Morning Skate: Wednesday, Nov. 14


Morning Skate: Wednesday, Nov. 14

Sidney Crosby is not excited about the NHLs unwillingness to maintain player contract rights in the most competitive league in the world.

I wrote the other day that Gary Bettman and Donald Fehr shouldnt go to the Hockey Hall of Fame ceremonies. Here was the flip side argument from FOH (Friend of Haggs) Ian Mendes.

The NHL goalies might have a rough time when the regular season finally begins, and here are a few reasons why. One bright light for Bruins fans: Both Tuukka Rask and Anton Khudobin havent had problems finding work and should be in midseason form.

Elliotte Friedman weighs in with his always-worthy 30 thoughts for the week, including the leagues decision to hold the line on contracts.

Brett Hull tells the Sporting News that its time for the NHL to get things done and start the season.

Good piece by Alan Siegel for Boston Magazine where he gets the inside story on the iconic photo of Derek Sanderson smoking a cigarette while clasping his hands in prayer.

CSN Bay Area Sharks Insider Kevin Kurz wonders if theres any advantage for the Sharks in a shortened NHL season.

Lenny Clarke goes ballistic on Gary Bettman and Donald Fehr before saying that the women of Boston missing their hockey players. Okay then.

For something completely different: Amanda Rykoff is sick of the stereotype that women are only into sports for the players good looks, and blogs fiercely about it.

Kraft OK with the idea of a Raiders move to Las Vegas


Kraft OK with the idea of a Raiders move to Las Vegas

Robert Kraft doesn't seem all that concerned about the potential pitfalls of having an NFL franchise in Las Vegas.

The temptations found in that city, he says, can now be found around any dark corner of the Internet. That's part of the reason why he would be supportive of the Raiders if owner Mark Davis chose to move the team to Vegas from Oakland. 

He explained his reasoning to NFL Media's Judy Battista at the league's annual spring meetings on Tuesday. 

"I think we can put the discipline and controls in [for] whatever anyone might be worried about," Kraft said. "With the Internet and the age of the Internet and what's going on in today's world, it's so much different than when I came in 20 odd years ago. If you'd like to move there and they're supportive and Oakland doesn't do what they should do, I'm behind them."

The comments echoed what Kraft told USA Today earlier this week.

"I came into the league in ’94," Kraft said. "Back then, any exploration of that market was dismissed out of hand. I’m looking where we are today and thinking of the last 10 to 15 years, and the emergence of new media, with Google and Facebook and the like. We’re just living in a different world, technology-wise. The [sports gambling] risks in Vegas are no longer exclusive to Vegas. Whatever the risks, they are no greater [in Las Vegas] than playing a game in New Jersey."

Davis' hope to move the Raiders stems from an inability to get a deal done for a new stadium in Oakland.

"I have given my commitment to Las Vegas," Davis said this week, "and if they can get done what they're talking about doing, then we will go to Las Vegas."

Curran: Roger The Dodger continues his evasive maneuvers


Curran: Roger The Dodger continues his evasive maneuvers

Roger Goodell is doing that damn thing again down in North Carolina this afternoon.

The NFL commissioner -- who once could carry off a press conference with a breezy, in-command air -- came off like a carrot-topped armadillo talking to reporters at the end of the May owner’s meetings in Charlotte.

Defensive, clipped and disingenuous, a monotone-speaking Goodell was asked about Deflategate and Monday’s Congressional report that alleged the NFL had lobbyists trying to pressure concussion researchers into using NFL-approved doctors.

Asked about the appeal for a rehearing of Tom Brady’s case on Monday, Goodell said, “I respect the NFLPA’s ability to appeal if they choose to do that . . . I’m not really focused on that at all.”

Goodell did not answer the second part of the question, whether or not he’d keep Tom Brady off the field if the court case was unresolved.

The answer, one can only presume would be, “Abso-friggin-lutely.”

As for the Congressional report, Goodell had the gall to answer that he “didn’t see the report.”

He then went on to disagree with what was in the report -- meaning his initial response was less than candid.

A few more minutes of short answers and the show was over with nobody much the wiser than when he began.