Honestly girls, next you'll be challenging each other to a fight in the school parking lot... How about a little advice Joel... say more with less. You're trying to hard to be witty and cool yourself... it's not your strong suit.
- MnGump

so what you're saying... is that i'm doing this whole be the coolest guy on hockeybuzz, fit into the hockeybuzz clique, thing... wrong?

and i thought real world problems were intense.

That sounded angry.
- prock

hug?

Marty St Louis was the best player one year. The NHL couldn't market that midget for a free ice cream cone.

Sid and Ovie(prior to him getting a severe case of the Russian), are such elite players that they make the NHL money without any work on the part of the league. Their play and their dynamic abilities brings attention to the game on a continental level that 99% of the league couldn't bring it to.

Yeah, somebody will always be the best player but that's a ridiculous point to make and avoids the origin of the topic which was that Sid and Ovie make more money for the league than any other player in their career span could have. I'm pretty sure that nobody said the NHL would collapse when they retire but will there be two players who have the revenue generating success that these two have brought to the table? Not in the last 7 years, and counting.
- trolleytracks

There will ALWAYS be a face of the NHL.
Selanne
Kariya
Roy
Brodeur
St-louis
Lecavalier
Orr
Should I go on?
If Sid could never play again due to medical reasons Giroux, Stamkos, Yakupov, Tavares, Malkin, etc would be the marketing poster boy of the league.

The league survived 99's retirement.

Maurice Richard, Marcel Dionne, MIke Bossy, Guy Lafleur, Pavel Bure etc
SOMEBODY will be the best player.
I wonder if the NHL will collapse the day after Ovi and Sid retire.
- braidan

Generational stars and Hall of Fame players. They weren't replaceable just as today's top stars aren't. That doesn't mean there won't be another generation of stars in the future. But let's not pretend that the NHL can get the same results out of marketing Doan and Alfredsson, that they can from marketing Crosby, Ovechkin, and Malkin. Because that is just plain asinine. And I know you didn't say that.

Your opinion is fair, but I find this site is drastically pro-NHL. I just find it funny that when some of us give the PA at least some credit, we are cast ablaze as PA jock sniffers and we need to get our heads out of their idiot asses.

There's a lot A LOT of aspects in every bit of these negotiations and they affect different people differently. Personally, I could care less that players make millions, in fact I think they should. Other people, won't even watch the sport at the disgust of them making so much money. You are never going to convince the other to change there stance.

But I don't understand why people are so one sided on this. Both are to blame yet you are chastised should you dare point something out criminalizing to a persons favored side. This poll is ridiculous by EK, what a completely redundant question, neither care about hockey. Everyone knows that. It's not even relevant to the situation, it's just ammo to attack the other side. But it got this poster to post, so good job ek *slow clap*
- Boosinicka

Well said, the whole negotiation is open to debate for both sides, Myself and other posters here have shown obvious frustration in MJL's one sided posts.
I think we all agree the lock-out is frustrating, but don't need to add the frustration of someone trying to convince us that we are all uninformed idiots that have no clue to the process at hand. That's the way he comes across, deliberate or not, it is perceived that way with most here.

Admit it, you are googling bells and salivation now aren't you.

It's OK don't be afraid of learning something. A lot of us have a lifetime of it. You will get used to it, maybe, one day.
- Aetherial

he's so... hockeybuzz cool. the way he recycles little internet fight angles. the are you gay schtick, to the learn something gimmick.

if i could have your life sir, it would be all i needed. ugh. even obama is nothing without online hockey forum acceptance, on top of being the baddest mofo to ever post.

If you want to argue that having Malkin and Ovechkin help make the NHL the best league in the world, no argument. There's no argument to be made about the AHL being a threat to the NHL in terms of talent with or without the superstar players of today.
- Flyers_01

Then why are you continuing to argue the point? Because that's all I ever said. And we can review if need be.

So, like, one year. okay. Who were they marketing instead? I guarantee there was someone.



Oh I guarantee you there will be. They've always had someone to market.
- prock

You're great at avoiding the main point in attempt to make yourself look right.

Yes, there will be other people to market. I've said that already. Multiple times.

What there isn't, and hasn't been, over the course of Sid and Ovie's career, is someone to market that generates as much revenue as those two do. There will always be people to market unless hockey ceases to exist, but some players are at a more elite level than others and will generate more income. How many Crosby and Ovechkin jerseys have been bought in the last 7 years versus any other player in their career time-frame? That's not because the NHL is so spectacular at selling the two of them. It's because the two of them are so elite and draw fans by themselves.

Generational stars and Hall of Fame players. They weren't replaceable just as today's top stars aren't. That doesn't mean there won't be another generation of stars in the future. But let's not pretend that the NHL can get the same results out of marketing Doan and Alfredsson, that they can from marketing Crosby, Ovechkin, and Malkin. Because that is just plain asinine. And I know you didn't say that.
- MJL

Well, Doan and Alfredsson aren't close to the best in the NHL. But if Crosby, Ovechkin, and Malkin all suffered career ending injuries before they got to the NHL, they'd make just as much money marketing Stamkos and Giroux. Absolutely they would.

