Positive NHL Thoughts

Positive NHL Thoughts

Proving once again why it is sometimes better to keep players around based on personality, Adam Burish has given Hawks fans a reason to rejoyce. Among the talks of deals, proposals, pointing fingers and the lack of hockey, Burish decided to make something positive happen. For Burish, it was simple: nothing going on right now, so why not get a bunch of players together, including 2010 Cup teammates, play a game and do it for charity?

Missing the good old days, Burish formulated a great plan to bring everybody back for a game. "Most of the 2010 Blackhawks and other players around the league, including Bobby Ryan, Ryan Suter and Jack Johnson, will play in the Champs for Charity exhibition game on Oct. 26 at AllState Arena. Proceeds from the game will benefit the Ronald McDonald House Charities of Chicagoland & Northwest Indiana" (CSN).

The list of Hawks showing up for this exhibition game includes Burish, Jonathan Toews, Patrick Sharp, Andrew Ladd, Ben Eager, Brian Campbell, Dave Bolland, Jake Dowell, James Wisniewski, John Madden, Troy Brouwer and Kris Versteeg. This, and the new movement in the CBA talks have prompted Kane to put a European contract on hold, so Patrick will most likely be in attendance as well. The list also includes a native by the name of Mike Brown, a player I had the experience of playing with during my younger years.

All in all, a great idea, and with the date being set one the day before my birthday, a likely event for myself to attend.

So, how about those CBA negotiations? Without getting into specifics, and maybe you already have them, the owners came up with a contract that seemed to be pretty fair on the surface, and even included a full 82 game season, along with a 50-50 split and many other details I do not care to get into.

My reaction; there will be hockey soon, and the team owners are getting pressure from other business owners. Looking at the details made it hard to see how the players could avoid signing, especially given that the real war has been seemingly one focused on PR. However, the NHLPA did not exactly accept it with arms wide open, and a recent meeting ended in surprisingly negative ways. But, even though the conversations might still stink of negativity, I am optimistic about the near future and starting to think more positively about hockey. Of course, I am also trying to ignore the finger pointing and name calling going on at the moment.

The owners have succeeded in grabbing a few PR wins and in the end, their new offer is mostly fair, while serving to bring both sides closer. We shall resume our waiting, but now we can do it with the prospects of having the guys back at the UC for a night, and of a full NHL season maybe only weeks away.

Filed under: Uncategorized


Leave a comment
  • It has been almost surreal to watch this drama unfold in the midst of an election. The politicking by both the NHL and NHLPA are nearly as aggravating to watch as political ads. Everything these days is about smear and nothing about substance. It's kind of funny that both sides are waging such a PR campaign to us. Does what we think matter to them even a tiny bit? At some point, it's kind of like me buying a homeless guy a bottle of booze just to make him sit there and listen to me bitch about something that means nothing to him for a hour or so. It means nothing if he agrees with me.

    Sure wish I could see that game.

  • In reply to VegasHawksFan:

    I agree Vegas,
    And, I think it is the smear with a lack of substance that is of most importance. I engaged into a conversation of politics recently with a person whom I did not agree with. I am thinking of posting that conversation on this blog since everything is about politics now anyway. Why avoid it.

    The most striking realization to me was not the details of the argument, rather that Amercians are becoming increasingly bad at having these conversation in general. No one listens, no one even knows what they are even talking about. It seems that we argue just to argue, and we aren't any good at it. I find myself shocked at lack of information a person has on a given subject and how hard they are willing to fight for that opinion. Then, when presented with accurate information (that proves their point wrong), they just label it a lie and keep going as if nothing of importance was even said.

    Things may not always be so black and white, but sometimes they are. You can argue that 2+2=5 as long and as hard as you like, but I am not a liar, nor a crazy person for suggesting that it equals 4. At a time when such a vast amount of information is at our fingertips, how are people so under informed? And, why are we so bad at seeing the other side when it is actually gray?

    Look for me to post my conversation in the next day or so.

  • "At a time when such a vast amount of information is at our fingertips, how are people so under informed?"

    I think the question sort of answers itself. With the amount of information out there on the internet or on cable TV, you can find an enormity of people who will agree with whatever viewpoint you have. I just did a quick search for the words "Obama lies" and "Romney lies" and found scores of partisan links that describe their "treason" in great detail. All the talk these last couple weeks is about low information voters, but I say it's less about information and much more about inability to think critically about the information presented.

  • Maybe you've all seen it already... Kane's first goal in the Swiss league is on youtube.


  • In reply to iplagitr:

    That goal doesn't happen on the smaller NHL ice.

  • In reply to beaverwarrior:


Leave a comment