Isn't that what I said? Didn't you call me crazy?
by Quisp on Jul 25, 2010 3:25 PM PDT
Email
PrintReport: NHL may fine the Devils over Kovalchuk contract - ProHockeyTalk - Hockey - NBC Sports
The strange and unprecedented journey that is the Ilya Kovalchuk story continues to take some more strange turns. Mark Everson of the New York Post reports today that the NHL may be considering taking action against the Devils and Ilya Kovalchuk for their potentially cap circumventing contract. A league source said the NHL is not threatening, but also not dismissing the possibility that the Devils might be liable for a fine of at least $1 million. The fine could go up to $5 million should an arbitrator finds that their $102 million, 17-year contract is indeed a circumvention of the collective bargaining agreement. In addition, Kovalchuk himself conceivably could be liable to a fine between $250G and $1 million.
100 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Fine to IK?
How about paassing along the fine to that asshole agent of his who seems to be running this whole circus?
I had the same thought reading this.
Wheel of Location, Turn Turn Turn. Tell us the location that we will play.
Contributor to Lighthouse Hockey not sure if I'm the Sniper or the Enforcer.
If I recall from one of Quisp's earlier posts....
Grossman can lose his certification as an NHL agent for at least a year or until the league feels fit to alow him his certification back.
(vii) Suspend any Club employee, Player, or Certified Agent involved in such a violation for a period of time determined in the sole discretion of the Commissioner, the System Arbitrator, or the NHLPA, respectively.
That is under one of the possible penalties so really Lamoriello, Grossman, Kovalchuk, or anyone else involved with this could be suspended as long as Bettman feels they should be. There is no limit.
That's it, thanks....
It would be hilarious if they banned Kovadonnachuk. That would be ULTIMATE REVENGE!!!
Haha
I doubt he gets suspended though because the reason he has an agent is to deal with making sure the details of the contract and such are following league rules and acceptable. The blame falls on the agent and the team, little of it on the player in my opinion.
kovalchuk innocent
Wait till this year.
by Quisp on Jul 25, 2010 7:15 PM PDT via mobile reply actions
Da. How you say, vyictim.
Allo, Grossman, thees is Ilya. Why you make me luke like bad. Hyu telled me is hokay, now is not. Why hyu do? I have many friends, some with particlar tatoos. Hyu weel fyix, or hyu weel suffer. And, if Ilya has the fined by Kommissioner, Hyu will be visit, ees Eastern Promise I make you.
End Corporate Personhood.
If the hockey glove fits, then you must acquit
The Spirit of MeatTrain'10!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Jul 26, 2010 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions
Akthough, I notice that the report says the NHL "May" be considering taking action, it does not say they "shall" consider taking action.
Nyuk, Nyuk.
End Corporate Personhood.
Yes, nothing is definite yet
And much remains uncertain in advance of tomorrow’s deadline for the NHLPA appeal. But the reason Quisp is drawing so much fire/praise is that he took seriously the possibility of the NHL rejecting the contract earlier than just about all of us did. So we’ll see.
I agree that Kovalchuk is relatively blameless in all of this, and even if the league wanted to sanction one of its marquee players, I would be surprised if it did so. Grossman is the agent; he is supposed to give his client good advice and represent his best interests. If his client demanded that he do something that he knew to be against the rules, he was honor-bound to resign.
I wasn't aware of any praise, but I'm pretty sure I was the only one saying it might be disallowed because it IS a circumvention. However,
the reason I’m drawing so much fire from the 6-10 main commenters on the ILWT site (and nowhere else, as far as I can tell) is that they require absolute submission to their “the league has no case” line and can’t hear anything else. The league does have a case. Doesn’t mean they will win. I could argue the NHLPA side, too, if I wanted to. Better than those idiots at ILWT. I’m agnostic on whether the contract “should” be disallowed.
Wait till this year.
The thing is, many of us can see it going either way and could make a case for it going either way. They can only see it going one way and if you argue the other, well you better have the facts and only the facts they will accept as facts.
Ever get the feeling we are on a collision course with reality?
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -- Benjamin Franklin
They have their own facts.
Actual facts they can’t be bothered with. Which is why they banned me and then complained that no one would refute their idiocy on their blog.