Crosby has been injured for the better part of two seasons, and ovechkin hasn't really been all that great for the same time period, and it hasn't made a lick of a difference.

Generational stars and Hall of Fame players. They weren't replaceable just as today's top stars aren't. That doesn't mean there won't be another generation of stars in the future. But let's not pretend that the NHL can get the same results out of marketing Doan and Alfredsson, that they can from marketing Crosby, Ovechkin, and Malkin. Because that is just plain asinine. And I know you didn't say that.
- MJL

Funny how Sakic, Sundin, Oates and Bure have all been replaced by the NEXT generation of superstars.
EDIT: Coffey, Bourque, Neely etc
This generation can also be replaced.

How many Crosby and Ovechkin jerseys have been bought in the last 7 years versus any other player in their career time-frame? That's not because the NHL is so spectacular at selling the two of them. It's because the two of them are so elite and draw fans by themselves.
- trolleytracks

And if they weren't there, they'd be selling just as many Giroux and Stamkos jerseys.

That's exactly the point. You're not watching the NHL to watch Crosby, Stamkos, Ovechkin, specifically. You're watching because they're the best in the world. But, there will always be someone there, that is the best in the world. If Crosby and Ovechkin never came along, I don't think it would have changed anything over the past 10 years. We'd just be talking about Giroux and Stamkos instead.
- prock

Tons of fans watch the NHL to watch Crosby, Stamkos, And Ovechkin. Players like make people into fans of the game. Fans in other cities purchase tickets to go to games when they come to town just to watch them play. Players like that put fans in the seats.
Take away a few star level players and you dilute the star power and talent in the League. There are less players that draw fans to the game. The overall drawing power of the game would be affected. There are only so many star players capable of doing what the top players do for the NHL.

Funny how Sakic, Sundin, Oates and Bure have all been replaced by the NEXT generation of superstars.
EDIT: Coffey, Bourque, Neely etc
This generation can also be replaced.
- braidan

Which is exactly what I said. There will be a next generation of stars. Read my post again.

There will ALWAYS be a face of the NHL.
Selanne
Kariya
Roy
Brodeur
St-louis
Lecavalier
Orr
Should I go on?
If Sid could never play again due to medical reasons Giroux, Stamkos, Yakupov, Tavares, Malkin, etc would be the marketing poster boy of the league.

The league survived 99's retirement.
- braidan

Are you retarded? And I say that with the utmost respect, ref.

Keep pushing the thought that I don't think the NHL can survive without Crosby or Ovechkin, you push that made up thought. I never ONCE said that. I'm talking current affairs, current state, post-04 lockout. That era. Not Bobby (frank)ing Orr and the Bruins of 19-Richardety-2. Not Roy and the two rings stuck between his Hears. Not Selanne's rookie season with the Jets. Not St Louis's ONE (frank)ing season as face of the league because the rest of the league (frank)ing sucked that year. Not Lecavalier never living up to the enormous hype that was set for him.

My point is on how much money that Ovie and Sid generate for the league versus any other two players since they've came into the leaguein the 05-06 seson would have made as the face of the league. Add up the jersey sales. What two players lead that category? Is it because the NHL are the king marketers on planet Earth? No. It's because Crosby and Ovie were so elite entering the league and have continued to provide the fans with the entertainment they long for.

Funny how Sakic, Sundin, Oates and Bure have all been replaced by the NEXT generation of superstars.
EDIT: Coffey, Bourque, Neely etc
This generation can also be replaced.
- braidan

for sure they would.

but, the original argument, was that if they all disappeared and were replaced by soup cans, we'd all be on here discussing soup cans. if the entire PA was given the boot, and the mike zigomanis's of the world became the nhl's elite level talent.. alot of people aren't going to be watching the nhl's product anymore.

all of those names listed have drawing power. even with a lockout now, you don't see the doors being ripped off of the ahl product, as the next best thing.

And if they weren't there, they'd be selling just as many Giroux and Stamkos jerseys.
- prock

Minus the thousands of fans that Crosby and Ovie brought to the game, yeah, they would. In other words, less revenue.

Marty St Louis was the best player one year. The NHL couldn't market that midget for a free ice cream cone.

Sid and Ovie(prior to him getting a severe case of the Russian), are such elite players that they make the NHL money without any work on the part of the league. Their play and their dynamic abilities brings attention to the game on a continental level that 99% of the league couldn't bring it to.

Yeah, somebody will always be the best player but that's a ridiculous point to make and avoids the origin of the topic which was that Sid and Ovie make more money for the league than any other player in their career span could have. I'm pretty sure that nobody said the NHL would collapse when they retire but will there be two players who have the revenue generating success that these two have brought to the table? Not in the last 7 years, and counting.
- trolleytracks

Lots of articles out there about what Sidney Crosby did for that franchise, and how his arrival turned them around. But I'm sure the same thing would happened eventually when Jame Neal arrived.

