Tim Panaccio: Mixed Feelings

Tim Panaccio: Mixed Feelings
- tpanaccio

signing an extension is a kiss of death in Paul Holmgrens Flyerdom.

Simmonds will be traded within the year

What does this mean for Hartnell long term?

What does this mean for Hartnell long term?
- mochoson

It has no affect on Hartnell in my opinion.

This is why I hate the flyers....

Their ownership is so corrupt. First they cry poverty, then they offer the moon. now the cry for a 5 year limitation on contracts, and break it to benefit themselves.

It's not just the Flyers but they are a pretty bad example.

This is why I hate the flyers....

Their ownership is so corrupt. First they cry poverty, then they offer the moon. now the cry for a 5 year limitation on contracts, and break it to benefit themselves.

It's not just the Flyers but they are a pretty bad example.
- Beatle_john

They're taking full advantage of the existing rules.

They're also far from crying poverty. They simply don't want to be forced to help the poor teams.

The way Snider looks at it is simple, the Flyers made money in a 12 team league, they made money in a 21 team league and they've made money in a 30 team league. He's very much a devotee of Ayn Rand-do for yourself, without taking help.

He feels that having a hard cap limits a big competitive edge for his team, namely the ability to spend extravagantly. He then has to send a check to the poor teams, who use that money to prevent Snider from adding players he wants to add to make his team better.

This is why I hate the flyers....

Their ownership is so corrupt. First they cry poverty, then they offer the moon. now the cry for a 5 year limitation on contracts, and break it to benefit themselves.

It's not just the Flyers but they are a pretty bad example.
- Beatle_john

the flyers have never cried poverty. they spend to the limit and have no interest in helping other teams. pretty simple.

no reason for you to hate the team because of that. you might not like the players, or the coaches or gm or whatever, but that's a different story.

btw, can you provide a source to the list of flyers-specific demands with respect to the new cba?

This is why I hate the flyers....

Their ownership is so corrupt. First they cry poverty, then they offer the moon. now the cry for a 5 year limitation on contracts, and break it to benefit themselves.

It's not just the Flyers but they are a pretty bad example.
- Beatle_john

corrupt? maybe morally but legally, no.
why so much angst against "American" teams? Without the lower 23 teams the league would have failed years ago, even the original six only had 33 percent of them Canadian based

corrupt? maybe morally but legally, no.
why so much angst against "American" teams? Without the lower 23 teams the league would have failed years ago, even the original six only had 33 percent of them Canadian based
- watsonnostaw

Small market teams should be limited or not existed at all. A 2nd team in Toronto would be more profitable than having teams in Nashville, Carolina, Florida and Columbus. It just does not make sense for a team to earn revenue then give it away to your opponents. Im sure Ed Snyder has thought about the positives of a lockout, with Nashville still having to pay Weber's money. Perhaps Nashville should stick to banjos and trumpets.

Congrats to Simmonds from his LA fans....when Wayne first came to the Kings, I was literally worried about his safety on the ice; he played an aggressive game but he hadn't filled out and didn't know how to protect himself, and he took some pretty fearsome hits. Over time he filled out both his body and game and we were all sorry to lose him, and sorry he wasn't part of the Cup run....but if he and Brayden continue the way they have, they should have a good chance to lift the Cup in Philly themselves.

Tim

You are way over blowing this potential lockout. There will be a season. It may start in November, but it will start. There is too much at stake.

This is why I hate the flyers....

Their ownership is so corrupt. First they cry poverty, then they offer the moon. now the cry for a 5 year limitation on contracts, and break it to benefit themselves.

It's not just the Flyers but they are a pretty bad example.
- Beatle_john

Why do you single out the Flyers as a "pretty bad example"? I can't recall one instance where Ed Snider or ownership has ever cried poverty. I think you need to check your facts at the door before you come in here spouting off nonsense.

What does this mean for Hartnell long term?
- mochoson

That he is coming to Boston.

signing an extension is a kiss of death in Paul Holmgrens Flyerdom.

Simmonds will be traded within the year
- watsonnostaw

why you leaving out jakob?

why you leaving out jakob?
- Marc D

Signed to extension = on the trading block

They're taking full advantage of the existing rules.

They're also far from crying poverty. They simply don't want to be forced to help the poor teams.

The way Snider looks at it is simple, the Flyers made money in a 12 team league, they made money in a 21 team league and they've made money in a 30 team league. He's very much a devotee of Ayn Rand-do for yourself, without taking help.

He feels that having a hard cap limits a big competitive edge for his team, namely the ability to spend extravagantly. He then has to send a check to the poor teams, who use that money to prevent Snider from adding players he wants to add to make his team better.
- Jsaquella

So they are taking advantage of the rules, big deal, what the Flyers did on the Weber offer has divided the ownership that much more & will ultimately extend this labour dispute. There is no way this thing is getting resolved until the ownership sort out a fair playing field with each other or you'll get your wish of a smaller league. Then you probably think that thats in the best interest of hockey. You can always go buy a Stanley Cup I guess. Whats disgusting is the outrageous amount of money that is being fought over & the ridiculous price of tickets for a Joe fan to go watch a hockey game. Maybe the Season Ticket holders of the teams should get some legal representation & negotiate for a piece of this Revenue Sharing.

