HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   It sounds like John Madden would accept a cap (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=103978)

Chili 09-16-2004 12:22 PM

It sounds like John Madden would accept a cap
 
link


Quote:

The NHL lockout is not even a day old and one player is already saying he would be willing to accept a salary cap if it saved the 2004-05 season. Devils' forward John Madden told the (New Jersey) Star-Ledger that he wants the NHL Players' Association to do whatever it takes to get a deal done.


"It all comes down to what's fair," Madden told the Star-Ledger. "The only problem I'm having with things is believing whose numbers are right and whose numbers are wrong. Those are the big issues. And if it needs to have a cap, give it a cap, you know?"

Go Flames Go* 09-16-2004 12:24 PM

They should fire tervor linden and name him the president.

Brodeur 09-16-2004 12:26 PM

Heh, Madden knows he signed his retirement contract and he wants to cash in! Gotta see what's in that Kool-Aid that Lou's been giving him.

Slats432 09-16-2004 12:40 PM

Cue NHLPA damage control in 5...4...3...2...1...

Russian Fan 09-16-2004 12:49 PM

Don't forget 1 thing.

30 owners is easier to control than 1200 members.

Do people really think that everyone thinks the same in a syndicate of 1000+ members ?

No matter what anyway , the players will never win the PR battle.

from a Fan point of view.

''Players being paid with 1,8M$ a year average won't make me cry''

Miracle a cap coming in

''Players being paid with 1,3M$ a year average won't make me cry''

No matter how much an owner will lose or win.

That tell you why the polls goes to the owners.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To me : THE DAY a cap can be agree on is when the OWNER will open the books freely which they never accept to agree on. The open some books to some NHLPA executives but with a confidentiality agreement that they can't reveal any discrepancies.

The PR is being won because the OWNER can HIDE any information they want while the players salaries are EXPOSED to the public & cannot be hidden.

Chili 09-16-2004 01:08 PM

As far as polls go, the fans are no different than the owners or players, they want what is best for them. More fiscal responsibilty in the game should mean lower ticket prices. If the players could show how the marketplace approach would be better for everyone involved (and not just for themselves), they could win more fan support.

John Flyers Fan 09-16-2004 01:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russian Fan
Don't forget 1 thing.

30 owners is easier to control than 1200 members.


Not necessarily.

The players for the most part have the same agenda. They prefer the status quo, or the closest they can get to the status quo.

The owners on the other hands have different agendas.

Their are cerrtainly teams that have very different view points.

Flyers, Red Wings, Leafs, Rangers etc.

Carolina, Nashville, Calgary, Edmonton, Boston

New Jersey, Vancouver, San Jose etc.


There are certainly factions in the ownership group.

EJsens1 09-16-2004 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russian Fan

The PR is being won because the OWNER can HIDE any information they want while the players salaries are EXPOSED to the public & cannot be hidden.

Wasn't it the players that wanted their salaries released in order to avoid problems like having Gordie Howe being paid less then other players on his own team when he was clearly the best??? I'm not 100% sure about, can anyone verify that???

Russian Fan 09-16-2004 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
Not necessarily.

The players for the most part have the same agenda. They prefer the status quo, or the closest they can get to the status quo.

The owners on the other hands have different agendas.

Their are cerrtainly teams that have very different view points.

Flyers, Red Wings, Leafs, Rangers etc.

Carolina, Nashville, Calgary, Edmonton, Boston

New Jersey, Vancouver, San Jose etc.


There are certainly factions in the ownership group.

I was mostly refering to censoring the members.

It's easier for Bettman-Daly to say SHUT UP to 30 owners even if 10% does not agree with move (= 3 owners) while Goodenow-Saskin got 1100-1200 members if 10% of that bunch think a cap is good it's 110-120 members that every HF posters will take that & put a highligh in the commentary subject.

