POLL: When will the NHL lockout end?

shabbs wrote:A Jan. 1st start could see a season that is close to 60 games. I think they suggested 56 games or something could be done.

A 48-game season just seems so odd and more like a cash grab than anything else.

How about a 29-game season... each team plays each other once. What a joke that would be.

Ridiculous frustration at the lockout aside, I'd be happy with pretty much any NHL hockey. That said, if it gets to a point where a 48 game season isn't possible, that's when Bettman just cans the entire season. 48 games is decent enough, I think.

The obvious problem with a short season is that any injury to an important player can pretty much seal your fate. Like if Spezza goes down early on…it could get ugly. Slow starts would also be fatal. But this applies evenly to every team, so you just gotta hope for the best.

Saw someone propose this the other day, an end to the lockout in a week:

Mon: Training Camp
Tue: Regular Season
Wed: All Star Game
Thu: Playoffs
Fri: Parade

Done.

shabbs wrote:A Jan. 1st start could see a season that is close to 60 games. I think they suggested 56 games or something could be done.

A 48-game season just seems so odd and more like a cash grab than anything else.

How about a 29-game season... each team plays each other once. What a joke that would be.

A round-robin, in other words.

shabbs wrote:A Jan. 1st start could see a season that is close to 60 games. I think they suggested 56 games or something could be done.

A 48-game season just seems so odd and more like a cash grab than anything else.

How about a 29-game season... each team plays each other once. What a joke that would be.

I doubt it would just be a cash grab. I just can't see them doing that to the best fans in the world.

48 was only mentioned as a drop-dead number because that's how many games they played in the shortened season. It's just precedent. They've done 48 games in the past so I guess they couldn't really say that they are not willing to play anything less than, say, 50 games.

They make most of their profits from the ASG, Winter Classic, Heritage game and the playoffs (when players don't get paid). Only 16 teams make a dime from the post-season, and the other "cash grab" events are gone.

I think a shortened season, right now, is for salvaging the league and future revenues (appeasing the fans, sponsors, NBC) and not about making money for the owners.

Gary Bettman himself said that they have no interest in doing anything less than a 48-game season in order to maintain the integrity of the game, that's where this 48-game deadline is coming from. So he's putting a line in the sand there in some way.

As far as the integrity of the game, it's out the window with all this lockout crap fuckyouverymuch NHL and NHLPA.

I'm sure they have a drop dead date in their mind now... doing the math on a 48 game season should be pretty easy. But who knows, they may go less.

He could have also arbitrarily said 50, but because they had already played a 48-game season (in a 30-team league) they had set the precedent. I'm pretty sure saying 60 games and no less would have produced the pressure to make a deal sooner, but that could have been viewed as a bit of an empty threat given that they already played a 48-game season.

IMO if talks are going nowhere.. just like todays.... then the season will be cancelled before Jan 10th.

There were no actual talks today, so they didn't go nowhere.

Big Ev wrote:There were no actual talks today, so they didn't go nowhere.

So...you're sayin' there's a chance!!!!!!!!!!!