The best (funniest) part is, to every counter-point, their response is “show me where in the CBA it says there’s a limit on length of contracts,” as if they’re actually incapable of stringing two thoughts together to form a new thought. You say, essentially, the CBA says this, and over here it says that, and when you put this together with that, you get — and they leap in with “YOU’RE MAKING ASSUMPTIONS!”
But they don’t understand what an assumption is, apparently. It’s not an assumption that, for example, “if bobby is allergic to peanuts, and peanut butter is made of peanuts, then bobby is allergic to peanut butter.” That’s a deduction. An assumption is “lou checked it out so it must be okay.”
Wait till this year.
by Quisp on Jul 26, 2010 12:12 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
-J
you can’t reason with myopic, one-tracked, all or none, black or white thinkers. Remember Anthony?
by -J on Jul 26, 2010 5:42 AM PDT up reply actions
Anthonyy was Socrates compared to these Bozos. I long for the days of Anthony.
Anthony? Are you out there? You’re a lawyer…
Wait till this year.
No Quisp, you were banned because you broke the blog rules. Probably about 3 or 4. Don’t pretend like you are a victim.
Calling the ILWT posters ‘idiots’ and ‘bozos’ shows that you can’t debate without bringing the coversation down to a mocking, confrontational level which leaves your opinion with no real value.
Personally I had thought you were very irresponsible with the ‘Fire Jay Grossman Post’ (you know the one where you made many silly ‘assumptions’ about the Kovalchuk free agency process) but the name calling through various points has brought you to a new low. Congrats on bringing down the level of dialogue on the SB Nation Network.
It’s sad because you post some great stuff over here, but that is clouded by your obvious bias as to anything Kovalchuk.
by Tom Stivali on Jul 26, 2010 11:13 AM PDT up reply actions
Calling the ILWT posters ‘idiots’ and ‘bozos’ shows that you can’t debate without bringing the coversation down to a mocking, confrontational level which leaves your opinion with no real value.
Lots of namecalling by ILWT posters happened before this point. Not that it seemed to matter.
In Dinglebarn We Trust
Congrats on bringing down the level of dialogue on the SB Nation Network.
I thought that was my job.
This said by someone who clearly isn’t biased huh? Since it’s funny that Quisp can be called all sorts of things, but no banning happened.
(damn I’m defending a Kings fan – shoot me!)
Ever get the feeling we are on a collision course with reality?
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -- Benjamin Franklin
It seriously kills me I’m hanging out more on a Kings site and Devils site more than the Sharks site this off-season due to this situation. God will the season please start so the world will be righted once again!
Ever get the feeling we are on a collision course with reality?
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -- Benjamin Franklin
Yes, the rules I broke...here they are...ready?
1) I cursed using asterisks. Which is to say, I didn’t curse. I thought that was the accepted form of not cursing. If there is some rule against cursing with asterisks, I didn’t see it. The offending curse word was, and I quote “****ing.” Wait, it might have been “****.” I don’t know. I obviously don’t have access to my work product anymore.
This was in a response to your numerous commenters saying I refused to refute them there, on their home turf. They didn’t put it like that though. They said, “be a man about it.”
So I responded in detail and thoroughly point by point. I didn’t say anything insulting to anyone, nor was I “warned” for doing so (yet).
Your moderator deleted my thoughtful response because of the asterisks. Conveniently, this allowed the dopey attack on me (that I don’t come there and refute them) seem true, since my response was deleted. If I had been smart (or if I had known how vindictive and petty your population is) I would have kept a copy. Fortunately, I have made most of the points here also.
I then responded in a comment on your site that I thought it was “intellectually dishonest” to delete my comment which was in response to comments directed specifically to me personally, and were specifically about me not responding. Again, I was reasonable and did not insult anyone or call anyone names, unlike your several commenters, all of whose comments still stand.
Your moderator’s measured response to this was to delete my second comment and ban me from the site.
He then emailed me and informed me of the banning. The reason? Personal attacks! What were they? I said I thought it was “intellectually dishonest” to delete my previous comment. Also, my favorite, I attacked his commenters. By saying that their comments were “unreasonable.”
Oh, also, there was another offense. I mentioned blog policy on the blog, which is against the rules. I should not have said that he deleted my comment, because the mentioning of that publicly is a violation of the rules? Errr, okay. Good rule. Why don’t you just make it a rule that no-one can disagree with you or respond to your insults?
Last point: I’m not pretending I’m a victim. You can’t victimize me. I don’t even know you. I certainly have no respect for you. The few posts that I’ve read are incoherent. Do you know the term “echo chamber?” That’s what you’ve got there. All you’re doing is confusing people. That’s fine. I especially love the comments that rally to have your leader “testify” for the NHLPA. If I had one wish this morning, it would be to make that happen.
p.s. if you would like me to cut/paste the idiocy in your comments I’m referring to, I would be more than happy to do that. I don’t think it would reflect very well on you at all though. Just give the word. I’ll preface it by saying that I thought it would be seen as petty on my part (which is why I haven’t done it already), but you said you wanted me to.
Please advise.
Wait till this year.
by Quisp on Jul 26, 2010 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Due to the previous arguments you have show, your intention was to circumvent the laws
It’s all there, black and white, clear as crystal! You stole fizzy lifting drinks! You bumped into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized, so you get nothing! You lose! Good day, sir!
bread. butter. cheese. VICTORY!
by Prometheus74 on Jul 26, 2010 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions
Your points and arguments are valid with them as long as they don't apply to the Kovalchuk situation
Just give them back the everlasting gobstopper
bread. butter. cheese. VICTORY!
by Prometheus74 on Jul 26, 2010 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions
Waiting for reply...
Okay. I’ll check back in a few hours. Maybe by then I will have sunk so low that you will actually be able to see me.
Wait till this year.
Oh I wasn’t aware I was under a deadline to respond.
Since most of your post is just explaining how you broke the rules, there is really nothing for me to address. If you are referring to ‘posting comments from ILWT’ as an actual serious question I do not think that starting a back and forth of ‘copy/paste comments’ on the respective blogs really provides any value.
A Devils fan – proving once again they have blinders on … :)
Ever get the feeling we are on a collision course with reality?
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -- Benjamin Franklin
And they act like it's us vs. them when it's really
them vs. reality.
All I am saying is, the league has a case. Not the league will prevail. Not, it’s a slam dunk. Not, the Devils are screwed. Not, the NHLPA doesn’t have a leg to stand on. Just, the league has a case.
LALALANOTLISTENING
Wait till this year.
Well, clearly you crossed some sort of line. I don’t think you’re allowed to write more than three posts about the CBA per week. It’s indelicate, or something.
It also must be nice for them that one blog and one blog only lives in a world without bias…helps with that sense of superiority.
In Dinglebarn We Trust
I think what bothers them
is they feel proprietary about Kovalchuk for some reason, as though this story didn’t mean anything to the rest of the league, as though Kovalchuk weren’t the #1 free agent on the market, as though front-loaded mega deal contracts aren’t a huge deal that everyone is worried about, as though this CBA parsing (and the prospect of another work-stoppage) is just meaningless paper-shuffling.
They feel, in a sort of primitive toddler sense, that he is theirs and NO GRABBING. It doesn’t matter that nobody is grabbing. We don’t even necessarily like your toy. YOU CAN’T FOOL ME! YOU WANT IT!
Projection. They want it, so they assume everyone else must want it. They can’t fathom that the story is interesting to all hockey people for about a million different reasons.
Also, when I write a story, if it involves the Devils, it gets tagged and shows up on the SBN team site, and my posts are getting in the way of their parade.
Wait till this year.
Something that strikes me as odd
Or perhaps ironic. I don’t know. Brain all wore out; no good no more.
But basically, if I was a Devils fan, I would have been deeply ambivalent about this deal. And I would have been ambivalent about it precisely because it seemed so out of character for the very man whose legacy is enshrined in the name of that blog.
On the one hand, getting Kovalchuk = good.
OTOH, having to cope with the consequences of this deal until almost the end of the next decade and giving one player $100 mil = not good. Plus Lou’s obvious discomfort with the deal, it being out of character for him and all.
The whole thing would have this sort of “I’m gonna hate myself in the morning” kind of feel to it for me.
