Kukla's Korner

Kukla's Korner Hockey

CBA Meeting Is Over

 

added 5:17pm,

 

added 5:25pm,

 

added 5:35pm,

 

added 5:39pm,

 

Filed in: NHL Talk, NHLPA, | KK Hockey | Permalink
 

Comments

Avatar

... annnnnnd Cynical HD scores another win over Hopeful HD.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 12/12/12 at 05:28 PM ET

Evilpens's avatar

Fehr STILL doesn’t Get this isn’t MLB!

Posted by Evilpens on 12/12/12 at 05:45 PM ET

Red Winger's avatar

The sad part, I believed, yet again, there may have been hope.

Wow, my gullibility during this whole shi*show has been embarrassing.

Please, Gary, for the love of all that is good - pull the plug on the season now. We have lives to get on with.

Posted by Red Winger from Sault Ste Marie on 12/12/12 at 05:54 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

God I wish Fehr would just hurry up and ruin hockey like he ruined baseball.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 12/12/12 at 05:54 PM ET

SYF's avatar

oUTSTANDING wORK, gENTS.

Posted by SYF from The Revenge of Johnny E on 12/12/12 at 05:57 PM ET

Evilpens's avatar

SYF that is Disturbing cheese

Posted by Evilpens on 12/12/12 at 06:05 PM ET

Red Winger's avatar

God I wish Fehr would just hurry up and ruin hockey like he ruined baseball.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 12/12/12 at 05:54 PM ET

I know you bleed union, JJ. I thought of you when our wonderful state went RTW yesterday. smile

Posted by Red Winger from Sault Ste Marie on 12/12/12 at 06:08 PM ET

WingsFaninCO's avatar

I know you bleed union, JJ. I thought of you when our wonderful state went RTW yesterday.

Posted by Red Winger from Sault Ste Marie on 12/12/12 at 06:08 PM ET

Great job keeping this about hockey and not personal political views.  There are political forums if you want to get in petty fights over that crap.

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 12/12/12 at 06:15 PM ET

SYF's avatar

I think it sums a lot of people’s feelings, EP.

Posted by SYF from The Revenge of Johnny E on 12/12/12 at 06:30 PM ET

Evilpens's avatar

Posted by SYF from an NHL wasteland…and it fuching sucks. on 12/12/12 at 06:30 PM ET

I still think at the Last Moment Fehr will see or will be told This isn’t MLB & they have cancelled 1 season already & they aren’t bluffing

Posted by Evilpens on 12/12/12 at 06:34 PM ET

Red Winger's avatar

Great job keeping this about hockey and not personal political views.  There are political forums if you want to get in petty fights over that crap.

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 12/12/12 at 06:15 PM ET /

You’re from Colorado. You have no right to talk down to a Michigander. smile

Posted by Red Winger from Sault Ste Marie on 12/12/12 at 06:36 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

I know you bleed union, JJ. I thought of you when our wonderful state went RTW yesterday.

You presume too much.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 12/12/12 at 06:47 PM ET

Red Winger's avatar

Yahoo Sports NHL ‏@YahooSportsNHL

Take it for what it’s worth: U.K.-based hockey agent says teams in Europe are bracing for lockout to end within week. http://tinyurl.com/bs7pd63

Posted by Red Winger from Sault Ste Marie on 12/12/12 at 06:51 PM ET

Avatar

God I wish Fehr would just hurry up and ruin hockey like he ruined baseball.

At a certain point Baseball was America’s Pastime and more popular nationally than football.

Now it’s third in the ratings and is routinely drubbed by #2, the NBA.

In 2012 it set a record low for it’s World Series TV rating.

Fehr didn’t ‘kill’ baseball.  He just blinded an eye and chopped off an arm.

Just a flesh wound!

Posted by HockeyinHD on 12/12/12 at 06:58 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Posted by HockeyinHD on 12/12/12 at 06:58 PM ET

Right. And the sooner Fehr can do that to hockey, the quicker I can get on to doing other things.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 12/12/12 at 06:59 PM ET

HockeytownOverhaul's avatar

Where does baseball sit based on revenue HD?  Still 3rd?

Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 12/12/12 at 07:00 PM ET

Evilpens's avatar

Posted by HockeyinHD on 12/12/12 at 06:58 PM ET SHHHHHHHHHHHHHH you’ll scare the “Union” lovers here

Posted by Evilpens on 12/12/12 at 07:16 PM ET

HockeytownOverhaul's avatar

lmao EP, were you management for a WV coal company or something?

