mikey287 wrote:No, that's a silly idea. There's lots of hockey being played right now...
DelPen wrote:It would essentially just be the AHL in NHL buildings. Which might not be a bad idea if this thing drags on. Most of the AHL schedule is played all on weekends, at least in Charlotte, so a Saturday afternoon game at Consol for WBS giving the ticket holders first access to the best seats might work, then fill out the building with cheap tickets.
Bathgate wrote:NHLers going to Europe are taking jobs from less skilled players over there. NHL owners need to capitalize on these disgruntled European players. Invite them over as replacement players, or at least bring them over for some form of competition in NHL arenas. Invite fans to attend games at severely reduced prices, and many fans, especially those who support the owners, would do so. If there is no settlement this season, these players could form the basis of a new and reorganized NHL next season. To hell with the current players and their blanking union and their blanking union chief who ruined baseball in Pittsburgh, Montreal, and other cities!
Given rules on imports in each individual league (some leagues allowing no more than 2 non-EU players, some no more than 3 players from the host nation, some requiring X homegrown players under the age of 21 to dress, some requiring at least 11 players be deemed "homegrown", etc.), there aren't excessive amount of players being put out of work over there. And the ones that are actually out of luck (that aren't young, who don't need developmental time in the junior leagues over there: J20 SuperElit, MHL, etc. and who didn't come in via the CHL Import Draft) are out of luck because they aren't very good. And I don't think we're comprehending how not very good they are. No one would want to see them. The cost of operating an NHL arena would likely swallow up any revenue generated (if any) from putting such a poor product out there. Not an option.
Honestly, the thread should be just done away because it was a result of boredom and, well, whatever else...it just breeds nonsense unnecessarily...
mikey287 wrote:That 27 number isn't accurate. And they couldn't make more with replacement players because they'd be below AHL-quality, but with NHL-related overhead costs...arena expenses, ice preparation, travel, accomodations, coaches are not locked out, equipment and jerseys, etc. just for 15 games of something that no one wants to see...they could see better hockey for cheaper in the AHL (not to mention it would be at least some players they've actually heard of and will hear of again)...or for Canadians and border staters, junior hockey - which is quality hockey...
Replacement players is simply not an option. It's just not feasible.
Bathgate wrote:You can Google "NHL replacement players" and find a slew of articles about the possibility, and where the replacement players might come from.
71Aj66ax87 wrote:You mean like the NFL did at the beginning of the 1987 season when there was a players strike?
If you're talking to me, no. I'm asking about this 2012 NHL lockout.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests