HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ab870@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Eric Rickin)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Ok, draft is over... BUT!
Date: 11 Apr 92 22:46:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: usenet.1992Apr11.224632.20663
Reply-To: ab870@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Eric Rickin)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)


In a previous article, ab870@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Eric Rickin) says:

>
>How are they going to get times rescheduled for the playoff games?  I
>mean, the Bulls will be in the playoffs (until they play Cleveland!),
>which is going to be a long time.  Are the Sixers in?  That poses a
>problem for Philly.  How about the Knicks and the Rangers?
>-- 
>ab870@cleveland.freenet.edu (Eric Rickin) or bu072@gnh-bauhaus.cts.com
>Slap and Tickle... The Canadian National Sport
>University of Michigan: Class of 1996
>

Hehe, a little NHLPA freudian slip there!

Anywya, THN is on top of things.  All this week, my THN said, "Judgement
Day," and that was during the strike.  Today, when I got my THn, it
said, "Strike", and it is over now.
-- 
ab870@cleveland.freenet.edu (Eric Rickin) or bu072@gnh-bauhaus.cts.com
Slap and Tickle... The Canadian National Sport
University of Michigan: Class of 1996
From: cs902159@ariel.yorku.ca (DAVID A LISOGURSKI)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Stanley Cup 1992
Date: 10 Apr 92 04:04:53 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: York University, Toronto, Canada

Assuming there will be no NHL playoffs this season, I say we count the
AHL playoffs as the real games, but we look at the teams as the NHL
teams they represent.

For example, if Fredericton was to play Cape Breton, and Fredericton
wins (I don't know if that's possible - I don't know the divisions),
we could say Montreal beat Edmonton for the Stanley Cup.

At least that gives us SOMETHING to cheer about.

--Dave

PS. Go Fredericton!!!!!!   :-)
From: Steven_Boey@mindlink.bc.ca (Steven Boey)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: BURE... - Michigan is not EASTERN.
Date: 7 Apr 92 00:03:16 GMT
Article-I.D.: mindlink.11284
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada

Bure should be strongly considered for the Calder mainly because 60 games is
most of the season and whoever can get 31 goals in 60 games as a rookie while
at the same time be one of the most exciting players in the league is one heck
of an achievement!!.
From: chuq@Apple.COM (Chuq Von Rospach)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Strike and Other Thoughts
Date: 13 Apr 92 05:14:37 GMT
Organization: I is a writur

nhmas@gauss.med.harvard.edu (Mark Shneyder 432-4219) writes:

>The season is over.

Boy. I'm glad you told me that. I can stop worrying. Now, why don't you go
tell the league? They were all playing tonight. Unfortunate to know none of
that counted.

-- 
            Chuq "IMHO" Von Rospach, Enterprise Products Support
            chuq@apple.com | GEnie:CHUQ & MAC.BIGOT | ALink:CHUQ
               Book Reviewer, Amazing Stories =+= Member, SFWA
           Editor, OtherRealms =+= #include <standard/disclaimer.h>

And lo, though I travel through the valley of the archetypes, I shall fear
no evil, for I know that the author can't kill me off for at least another
150 pages, no matter how stupid or trite I become, or he ruins the book.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
From: ARBOGASTW@vaxb.gbus.virginia.edu (Warren Arbogast)
Subject: Re: What the world needs now is an AMERICAN TV CONTRACT.
Organization: Darden Center, University of Virginia
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 15:48:48 GMT

In article <allan.702679696@kitscoty> allan@cs.UAlberta.CA (Allan Sullivan) writes:
>ARBOGASTW@vaxb.gbus.virginia.edu (Warren Arbogast) writes:

>>In article <allan.702362807@so-heart-rv> allan@cs.UAlberta.CA (Allan Sullivan) writes:

>Well, how's this for a senario? Team X has a star player (lets call him
>Wendel Clarke ;-) Team Y knows that Wendel is a good player, and they want
>to neutralize him. So they take an 'expendible' player, and get him to
>instigate a fight. Both players get thrown out, but who looses
>more? I'd say Team X. Sure, the player on Team X could just not fight,
>but when the other player is going out of his way to try to injure him,
>and the ref doesn't see it, he should be allowed to do something.

>Sure, a hypothetical situation I know. After all, no player in the NHL
>would go out of his way to deliberately hurt another player. (And all
>those incidents Ulf Samuelson was involved in were just accidents.)
>Sarcasm intended.

