SCPhillyPhan wrote:MFP wrote:Cannot imagine siding with the owners in any part of this.
The only thing I see the owners side on the two proposals is the length of schedule. I do believe the owners that if they play in front of no fans, they will lose money as opposed to making money. But I've got to believe that playing the games will lose less money than not playing games at all. I'd counter with a 96 game season. 14 games against each of your division foes. 8 games against the opposite division. Yes, mostly 4 games series. Good for travel. If you want to bump it up to 100 games, play a couple of 2 game sets with more or less the two closest teams to you not in the East. Or whatever division you happen to be in.
Feels like one of two outcomes is likely at this point: Either there’s enough bad blood that there’s no season at all, or they come to an agreement on an 81-game schedule with pro-rated salaries.