The last time I checked the NHLPA wants more revenue sharing. Team contraction leads to fewer jobs. So your point is?This lockout has to do with the Owners. Their greed their stupidity and their crappy league business model that rewards teams that should be moved or contracted by sharing revenue from teams making money to pour into the bottomless pits that are allowed to still compete in the league.
Less on the players and their resistance to come down on % earnings.
NHL needs to contract 4 teams (Pheonix, Nashville, Tampa Bay, Florida) or contract 2 of them and move the 2 others to existing markets that desperately want a team. Quebec City and Hamilton. Where hockey could survive long term.
Revenue sharing helps to level the playing field amongst the rich and poor teams and maintains a competitive balance in the league, what's wrong with that?The last time I checked the NHLPA wants more revenue sharing.
Read carefully Wilde. I didn't say there was anything wrong with revenue sharing. It was Badge who referred to it as a "crappy business model."Revenue sharing helps to level the playing field amongst the rich and poor teams and maintains a competitive balance in the league, what's wrong with that?
What's a southern climb? A hike up a mountain south of the border?to Southern Climbs.
No problem, The Soprano's is back on HBO.
Max length is 5 years in the new proposal which should also take care of those front loaded contracts...They should but they need to clean up length of contarcts and getting around the salary cap issues.