Funny how Sakic, Sundin, Oates and Bure have all been replaced by the NEXT generation of superstars.
EDIT: Coffey, Bourque, Neely etc
This generation can also be replaced.
- braidan

The Penguins were not the biggest draw in the NHL this year, and the Caps weren't even close. When in arenas other than their own, only the RAngers and Boston drew full capacity crowds everywhere they went.

Pretty convincing indication that people generally just follow the best.

Well said, the whole negotiation is open to debate for both sides, Myself and other posters here have shown obvious frustration in MJL's one sided posts.
I think we all agree the lock-out is frustrating, but don't need to add the frustration of someone trying to convince us that we are all uninformed idiots that have no clue to the process at hand. That's the way he comes across, deliberate or not, it is perceived that way with most here.
- sloppyseconds2

I sensed that, on the opposing spectrum have you read how one sided a Richard Cloutier blog is? I just think it's ignorant to think these players are all idiots and wasting their time and that Fehr has no idea what he's doing. So I get frustrated when people are that naive to make those accusations without taking other important things (to the players) into consideration, only what they believe to be important.

This won't be a popular opinion but I think Crosby is underpaid for how much money he makes for his employer.
- Canada Cup

I agree. Not only for the Pens. But the League as a whole.

Are you retarded? And I say that with the utmost respect, ref.

Keep pushing the thought that I don't think the NHL can survive with Crosby or Ovechkin, you push that made up thought. I never ONCE said that. I'm talking current affairs, current state, post-04 lockout. That era. Not Bobby (frank)ing Orr and the Bruins of 19-Richardety-2. Not Roy and the two rings stuck between his Hears. Not Selanne's rookie season with the Jets. Not St Louis's ONE (frank)ing season as face of the league because the rest of the league (frank)ing sucked that year. Not Lecavalier never living up to the enormous hype that was set for him.

My point is on how much money that Ovie and Sid generate for the league versus any other two players since they've came into the leaguein the 05-06 seson would have made as the face of the league. Add up the jersey sales. What two players lead that category? Is it because the NHL are the king marketers on planet Earth? No. It's because Crosby and Ovie were so elite entering the league and have continued to provide the fans with the entertainment they long for.
- trolleytracks

Careful with your choice of words, saying with all due respect doesn't change anything.
So Yakupov, Eberle, Seguin, Hall cannot take over that mantle?

According to Michael DiLorenzo, the NHL’s Director of Social Media Marketing and Strategy Business Communications, Toews and Kane have two of the most popular jerseys on NHL.com

Lots of articles out there about what Sidney Crosby did for that franchise, and how his arrival turned them around. But I'm sure the same thing would happened eventually when Jame Neal arrived.
- MJL

I thought that it was Max Talbot all along...

I don't have a problem with the NHL not agreeing to play while negotiating. That would've been a mistake on their part. But to blame the lockout on Fehr going on strike with MLB is pretty silly. The players were always going to lose on the money issue. We knew that before the lockout even started. Why were player expenses growing faster then revenue? Who created that. There's one thing that is constantly missing from all your replies. And that is the Owner's culpability in creating these issues that has led to a lockout.



They have no desire to punish the players? Seriously? Then why is every so called solution they offer, have to do with taking from the players? LOL I couldn't disagree more that the time has passed for over a month ago for the NHLPA to be defending themselves within reason. As they just go another increase on Make Whole. So you're obviously incorrect.
The Owners are so very impressive with a well of experience in dealing with Labor issues, that the NHL is in it's 3rd lockout in 20 years. And is possibly looking at another cancelled Season in less then a decade. What are you missing here?
The Owner's absolutely can reign themselves in outside of the CBA. They just have proved unwilling to do so.
There's not Ego involved in the NHL here is there? Again, a clear bias showing.
- MJL

This is getting ridiculous, pretty soon with all the quotes it's going to be one post per page. The one thing that bothers me the most here is that you equate the owners trying to negotiate a more equitable CBA as "punishment". The owners do want more from the NHL but to label it as "punishment" gives it a malicious intent. What exactly would they be punishing the players for? The players benefitted greatly from the last CBA, don't you agree? There is every likelyhood that the players would benefit greatly from this CBA as well. No "actual dollars" needed to be lost as recently as a month ago. The CBA is a reason why the minimum salary is upwards of $500k for 4th liners and I don't see anywhere that they were trying to lower the minimum salary?

No, the owners aren't trying to punish the players but I won't dispute that the players may have been sold that emotional trigger by Fehr.

As far as the make whole? The players lost upwards of 500 million (to date and untold millions in the future due to damage to the brand) to get that $300 million) when they could've lost ZERO on their contracts with the 1 year transition proposed previously. If you call having a net loss in 100's of millions "winning" you can get together with Charlie Sheen who also has a bizarre definition of the word.

If you think Fehr's history is irrelevent then we will have to agree to disagree. If a person shows that he will go to any length to put the people he is negotiating with at the worst disadvantage at the worst time possible to increase his leverage than negotiating in good faith and was successful, why wouldn't he do it again. What is his deterrent?

*eats popcorn at the star players replacement argument*

I have no idea what they are arguing over but it's quite entertaining. $10 somebody took someone's point and got lost in it and they've ventured so far away that there's a portrait of UG in the room they've ended up in.