BeerGuyJordan Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 Bettman is such a mixed bag. He was only part of the equation, with the lockouts, but acting like the League was innocent is asinine. The anti-Canadian argument holds water, but it's basically what he was hired to do: grow the game. Do I wish it weren't coming at the expense of traditional markets? Yes, but Bettman has no power that the owners don't give him. If the move south weren't the collective will of the owners, Bettman would have been fired by '97. Within the parameters of what the owners have him there to do, I think he does a pretty good job. I think the big issue, for me, boils down to hating what the owners have him there to do. He's just a focal point for the fans to hate, while the owners sit back and make the real decisions. Thunder Bay Lynx - International Hockey Association (2 seasons, 2017-18, 2019-20, 2018 Xtreme Cup Champions) | Houston Armadillos - Major League Hockey (2 seasons, 2016-18) | Minnesota Muskies - North American Basketball Association (1 season, 2017-2018) | Louisville Thoroughbreds - United League of Baseball (1 season, 2017, 2017 United Cup Champions) | Las Vegas Thunderbirds - International Basketball League (1 season, 2016-17, 2017 Champions) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 I weighed the pros and cons of Gary Bettman about four years ago here. I don't think there's been much to add since. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CreamSoda Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 I don't care is someone likes Gary Bettman or not, but it looks bad on the sport when you can't even hear what the commish is saying when he is giving out the sports most prestigious trophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walter Sobchak Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 2 hours ago, McCarthy said: Who the hell sides with the billionaires in "Millionaires vs. Billionaires"? Do you root for the Empire in Star Wars? Weren't you suspended for actions in a previous conversation identical to this one? I thought it was because of the "Maple Leafs new logo looks like a pot leaf" argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sport Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 11 minutes ago, CreamSoda said: I don't care is someone likes Gary Bettman or not, but it looks bad on the sport when you can't even hear what the commish is saying when he is giving out the sports most prestigious trophy. 1. That isn't exclusive to hockey. Roger Goodell gets roundly booed by the fans every year at the draft and that gets triple the ratings as the SCF. 2. If it's such a problem then have someone else present the trophy like Wayne Gretzky or Bobby Orr. It's the only sport where the players get the trophy first and not the owner. It'd make sense if a former player presented it. Actually, that's a really good idea I just thought of. They should do this. 3. The problem with Bettman presenting the trophy is not that he gets booed or what makes the sport look bad. What makes the sport look bad is he's so awkward and he has trouble getting through his 2-3 lines of "congratulations to the losing team, what a wonderful season of hockey we've had, congratulations to the winning team, captain of winning team we need you over here" *awkward photo with captain of winning team* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Admiral Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 10 minutes ago, CreamSoda said: I don't care is someone likes Gary Bettman or not, but it looks bad on the sport when you can't even hear what the commish is saying when he is giving out the sports most prestigious trophy. It looks bad on the sport when you don't play it. ♫ oh yeah, board goes on, long after the thrill of postin' is gone ♫ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CreamSoda Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 15 minutes ago, the admiral said: It looks bad on the sport when you don't play it. Absolutely agreed. Remind me though, do we have a salary cap now or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JayMac Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 Another issue with Bettman, at least for me, is that he seems like he has no genuine like for the game. Goodell, if nothing else, seems like he actually might watch the game. I get the same sense about Silver. Manfred...no clue really. But Bettman has no clue about anything because he doesn't even enjoy hockey. Just an opinion that may be completely wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 1 hour ago, CreamSoda said: I don't care is someone likes Gary Bettman or not, but it looks bad on the sport when you can't even hear what the commish is saying when he is giving out the sports most prestigious trophy. Does anyone pay attention to the Commissioner saying "Congratulations winning team?" On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morgan33 Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 2 hours ago, McCarthy said: 3. The problem with Bettman presenting the trophy is not that he gets booed or what makes the sport look bad. What makes the sport look bad is he's so awkward and he has trouble getting through his 2-3 lines of "congratulations to the losing team, what a wonderful season of hockey we've had, congratulations to the winning team, captain of winning team we need you over here" *awkward photo with captain of winning team* Bingo. This is a great article that covers every Stanley Cup presentation... The best one was when Rod Brind'Amour showed up early prompting Gary to scold him, saying "I'm almost done." Then he just rips it out of his hands and celebrates :P. Definitely worth a read. http://grantland.com/the-triangle/20-years-of-awkwardness-a-celebration-of-gary-bettman-stanley-cup-presentations/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElwoodCuse Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 On 