alexstream

Well from the Bob article I posted, Goodenow seems to be less of an idiot, although he might still be a total idiot if Bettman hid a trick in the rules... Cause the Cap seems to be tied each franchise's revenue... so that the frikkin rags could spend 54% of their frikkin 200M revenues (hypothetical)... Put in this way, Goodenow has the upper hand. But I'm pretty sure (and Bob too is pretty sure) that this particular situation wouldn't be accepted by the owners and there might really well be a hidden rule prohibiting that. That said, I'm totally on the owner's side... They invest millions of dollars on this, they take risks to make a business work, they're rich, yeah, but it took them all their lives (or no-life lives) working 80 hours per week piling up that money. I respect more the fact that Gillet earns couple of millions than Koivu or theo pilling up the bills... But that said, I don't intend to do slavery... The players deserve to be paid good wages... but not frikking 5 years 5M per year guaranteed contracts no matter how they suck !!! (the owners have way less financial security than that, they can go bankrupt at any time... e.g. Bryden) The agents, the Union and the Players have stretched the band too far away and I'm really happy to see it coming slapping in their faces! IT is not as if The owners weren't trying for the last 5 years to implement a new system... The owners wanted to restrain the rags, the caps, the wings etc... but the players wouldn't allow them to do so....well congrats players, you deserved your faith of sitting in the losing corner (and I hope this will be the final result) [Edited on 2005/6/10 by alexstream]

I don't wanna start it, cause I know I will get addicted... So simple yet so complex, it's a beautiful game... I prefer chess, but Poker is more social and more marketable, more accessible... I have two friends badly hooked on internet poker... but because they keep on winning ... one is doing it full time and will plans to buy a condo with his poker money in more or less 18 months... the other quitted his part time job cause he was losing money while there... lmao... but kids, don't try this at home, these two are the nearest thing I know to professional players...

Well, Bob explained me and it makes a bit more sense... but it's still illogical... Latest cap story is confusing TSN.ca Staff 6/8/2005 6:49:30 PM Wednesday's story on the Globe and Mail's website is both interesting and confusing. Interesting because it re-affirms the rumours that the NHL and NHL Players' Association have basically agreed on a macro-economic linked salary cap payroll system and also interesting because it's chock full of specific numbers, though these numbers are not too much different than what were reported in the New York Post 10 days ago. But it's an extremely confusing story for the following reason: The story says each team will have its own individual salary floor and ceiling and that this team-by-team payroll range will be determined as a percentage of each club's individual revenue, not as a percentage of league-wide revenue. If this were indeed the case, it would be a huge victory for the NHL Players' Association, which would love nothing more than to allow larger revenue teams like the Toronto Maple Leafs and New York Rangers to spend much more than small revenue teams like the Nashville Predators and Phoenix Coyotes. Think about it. Say for argument's sake, one NHL team has revenues of $100 million and another team has revenues of $50 million. If, as an example, the teams are permitted to spend 54 per cent of revenues on salaries, one team would have a cap of $54 million, while the other team would have a cap of $27 million. That is a $27 million spread between the two teams' caps and you can rest assured it will be a frosty Friday in hell before NHL teams sign off on that type of discrepancy. And, in fact, the Globe and Mail alludes to the incongruity of that type of formula, but passes it off as saying it will be a "complicated" system. Oh, it will be complicated alright, but using the Globe and Mail's own numbers, a $22 to $24 million floor and a $34 to $36 million ceiling, those numbers aren't so very different from what the two sides have been batting back and forth for the last month or two on a deal that is linked at 54 per cent of league-wide revenues. To put it bluntly, if the NHL teams with the highest revenues can't spend any more than $36 million on player costs, you can be sure the new economic system is not based on individual club revenues, which is the premise of the Globe and Mail story. Now, if all the Globe is actually saying is that big revenue teams will get to spend at the top of end of the $36 million range and small revenue teams will have to spend near the bottom end, well, that's a different story because one suspects those salary range numbers were determined by a percentage of league-wide revenues, such as the 54 per cent figure the league has wanted for a long time. And, make no mistake, there's a big difference between the two premises. A very big difference. For Habsworld.net, I'm alexstream (actually this is McKenzie's article)

The question is not whether we'll have hockey... Both sides know that they can put RIP besides NHL if they don't get a deal done by october... The question is what kind of deal it will be ? We now know for sure that Goodenow will lose his job... I mean, he went from a last owner offer of 42M(?) to this actual system which seems to be overly complicated and which not only have a ridiculously low cap, but is ALSO tied to revenue... If someone could explain it so that it makes more sense, I'd appreciate... cause the way I see it, each teamswill have different cap (% of revenue) , with a tax starting at 29M... What is that?!!! Even the habs will be overbudget... Theo will have to call his agent to make other tv ads... This is freaky... cause if it really goes this way, some of the anti cap fans will be right, Euro players will stay in europe... With a 29M payroll for the habs, how much is Saku worth? 2M? Markov? 800k? We're going back to 80's figures... Bravo Goodenow!!! you ######ed it up for your players... 42M seemed to be a reasonable cap...

Come on, you cant leave us hanging like this... You have to tell us the rest of the hfboards story. I realised that I can't express myself so that you understand me... lol... I banned HFboards, they didn't ban me...

Yeah, apparently he's spamming HWL forums with nonsense and useless stuff... Congrats Hannes! I plan to join your club in less than 130 days guys... so, by October... I guess... I'm reckless, 5.5 posts a day... This might be due to my banning of HFboards, (which itself is due to some chick, to HWL, to school and in respect to Dan although he told me not to ban them...)

