|
Post by catnut on Jul 25, 2007 8:45:57 GMT -5
(you wanted some news Shoooooot)
According to this morning's Acadie Nouvelle, Devon Macausland is getting closer to being a Cat. Troy Dumville is practically giving up on seeing him with the Beavers this year.
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Jul 25, 2007 8:52:49 GMT -5
Flynn states that they have received a proposal from MacAusland and his agent, and that the Cats are now in the process of preparing a counter proposal. Dumville states that the mere fact that the sides are negotiating back and forth is a sign he will likely end up with the Cats, as if MacAusland was truly not interested the answer would be a simple no thanks.
Awesome news!
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Jul 25, 2007 10:04:15 GMT -5
I heard that the MacAusland clan asked for a huge package...about twice what the WC wanted to offer...I think it will get done, but I wouldn't be shocked if he plays Jr.A at 16.
|
|
|
Post by Shooooot on Jul 25, 2007 10:27:41 GMT -5
(you wanted some news Shoooooot) According to this morning's Acadie Nouvelle, Devon Macausland is getting closer to being a Cat. Troy Dumville is practically giving up on seeing him with the Beavers this year. I want news for sure...even if it's not fact, who cares. I wonder if a player would ever negotiate with a junior club to up his offer from a college? We know it works when a player threatens college to improve his contract with a junior team but does the reverse happen? Thanks for the news, hope it turns out to be true. I really enjoyed watching him play midget...he'll be even better with higher calibre players.
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Jul 26, 2007 18:52:44 GMT -5
Money talk$.......it's negotiations like this that make me think the league needs to go with a revenue sharing program like the new NHL has brought in.
|
|
|
Post by gongshow on Jul 27, 2007 8:49:32 GMT -5
I hope the kid gets his fancy "education" package and goes on to record an average of about 15 points per season,then gets cut in his 19 year old season........wouldn't that be a funny waste of money.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Jul 27, 2007 10:25:01 GMT -5
Money talk$.......it's negotiations like this that make me think the league needs to go with a revenue sharing program like the new NHL has brought in. It's not revenue sharing that will fix that, it's a much improved education pacake to match the OHL and WHL.
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Jul 27, 2007 17:05:18 GMT -5
Money talk$.......it's negotiations like this that make me think the league needs to go with a revenue sharing program like the new NHL has brought in. It's not revenue sharing that will fix that, it's a much improved education pacake to match the OHL and WHL. Revenue sharing...........if the money was spread around, more teams could compete when offering these types packages.......revenue sharing and better education packages from the league would go a long way in making this league hang around for a while.
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Jul 27, 2007 17:19:39 GMT -5
It's not revenue sharing that will fix that, it's a much improved education pacake to match the OHL and WHL. Revenue sharing...........if the money was spread around, more teams could compete when offering these types packages.......revenue sharing and better education packages from the league would go a long way in making this league hang around for a while. If you share the revenue, some teams will just pocket the money, all owners are not the same as you can see firsthand in Bathurst.
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Jul 27, 2007 18:32:55 GMT -5
Revenue sharing...........if the money was spread around, more teams could compete when offering these types packages.......revenue sharing and better education packages from the league would go a long way in making this league hang around for a while. If you share the revenue, some teams will just pocket the money, all owners are not the same as you can see firsthand in Bathurst. They could do what they see fit with it.......the point would be that they would have the opportunity to improve if they did have it........and since you know very little about the inner workings of the Titan, your "firsthand in Bathurst" comment is kinda dumb..... anyway, back to Macausland..... ;D
|
|
|
Post by MJA on Jul 27, 2007 19:07:42 GMT -5
I hope the kid gets his fancy "education" package and goes on to record an average of about 15 points per season,then gets cut in his 19 year old season........wouldn't that be a funny waste of money. My understanding, from having a player at our house a few years back, is that the "education package" is only paid out if the player doesn't make it to the next level (ECHL, AHL, NHL) and goes to university after leaving the Cats as a 20 yr old. For example, RKI could offer an education package 10-15k per year (x 4 years university) to a top end player to join the Cats as opposed to going to the NCAA route. If the player can't/doesn't make it to the next level after his junior career, he still has his education paid for. BUT if he makes it to the next level after his junior career, that top up money from RKI is gone. Not a big loss to RKI considering most of the "education top up packages" offered are to the top end players that make the next level after leaving junior anyways. (ie. Pineault, etc.) No money out of his pocket if they advance to the next level and decide not to go to college/university. I'm sure the Q funds are still available to them but no where's near what RKI would offer them on top of that.
|
|
MikeC
Full Member
Posts: 454
|
Post by MikeC on Jul 27, 2007 19:40:31 GMT -5
They could do what they see fit with it.......the point would be that they would have the opportunity to improve if they did have it........and since you know very little about the inner workings of the Titan, your "firsthand in Bathurst" comment is kinda dumb..... anyway, back to Macausland..... ;D Revenue sharing in the NHL also comes with a minimum salary floor that teams have to pay. The revenue sharing is designed to help these teams reach that minimum. So if you had revenue sharing in the Q, you'd also have to force teams to pay more to their players, whether it be the weekly stipend, education amounts, whatever. Anyway, besides that, I think revenue sharing in junior is silly for a number of other reasons. Increasing the league wide education fund would be enough.
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Jul 28, 2007 7:48:15 GMT -5
They could do what they see fit with it.......the point would be that they would have the opportunity to improve if they did have it........and since you know very little about the inner workings of the Titan, your "firsthand in Bathurst" comment is kinda dumb..... anyway, back to Macausland..... ;D Revenue sharing in the NHL also comes with a minimum salary floor that teams have to pay. The revenue sharing is designed to help these teams reach that minimum. So if you had revenue sharing in the Q, you'd also have to force teams to pay more to their players, whether it be the weekly stipend, education amounts, whatever. Anyway, besides that, I think revenue sharing in junior is silly for a number of other reasons. Increasing the league wide education fund would be enough. I agree........
|
|
|
Post by Cristobal Huet on Jul 28, 2007 9:37:29 GMT -5
If you share the revenue, some teams will just pocket the money, all owners are not the same as you can see firsthand in Bathurst. They could do what they see fit with it.......the point would be that they would have the opportunity to improve if they did have it........and since you know very little about the inner workings of the Titan, your "firsthand in Bathurst" comment is kinda dumb..... anyway, back to Macausland..... ;D You seem to be the one that knows very little about the inner workings of the Titans or you're playing dumb. When LGM was making piles of money in 1999-2002, he was still lowballing 20 year olds and getting low end Euros because he didn't want to pay for impact guys. Making money and spending it are 2 different things.
|
|
|
Post by Porkchop on Jul 28, 2007 15:57:49 GMT -5
They could do what they see fit with it.......the point would be that they would have the opportunity to improve if they did have it........and since you know very little about the inner workings of the Titan, your "firsthand in Bathurst" comment is kinda dumb..... anyway, back to Macausland..... ;D You seem to be the one that knows very little about the inner workings of the Titans or you're playing dumb. When LGM was making piles of money in 1999-2002, he was still lowballing 20 year olds and getting low end Euros because he didn't want to pay for impact guys. Making money and spending it are 2 different things. I know for a FACT that some of the 20's getting up to 30 grand per season and we've always had solid 20's unless it was in a down year or rebuild.......with the Euros he's been the type to trade for guys that are already here and established instead of drafting high end guys........Materoukine (sp?), Durak, Bartos, and now Svoboda, Sprukts, etc., all solid guys in years when we have a good team and need solid guys......Euros have sucked in the down years where there was no point in trading for a good one........
|
|