It's 4-1 now and Ersberg is down in his crease. If I was him I'd just lay there until someone comes out to play defense.

Stolarz Nebraska -Omaha this weekend.


- mayorofangrytown

whats channel/time?

Well Ersberg didn't heed my advice. 5-1.

Granted my comment regarding contraction was flippant. However, it is in the "union's" best interest to employ as many NHL players as possible. It is unreasonable to expect that (let's say) 25 viable franchises should subsidize 5 franchises, that are not, indefinitely. For the fans and owners of those 25 franchises, the league would be better off without the other five as the on-ice product would be better and money would not be flushed down the drain. In effect, if the players intend to protect those jobs, they will be required to subsidize them as well. To some extent they currently are but perhaps not enough.
- GeorgeBailey

There isn't any credible reason to suggest that players need to subsidize any team. I disagree that the League would be better off without those 5 franchises. They may be better off relocating a few of those franchises. But not better off without them. Which franchises are the 5 you talk about?

At least 10 of the 30 teams have been sold in the last several years, one has already been moved, apparently 15 to 16 can't meet payroll and turn a profit, one is owned by the league and New Jersey and the Isles are on the verge of financial collapse. This league is in complete flux. The problems are with the basic NHL structure, not with player salaries.

While I can't agree in the least with the proposal as stated I certainly can understand the sentiment. The NHL needs new leadership and the ownership of 50% of the teams needs to be stabilized with a vision of the future not a gouging of the players and a lockout. There's no true fix to the ills of the league to be found in a new CBA.

And I don't disagree with a single thing you said. This league needs a more brash forward thinking vision of the future and that takes new leadership because the brash vision that was installed in the 90s has created as more problems than it has growth. We're more than 15 years into the plan they still haven't recovered from leaving for the USA network in the 80s.
- mayorofangrytown

I agree. There is no doubt that there are some serious financial issues with some teams. And that there are real problems that need to be figured out. But do it for the right reasons. And solid labor relationship between the players and the League is in everyone's best interests.

There isn't any credible reason to suggest that players need to subsidize any team. I disagree that the League would be better off without those 5 franchises. They may be better off relocating a few of those franchises. But not better off without them. Which franchises are the 5 you talk about?
- MJL

There's been a lot of talk about contraction, but I'm not sure that's the answer. I think that many troubled teams could be saved by relocation.

There isn't any credible reason to suggest that players need to subsidize any team.
- MJL

I think they do. [Please note the phrase: I think - suggesting an opinion.] Let's try this sentence: There isn't any credible reason to suggest that the owners need to subsidize any team.
For the Flyers, Maple Leafs, etc. do you think they would be materially hampered any more than the subsidy they are already paying out if the league were 29 teams without the Coyotes? Do you think the Flyers were hurting when it was a 16 team league?
On the other hand, are the players better off if there are 725 jobs vs. 750?

I disagree that the League would be better off without those 5 franchises. They may be better off relocating a few of those franchises. But not better off without them. Which franchises are the 5 you talk about?
- MJL

Please refer to MayorofAngryTowns post.

Well Ersberg didn't heed my advice. 5-1.
- mayorofangrytown

FYI: Sent you a DM over Twitter.

There's been a lot of talk about contraction, but I'm not sure that's the answer. I think that many troubled teams could be saved by relocation.
- funmaster18

They should pare the league down to the original 6 + Philly. It's the only answer.

I agree. There is no doubt that there are some serious financial issues with some teams. And that there are real problems that need to be figured out. But do it for the right reasons. And solid labor relationship between the players and the League is in everyone's best interests.
- MJL

Ayup, which is why it's a pipe dream.

They should pare the league down to the original 6 + Philly. It's the only answer.
- Flyskippy

I can't wait to play the rangers 13 times a year!

whats channel/time?
- Philly1980

9 on Friday on NBCSN

http://www.collegehockeyn...s.com/news/tvsked.php#byd

I can't wait to play the rangers 13 times a year!
- funmaster18

We could do it like baseball. How's a three game home stand with the Rangers sound?

Just to clarify, I am not saying I would prefer contraction.

At some point, though, both the owners and the players will need an agreement as to how much they are willing to subsidize certain teams to keep them competitive. So far, the NHL only has the Seals/Barons franchise as an example. However, the current structure may be more like the WHA. Relocation may be an answer but nothing is a given. You need significant population to ensure a fan base that fills the building and provides a ton of other eyeballs watching on TV and buying merchandise. You also need to pay to have a competitive team to have that happen.

We could do it like baseball. How's a three game home stand with the Rangers sound?
- mayorofangrytown

Could you imagine? Tempers would be flaring. I'd like to see the penalty minutes after game three. Lou Nolan would be a busy man.

Just to clarify, I am not saying I would prefer contraction.

At some point, though, both the owners and the players will need an agreement as to how much they are willing to subsidize certain teams to keep them competitive. So far, the NHL only has the Seals/Barons franchise as an example. However, the current structure may be more like the WHA. Relocation may be an answer but nothing is a given. You need significant population to ensure a fan base that fills the building and provides a ton of other eyeballs watching on TV and buying merchandise. You also need to pay to have a competitive team to have that happen.
- GeorgeBailey

There isn't another major sports league that doesn't have a stronger revenue sharing system. The MLB and NFL allow teams to keep more of their team related revenue streams but that wasn't allowed until all the teams were financially sound. That's what needs to happen here. When you get to the point where all teams are turning a buck everything above that can start to be hoarded. Right now it's sink or swim with the owners.

9 on Friday on NBCSN

http://www.collegehockeyn...s.com/news/tvsked.php#byd
- mayorofangrytown

thanks!

I think they do.
- GeorgeBailey[Please note the phrase: I think - suggesting an opinion.] Let's try this sentence: There isn't any credible reason to suggest that the owners need to subsidize any team.
For the Flyers, Maple Leafs, etc. do you think they would be materially hampered any more than the subsidy they are already paying out if the league were 29 teams without the Coyotes? Do you think the Flyers were hurting when it was a 16 team league?
On the other hand, are the players better off if there are 725 jobs vs. 750?



Please refer to MayorofAngryTowns post.

Yes, there is a credible reason why the owners need to subsidize any team. They are part of a League, and in the same group. Any idea why there is revenue sharing in just about every Major sports League? Any idea why? It isn't about what is better for the Leafs, Flyers etc, if the Coyotes weren't around. it's about what is better for the League as a whole and the Phoenix franchise.

Contraction and location of franchises doesn't have anything to do with the players.

Huge comeback by the Fedotenkos. 5-4.

Off Topic

I just converted to a Galaxy S III from a Blackberry Curve. I havent had a chance to play around with it yet (damn work). Does anyone else have one? Thoughts? Tips?

Thanks

Off Topic

I just converted to a Galaxy S III from a Blackberry Curve. I havent had a chance to play around with it yet (damn work). Does anyone else have one? Thoughts? Tips?

Thanks
- KINGKENZO

ob18 has one, if I remember correctly. I've got a pretty similar phone, too, so shoot me a PM if you need anything, I can probaly point you in the right direction.

Off Topic

I just converted to a Galaxy S III from a Blackberry Curve. I havent had a chance to play around with it yet (damn work). Does anyone else have one? Thoughts? Tips?

Thanks
- KINGKENZO

hipster

ob18 has one, if I remember correctly. I've got a pretty similar phone, too, so shoot me a PM if you need anything, I can probaly point you in the right direction.
- BulliesPhan87

Youre the man, I dont care what the others say about you

hipster
- jak521

I thought hipsters exclusively used electronics with giant Apple logos on outward facing surfaces?

hipster
- jak521

hahahahaha