From now on, call me Bubba Jamaica

Hockey - Patrick Roy Golf - Tiger Wood.. Baseball - Anybody willing to take some steroid Football - read baseball Soccer - Beckham?

Weak is not strong enough to describle it... anyway, ok, maybe he won't be there... but hey, it's not like it was still frikkin Andre Savard over there. Markov's not there? what about Niedermayer as a replacement? Seriously, Bob Gainey has all my faith, and it's blind faith, I really believe that with this guy in control: -We cannot question management moves (e.g. aquiring Kovalev, or the decision to re sign him or not) we can only accept them and understand that they were the good move to make. -We are not fighting for a playoff spot anymore but for a top spot, and that's only short term... middle term, we are a Cup contender year in year out.. Did I say that I have blind faith in Gainey?

Just BELIEVE in Bob. If he thinks we need Markov, we'll have Markov... the only way we won't have Markov is if Markov himself doesn't wanna come back... No contract is strong enough to stand against Bob the Great. That's the same situation as Kost, he was locked, Bob unlocked him. he gave 1M to his Russian team I believe. I've just broke a tantrum in another thread explaining my point of view, but in short, I think that we should be confident about the new economical context, particularly with Bob as the GM... No worries about whether we can afford such or such player... If Detroit can, the new CBA will make the habs as much able to do so than Detroit.

LMAO!!! This brooks guy is one crazy horse!! if he had a clue about what he's talking about, it could be interesting to read him... His UFA list is the same as if the UFA age stays at 31. and teams not requalifying their best players!!!! what the heck is that? he could speculate about the habs wanting to trade Ribs.. ok, maybe... but Habs not wanting to re-sign K?!! b/c of cap?!!!!!!! WTF!!!!!!!!!!! habs are one of the healthiest team under a new system, full of young players (perez, ryder, higgins, kost, chip, markov, komi, name them...), full of cheap players (zed, souray, markov, ryder, ribs, bulis, name them...), and most expensive players' contracts are over and to be renegociated (Theo RFA; Saku RFA or UFA, depending on the age; Briser buyoff at 1M) Man, the more I read such nonsense, the more I think about applying to a job in a newspaper. The only ways we see Saku go: 1. we're offered Crosby's pick 2. Saku retire 3. We're offered a better center Brooks and his gang seem to forget that habs are already under the projected cap and that with the projected cap, they will be ex aquo #1 top spending team (with 10-15 others) I've made all sorts of possible future scenario and habs can only get better under a new system. not weeker as some fool like brooks would like us to think. I'd even make further projections if you want: 1. Habs will have all of last seasons big name, including Kovalev, if we don't re-sign Kovalev, it's because Gainey has a hidden card in his sleeve (Perez? Higgins? ready to take Kov spot). 2. We'll either sign or trade for a Big Name D-Man. 3. we won't be discussing about whether the habs make the playoffs or whether they finish 8th or 10th... we'll be discussing whether or not they'll win their division or whether they'll have the ice advantage in the playoffs (4th or 5th) The New CBA aims two purposes: 1. give back some power to Canadian AND middle of the pack teams (all the 40M payrolls, namely, ottawa, mtl, vancouver, calgary, etc.) 2. Make the rich teams richer... Det was making money with a 75M payroll... with a 45M payroll, they'll make 30M more... Brooks could have made an interesting article about the consequences of lowering the UFA age, he could have discussed the effect on the market, the effect on player movement... anything... but as usual he spoiled it because he tried to speculate... this time it was about teams not wanting to re-sing their MVP... Koivu, Morris, Arnott, Friesen are all to valuable to simply let go for free. And these teams will be among the "richest" team under a new CBA so there is no way they have difficulty to re-sing their best players...

LOL, won't be long, install the game, read the rules, get ready to make some scenario... etc... Hannes (our beloved commish ) will log in during the night, he's in austia. you'll surely be in by tomorrow afternoon. which team did you choose?

but if you have a very old pc, it still works, even if you got it in 1999. don't you have "real pc" or something similar on mac?

I have no idea if the game work on a mac, you can try to install it, and if it runs, then you're all set, it's very easy, It's my first time in such a league and my first time with the game, if you wanna learn about the game it's really interesting and really fast to do... if you want you can! (unless it's not mac compatible...) so try to install it, follow these instructions http://www.habsworld.net/ehm/install.html and if it works, APPLY NOW (what team would you want?)

http://hfboards.com/showthread.php?p=28737...716#post2873716

LOL thanks a lot ... you're worth your share of fun too!!! By the way, I'm about to post it on hfboards, isn't Colorado availible too?

Next WC remind me to have more checkers, we shouldn't have let that goal in, with more checkers it would still be 0-0 and would probably finish that way... that is WC at its best. (for those who think I'm stupid, go look what sarcasm mean in your nearest dictionary) Hatchfield of wathever his name is, is too rookie to coach against the best... he's always late on his line changes which often causes oddmen rushes or difficult situations for the exhausted players.

I've seen a video of him, he seems to be quite a star in Sweden... How big he is? Is there a Souray frenzy?

-First nation Native american as in north america as in north america is the northern parth of america as in america is one of five (or 6 or 7 depending on how you count them) continents and not as in god bless america. -Native but the best is indian as in I think I'm in india so these guys must be indians. In french it's Amérindiens somewhat of a contraction à la German of Indien d'Amérique