Dont’ think union or non-union is playing much into peoples oppinions on the lockout rather, hockey vs. no hockey.

Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 12/12/12 at 07:45 PM ET

Evilpens's avatar

[Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 12/12/12 at 07:45 PM ET/strong] I think it is My Brother is Big time Union Guy & I Know the Union Group Think

Posted by Evilpens on 12/12/12 at 08:03 PM ET

LivinLaVidaLockout's avatar

I know you bleed union, JJ. I thought of you when our wonderful state went RTW yesterday.

You presume too much.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 12/12/12 at 06:47 PM ET

That’s interesting, I never really thought JJ posted anything that tells me he is generally a “pro-union” person in his everyday life.

lmao EP, were you management for a WV coal company or something?

Dont’ think union or non-union is playing much into peoples oppinions on the lockout rather, hockey vs. no hockey.

Posted by HockeytownOverhaul on 12/12/12 at 07:45 PM ET

The way I’ve been looking at it.. since 2005 and the start of the cap era, the owners have created a “social” society where they have tried to artificially limit the earnings of players against their true market value.  Since they haven’t been able to do that and they still end up spending Parise/Suter money because they “can’t help themselves,” the owners have decided to further impose their will for an anti-capitalist system.  Pre-2004, what was Nick Lidstrom making… $11M?  Is there an argument he wasn’t worth that much if it’s what was necessary to keep him in Detroit vs going home to Sweden?  Part of my support for the NHLPA is my concern that if their league is nickeling and diming the players to the point where the KHL can be just as attractive, we give Russian stars a reason to stay home and grow the KHL.  That opinion has no relation to my other opinions about traditional labor/unions.

Posted by LivinLaVidaLockout on 12/12/12 at 08:51 PM ET

Avatar

Right. And the sooner Fehr can do that to hockey, the quicker I can get on to doing other things.

Until the sport starts to crumble structurally, anyway.  But hey, why waste any time looking into the future, right?  Let’s just make a bunch of really dumb business decisions to patch things up int he short term.

Where does baseball sit based on revenue HD?  Still 3rd?

Not entirely sure.  It’s pretty hard to get actual revenue numbers because of the amount of local TV deals.  That said:

1) Revenue /= profits.
2) 162 game season > 82 game season > 16 game season.
3) Fully 15 teams a year may as well not even be playing major league baseball.
4) MLB attendance was down in 2008, 2009 and 2010.  Fehr’s last year was 2009.

Again, Fehr didn’t kill baseball.  He just wounded it badly and left it with long term scars.

Like, for instance, his staunch refusal to countenance drug testing in baseball, which led to the steroid scandal that’s gone a long way towards invalidating all sorts of league records and threw a fairly sooty cloud over around a decades-worth of baseball.  And, you know, made it a lot easier for a bunch of his members to shorten their lives.

Or more recently, his ki-boshing of the NHL’s realignment plan out of hand.

In both cases he was doing his ‘job’, more or less.  Driving the best possible bargain for his side in baseball, and not giving away a future negotiating chip for nothing in hockey, but I think it’s pretty hard to argue that in either case those decisions did anything but hurt the respective sports.

Dont’ think union or non-union is playing much into peoples oppinions on the lockout

Totally disagree.  Pro-union people are pro-player people.  Pro-business people are pro-owners people.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 12/12/12 at 08:51 PM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

Not entirely sure.  It’s pretty hard to get actual revenue numbers because of the amount of local TV deals.  That said:

1) Revenue /= profits.
2) 162 game season > 82 game season > 16 game season.
3) Fully 15 teams a year may as well not even be playing major league baseball.
4) MLB attendance was down in 2008, 2009 and 2010.  Fehr’s last year was 2009.

The NBA had a lockout that cost them games in their season. MLB hasn’t had a labor stoppage in 21 years.  By your logic that the presence of a lockout is evidence that a lockout is necessary because it’s not worth it to play through, baseball appears to be doing better.

Number 2 doesn’t say anything other than baseball has a longer season. They also play in stadiums that are more than twice as big as basketball arena and only about 70% the capacity of football stadiums. Football has the shortest season of those three and is believed to be the biggest revenue (and profit) generator of the bunch.