>I also base my opinion on a friend of mine, who played hockey first
>with the OHL (Junior A), where fighting is allowed, and then University
>Hockey, where fighting is not allowed. (I think the player gets suspended
>for the season if he fights.) His observation? A lot of players at
>the University level were careless with their sticks, because they knew
>that the other players were powerless to do anything about it. If
>fighting were allowed at the University level, then the players could
>quickly end the careless use of sticks right then and there.

If 560 players can get together on this strike thing, why in the world, as 
some of the best athletes in the world, can't they get together and protect 
their bodies?  Your suggesstion that they need a rule to protect themselves 
from beating each other with bare hands is like the owners claim 
that they need rules to prtect themselves from themselves.  

Suppose your hypothetical situation takes place in an NFL game.  What if a 
big linebacker fights a quarterback.  You could argue one team looses more 
IF THE FIGHT IS SO OUT OF HAND THAT THE SITUATION IS BEYOND OFFSETTING 
PENALTIES.  That's unfortunate.  But not nearly as unfortunate as putting in 
rules simply because players can't control themselves.

The heat of the moment is one thing.  That's where you call an offsetting 
penalty.  Tie Domi and Bob Probert are quite another thing.

And, yes fans may APPEAR to like seeing that stuff at a game... or is it 
that such a sight is like an accident on the side of the road.  People stop 
to look at it, but is that why they are really on the road.  I've heard 
people go to auto races to see accidents...I'm sure there are some who do, 
but the majority?

When I say ban fighting, what I'm really saying is that the league 
should state that it will control fighting like all self-respecting sports 
do.  Even boxing lets the athletes wear padded gloves.
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
From: farenebt@craft.camp.clarkson.edu (Big Bri)
Subject: Re: NCAA Officiating
Organization: Clarkson University
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 17:24:40 GMT

S1.JON@isumvs.iastate.edu (Jon Wells) writes:


>Sure, let's turn college hockey into the pre-1980's NHL with a brawl a
>period and the officials needing body armor just to get to the locker
>room. How wonderful. That is certainly the way to encourage good officials
>to try the college game. Call him a name, perhaps. Swing a stick at him,
>no way!

>Try swinging a stick or throwing a punch at a policeman and see what happens...
>the ref is hockey's equivalent of a policeman (or policewoman, if you prefer).
>The UW players have every right to say he called a lousy game. That's their
>opinion. Saying is one thing, brandishing sticks is another. You can't
>brandish a stick against a player, so why should you be able to do so against
>an official?

>The ref MAY have called a poor game in some people's opinions. It is illegal
>to swing a stick at a player who can fight back, why should it be legal to do
>so against an official, who can't fight back?

>Amen to that!

One suggestion Jon, this is word for word the exact same posting I posted
except the Amen to that! One uses >'s to indicate quoted material. And
no >'s to indicate stuff you say.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
BRI FARENELL			"It's a great day for hockey" 
CLARKSON '95			   --Bob Johnson 1931-1991 
FARENEBT@CRAFT.CAMP.CLARKSON.EDU

GO ADIRONDACK RED WINGS! 	CALDER CUP CHAMPS: 1981 1986 1989
From: scooter@hirgon.hw.stratus.com (Scott Jeffrey)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Kings vs. Canucks
Date: 17 Apr 92 20:15:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: transfer.2304
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Apr16.184401.12628@u.washington.edu>, aranta@milton.u.washington.edu (Aaron Ranta) writes:
> In article <1992Apr16.162710.29874@mprgate.mpr.ca> harrison@mprgate.mpr.ca (Jeff Harrison) writes:
> >
> >- NAH NAH NAH NAHHH    NAH NAH NAHH NAHHHHHH  WINNNNN EEEEE PEEEEEEGGGG
> >  GOOOOOODDD BYYYYYEEEE (repeat chorus 20 times)
> >
> 
> Hey, heh.  I have the Canucks version of that song from the '82 playoff run
> on a record single ( anyone remember these? ) It has a picture of good old
> King Richard on the sleeve, and brings back memories galore.
> 
> I think it's time we pulled it out of hiatus and tossed it on the turntable.

	This reminds me of a 45 I have kicking around somewhere:  I got it
at a Nordiques game when they were still in the WHA.  Translated, it goes
something like: 
	"...Those guys there,
	<something, something>
	The Nordiques
	Are our own team. 

