WHA to knock out NHL?
Originally posted by JordyO:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jmac:
It's not a strike ... it's a lock-out ...
Strike = Players refuse to play
Lock-out = Owners refuse to let players play
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jmac:
It's not a strike ... it's a lock-out ...
Strike = Players refuse to play
Lock-out = Owners refuse to let players play
It's not "almost" like a strike because the players would go back to play under the same rules if they were allowed to.
Meaning the owners hold all the cards in terms of whether or not they go back to play. So, like I said, if it becomes too big of a problem they'll just accept the best offer they can get and then get back to the way things were. </font>[/QUOTE]So it has nothing to do with the players?? What exactly is goin on then, im confused now
The owner's want a salary cap and salary limits so the players get less money ...
Of course, all this was caused by the owners themselves by giving out outrageous salaries and now they're whining and complaining about not making enough money ...
Of course, all this was caused by the owners themselves by giving out outrageous salaries and now they're whining and complaining about not making enough money ...
Originally posted by Jmac:
The owner's want a salary cap and salary limits so the players get less money ...
Of course, all this was caused by the owners themselves by giving out outrageous salaries and now they're whining and complaining about not making enough money ...
The owner's want a salary cap and salary limits so the players get less money ...
Of course, all this was caused by the owners themselves by giving out outrageous salaries and now they're whining and complaining about not making enough money ...
Originally posted by ChizzerZ24:
World Hockey Assosiation .. .I think...
World Hockey Assosiation .. .I think...
Originally posted by Z24:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JordyO:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jmac:
It's not a strike ... it's a lock-out ...
Strike = Players refuse to play
Lock-out = Owners refuse to let players play
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by JordyO:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jmac:
It's not a strike ... it's a lock-out ...
Strike = Players refuse to play
Lock-out = Owners refuse to let players play
It's not "almost" like a strike because the players would go back to play under the same rules if they were allowed to.
Meaning the owners hold all the cards in terms of whether or not they go back to play. So, like I said, if it becomes too big of a problem they'll just accept the best offer they can get and then get back to the way things were. </font>[/QUOTE]So it has nothing to do with the players?? What exactly is goin on then, im confused now </font>[/QUOTE]Basically.. no, it doesn't really have anything to do with the players. The would keep on playing with the rules the same way they are now if they could.
The problem is that the owners have over payed for too many players and now they need/want a way to bring it back under control.
So they're trying to put some sort of salary restrictions in place (not necessarily a cap from what I've heard)
The players want no part of it because it would restrict their salaries. They just want things left the way they are.