So if someone from outside the fan base were to come in and say, “Y’know, I think the league has a basis for voiding the deal,” my reaction would be, “Really? Maybe it’s just as well.”
but they're not worried about any of that because they know he's going to retire in ten years.
they’re worried a little about the fact that his production is going to go something like 45, 55, 42, 35, 43, 30, 33, 28, 25, 22 if they’re lucky. i obviously just pulled those numbers out of my * (!!), but one 50 and a couple/three 40s, a handful of 30s and the rest 20s, is historically what’s expected.
Wait till this year.
It would provide the value of showing that the facts bear out what I'm saying and not what you're saying.
Which I can understand if it doesn’t meet with your standard of “value.”
Most of my post was explaining how you or your blog banned me because you or your blog chose to interpret the charge of “intellectual dishonesty” as a personal attack. It’s a personal attack along the lines of “you hit me.” Pointing out what you (or your moderator) did is not a personal attack. He could have responded to what I said, which was totally fair. But of course there was no response. Other than to pretend that to say, “hey that stunt you just pulled is completely not kosher” is on a par with “your mother wears army boots.”
Just so we’re clear. I’m not saying your mother wears army boots.
Wait till this year.
Are you seriously asserting that posters here attacked your bloggers in the same way that posters on ILWT went after Quisp?
Did any of us suggest your blog was written by a high schooler?
In Dinglebarn We Trust
Time limit? You're right, there is none.
Having now read only two of your posts, it is obvious that you are dealing with far more significant limitiations than mere time.
Quisp has been somewhat ambivalent, as I recall, about Kovalchuk. Actually, I am not totally sure of his view on Kovalchuk other than that he earlier today said Kovalchuk was the victim in all this when it was suggested that Kovi might get or should get fined. Quisp doesn’t dwell on Kovi, so although I read everything and remember damn near all of it, Quisp has made so few statements on the man himself that it clearly is not a focus.
Quisp has been working very hard to understand the CBA. He has taught all of us quite a bit, and as well his knowledge has evolved, as people respond and debate with him, plus all that while he has been very up front about posting with the caveat that his ideas are only as he understands them, and that he claims no authority. I don’t know what he might have said at your bleck- I mean blog- but if it ever did get to a point of anger I am sure it was provoked and deserving, as well as measured and appropriate in delivery.
As well, if as you just said, that Quisp accurately describes his “violations” above, then I am reminded of those who use freedom of speech to decry their lack of freedom in this country, while at their home country they ban dissidence in all forms.
In short, you’ve merely caught yourself up in a tautology, by saying that he deserved to be banned because he got banned for something he deserved. And of course, since what he did is not up on the site to be judged by anyone other than the original censor, we can only go by what you agreed was Quisp’s correct description.
From what Quisp said he did, the ban seems more like censorship of view than policing of content.
End Corporate Personhood.
by Player-X on Jul 26, 2010 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions 5 recs
It IS censorship
Pure and simple and Tom Stivali is an unreasonable ****. Oh, by the way, the word in the asterisk rhymes with “duck”.
by 88fingerslukee on Jul 27, 2010 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions
I'm not
I think the contract “should” be rejected. Not because I’m a Kings fan and hope that this can lead to Kovy coming to LA(still feel the same where I’d like to have him IF its at the right price and he wants to come here), but rather because the line needs to be drawn somewhere on these long term contracts and I think Kovy’s pushed the limit too far. If it gets approved what is to stop someone from pushing it a little further and then a little further. Even if Kovy ends up figuring out a different deal with the Devils, I want this contract to be rejected and punished to keep further contracts like this with the intent of getting around the salary cap from being signed.
NHLPA is waiting for what?
I wonder why they haven’t filed yet? I was certain they would have their brief done after the weekend and would file in the morning.
I know they have until 5:00 pm EST, but why wait?
The NJ fans heads would explode if the NHLPA doesn’t file today.
I still think they will grieve. I assumed that they’d wait to file until today in order to have more time to marshal their defense. We’ll see.
In Dinglebarn We Trust
I expect them to dispute, but as I've said, I can imagine their reasoning if they don't.
It depends on which action results in the most political damage. If they think the masses (the players I mean) aren’t really that “active,” then they are more likely to protect the big contracts. If they are afraid of a ground-swell of support for the “average” player who is paying out of pocket for these big contracts, then it becomes more likely they were decide not to fight this fight.