	Game after game
	Season after season
	We fans all go out
	To applaud the action..."

scooter
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
From: snichols@adobe.com (Sherri Nichols)
Subject: Re: Dear Sherri
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 15:51:39 GMT

In article <28370022@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM> cadams@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM (Chris Adams) writes:
>I don't believe that the NHL draft is completely random any more than I
>think that Mario Lemieux,  Eric Lindros, Owen Nolan,  Trevor Linden etc.
>etc are total flukes (I know that Eric is "unproven" but does anyone
>want to bet against him?).

There are unquestionably players like Lemieux for whom it is obvious to the
worst team at evaluating players that you should draft him first overall,
and for whom the team won't have to develop him.  Those players are the
exception, not the rule.  The same year the Pens drafted Lemieux in the
first round, they also drafted Doug Bodger (who turned out reasonably), and
Roger Belanger, who didn't.  Note that the Pens managed to stockpile three
first round picks to increase their access to the top players.

>I think that I mentioned that any reply sounding like "Gee, if all the
>rich teams already have all the talent they need then the poor teams can
>have their pick of the leftovers!" would not be well received.  This is
>so silly it doesn't really justify a reply.  LA Kings: "Gee that Lindros
>sure looks good but we already have 20 good players".  Yah sure.

The point is, if they sign Lindros, they have to let one of those 20 good
players they already have go.  

>>I don't ever think in terms of whether a city "should" or "should not" have
>>a team.  It doesn't make sense to me; cities don't "deserve" teams or not
>>"deserve" teams.  
>
>Thats fine,  but perhaps it is necessary to structure the league so that
>more than a few cities can have teams that can compete.  Lets face it -
>it's more fun that way.

I don't disagree.  However, what restructuring are you proposing?

Sherri Nichols
snichols@adobe.com
From: cadams@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM (Chris Adams)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Most popular athletes
Date: 14 Apr 92 23:16:26 GMT
Organization: HP Stanford Park - Palo Alto, CA

San Jose:
   Pat Falloon is most popular among hockey fans.  The SJ Sharks logo is
   the most popular logo around here.  However, most people who wear the
   logo don't even know the players.  The most popular players would
   still be drawn from the SF 49ers/Giants or Oakland A's or Golden
   State Warriors.  Chris Mullen of the Warriors is definitely up there.
   Actually Falloon has been poor at dealing with the public.  There
   have been a couple of times where he didn't show up for autograph
   sessions when kids had been waiting for hours to see him.  

Vancouver:
   Trevor Linden definitely belongs on this list.  Pavel Bure was an
   excellent choice.  I don't live in Vancouver anymore but friends send
   me Canucks related clippings from newspapers and it seems that Pavel
   Bure isn't just a Russian Hockey star but a public relations star
   too.  Apparently Bure is great with fans,  particullarly kids.  It
   seems that the language barrier has not limited Bure.
From: bsk@acsu.buffalo.edu (Brian S. Kazmierczak)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Playoff Scheduling (was: Re: Ok, draft is over... BUT!)
Date: 11 Apr 92 19:24:36 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <1992Apr11.131218.26125@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> ab870@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Eric Rickin) writes:
>How are they going to get times rescheduled for the playoff games?  I
>mean, the Bulls will be in the playoffs (until they play Cleveland!),
>which is going to be a long time.  Are the Sixers in?  That poses a
>problem for Philly.  How about the Knicks and the Rangers?
>-- 

The '76ers are quite a ways from the playoffs, I believe. 

My guess would be that they would schedule the games on the same days they
had them originally. For example, perhaps they had game 5 of the first
round scheduled for a certain day. Well, game ONE would be scheduled at 
this time instead. By the time the final round comes about, there would
be only 2 teams. and since one will be the Sabres, and there is nothing
else that really happens at the Aud, there will be no problem ;)

But seriously, the contract that was rejected and was supposed to end the
season Thursday included a clause where the season would end by early June.
From what I understand, the fact that there was a Democratic convention in
MSG in June and the success of the Rangers this season had something to do
with that.


