Brian in Boston Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 Cal Nichols, chairman of the Edmonton Oilers, was quoted in yesterday's National Post as saying that he would recommend the National Hockey League suspend his franchise or he would consider relocating the team to a larger market if a new labor deal for the NHL doesn't include a salary cap."This isn't sabre-rattling. It's the truth," Nichols told the newspaper.Wow. Someone's "digging in". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DEAD! Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 That's one hell of a threat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 The owners ain't gonna give in guys.These guys are of the stance "We get our way, or we'll just fold up shop."And while many thought they were just blowing alot of hot air, i knew this time would be different.It is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STL FANATIC Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 The owners ain't gonna give in guys.These guys are of the stance "We get our way, or we'll just fold up shop."And while many thought they were just blowing alot of hot air, i knew this time would be different.It is. And it's a good idea.It's not like I think the players are all to blame for this mess. The owners could have showed restraint in signing players before it got to this point. It's just, in my oppinion, the owners have the best long term solution. I don't think it's worth a temporary compromise either. The league may not come back stronger, but if it comes back with a cap, it will come back with the potential to be stronger.And frankly, I don't think the Oilers owner is simply making a threat. I believe he'll make every effort to keep the team running, but he really may be forced to do this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrh31584 Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 If there is a move, any idea where they would go? My first guess would be Portland, but if market size is that important, I'd say Houston would be more likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JQK Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 If there is a move, any idea where they would go? My first guess would be Portland, but if market size is that important, I'd say Houston would be more likely. i don't see a move, i see a fold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJTank Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 The players need to cut their losses and just accpet the fact there will be cap, because if it goes longer and into next year they will lose far worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shizznick Posted January 27, 2005 Share Posted January 27, 2005 If there is a move, any idea where they would go? My first guess would be Portland, but if market size is that important, I'd say Houston would be more likely. The Houston Oilers???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LMU Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 If there is a move, any idea where they would go? My first guess would be Portland, but if market size is that important, I'd say Houston would be more likely. The Houston Oilers???? Yeah, I heard something about the Oilers thinking about moving to Houston a few Years ago... maybe they could use the derrick? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC97 Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 It's not like I think the players are all to blame for this mess. The owners could have showed restraint in signing players before it got to this point. But then wouldn't that be considered collusion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CJR Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 It's not like I think the players are all to blame for this mess. The owners could have showed restraint in signing players before it got to this point. But then wouldn't that be considered collusion? Only if they decided as a group what "restraint" meant. If teams individually didn't spend more than they can afford, this wouldn't have happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stampman Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 "This isn't sabre-rattling. It's the truth," Nichols told the newspaper. Hmm, I thought Sabre rattling was what went on in Buffalo...or it was this-Sabre rattlingSeriously though--as a Flames fan the Oilers demise would hurt the Flames--and the NHL too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaolinaJoe Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 It's not like I think the players are all to blame for this mess. The owners could have showed restraint in signing players before it got to this point. But then wouldn't that be considered collusion? Only if they decided as a group what "restraint" meant. If teams individually didn't spend more than they can afford, this wouldn't have happened. Yeah but every time the players don't get what they expect they scream collusion, and get the union lawyers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.