But I think they’ve taken this long because they’re trying to work that out, and because the document they submit has to contain their reasons.
Also, I keep thinking that there’s no head of the NHLPA, so there’s no one person whose career or public reputation is on the line if they do nothing. Bettman, for example, felt personally attacked by the kovalchuk contract (I believe). There’s no one person to take that on, at the NHLPA.
And the fact that supposedly Fehur (sp!) is “cooling” on the idea of taking the job is possibly a red flag. I mean, if he thought he could win this fight, wouldn’t he just jump in and be the hero?
Even he is waiting to see how it plays out.
And that may be freaking out the NHLPA interim whoevers.
All that said, they ought to dispute so as not to look like total fools.
Wait till this year.
Why not wait? They have until 5:00pm EST, so they are taking every bit of time they have to make sure they dot their “i” and cross their “t”. :)
Ever get the feeling we are on a collision course with reality?
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -- Benjamin Franklin
What if they wait too long...
…and they do forget to "dot their “i” and cross their "t"" and then they don’t have time to re-file.
Tallon found out the hard way that waiting too long can have terrible results. Just sayin’ :)
Great find, Niesy. Come back to us, Fro!
The Spirit of MeatTrain'10!
by DodgerBlueBalls on Jul 26, 2010 8:27 AM PDT up reply actions
We’ll give you lots of sweaters, and you can run down the street yelling “They’re so FLUFFY!!!”
In Dinglebarn We Trust
Google translator helps a bit with the interview with his agent.
And at what stage of negotiations with Ufa?
- Too long on any. Sasha has focused on “Los Angeles”. Over the past two days, club, in which our client played eight years as a particularly intensified. He became suddenly take an interest. Now Agent Frolova in North America, Dong-Min [Meehan, hee] has been working on signing a new contract.
It turns out Frosya, as his friends called him, wants to remain “king”?
- Probably, yeah (smiling). Once said talks with Russian clubs to stop. After all, it wants to see not one team CHL. But he is waiting for the end of the epic “Los Angeles”. And at the moment still unknown to what extent can be calculated by the contract. . By the way, of great interest to Frolov takes more and the New York Rangers. It is possible that Alexander will continue his career in New York. Super news! Incidentally, I will first spoke about this.
Oh, Sasha. We love you.
In Dinglebarn We Trust
Puck Daddy
Did everyone see this blog by Puck Daddy:
http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy;ylt=Ar9nEI2PuVsr.EvQzL9YTZ.ppJ4
Every source I’ve spoken to expects the NHL to take a whuppin’ in arbitration. But one sports law pundit breaks down the cases for the NHL and the NHLPA, and thinks it might be a tough case for the Devils to win.
I’m so tired of hearing about “sources”. Are these other players, GMs and agents or from ILWT? Of course they would side with the NHLPA on this fight. Why not talk to arbitrators and lawyers? Notice the only lawyer in the article thinks that the fight could go either way.
that's funny
The general impression I’ve gathered from all around, everything I’ve read, save for Devil’s fans, is that the contract is bogus. I can’t imagine what these “sources” of his are and it’s really lame and disingenuous to march them out to support your position without any validation or transparency. Regardless of his “sources” all the stuff I’ve read/heard from contract and sports lawyer, people who would actual know something about this type of situation, seems to indicate that the NHL does have a good chance of sustaining their position.
by -J on Jul 26, 2010 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions
all the stuff I’ve read/heard from contract and sports lawyer, people who would actual know something about this type of situation, seems to indicate that the NHL does have a good chance of sustaining their position.
Which is why those who are not Devil’s fans are saying it could go either way. It’s just an interesting situation to watch. Granted it’s the only hockey situation going on this summer. :)
Ever get the feeling we are on a collision course with reality?
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -- Benjamin Franklin
I can't say i hate the situation precisely for that reason
normally this time of year, there’s absolutely nothing go on in hockey. At least this gives us something hockey-related to follow.
Tick Tock, on the clock...
…the waiting is the hardest part.
nhlpa files grievance...
according to dregster…it’s on…
in 1984, i was hospitalized for approaching perfection....
Dunn dunnn dunnnnnnnnn!