>ab870@cleveland.freenet.edu (Eric Rickin) or bu072@gnh-bauhaus.cts.com
>Slap and Tickle... The Canadian National Sport
>University of Michigan: Class of 1996


Brian
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Salary Cap questions
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 23:18:17 GMT

In article <AdsRGqO00iV103WF9P@andrew.cmu.edu> am2x+@andrew.cmu.edu (Anna Matyas) writes:
>
>Thanks for the answers, Gerald.  Of course more questions have
>surfaced now!
>
>>I think gross ticket revenue, and gross television revenue, plus perhaps
>>a few other thinks go into the defined revenue for determining the
>>salary cap.  Players are entitled to a specified portion of this
>
>*Does this mean that every team has a different cap?  In a way, that
> seems fair, but it also doesn't seem to do much for parity.  But was
> the NBA looking for parity to begin with?  (I hate that word about as
> much as "politically correct.")
>

The teams share a good deal of revenue, so the established teams all
have the same cap...the expansion teams salary cap and floor may be
phased in.

>>> the beginning of each season for more money?  Are there a lot of demands
>>> to be traded?
>> 
>>They have free agency...a player just has to play out his contract and
>>go elsewhere...there is no need to demand to be traded.
>
>*I was thinking in terms of players being unhappy; e.g., LaFontaine in
> New York; Tocchet in Philadelphia.  If the NHL had a cap and the teams
> that had a need for these players couldn't afford them it seems that
> everyone loses.  Maybe I'm not looking at this the right way.
>

Most teams will have room under the salary cap...or certainly the
less successful ones with fewer good players.  The salary cap is
based on gross league revenues...it guarentees that players as
a whole will receive a fair share of the money.  But with a salary
cap should come free agency, which means the player is free to move
when he fulfills his contractual obligations.

>*How did this come about in the NBA?  Was it due to spiraling costs and
> player salaries?  I assume the players association and owners had to
> agree to this?  Or is the governance of the NBA different? I have a hard
> time seeing how players could be happy with this situation.  Was the
> NBA in financial trouble at some point?
>

The league was losing big money, was hardly ever on television, playing to
half filled arenas, had a bad public reputation because of players with
drug problems...                               

Gerald
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
From: golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy)
Subject: Re: Dear Sherri
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 14:37:08 GMT

In article <28370024@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM> cadams@hpspdla.spd.HP.COM (Chris Adams) writes:
>
>So what.  They would give a low end player for a superstar.  What kind
>of check and balance is that?  The *very best* players will end up with
>the *very few* rich teams.  As I said before,  the other teams will get
>only the *leftovers* (e.g. that one released player).
>

Greater free agency will spread out the talent...not concentrate it...
Lindros cannot get a big salary in LA, if he is the third line center
behind Gretzky and Lemieux.  Money certainly is a law of "nature" but
so is entropy.

Salary correlates with point production which correlates with ice-time...
and the need for ice-time will distribute the talent.  To make free
agency work, each franchise just has to be guarenteed a competitive
amount of revenue which means that there has to be some level of
revenue-sharing between teams to stabilize the poorest franchises...
since free agency inevitably makes the poorest franchises unprofitable
without any revenue-sharing.

Gerald
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
From: schultz@boulder.Colorado.EDU (Dennis Schultz)
Subject: Re: Wisconsin got screwed!!!
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
Date: 11 Apr 92 01:31:54 GMT

	I saw the game as well live on ESPN.  The announcers even commented
at times that they didn't see the Wisconsin foul.  The exact same fouls
were not called on both teams.  It was impossible not to notice the
referee.  Because 5 on 3 is nearly impossible to stop and so wearing, these
calls obviously led to Lake Sup. comeback.  Of course its impossible to say
who would have won without these calls, but Wisconsin did appear to control
the game in the few instances of 5 on 5 hockey. And because of the refereeing
it was the most boring game I ever saw.  Dont know if this ref was paid-off
but he did exactly what I would expect of a ref, if he was.
From: gak@gakbox.Corp.Sun.COM (Richard Stueven)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: And it's Hockey Night in Kansas City (Sat
Date: 8 Apr 92 19:14:31 GMT
Reply-To: gak@gakbox.Corp.Sun.COM
Distribution: ba
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: gakbox.corp.sun.com

In article 19026@usenet.ins.cwru.edu, au021@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Roland Behunin) writes:
>
>A Salt Lake TV station is planning on broadcasting the Salt Lake
>Golden Eagles at teh Kansas City Blades Saturday Night Apr 11, 1992.
>The feed will be on S4, transponder 12.  Game time is 6:30 MDT.

Bay Area Hockey Fans:

I'm going to take a copy of Roland's article to Ricky (of Ricky's
Sports Lounge (San Leandro)) fame and see if I can convince him to put
this game up.  I'm sure he'll do it, as long as there's no stinking
Warriors game...

See you there!

