conservative, pass a recreational marijuana bill. That says allot. For me, there has to be restrictions in operating a vehicle. The strength of some of the marijuana made today is pretty astounding as compared to 30 years ago. I do not partake, but have friends that do and when I watch them they turn into marshmellows for a while. They function, but certainly not of the ability operate machinery.

I have recently read allot on both sides. Aside from the issues alone, there are two things that extremely irritate me and I think that their is no excuse for: 1) The players not wanting to begin negotiations until after the playoffs were completed and then the NHL in turn not starting said negotiations until the middle of August. 2) The NHL using the "lockout" as an initial bargaining tool. That is not how labour talks / negotiations work. The NHL could have easily extended the current CBA on say a monthly basis and then if things continued to be at a stall use the lockout as a last resort- not a first resort. The thing that is irritating the most is that it is the fans that are suffering. A settlement will come some time (this year, next year etc.) and the players will continue to be millionaires and the owners will continue being billionaires. But the fans will have lost however long of a sport they love. For the hard core fans, they will be back, for the casual fan they won't come back. In places like Phoenix and Dallas that is significant. I would add to that the younger players (in seasons 1-3). They are losing a season (potentially) of their careers and I would imagine being a young millionaire, they just want to play hockey. It is the vets that will be the anchor and core to any agreement.

I found that very interesting as well. I thought for sure they would have many more stars to choose from with longevity on the team. The other interesting fact that I did not know is that they only have one 3 stanley cups. That is very poor for an original 6 team.

Interesting perspective. With York, I just can not get over my tainted perception of him in philly @idahophilly is it reasonable to modify the poll after it has started as long as we are under the 15 player max??

I thought you were referring about how long the NHL wanted to take to make existing contracts "whole", not the changing the length before a player can become a UFA or the length of contracts (both are significant issues on the table). I sort of don't mind the UFA one because it actually ensures that a player will play with one team longer- which is good for the fans. The length of the contract one makes sense too as it keeps rich teams from making astronomically long contracts in order to circumvent the cap.

For me it is hard to add a 3rd liner to the list. I respect the lunch pale guys, but I could not put York on my top list for the vote (aside from the Flyer fandom ccynicism about nachos). I am hoping you were making a joke, if not....say so! :-)

It is an interesting thing to do, because it is Most Valuable Retired Player- by team.Maybe Idaho could post the contest rules the same as HF did for the summer contest. Post Era, I would have voted either Leetch or Richter. Messier play was great, but without Leetch or Richter it would have never have happened (maybe). Even as I write this, I am torn. Maybe we can figure a way for portable players in the contest. Ie. Messier was GREAT with the Oiliers and Lindros was GREAT with the Flyers, but Leetch and Richter were great with the Rangers as was Vic.

I agree with everything you said- and was a bit lazy. But it is post-era and I think I listed the players post era there were the best of the best to put on a blue shirt regardless of duration. That said, who else would you put on the list. Under the rules, we can list 10 players, post era. I can not change it now, but it is good for the dialogue. Truthfully, I wanted to write more about the early guys- as it was much more intriguing. Also, I never knew the Rangers have only won 3 cups since inception (as an original 6 team). This is a pretty cool thing to do- as I learned more about the Rangers than before. I of course only authored a small portion, but I researched allot.

Mess is one of my favorite hockey players. Skilled, nasty at the same time. Very Clarke-esque, but bigger and stonger.

I am periodic now, but usually check in every other day. Not sure what the Radoran story is, but I like him. He is one of the few that will not ***** foot around his POV. Even if I am at odds with that, I respect that.

It has nothing to do with the length, it is about the money. In a nut shell, the league wants lower the cap, which in turn lowers the ability to pay current contracts. They want to defer (escrow) moneys due on current contracts to allow the teams to fit under the cap. The players are saying eff that, we signed, you pay NOW under the terms of the contract (they don't want to get their money 2, 3, 4 years from now). That is the stumbling block. Meanwhile, the league has lost 700 million in revenue by this sticking point, which would have covered most of the deferments. Basically, it is a stake in the sand. If the players cave now, the next CBA will be worse (is their mind set). The owners mind set is "who cares", we made you millionaires and we will do what we want. There is no right side of this, just the loser fans that pour their hearts and cash to make both the league and players rich.