8/28/2016 at 6:16 PM, worcat said: I'm all for raising the age limit of players. One and done players are ruining the NBA and College Basketball. College teams used to have heated rivalries, but now you see players go to big name colleges only because they know in one year, they are guaranteed to be drafted instead of going to a four year school and get an education. Then people wonder why the NBA talent pool is diluted and there's an unbalance in talent. Kids, yeah KIDS are being drafted making millions and don't know how to handle themselves with their money or responsibilities. Go back and look at the last 10 NBA drafts and see how many busts have been drafted. There's not enough research to develop these kids. College basketball deserves to be destroyed unless they are going to pay the players what they are worth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worcat Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 1 minute ago, ElwoodCuse said: College basketball deserves to be destroyed unless they are going to pay the players what they are worth Yeah its called a scholarship for a free education. Bleeding Blue since 1986 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElwoodCuse Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 9 minutes ago, worcat said: Yeah its called a scholarship for a free education. It's called an illegal cartel that fixes wages at zero, sorry. Even the NCAA denies that a scholarship is compensation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worcat Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 Haven't we all debated this before. These are student athletes that get a one and done deal to get them to the professional level. I don't want to hear about the "hardships" that these "students" go through.We all know they are taken care of, they want you to think they are mistreated. Doubtful these kids even go to class and deserve the grades they are given. Have you seen some of these "educated" athletes give interviews after games? Half of them can barely form proper sentences. No college athlete should be compensated for them playing a sport UNLESS the university is making money off of their merchandise sales, which will also lead you down the rabbit hole of saying that students should be able to receive sponsorship as long as they are not wearing that university's jersey. Bleeding Blue since 1986 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElwoodCuse Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 10 minutes ago, worcat said: No college athlete should be compensated for them playing a sport UNLESS the university is making money off of their merchandise sales, which will also lead you down the rabbit hole of saying that students should be able to receive sponsorship as long as they are not wearing that university's jersey. College are making a crap ton off of them thanks to TV. There is absolutely no reason why they shouldnt be allowed to negotiate their share of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worcat Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 I understand that the colleges are making money off of the athletes but they are also using the schools to advance their growth in the sport to ultimately make them millions of dollars. You pay football and basketball players then you will have to pay baseball, soccer, lacrosse, cheerleading, hockey etc. While they may not draw as much revenue, you'd have to pay everyone. Do they all make a flat rate? Is it based on what percentage the games bring in? Do the students form a union to negotiate? Do you see how absurd this is already? Players already choose to go to Duke, Kentucky, Kansas etc. So now if those big name schools can already pay the students more? That's really good for the sport and kids education. Way to send home the right idea to the future of our nation. Bleeding Blue since 1986 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElwoodCuse Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 No you would not have to pay everyone, everyone would negotiate what they are worth. If they are worth a scholarship, that's what they get. If they are worth more, they get more. You are so pollyanna it's ridiculous. NCAA sports being about "education" has been a hollow lie for decades, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont care Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 12 minutes ago, ElwoodCuse said: College are making a crap ton off of them thanks to TV. There is absolutely no reason why they shouldnt be allowed to negotiate their share of that. The majority of athletic departments don't make money. It's only really the top of the power 5 that make a lot of money, the rest either break even or lose money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElwoodCuse Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 Just now, dont care said: The majority of athletic departments don't make money. It's only really the top of the power 5 that make a lot of money, the rest either break even or lose money. lol and you believe that. Where do you think the money for all those high-tech weight rooms, 10 different jerseys, and coaches come from? The STRENGTH COACH at Iowa makes almost $600,000 a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont care Posted August 29, 2016 Share Posted August 29, 2016 2 minutes ago, ElwoodCuse said: No you would not have to pay everyone, everyone would negotiate what they are worth. If they are worth a scholarship, that's what they get. If they are worth more, they get more. You are so pollyanna it's ridiculous. NCAA sports being about "education" has been a hollow lie for decades, Title 9 would block anything close to that. female athletes wouldn't be able to be compensated as well as male athletes, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.jpg.4f6d856a41a89fb103eb6cc4b774713a.thumb.jpg.191332edc859f9cf81f17240b8845ef0.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.