---
Richard Stueven       AHA# 22584 |----------|       Vote NO!
Internet:       gak@Corp.Sun.COM |----GO----| 
ATTMAIL:         ...!attmail!gak |---SHARX--| If you can't vote NO,
Cow Palace: Sec 107 Row F Seat 9 |----------|   vote Libertarian.
From: etxonss@ufsa.ericsson.se (Staffan Axelsson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: Re: Yet another debate over the draft (was Re: Another Lindros)
Date: 8 Apr 92 16:11:33 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Telecom, Stockholm, Sweden

In article <1992Apr4.202217.23619@klaava.Helsinki.FI> tarkkone@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Lauri Tarkkonen) writes:
[lots of stuff deleted]
>
>In Europe there are several pro leagues, not in hockey, but say soccer,
>they live without draft and they prosper. The draft was designed in the
>NHL, because the excisting teams had to give something to the new teams
>for the entry fee, and they sold something that was not theirs to sell:
>The human rights of the future players. 
>
Well, the hockey leagues here are as close to professional as you can get.
But there are a few bad sides with "our" system too.
For example: One of my favourite teams, Bjorkloven, won the Swedish
championships in '87. 2 years after that they had lost 22 of the players
that won the gold in '87. Naturally, the team wasn't competitive enough
and fell down to division1. They have been in division1 ever since.
Now they are developing their own talent simply because they have no 
money to buy quality players. What happens when they develope a top
player? Yes, teams from Elitserien come and buy this particular player
and the team loses skill once again. This way, it's very hard for teams to
get up in the top league unless you have a lot of money.

Another example: Malmo was in division1 before. Fortunately they had a
man loaded with money who was willing to spend them. He started buying
like crazy and Malmo made it up to the top league, Elitserien.
And now, at this moment, Malmo are playing for the Swedish championship.
The teams from who Malmo bought these players got very pissed and
many people still are.

I'm not claiming that one system is better than the other (simply
cause I don't know yet), but I'm just trying to say that both systems
has its advantages and disadvantages.

>
>I am most surprised that beyond the pond there is such a strong support
>of this in the nature socialist system, that you do not support the
>freedom as understood in the capitalist society. :-).
>
This struck me as odd too when I learned about the NHL draft system.

>Lauri Tarkkonen

Staffan
--
 /\         /|                              Go MALMO!! 
 \         /-|                      Go Leksand!! Hata Vita Hasten!      
\_)taffan /  |xelsson        Congratulations, Rogle! New Elitserie team 92-93
#etxonss@ufsa.ericsson.se#   r.s.h net contact for the Swedish Hockey League
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
From: allan@cs.UAlberta.CA (Allan Sullivan)
Subject: Re: What the world needs now is an AMERICAN TV CONTRACT.
Organization: University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 05:42:35 GMT

ARBOGASTW@vaxb.gbus.virginia.edu (Warren Arbogast) writes:


>>But I'm still living in my house, and Canadians are still watching
>>hockey. And they will be for a long time to come. 

>Atleast until the next strike of mostly Canadian-born players who are 
>envious of salaries made by baseball and basketball and football players, 
>whose sports are funded in large part by American TV dollars.

There are a few holes in your argument:

I think hockey players are a LITTLE smarter than that. Salary
rivalries between fellow hockey players DOES play a role in escalating
salaries, but hockey players are smart enough to know that they
could never be paid as much as football or baseball players, because
of the smaller seating capacities.

As for basketball, the NBA has a salary cap, and revenue sharing
between players and owners. (Thats probably the way the NHL should
go.)

As for baseball, the big television contract helped lead to a big
increase in player salaries. Soon the contract will expire, and the
networks will likely pay a lot less for broadcasting rights. So teams
will be left with large payrolls, and less money. So what is the
future of baseball on TV? You got it... PAY PER VIEW!

Welcome to the world of American TV.
From: nk0s+@andrew.cmu.edu (Brennan Kraje)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey
Subject: NEED CAPS/PENS TIX
Date: 16 Apr 92 17:51:26 GMT
Organization: Masters student, Urban and Public Affairs, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA


    I am looking for a ticket or two to one on the first two PENS/CAPS
playoff games here in Pittsburgh.  Anybody wishing to sell some at a
reasonable price, please e-mail me @ nk0s or call 361-0730 (if not home,
please leave message on answering machine).

    Thanks to anyone who can provide any help...

                                                    - Brennan Kraje
Newsgroups: rec.sport.hockey