Quote:
Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm
It would be settled by the NHLPA and NHL long before it ever got anywhere near a court.
|
Presuming that all the teams would have signed off, including the ones who stood to gain from the opposite interpretation, but you're probably right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
Are you really stupid enough to argue that what Bill Daly thinks about the CBA is meaningless, yet what Elliott Friedman thinks is relevant?
C'mon man. That's just trolling. If you want to cast doubt on Daly's comments, point out that they come from Eklund and presently lack verification from a legitimate source.
|
Yes, because I have a law degree - I am not saying that what Friedman thinks is relevant, only that I agree he's right that it SOUNDS like it applies only to the Avs (in this case) RFA list, and that it would be a good battle for the lawyers. Others are speaking as if Daly's interpretation is authoritative and his comments end the discussion - it is not. "Meaningless" is too strong a word, but what Daly says is not the be-all end-all here. You read the words in the document and come to a conclusion about their plain meaning.
Not to mention as Puckluck says, Daly's response was to a question framed as if the Avalanche had re-upped with ROR, which doesn't address the issue here.