Russian Fan 09-16-2004 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craven Morehead
Wasn't it the players that wanted their salaries released in order to avoid problems like having Gordie Howe being paid less then other players on his own team when he was clearly the best??? I'm not 100% sure about, can anyone verify that???

Don't make mistake, they don't put the salaries a public notoriety to make PR relations but to get more leverage between each members.

Slats432 09-16-2004 01:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russian Fan
The PR is being won because the OWNER can HIDE any information they want while the players salaries are EXPOSED to the public & cannot be hidden.

Actually for me, it is a bit different. A lot of respected hockey people...Brian Burke, Wayne Gretzky, Kevin Lowe, Jim Rutherford are saying a lot of teams are losing money. I believe them.

The owners are trying to say we will share an exact proportion of our revenues with you. If our profits grow, so will yours.

To me it sounds a whole lot better than..."Market system with 20 teams losing money is OK with us. The Market system is the only way."

But let's be honest here. If in a meeting behind closed doors, if the owners made a pact never to give a guy more than $3 million a season, that would be collusion. The players can easily get together and set the markets, because all the agents, and the association conspire to get the best deal for the client. The teams do not work together.(Which is why the NHL offered to negotiate all player contracts for the teams and was turned down.)

The players want guaranteed contracts. The players want a market system. The players should understand that they are putting their employers out of business.

Chili 09-16-2004 01:21 PM

You can trivialize what Madden said if you wish but I doubt the NHLPA higher ups feel that way. And is this one player or are there others who feel this way and are afraid to voice their opinion?

John Flyers Fan 09-16-2004 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russian Fan
I was mostly refering to censoring the members.

It's easier for Bettman-Daly to say SHUT UP to 30 owners even if 10% does not agree with move (= 3 owners) while Goodenow-Saskin got 1100-1200 members if 10% of that bunch think a cap is good it's 110-120 members that every HF posters will take that & put a highligh in the commentary subject.

That point I'll agree with. I believe the owners are under a gag order and can be fined upto $1 million for speaking.

Russian Fan 09-16-2004 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by George Bachul
Actually for me, it is a bit different. A lot of respected hockey people...Brian Burke, Wayne Gretzky, Kevin Lowe, Jim Rutherford are saying a lot of teams are losing money. I believe them.

The owners are trying to say we will share an exact proportion of our revenues with you. If our profits grow, so will yours.

To me it sounds a whole lot better than..."Market system with 20 teams losing money is OK with us. The Market system is the only way."

But let's be honest here. If in a meeting behind closed doors, if the owners made a pact never to give a guy more than $3 million a season, that would be collusion. The players can easily get together and set the markets, because all the agents, and the association conspire to get the best deal for the client. The teams do not work together.(Which is why the NHL offered to negotiate all player contracts for the teams and was turned down.)

The players want guaranteed contracts. The players want a market system. The players should understand that they are putting their employers out of business.

Well

1- I believe even the owners when they say 20 teams losing money

2- I heard very often Goodenow & Saskin acknowledging that 20 teams are losing money.

Maybe the general perception is ''we want a free market'' but what NHLPA is saying all along is ''We know they lost money & we're ready to fix part of it but at least HALF of those team are losing money not because of the salaries , not because of the CBA but because of bad management, bad decisions, bad markets''

cws 09-16-2004 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russian Fan
To me : THE DAY a cap can be agree on is when the OWNER will open the books freely which they never accept to agree on. The open some books to some NHLPA executives but with a confidentiality agreement that they can't reveal any discrepancies.

The PR is being won because the OWNER can HIDE any information they want while the players salaries are EXPOSED to the public & cannot be hidden.

What part of "private business" is a mystery? There are reasons beyond this why certain information isn't public knowledge.

And you can bet every dollar you have that the government (who gets to look at everything) will be on them like in a flash if something is that fishy. These are the people who help make up part of the line "that the only two certainties in life are death and taxes."

Oh, screw this...

Forget about blame. I could point out probably a dozen items for each side showing blame. Yes, they have both screwed up at times. May they be struck down for trying to correct their mistakes (sarcasm warning).