Just so I understand, you are taking the owners side of this or the players. Truthfully, I think it depends on when you signed your contract. The Webers, Suters, Parise of the world knew the deal. The players that signed two or three years ago- while not being blind (hopefully), those contracts should be honoured. And shamefully I will add, Bryz.

Why not, his salary will be reduced- thus why there is no NHL hockey being played today. The players are angry that the owners do not want to honor EXISTING contracts and want to reduce proportionately. Parise, Suter and Weber are all effd. The god send is that if it does come to pass, Breezy is eff'd too and KHL looks more attractive.

Now I have to go delete my posts. That is weird if true. How can you put a "proposed" contract in front of a player without all provisions addressed??

See above when looking up hipocrisy in the dictionary.

Interesting. Where are Suter and Parise to ask about this??

I know a great hockey streaming sight out of russia if anyone is interested? Ha ha

How can the deal not be finalized? If the contract was not signed (which it was), then Weber would be a Flyer today (and their might be law suits to the Flyers since Snider is one of the key members of the owners that knew the terms of the impending CBA). I don't really get this. It is not a negotiation. The flyers put an offer sheet in front of Weber (basically a contract), he signed. Nashville had the right to match- and they did and Weber signed. In laymans terms, as I understand it, Nashville has the right to match the contract that the Flyers put in front of Weber. By doing so, Weber has no choice but to sign (no arbitration, negotiation, etc.). Whatever the terms of the Flyers "offer sheet / contract" are the terms that Nashville adopts by matching. If Weber does not want to sign, then he can not play in the NHL.

Spectacular job by all. I am very impressed by the site alone, but moreso the hockey content and ability to let people speak freely. There are very little hostile situations here (some heated debate is welcomed at time, but not when that is the purpose of posting only). Without Digity, this site would not be. So number one hats off to him. Without the great posters whoms main objective it to talk hockey, hat trick hats off to all you all. In the coming year, it would be my hope and wish that we can get more posters that are fans of other teams- ie. diversified. For me it is a selfish wish as I learn more by "seeing" through other fans eyes and also learning more about the players they see everyday for their respective teams.

Actually the players assocition is agreeing to a cut in salary. What they are not agreeing to is that reduction be applied to existing contracts. They also had put a proposal on the table to distribute monies differently that would help the struggling teams more. I am currently p/o'd at both. WE (the fans) are where the money comes from and nobody gives a crap about us. If a whole season is lose, that is 3 BILLION dollars in revenue gone. That is MUCH more than what they are fighting about now- even spread out over the term of the next CBA. The fight now is about "caving" and "upper hand". The PA feels if they given in, then they will be whipping posts forever more. The owners thinks, who cares what the PA thinks, without us they would be serving coffee and donuts at Tim Hortons or flipping burgers at McDonalds. At the end of the day, it is two parties of spoiled brats. No matter how you slice it. And I am sick of it. I would rather watch AHLers (who ride a bus from town to town- see slapshot, Juniors or NCAA) then pay a nickel to see these p u s s i e s (owners and players alike).

Again I agree. And truthfully, this is one of the problems with the NHL. The NHL only promotes the NHL. It does not help expose any other hockey. From a business perspective, I totally get it, yet if you really want to develop the game expose people to all levels of hockey (NCAA, Juniors - CHL, AHL, international tournaments all come to mind). That is a big difference between Canada and the US -not to differentiate the NHL from either country, but lets be honest that while Hockey is Canadas game, the NHL is centralized USA sport- even from inception. Both countries have significant to enourmous support for the developmental leagues / teams, but Canada has a much greater exposure (TV, promotions, etc.). While I really enjoy watching the best players in the world play against each other, I also really enjoy watching the aforementioned. And trufully, if is allot more affordable. I can take my family to watch a Giants, Thunderbirds or Winterhawk game (4 people) for $40 dollars. Often times there are enormous promotions to bring the kids out (hotdog night etc.). $40 does not buy me a nose bleed seat for ANY NHL team. So, where do I really want to put my money??

I thought this was for sure going to be the ugliest shirt contest.

While I don't disagree with your sentiment, are you are season ticket holder?? Some of those seats have taken years for people to get and while your lament is accurate, if the game was to start tomorrow and you are section 117 row 10 with 2 seats, are you going to cancel? The bigger issue is how teams have held STH hostage with the money. Make a stand- sure, easy to say. Again I ask, are you are STH?