Number 3 is moot from a business standpoint; except that it’s a gross oversimplification.

MLB attendance being down over a three-year span tells us that attendance was down over a three-year span and that’s about it.

As far as popularity, the Lakers’ local TV deal nets them about $150M while the Dodgers’ is worth $240M per season. While finding all the figures for local and national deals is difficult, it appears that they’re very similar with MLB holding a slight advantage.

Then when you get to what Forbes thinks of the team values, you’re absolutely right that 15 teams per year may as well not be playing MLB baseball because that’s precisely how many teams it takes for MLB franchise valuations to exceed the entire sum of NBA franchise values (about $11.77B).

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 12/12/12 at 09:21 PM ET

LivinLaVidaLockout's avatar

Totally disagree.  Pro-union people are pro-player people.  Pro-business people are pro-owners people.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 12/12/12 at 08:51 PM ET

That’s almost as bad of a generalization as saying that everyone in Michigan misses hockey right now because this is where “Hockeytown” is.  I just tried to explain why I’m pro-player in this argument ... my idea of being “pro-business” is that successful companies in an area lead to the growth of prosperity for the community as a whole, which will in turn encourage both small and large business to further invest in the community and propagate that prosperity. 

Simply, I don’t see the owners doing their part to help “grow the pie” for everyone.

And I’ll also add that I thought that yesterday was a great day for the State of Michigan.

Posted by LivinLaVidaLockout on 12/12/12 at 11:21 PM ET

Avatar

The NBA had a lockout that cost them games in their season. MLB hasn’t had a labor stoppage in 21 years.  By your logic that the presence of a lockout is evidence that a lockout is necessary because it’s not worth it to play through, baseball appears to be doing better.

The NBA is a capped league and MLB is not.  That’s the difference.  In a capped league where the idea is ostensibly increasing parity, having a CBA that adequately protects the weaker franchises from the strong ones is always going to be a huge sticking point beause it will have to by default limit the amount which big teams can overspend small ones.

In MLB, they don’t care.  The big spending teams outspend the cheap ones by 3 or 4+ to 1 and fan bases in 15+ cities get to feel like Triple A affiliates because they’ve got just about no shot at ever being a consistently dangerous team.

Does that mean MLB is ‘healthier’ than the NBA?  I don’t know.  Maybe?  It’s a big part of the reason why MLB went from #1 to #3 in my lifetime, though.

Number 2 doesn’t say anything other than baseball has a longer season.

Well, the issue was how Babeball did with regards to revenue relative to other leagues, JJ.  It seems germane to note in any such comparison that one league plays more than half again as many games as the next closest and 10 times as many games as the furthers.

Football has the shortest season of those three and is believed to be the biggest revenue (and profit) generator of the bunch.

I don’t think that is true, though.  It wouldn’t surprise me to discover that when you get done totaling up all the local TV deals MLB blows football away in terms of total revenue.  Remember those huge baseball local TV deals I mentioned a week or so back?  Are there any local football deals which compare to that?

I don’t think so.  The NFL signs packages with CBS, Fox, NBC, ESPN, and their own NFL Network.  All that money is tied in with regular over-the-air broadcasts.

For example, here in Detroit where are most of the Tigers games shown?  FSD.  Which has a TV deal with the team independent of (although inpacted by) the leagues national deal.

Football’s TV presence is unique among the pro sports due to the relative rarity of the games and the (until this year God-awful Thursday Night sessions) very limited times in which broadcast partners need to have their programming windows available to be filled.  Sunday at 12:30, Sunday at 4:30, Sunday at 8:30.  Monday at 8:30.  And the last two are boutique times that only one network has to deal with.

Contrast that with, say, Hockey.  Games possibly on any day of the week.  Games at either 7 or 8 or 9 or 10 EST.  Day games, occasionally.  Baseball’s far worse, with not only a whole lot more games to broadcast, but way longer games on average and a whole lot more time slots they may fall in.  Doubleheaders.  Extra innings.

Number 3 is moot from a business standpoint; except that it’s a gross oversimplification.

Not if you care to consider franchise value as part of the expression of business health.  Or if you consider the competitive balance of the league as a relevant factor in television deals.  Or if you’re interested in talking about the competitive structure of the league vis a vis fan interest and support in those teams.