That point was never relevant to begin with and it sure as hell isn't helping right now. There are problems, they need to be fixed, all parties involved must work together and be a part of that. Anything else; window dressing, a bad distraction.

Chili 09-16-2004 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russian Fan
Maybe the general perception is ''we want a free market'' but what NHLPA is saying all along is ''We know they lost money & we're ready to fix part of it but at least HALF of those team are losing money not because of the salaries , not because of the CBA but because of bad management, bad decisions, bad markets''

For many workers the most important part of a cba is job security. If the NHL continues with a market place rules agreement do you believe there will still be 30 teams in a few years? Would it take a couple of teams folding to bring this point to light?

Poignant Discussion 09-16-2004 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Go Flames Go
They should fire tervor linden and name him the president.


Why Linden said the same thing. If the numbers the owners are giving are true we will look at it differently. The thing is the owners are NOT opening the books completely and until they do why should the players change their demands

Russian Fan 09-16-2004 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chili
For many workers the most important part of a cba is job security. If the NHL continues with a market place rules agreement do you believe there will still be 30 teams in a few years? Would it take a couple of teams folding to bring this point to light?


Again :

If even the CBA can be agree on , how can you make sure there won't be any team folding if half the team losing money is not even related to the actual CBA ?

So JOB security is not an issue because if 6 teams can fold because of bad management & bad markets , 6 teams will fold anyway if they don't agree to a CBA. That means 6 teams is about to fold anyway. That's a players perspective.

Russian Fan 09-16-2004 01:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cw7
What part of "private business" is a mystery? There are reasons beyond this why certain information isn't public knowledge.

And you can bet every dollar you have that the government (who gets to look at everything) will be on them like in a flash if something is that fishy. These are the people who help make up part of the line "that the only two certainties in life are death and taxes."

Oh, screw this...

Forget about blame. I could point out probably a dozen items for each side showing blame. Yes, they have both screwed up at times. May they be struck down for trying to correct their mistakes (sarcasm warning).

That point was never relevant to begin with and it sure as hell isn't helping right now. There are problems, they need to be fixed, all parties involved must work together and be a part of that. Anything else; window dressing, a bad distraction.

I understand to PRIVATE BUSINESS statement but as a fan I don't think I need to see them. I would like to personnaly because I'm into strategic management myself.

But if you don't expose your book completely to the other part that you are negotiating with & like Bettman said ''We want a PARTNERSHIP'' , how can you expect the NHLPA executive to trust them ?

If somebody is telling you , I'm losing money right now, would you believe it instantly ? Let's say yes & he's saying I'm losing 224M$ can you help me ? will you give him 224M$ or you will take a look on why he's losing 224M$ & what can you do to help him outside of giving him 224M$ just for the fun of it.

EJsens1 09-16-2004 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russian Fan
Again :

If even the CBA can be agree on , how can you make sure there won't be any team folding if half the team losing money is not even related to the actual CBA ?

So JOB security is not an issue because if 6 teams can fold because of bad management & bad markets , 6 teams will fold anyway if they don't agree to a CBA. That means 6 teams is about to fold anyway. That's a players perspective.

But that hasn't been the theme here at all. Its just a conspiracy that the NHLPA is throwing around. Its naive to think there isn't a correlation between bad management and high salaires IMO. I'm certainly not a business major or pretend to understand everything, but common sense suggests to me that the majority of teams losing money is because of higher salaries, not mis-management from non CBA issues.

Chili 09-16-2004 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Russian Fan
If even the CBA can be agree on , how can you make sure there won't be any team folding if half the team losing money is not even related to the actual CBA ?

What are your examples of teams losing money totally because of non cba issues?