Wonder how they will agree upon an arbitrator. Not that we will get any leaks on that!
In Dinglebarn We Trust
I haven’t really decided which way I want the coin to land on this one. Is there a way they can both lose? :)
Ever get the feeling we are on a collision course with reality?
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -- Benjamin Franklin
I still think the Devils could win this and come to regret this contract. It wasn’t Lou’s idea. But the whole process is fascinating all the same.
In Dinglebarn We Trust
least they didn’t make us wait all day (considering it’s only 10:30am here on the west coast)
Ever get the feeling we are on a collision course with reality?
"They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty or security" -- Benjamin Franklin
i would have loved to be the process server on that delivery…
in 1984, i was hospitalized for approaching perfection....
Matter of fact. "Dorn Platz Properties" in Pasadena, beware. I am coming for you RIGHT NOW.
End Corporate Personhood.
the funny thing about "finding" an arbitrator/arbiter is
everyone keeps saying things like, “it could take months,” but I don’t see anywhere in the CBA where it says that’s the case. I’m being polite actually. The CBA specifically says that once the NHLPA gives notice that it’s disputing, they may take an additional 24 hours to notify the arbitrator, after which there will be a ruling from the arb in 48 hours.
there is no provision for “finding an arbitrator.” I suppose the league and the NHLPA could agree in writing to take extra time or something.
but the letter of the CBA says “shall.” there is no provision for “what if they forgot to have an arbiter ready?” maybe that’s part of what they were dealing with this weekend.
Wait till this year.
The rule for finding an arbitrator is in 48.5:
(a) There shall be one System Arbitrator, appointed jointly by the parties, who
shall serve for the duration of this Agreement; provided, however, that on February 1,
2007 and on each successive February 1, either party may discharge the System
Arbitrator by serving written notice upon him and upon the other party by that date. The
parties shall thereupon agree upon a successor System Arbitrator within the following
sixty (60) days. Should the parties fail timely to agree upon said successor, each shall
immediately designate the Dean of either a school of law or business and said two Deans
shall, within sixty (60) days, jointly appoint a successor who satisfies the requirements of
subparagraph (b) below.
(b) The System Arbitrator to be appointed hereunder shall be an attorney with
significant experience with matters requiring financial sophistication and
business/accounting expertise and as an arbitrator or judge or other decider of contested
proceedings.
Honor is no substitute for victory.
True, except I don’t believe they actually did appoint a new System Arbitrator. I think we’re in the “fail to timely agree” section, so each side needs to appoint a Dean and have the two Deans select an arbitrator, which could, in theory, take two months.
Honor is no substitute for victory.
no no no
after they fail they have to get two deans IMMEDIATELY and the deans pick the arb
Wait till this year.
said two Deans shall, within sixty (60) days, jointly appoint a successor
They pick the Deans immediately. The Deans have up to 60 days to appoint the System Arbitrator.
Honor is no substitute for victory.
feb 1 plus 60 = apr 1 approx plus 60 equals june 1 approx
so there has to be one, period. this was my original point. there is no “oh shit we blew that off, didn’t we?”
Wait till this year.
I think this is the "oh shit we blew that off" admission
Honor is no substitute for victory.
i guess that’s the key – can they agree on someone…and did they already discuss this over the weekend…(?)
i know there’s suppose to be proforma, but maybe there was a lil’ preemption by both parties, knowing in advance that there might be difficulties in agreeing on a person…
in 1984, i was hospitalized for approaching perfection....
Hang on
the 60 days has passed. the league and the NHLPA can not pick an arb now. they havr to pick deans of law schools who then pick the arb. and that should have been done on apr 1, when the 60 days expired. bunch of idiots if they didn’t do this.
Wait till this year.
“System arbitrator? We don’t need no stinkin’ system arbitrator. Nobody’d be stupid enough to try to circumvent our CBA. Especially not that genius Lou that helped write the thing.”
Yeah, that sounds about par for the current level of planning in the NHL head office.
Honor is no substitute for victory.
quisp is clutch…
…and clutch is everything…
thank you..!
in 1984, i was hospitalized for approaching perfection....
I am really glad you are here now, off the freakin' wall like it should be, man. Rock on.
End Corporate Personhood.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Jewels From The Crown
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