MLB attendance being down over a three-year span tells us that attendance was down over a three-year span and that’s about it.

Ah yes.  I had forgotten your aversion to forecasting in situations where doing so contradicts your position.

As far as popularity, the Lakers’ local TV deal nets them about $150M while the Dodgers’ is worth $240M per season. While finding all the figures for local and national deals is difficult, it appears that they’re very similar with MLB holding a slight advantage.

... and this is why noting the number of games played is relevant.  A MLB game, according to your numbers, is worth just south of 1.5 mil.  An NBA game is worth 1.8 mil.  It’s just that there are way more MLB games.

Which is why I think as a function of sport revenue, MLB may be the king.

Revenue /= profits, though.  And profits should be the number which is focused on.

That’s almost as bad of a generalization as saying that everyone in Michigan misses hockey right now because this is where “Hockeytown” is.

It’s not exactly a generalization if it’s true.  Hey, if there are any pro-union guys who are against what the NHLPA is doing that you’ve ever seen, heard or read, point them out to me.  I’ve yet to run across one.

successful companies in an area lead to the growth of prosperity for the community as a whole, which will in turn encourage both small and large business to further invest in the community and propagate that prosperity.

Successful companies make profit.  Ballgame.  That profit leads to well (or at least better) paid employees.  Which leads to more discretionary funds.  Which leads to other businesses opening in order to take advantage of those discretionary funds.  Which leads to a larger municipal footprint to accommodate the expansion of the business district.  Which leads to city planning and design.  Which expands the tax base and allows the municipality to add enticements for residential developments.

If a company (and by company we’re generalizing to encompass all the businesses in an area in aggregate) isn’t making a profit, none of the rest of the previous paragraph ever happens.

If you live in Michigan, it’s not hard to find the places where you see the reality of my timeline, as well as places where you can see it’s interruption.  Heck, even if you don’t live in Michigan I’m sure your state has it’s examples.

Simply, I don’t see the owners doing their part to help “grow the pie” for everyone.

Did you say that after the last lockout, right before league revenues jumped 5% a year throughout the term of the deal and blew past even the top end of estimations, too? wink

And I’ll also add that I thought that yesterday was a great day for the State of Michigan.

Depends on the part you thought was great, I guess.  The law or the protests, violence and rhetoric that sprung up from it’s passage.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 12/13/12 at 04:58 AM ET

Avatar

Heh.  ‘Babeball’.  I’d watch that.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 12/13/12 at 05:00 AM ET

J.J. from Kansas's avatar

In MLB, they don’t care.  The big spending teams outspend the cheap ones by 3 or 4+ to 1 and fan bases in 15+ cities get to feel like Triple A affiliates because they’ve got just about no shot at ever being a consistently dangerous team.

Is this seriously a consideration that gets brought up where the NBA holds an advantage? I’m sure all those Sacramento Kings fans are just waiting for their turn.

Well, the issue was how Babeball did with regards to revenue relative to other leagues, JJ.  It seems germane to note in any such comparison that one league plays more than half again as many games as the next closest and 10 times as many games as the furthers.

Not really.

I don’t think that is true, though.

National deals for MLB and NBA both seem to come in about $920M per year. IF local deals double that (which is possible, but also unevenly distributed among the teams in each league), that doesn’t come out to the $4.3B in rights fees the NFL collects annually, which is on the upswing, whereas MLB, NBA and their teams are signing longer-term deals for guaranteed sums, the NFL keeps their deals somewhat shorter because they know they’re going to be able to ask for more next time around.

Not if you care to consider franchise value as part of the expression of business health.  Or if you consider the competitive balance of the league as a relevant factor in television deals.  Or if you’re interested in talking about the competitive structure of the league vis a vis fan interest and support in those teams.

Well, the total of MLB’s franchise values looks like it exceeds the total of NBA’s franchise values by about $7B, MLB has had a more-diverse list of championship teams since 2000, and all factors indicate that MLB makes more on television deals, so…. ok.

Ah yes.  I had forgotten your aversion to forecasting in situations where doing so contradicts your position.

Things go up, things go down. Your entire forecasting position seems to be that things don’t ever change. Baseball’s ratings have fluctuated in the last 20 years and all the things I’ve said above about how they’re doing well still ring true.