Quote:

So JOB security is not an issue because if 6 teams can fold because of bad management & bad markets , 6 teams will fold anyway if they don't agree to a CBA. That means 6 teams is about to fold anyway. That's a players perspective.
Again: You're presuming that the cba has no impact on teams losing money. And the players should care if 20% of them would lose their jobs. A market place agreement isn't going to help them if they no longer have a job.

ej_pens 09-16-2004 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NataSatan666
Why Linden said the same thing. If the numbers the owners are giving are true we will look at it differently. The thing is the owners are NOT opening the books completely and until they do why should the players change their demands

The NHLPA has seen the books. That's the only party that needs to see them.

Russian Fan 09-16-2004 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craven Morehead
But that hasn't been the theme here at all. Its just a conspiracy that the NHLPA is throwing around. Its naive to think there isn't a correlation between bad management and high salaires IMO. I'm certainly not a business major or pretend to understand everything, but common sense suggests to me that the majority of teams losing money is because of higher salaries, not mis-management from non CBA issues.


even if there's a correlation between bad decisions & higher salary, if the teams losing money because of those bad decision, why should the other pay entirely for those decisions ?

MLB have problem & they didn't solve everything when they sign the CBA & they didn't expect the MLBPA to give everything to solve in 1 minutes. There was an agreement that both feels they can't work on it.

MLBPA make some compromise
MLB took those & build it so 1 year later the salaries took a shut down of 3% even if the ''FANS'' think the luxury tax is ridiculous.

To get back to the NHL

CBA is not related to
- Bad markets
Can't be the players fault if some arena are empty & ticket price is not the sole reason

- Bad management
Can't be the players fault is some owner took all the money at some time in their franchise & sign a poor lease arena.

those 2 alone could be a consequences between making 5M$ profits & losing 20 to 30M$ a year !!!

Also a CBA agreement like any fan would like to think, is 2 sides that feels they could live together.

NHL owners asking to the NHLPA to solve all the problems without pointing GM's & staff is naive & selfish.

Facts :
NHLPA offer a paycut of 5% that would result of 108M$ in saving.
without judgement ,it's called compromised.

NHLPA offer a luxury tax.
even if the luxury tax is poor or good, it's called compromised.

NHLPA cutback in Entry level Rookie bonuses. that would result to 60M$ in saving.
without any judgement it's called compromised.

I'm not saying it's a good or bad proposal but at least that should shut the mouth of fan thinking players are GREEDY. Wanting to not lose all their privileges & being greedy is not the same thing.

If NHLPA are willing to make those compromised it's at least a starting point to negociate something like a better luxury tax, maybe a 10% paycut (200M$).

The other side, Owners are playing the game ''my way or the highway''. Maybe the fans like it because they are bitter to see people making 1,8M$ for playing hockey but a CBA hockey or real life related is not negotiated by one side take-it or leave-it.

- Players need to recognize that teams are losing money & so far I listen that for the NHLPA executives.

- Owners need to recognize they made mistake & they can't ask the players to resolve all the problems they created so far all they said is ''we made some mistake & now we are trying to fix it''. They try to fix by asking the players to cave for their failure to put the CBA at their advantages.

Russian Fan 09-16-2004 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ej_pens
The NHLPA has seen the books. That's the only party that needs to see them.

I understand this but seen the books like a financial report & seeing the books to say what contains each area in the books they didn't seen it.

In La Presse it's been stated that some of the NHLPA has to sign some agreement that would not permit them to ask questions regarding some accountant methods.

Maybe you're not familiar with I just said but it's like saying to you I spent 6000$ this year for my house.

you ask me ''What does includes the 6000$ ?''

my answer would be ''Well it's all houses related''

It's very slippery. Buying some tools at the home depot is house related but should it be HOUSE EXPAND in the same section than paying the mortgage ?

That's what OPENING THE BOOKS should be & that's what the NHL didn't do to the NHLPA executives.

Benji Frank 09-16-2004 02:26 PM

Didn't Steve Thomas re-issue a statement after saying almost the same thing about salary caps in the NBA & NFL? I bet Madden comes out saying he was misquoted or misinterpretted real soon!!


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:43 AM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.