Sports Writers Replaces Lockout NHL Season with NHL 13

Status
Not open for further replies.

bustapr

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
550
0
18,930
0
thats certainly interesting. if people are reading it, then hes theres nothing wrong. but watching NPCs play seems a bit too boring to me. dont really know what the reason for lockout is supposed to be, but I hope people get to keep their jobs after.
 

Gundam288

Distinguished
Sep 23, 2011
68
0
18,580
0
[citation][nom]joepuckster[/nom]Get your FIRE BETTMAN T-shirts and more at:The arrogant weasel needs to go!!![/citation]

I think this is the 1st time in a while I've seen a spam bot with a relavent spam to the article.

Bettman = NHL commissioner
 

JMcEntegart

Splendid
Moderator
Aug 25, 2007
4,168
1
22,730
0
[citation][nom]Gundam288[/nom]I think this is the 1st time in a while I've seen a spam bot with a relavent spam to the article.Bettman = NHL commissioner[/citation]

I know. I can't decide if I am supposed to ban him for spamming... Is it spam if it's on-topic?
 

bustapr

Distinguished
Jan 23, 2009
550
0
18,930
0
[citation][nom]JMcEntegart[/nom]I know. I can't decide if I am supposed to ban him for spamming... Is it spam if it's on-topic?[/citation]
join date is today, so I think it might be spam...
 

alidan

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2009
1,681
0
19,730
0
[citation][nom]JMcEntegart[/nom]I know. I can't decide if I am supposed to ban him for spamming... Is it spam if it's on-topic?[/citation]

personally i down voted it because it looks spammy in appearance
but because of the relevance, i dont think its a spam bot, but a person behind it.

if anything, sanction the account until they can talk about why its locked.
but as for the message... id say let them keep it just because of the relevancy.
 

JMcEntegart

Splendid
Moderator
Aug 25, 2007
4,168
1
22,730
0
[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]personally i down voted it because it looks spammy in appearancebut because of the relevance, i dont think its a spam bot, but a person behind it.if anything, sanction the account until they can talk about why its locked. but as for the message... id say let them keep it just because of the relevancy.[/citation]

He's still got just the one post. This leads me to believe he's not a regular reader nor is he a spammer. Either way, I somehow doubt he'll stick around long enough to fight a spam ban. *holsters hammer* Carry on!
 

gm0n3y

Distinguished
Mar 13, 2006
1,548
0
19,730
0
As a Canadian, the lockout has weighed heavily on most people in our nation since mid-summer when it looked like no contract would be reached. The team owners and the players' union are trying to negotiate a contract in regards to salary cap and revenue split.

In the last 20 years there have been 4 lockouts in the NHL. The last one was 7 years ago when the entire season was cancelled. All of this has been spearheaded by the NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, who is villainous figure here in Canada.

The main problem has to do with the salary cap. Many teams are making a lot of money, but most of the more recent expansion teams are hemorrhaging money badly. Fans have been clamouring for more teams here in Canada, where Ontario alone could support another 2 teams.

For one example, my local team (Vancouver Canucks) has sold out every game for more than 10 years (#3 out of all North American sports: http://www.thesportmarket.biz/charts/sellout%20streaks/ranktop.html). Even the cheapest tickets can be over $100 for some games, especially during the playoffs. And Vancouver isn't even in the top 5 richest teams. This is compared to a team like Phoenix that is lucky to sell half of their available tickets, many of them in the $10-$20 range.

So to support the poorer teams, Bettman forced through a salary cap to keep teams from just buying up all of the best players. So the league is trying to force a contract on players that will see the salary cap cut by ~25%, while the league overall is making more money than ever. The players feel that it is only fair that they share in the windfall and have proposed a larger amount of revenue sharing between teams (there is already some) to help out the poorer teams and continue to grow the sport.
 

chewy1963

Honorable
May 9, 2012
43
0
10,580
0
As a Bruins fan, this lockout has been pure unmitigated torture. Bettman should be fired! Any way it's gotten so bad I've actually found myself watching football... I've also dusted off my old Xbox 360 (circa 2005) and am playing my own season of NHL10. Alas, that was the last version of the EA NHL series I bought before putting away the Xbox.
 

