• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

Flames sign O'Rielly to offer sheet.

bustaheims said:
Potvin29 said:
EDIT:  I'm removing that quote....the trail of it follows back to......wait for it....EKLUND *facepalm*
Click to expand...

Eklund does many things, but, he doesn't make up quotes and attribute them to real people.
Click to expand...

Here's the link then: http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Eklund/Morning-Buzz-Does-OReilly-Have-Leverage-Update-Luongo-Talk-Heating-Up/1/48902
 
Potvin29 said:
Here's the link then: http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Eklund/Morning-Buzz-Does-OReilly-Have-Leverage-Update-Luongo-Talk-Heating-Up/1/48902
Click to expand...

Well, in context, that quote doesn't seem to refer to the potential for offer sheets. So, I guess we're back to guessing about a situation that didn't happen.
 
Just heard on the FAN that each team has an exemption list for this sort of thing and O'Rielly was on the Avs' list (but obviously not the Flames). That is why he doesn't have to clear waivers for Colorado. It was apparently in a memorandum of understanding from around the time the new CBA was being brought in.
 
Would have been so amazing if this had actually happened, Flames get ROR, forced to put him on waivers then guaranteed Columbus picks him up.  Jay Feaster would have exploded and then been fired after donating 2 picks to the Avs, including a 1st that is sliding quickly to the top 5. 

Oh the hilarity!

 
So everyone seems in agreement now - O'Reilly would have had to clear waivers if Colorado refused to match.  What a gongshow that would have been.
 
Potvin29 said:
So everyone seems in agreement now - O'Reilly would have had to clear waivers if Colorado refused to match.  What a gongshow that would have been.
Click to expand...

Looks smart on Feaster and the Flames.  Someone should have known about that.
 
Potvin29 said:
So everyone seems in agreement now - O'Reilly would have had to clear waivers if Colorado refused to match.  What a gongshow that would have been.
Click to expand...

everyone?  one story on sportsnet that has been regurgitated by others doesn't mean everyone.
 
Derk said:
They "disagree" with the league's interpretation of the clause in the CBA.
Click to expand...

Gary Bettman has "trouble" with those that disagree with him.  All contracts have to get league approval.  You figure that the league would have had to disclose this "interpretation" when approving the contract signed by the flames and o'rielly.  Else if Calgary got screwed they could have filed an errors and omissions lawsuit or professional misconduct lawsuit against the league.
 
I vote we close the thread with this:

orly.jpg
 
Rebel_1812 said:
Potvin29 said:
So everyone seems in agreement now - O'Reilly would have had to clear waivers if Colorado refused to match.  What a gongshow that would have been.
Click to expand...

everyone?  one story on sportsnet that has been regurgitated by others doesn't mean everyone.
Click to expand...

Everyone isn't just regurgitating it, all of the hockey analysts/writers I follow on Twitter looked into it (Friedman, etc), TSN's hockey guys all looked into it and did a piece on it, O'Reilly's agent was on TSN radio talking about it.  By the end the consensus appears to be that the Flames would have been told they had to put him on waivers (at which point the Flames would argue they 'interpreted' it differently and start some whole mess there).  I haven't seen any prominent hockey person saying that he wouldn't have to be put on waivers, other than the Flames saying they disagree with the interpretation.  But I'm referring to the talking-heads of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top