Jump to content

SwampD

Member
  • Posts

    30,898
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SwampD

  1. I always wondered how the complaint even stood a chance in court.  How can we require a business to sell a specific product.  If you really like yellow skittles but none of the other ones, should they be forced to sell you only the 7 or 8 that are in a bag for a lower price?  I see that they settled and it didn't actually come down to being forced to sell a specific product, but the whole thing seemed a bit strange to me.

    Totally agree. It's weird.

  2. The lawsuit argued that the league and broadcasters were bundling.  As a GameCenter or Center Ice customer, you couldn't pay to watch only one team, you were forced to pay to receive the whole league at a higher rate.  It also argued that the NHL and broadcasters purposefully blacked out games out-of-market (for instance, you can get the MSG channel lots of places, like California, but it won't show you the Sabres/Rangers/Islanders/Devils games there without GameCenter or Center Ice).  This was to force the purchase of GameCenter or Center Ice.  The NHL and broadcasters settled out of court.  This writeup sumarizes.

     

    In reality, as this opinion states, the plaintiffs didn't ask for very much in the settlement, and it was an easy decision for the NHL settle.  The NHL must offer a single team version of GameCenter for at least 20% cheaper than full CenterIce.  They will also offer all packages discounted about 17% for 2015-16 only.  The league will make a single team version of Center Ice available, but won't mandate that the providers carry it.

     

    Important: local blackouts will still apply (ie, you can't watch Sabres games in the Sabres market on GameCenter or Center Ice).  So it doesn't make sense to purchase a single-team option if you live in-market, only really for out-of-market viewers.

     

    If you enjoy reading law documents, the settlement is here.

    I know all that (well, kinda). I still don't get it. Does any other league offer ala carte and do people really complain about fifty bucks? For what you get for that extra money, it's totally worth it.

     

    I'll still buy the whole package. The 20% discount will be nice, but whatever, I'll still buy it after the five years are up and they raise the price a $100. It'll still be worth it.

     

    I know I said it in another thread, but I'll say it again, I really need to start complaining more.

  3. My company has literally dozens of conference rooms set up for conferences where there are mics in the ceiling that pick up talking from the audience. It's not rocket surgery.

    It wasn't a separate feed though. Feeding crowd mics into the arena's PA would have been colossally bad.

  4. I'm talking Boston on a whole.....

     

    Chara/Krug/Seidenberg/McQuaid

     

    Bogosian/Ristolainen/Oduya/Gorges

     

    I'm being a nice guy and throwing Oduya in there......and I'd still take each of Boston's 4 over the others for next year.

     

    Bergeron/Krejci/Kelly/Talbot

     

    ORiley/Eichel/Girgensons/Larsson

     

    Next year.....Boston all the way....5 years from now?

     

    Rask

     

    Lehrner

     

    Ummm....yeah.........

     

    And Boston picked up 3 1st round picks in the process......

     

     

    I'm willing to make a MAJOR bet Boston finishes ahead of the Sabres in the standings this year. Beyond money........a true humiliation or something of the sort.

    I would not take that bet.

  5. I like the analogy but the original post said he would play a major role in a Cup run and unless you think a 3rd or 4th defenseman can play a major role, it doesn't hold up. Like you said, he might be worth more then some of the Sabres "D" but he's a depreciating asset and worse, a liability if forced to play too pair minutes

    The first and second pairings play a major roll. He would most likely be on a PP unit, as well. Even with the fog of gin lifted this morning I still see it happening.

  6. Interesting. Why, when he was playing against his peers and has posted better performances against men?

    Or just haven't seen him play much?

    I don't think he had any peers in Boston. He was that whole team.

     

    He was ready to make a play every time he had the puck on his stick in the scrimmage, and I don't think he was really even trying. When he can feed the puck to guys that can actually catch the pass and maybe even make a play themselves, we're going to see just how good he really is.

  7. This assertion disgusts me. After one scrimmage, a day after they gassed these kids, you are going to question his effort?

    Depending on who he is matched up with, I can see him being one of the league's leaders in assists next year. I am more hopeful about him after that scrimmage than I have been up to this point.

  8. I don't think it's planned as a money maker. Wouldn't the people working already be employed by the Sabres?

    That's kinda my point. For those complaining about not being able to see the game, that it's a slap in the face or this is about money,... c'mon. My gin and tonic will taste just as tasty, sitting on my back deck, and not watching the game on this beautiful summer day.

×
×
  • Create New...