alidan

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2009
1,681
0
19,730
0
[citation][nom]gm0n3y[/nom]As a Canadian, the lockout has weighed heavily on most people in our nation since mid-summer when it looked like no contract would be reached. The team owners and the players' union are trying to negotiate a contract in regards to salary cap and revenue split.In the last 20 years there have been 4 lockouts in the NHL. The last one was 7 years ago when the entire season was cancelled. All of this has been spearheaded by the NHL commissioner Gary Bettman, who is villainous figure here in Canada.The main problem has to do with the salary cap. Many teams are making a lot of money, but most of the more recent expansion teams are hemorrhaging money badly. Fans have been clamouring for more teams here in Canada, where Ontario alone could support another 2 teams.For one example, my local team (Vancouver Canucks) has sold out every game for more than 10 years (#3 out of all North American sports: http://www.thesportmarket.biz/char [...] top.html). Even the cheapest tickets can be over $100 for some games, especially during the playoffs. And Vancouver isn't even in the top 5 richest teams. This is compared to a team like Phoenix that is lucky to sell half of their available tickets, many of them in the $10-$20 range.So to support the poorer teams, Bettman forced through a salary cap to keep teams from just buying up all of the best players. So the league is trying to force a contract on players that will see the salary cap cut by ~25%, while the league overall is making more money than ever. The players feel that it is only fair that they share in the windfall and have proposed a larger amount of revenue sharing between teams (there is already some) to help out the poorer teams and continue to grow the sport.[/citation]

so... let me try and understand this.

some teams dont make crap
some teams make sacks of cash
so the guy in charge decides to help everyone, cut the amount a team can spend on players by 25%
but the players want to share the wealth?

does that sum it up well enough?
 

chewy1963

Honorable
May 9, 2012
43
0
10,580
0
[citation][nom]alidan[/nom]so... let me try and understand this. some teams dont make crapsome teams make sacks of cashso the guy in charge decides to help everyone, cut the amount a team can spend on players by 25%but the players want to share the wealth?does that sum it up well enough?[/citation]

No it doesn't sum it up well at all. What gm0n3y is saying is that if the NHL had allowed teams like Phoenix to move to a better market (i.e. Canada) instead of playing in a freaking desert, those teams might be a bit more profitable and many of the 'poorer' teams wouldn't be in as bad of a financial situation. Also the players association has recommended revenue sharing but the league wants none of that either. They want to load the whole thing on the players share of the revenue (which was cut 24% in 2004 during the LAST CBA negotiations). Not only that, they don't want to pay the players the full amount of their CURRENT CONTRACTS. Its absurd. Now the league/owners refuse to budge from that position.
 

alidan

Distinguished
Aug 5, 2009
1,681
0
19,730
0
[citation][nom]chewy1963[/nom]No it doesn't sum it up well at all. What gm0n3y is saying is that if the NHL had allowed teams like Phoenix to move to a better market (i.e. Canada) instead of playing in a freaking desert, those teams might be a bit more profitable and many of the 'poorer' teams wouldn't be in as bad of a financial situation. Also the players association has recommended revenue sharing but the league wants none of that either. They want to load the whole thing on the players share of the revenue (which was cut 24% in 2004 during the LAST CBA negotiations). Not only that, they don't want to pay the players the full amount of their CURRENT CONTRACTS. Its absurd. Now the league/owners refuse to budge from that position.[/citation]

what you said sounds like they want to share proffits with poorer teams, but the leauge wants to cut the ammount you can pay players, more or less exactly what i said

new angle is that they already cut their pay, and they are looking to cut current contracts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
O Streaming Video & TVs 4
L Streaming Video & TVs 3
S Streaming Video & TVs 1
H Streaming Video & TVs 2
R Streaming Video & TVs 2
J Streaming Video & TVs 3
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 1
C Streaming Video & TVs 2
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
G Streaming Video & TVs 16
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
JMcEntegart Streaming Video & TVs 3
zeus1356 Streaming Video & TVs 4
tuanmai Streaming Video & TVs 10
tuanmai Streaming Video & TVs 1
exfileme Streaming Video & TVs 56
G Streaming Video & TVs 0
Marcus Yam Streaming Video & TVs 28
G Streaming Video & TVs 17

ASK THE COMMUNITY