So they are taking advantage of the rules, big deal, what the Flyers did on the Weber offer has divided the ownership that much more & will ultimately extend this labour dispute. There is no way this thing is getting resolved until the ownership sort out a fair playing field with each other or you'll get your wish of a smaller league. Then you probably think that thats in the best interest of hockey. You can always go buy a Stanley Cup I guess. Whats disgusting is the outrageous amount of money that is being fought over & the ridiculous price of tickets for a Joe fan to go watch a hockey game. Maybe the Season Ticket holders of the teams should get some legal representation & negotiate for a piece of this Revenue Sharing.
- Kevin R

Actually, you don't have the slightest (frank)ing clue what I think.

What is in the best interest of hockey is to have a revenue sharing plan that works. The Flyers are one of the teams that is against that.

I realize that & dislike it. Oh, by the way, divided ownership likely means that any lockout will be shorter. The reason the 2004-05 seaon was lost was that the owners stood by their demands as a strong 30 member team.

Divided ownership means that we'll have groups of owners pushing to resolve things faster, rather than being able to stand together until they get what they want.

It is refreshing to see that the discussion this time around, is focused where it should be and that isn't the players. It has been Bettman and the owners who all along have been ego monsters and spoiled little rich boys. They fight to make rules to protect themselves from each other, get an advantage over one another, and maximize the total pie they have to slice up. They can't have it all and yet their greed and ego motivates them to try and get the biggest slice possible. There will be an agreement when the well heeled Capitalists and the Socialists who want handouts, decide they have fasted long enough, and agree on just how much more they can extract from the fans, and by what means.

You called the owners proposal "obnoxious". You called the players proposal "interesting". Hmmmm.......interesting........I wonder which side of the fence your on.

You called the owners proposal "obnoxious". You called the players proposal "interesting". Hmmmm.......interesting........I wonder which side of the fence your on.
- MadManPaddy

The simple fact is, the players proposal was based on offering concessions, giving things up. The owners' proposal demanded things. Any negotiation is about give and take. The owners' "offer" was all about take, and offered little to benefit the players.

The owners plan focused on a straight split of revenues with the players. The problem isn't the amount of revenue split between the players and owners, the problem is the the difference in revenue generated by teams like Philly and the Rangers and teams like Nashville, Tampa and New Jersey.

The revenue disparity between teams IS the major issue. Philly can offer Shea Weber $110mm without batting an eye. Nashville had to spend 6 days scrambling to match it. The owners feel that the same approach to the last CBA will fix this, when in reality, that approach is what caused the problem.

The simple fact is, the players proposal was based on offering concessions, giving things up. The owners' proposal demanded things. Any negotiation is about give and take. The owners' "offer" was all about take, and offered little to benefit the players.

The owners plan focused on a straight split of revenues with the players. The problem isn't the amount of revenue split between the players and owners, the problem is the the difference in revenue generated by teams like Philly and the Rangers and teams like Nashville, Tampa and New Jersey.

The revenue disparity between teams IS the major issue. Philly can offer Shea Weber $110mm without batting an eye. Nashville had to spend 6 days scrambling to match it. The owners feel that the same approach to the last CBA will fix this, when in reality, that approach is what caused the problem.
- Jsaquella

Not to be a schmuck, but large market owners are not going to budge much more in revenue sharing. MLB and the NBA are perfect examples, the NFL is the exception to the rule. The NFL would be closer to the other major sports, but its popularity has let it cash in on huge TV deals that gate revenue is almost an afterthought.

I'm all for the players. I don't want to see terms on contracts and would rather see a shorter time period for players to become an UFA (even as simple as less games on an NHL to accrue a full season towards free agency). However, the owners have a great deal of leverage considering the last lockout the fans came back and TV revenue is already paid. Furthermore, fans will say they will be done, but the reality is most if not all will be back in a little time after their initial anger subsides. I hope the players negotiate the best deal they can, and don't miss any games so they can get paid a full year's salary.

Not to be a schmuck, but large market owners are not going to budge much more in revenue sharing. MLB and the NBA are perfect examples, the NFL is the exception to the rule. The NFL would be closer to the other major sports, but its popularity has let it cash in on huge TV deals that gate revenue is almost an afterthought.

I'm all for the players. I don't want to see terms on contracts and would rather see a shorter time period for players to become an UFA (even as simple as less games on an NHL to accrue a full season towards free agency). However, the owners have a great deal of leverage considering the last lockout the fans came back and TV revenue is already paid. Furthermore, fans will say they will be done, but the reality is most if not all will be back in a little time after their initial anger subsides. I hope the players negotiate the best deal they can, and don't miss any games so they can get paid a full year's salary.
- ravishingone

Both the NBA and MLB have better revenue sharing plans in place than the NHL currently does. For a league making record profits, like the NHL, and have about a third of it's member teams in serious financial trouble, it means that the kitty isn't divided proportionately.

Both the NBA and MLB have better revenue sharing plans in place than the NHL currently does. For a league making record profits, like the NHL, and have about a third of it's member teams in serious financial trouble, it means that the kitty isn't divided proportionately.
- Jsaquella

When you look at teams like MTL & TO who have new ownership that paid big $$$ for their teams, it's difficult for them to share more of their profits before paying their loans.

When you look at teams like MTL & TO who have new ownership that paid big $$$ for their teams, it's difficult for them to share more of their profits before paying their loans.
- Champ

It's not difficult for a guy like Zach Parise to give up 24% of the brand new contract he just signed, before he plays a game with his new team?

There is already revenue sharing in the NHL. Teams like Philly, Montreal and Toronto already give a part of their profit to Nashville and Phoenix. It's also not as if somebody's suggesting that the Leafs and Habs give up all their profit. Those teams, the Flyers, Bruins and Rangers will still make a ton of cash.