... and this is why noting the number of games played is relevant.  A MLB game, according to your numbers, is worth just south of 1.5 mil.  An NBA game is worth 1.8 mil.  It’s just that there are way more MLB games.

Which is why I think as a function of sport revenue, MLB may be the king.

Revenue /= profits, though.  And profits should be the number which is focused on.

Eyeroll

So let’s do that and call Forbes a close approximation again. We’ll total the sum of all teams operating income (in millions):

Baseball: $431.9
Basketball: $174.7

If you’ve got any actual evidence which suggests that a baseball game is that much more expensive to put on than a basketball game so that the per-game nonsense should be taken seriously enough, then I’m all ears. Per-game valuations are fun to look at out of context, but what’s germane to this discussion is which league pulls in more money. Every indication is that MLB pulls in more than the NBA and that they keep more of what they pull in.  There’s also no evidence to support that there’s actually more competitive parity in the NBA than there is in MLB, despite that being a favorite rallying cry of people who haven’t bothered to actually look at what the Yankees have done with their monstrous payrolls since the turn of the century.

The concept that baseball is the #3 sport is laughable.

Posted by J.J. from Kansas on 12/13/12 at 08:30 AM ET

LivinLaVidaLockout's avatar

Dont’ think union or non-union is playing much into peoples oppinions on the lockout

Totally disagree.  Pro-union people are pro-player people.  Pro-business people are pro-owners people.

That’s a different angle than the poster was originally making.  With 17.5% of Michiganders being unionized workers, and a much smaller percentage of the population being business owners, now you’re talking about a fifth of the population, very likely correctly, that “Pro-union people are pro-player people.  Pro-business people are pro-owners people.”  I would also argue that taking the converse looking at the other 80% of people would not fit into the categorization that “Pro-player people are pro-union people.  Pro-owner people are pro-business people.”

Simply, I don’t see the owners doing their part to help “grow the pie” for everyone.

Did you say that after the last lockout, right before league revenues jumped 5% a year throughout the term of the deal and blew past even the top end of estimations, too?

A few weeks ago, Hostess decided it was better for them to go out of business because they couldn’t come to an agreement with the union on contracts as opposed to continue to exist.  The risk the players run into by never coming to an agreement is that the league would fold because it is not financially viable.  Obviously, that’s not a risk anywhere close to reality, and while the players propose increased revenue sharing to increase profits for even struggling teams, the owners don’t look to increase their financial strength as a group in the same manner, but instead look to make that money by rolling back contracts to players that they themselves offered in the first place.  Companies that increase their margins by marginalizing labor costs are the ones also at risk of losing that profit margin when they no longer can keep those wages artificially low.

Depends on the part you thought was great, I guess.  The law or the protests, violence and rhetoric that sprung up from it’s passage.

Posted by HockeyinHD on 12/13/12 at 04:58 AM ET

Maybe I mostly enjoyed hearing about the bystanding hotdog man getting beat up as part of the “civil disobedience” that the union-supporters were partaking.

Posted by LivinLaVidaLockout on 12/13/12 at 08:54 AM ET

Avatar

People that are pro-owners are 1. anti-hockey, 2. prefer an inferior product , 3. are anti-capitalist, 4. pro-monopoly and 5. like to eat babies. I’ll make my points in order: 

1. Hockey could have been played this season, but the owners locked the players out. You can play without a CBA, in fact the first lockout that lead to a shortened season eventually operated under an MOA until the CBA could be finalized. I have had union workers that came under contract with the company I work for and they continued to work while we negotiated a new CBA. So anyone that says otherwise is just saying it is better for the owners if they negotiate during a lockout, not that hockey could not be played. The owner’s supporters care more about the owner’s bargaining position than hockey.

2. People that are pro-owner do not care if they see the best players replaced by secondary players for less salary. Not less cost to the public, ticket prices are what the market bears and nothing less. They are willing to pay the maximum pirce without the owner having to make the comparable investment. Owners would be stupid not to get the most they can for each ticket sold.  The people that are pro-owner only root for the uniform and hockey is hockey. These same people would also go to see a concert in a stadium where all the music is played by cover bands at the same cost as the original artist. It is, after all, the same music and if you don’t know the difference you will pay for whatever they serve you and be happy. From what I have seen the cover bands “want it more” and are so happy to be doing what they love “they would do it for free.” 

