17to85

revenue sharing... just an excuse for Toronto and Hamilton to never get their own **** together and leech off the strong teams some more.

Agreed...but what do you expect from this team? Do you think that will still roll over and die? Or battled hard for 3 quarters and then roll over and die? Or actually have the personnel in place to deal with adversity and possibly overcome it? I expect what I said, battle from start to finish week in and week out. I think O'Shea is the kind of coach that can get a team to buy in like that. As for how well they'll do I have no idea but if they are playing hard all the time it'll work itself out eventually.

But again, does it matter how you find them if you find new players to the CFL who can play? You can't tell me that Mack and Moll didn't bring in rookies who were good. Hell that was ultimately their downfall. They found good rookies, but their teams lacked experience. I think you're just bitching for the sake of bitching and you love to completely trash the last management for anything whether it's valid or not.

After watching the team roll over and die at the first sign of adversity last season I just want to see a team that battles hard from start to finish week in and week out.

Were we really losing because the rookie americans weren't good enough though? I thought you guys all liked to point to lack of veterans and NIs as the big problem? Too much blind hatred going on. Maybe too much blind love, eh? We've been over this before, I only bring it up when you guys go on your hate tangents. I am simply providing balance to the discussion.

It really is a shame it's such a nonstarter to even talk about changing things. It's a broken system and things could be so much better, but it's political suicide to even try.

Were we really losing because the rookie americans weren't good enough though? I thought you guys all liked to point to lack of veterans and NIs as the big problem? Too much blind hatred going on.

is it boring hockey because he coaches a boring way or was he coaching the only way he could because he didn't get much in the way of high end forwards?

Watching Swaggerville in 2012 was highly entertaining, watching staggerville last year was the exact opposite. A team playing good football is entertaining, a team with a defense that gets beat regularly is not entertaining. They're taking a big gamble with Etch, I hope it pays off but if it doesn't things will not be entertaining no matter what kind of whacky **** he tries to get them to play.

he is a 6'3 centre taken 2nd overall in a draft with some very very good players at the top end. Taken ahead of Jonathan Drouin, ahead of Seth Jones... the kid has everything you want in a centre, wingers don't get traded for guys like that, especially when the picks exchanged so heavily favour Winnipeg as well.

When the best forward he's had in Nashville is David Legwand making the playoffs is a pretty damned good accomplishment. Nashville with Trotz there was a goaltending and defenseman factory though, that's a lot to do with the coaching going on there.

It guarantees that his opponents will be 100% focussed on game day. Remember how every defender in the CFL wanted nothing more than to shut down Ricky Williams when he came up here? I see this working out the same way. Lots of motivation for players to step up and take the "star" down a peg.

To me it's rely too much on players knowing what all of their team mates are going to do. If it pays off then yeah it's good but you never have everyone on absolutely the same page like that and someone always thinks the game a little bit differently and it creates issues. I'd rather see some firm structure so that guys have an easier time adjusting to one another.

you don't like coaches who get a ton out of crappy rosters?

Florida might have to add another player, maybe a prospect like mike matheson or even a bottom 6 like quinton howden or drew shore. Shore i think would fit in nicely with the bottom 6 here. Is there room on the top 6 here for barkov?

No one is going to touch reserve issues. As soon as the idea of opening up the constitution comes around politicians run for the hills because it's too much work and going to piss off too many people.

Gretzky was traded for money cause Pocklington was broke, Roy demanded a trade to get away from a coach he didn't like... That's really the point here. You don't often see teams trading players unless the relationship between the two sours and that makes it hard to get full value cause the buyer is reluctant to give up a lot. This whole idea that they can just trade Kane for big value is a fallacy because like it or not he does have some question marks with his attitude and that would give the perception they're moving a problem player.

Players without issues rarely get traded these days, it's really ******* hard to make good hockey trades anymore, that's why I keep asking it.

If I recall Chretien used to love it when his opponents made fun of his face. He always said if they have to resort to that they got nothing else.

Well it's hard to say, the Oilers would love some more size on their wings and Kane provides that. I don't like the move from an Oilers standpoint in terms of straight up value because I think Eberle is a better player without the attitude question marks, but if they get desperate to add a bit more beef might be something that could come to pass.

just because they knew they'd lose players doesn't mean they're happy about it. You know a GM anywhere who is happy to lose players for nothing just so an opponent can get stronger? No I guarantee no one is going to be looking to help Ottawa after they lost people to an expansion draft.

If he's so good why are you trading him? Jets fans are just stupid. I've seen them turn up their noses at even the thought of Eberle for Kane. Despite the fact that Eberle out produces him consistently.

ok but then they're down a centre and a defenseman that they need to replace... That's not exactly a deep and stacked playoff team there, they got lots of issues of there own and dealing quantity doesn't seem like the best thing for them to do.

If he was named Brett Smith rather than Brett Cameron I guarantee no one would have batted an eye when he was cut.

which team is going to give you a top 6 forward + for a top 6 forward though? If you want 2 or 3 pieces for Kane they are going to be lesser pieces. The best you could hope to get for Kane is a one for one swap with a guy on a similar level who has worn out his welcome on another team.