gain for taking the owner's side. But what does he gain? Are the owners going to give him a big fat cheque because he disagreed with the PA strategy? And Recchi didn't actually side with the owners. It's not like he said one side is right or wrong. I guess the PA has a problem because a) he doesn't agree with their strategy and b) former player doesn't trash the owners like the guys who still depend on those owners to sign their paycheques. I think putting as few layers in between constituents and their leadership structure as possible leaves the power where it needs to be -- in the players hands. There are 30 reps who can demand anything they want at any time. If there's anything Fehr and Miller proved in baseball it's that this is precisely the case. See, these guys just don't make sense. For one, how was Recchi's comment uninformed? What exactly did Recchi say that would suggest that he wasn't making use of the information available to form and express his opinion? Phillips, do you know what an uninformed answer/opinon is? His entire response seems to heavily draw on his own experience of being in the EXACT same position. Does that sound like not using information to form your opinion? And because Recchi doesn't agree with the PA strategy, they have to undermine his position as though it can't be objective. Why would he try to take the owners side just because he wants