3. Capitalism allows for risk and reward. A salary cap attempts to remove risk and socialize revenue. A failing team should fail or be moved or bought and sold off for parts. Capitalism does not reward poor business decisions or share wealth with the less fortunate. Failed franchises may hurt players near term, but a new franchise in a more viable market would emerge. Some smaller markets would fail, sorry if you have an owner or a market that can’t compete. Why should a successful business support your losses? Which owner are we protecting? Only the incompetent?  Maybe you aren’t in a Major League market. Allow an owner to buy a franchise for what it is truly worth and then move it to where he can make it work.  Why should a new owner pay inflated value for the an asset that is de-valued due to poor decisions of the previous owner?

4. Labor exemption allows unions to enter into agreements which may create a monopolistic practice regarding the working conditions of the employees it represents. The owners have said, “take it or leave” it for each of their offers and maintain a monopoly. Therefore they are not negotiating in good faith and this exemption should go away.  Playing under a CBA only serves to allow the owners to maintain a monopoly. I would do away with the CBA entirely. The best players would be rewarded and they would have the freedom to chose their employer like at will employees. Personal Service Contracts would be the last word.  We would still be seeing hockey played right now if there were no CBA to begin with. You would also have some teams that a perennial contenders since they could afford to reward success.  Parity with your competition is not a business goal of any successful business. Only monopolies are anti-competition. The best business and owners want to compete because they know they can win.

5. I have never read a media report that denies that owners will eat babies and I have never personally met an owner that denied it either.  I do know owners that eat beef and their subordinates feel players are cattle (no owner denied it either), so tell me who hasn’t ever had a little bit of veal? Therefore their supporters must like to eat babies too . I have met many owners and therefore I know what they are thinking and never make broad or stereotypical statements.

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 12/13/12 at 11:00 AM ET

Avatar

It’s not exactly a generalization if it’s true.  Hey, if there are any pro-union guys who are against what the NHLPA is doing that you’ve ever seen, heard or read, point them out to me.  I’ve yet to run across one.

So in your black-and-white, unable-to-fathom-shades-of-grey, narrow-minded, condescending viewpoint, pro-union hockey writers = all pro-PA people?

Wow, can you find a smaller, more biased group by which to judge a huge group of people?

Hey, I have a friend who is pro-NHL and a teacher, part of the teacher’s union, therefore all people who are pro-NHL are also in unions.  And by extension, since you’re pro-NHL, I conclude that you are a high school english teacher from Ottawa.

How does that work for you?

Posted by Garth on 12/13/12 at 11:06 AM ET

WingsFaninCO's avatar

You’re from Colorado. You have no right to talk down to a Michigander.

Posted by Red Winger from Sault Ste Marie on 12/12/12 at 06:36 PM ET

1: Wrong.  I am not FROM Colorado: I happen to live here now.

2:  So, as one born-and-bred Michigander to another: Go %^&# yourself.

 

Posted by WingsFaninCO on 12/13/12 at 12:00 PM ET

LivinLaVidaLockout's avatar

Posted by hockey1919 from mid-atlantic on 12/13/12 at 11:00 AM ET

Bravo, said much better than I could have.

1: Wrong.  I am not FROM Colorado: I happen to live here now.

I’d prefer to read it “Wings Fan ‘n Company” if you don’t mind.

Posted by LivinLaVidaLockout on 12/13/12 at 01:10 PM ET

SnLO's avatar

I would do away with the CBA entirely. The best players would be rewarded and they would have the freedom to chose their employer like at will employees. Personal Service Contracts would be the last word.  We would still be seeing hockey played right now if there were no CBA to begin with.

I fully support this notion.

Posted by SnLO from beyond the M-1 on 12/13/12 at 01:24 PM ET

Add a Comment

Please limit embedded image or media size to 575 pixels wide.

Add your own avatar by joining Kukla's Korner, or logging in and uploading one in your member control panel.

Captchas bug you? Join KK or log in and you won't have to bother.

Smileys

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Feed

Most Recent Blog Posts

About Kukla's Korner Hockey

Paul Kukla founded Kukla’s Korner in 2005 and the site has since become the must-read site on the ‘net for all the latest happenings around the NHL.

From breaking news to in-depth stories around the league, KK Hockey is updated with fresh stories all day long and will bring you the latest news as quickly as possible.

Email Paul anytime at pk@kuklaskorner.com