HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   Spector: why not (now) play games while negotiating? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1287825)

LadyStanley 11-20-2012 11:57 AM

Spector: why not (now) play games while negotiating?
 
http://aol.sportingnews.com/nhl/stor...-hockey-strike

Quote:

Both sides are hurting their future bottom lines, and continuing the lockout only serves to further shrink the pool of money that they are trying to figure out how to split. It is mutually assured destruction, and the only question is how widespread that destruction will be when everyone comes to their senses and makes a deal.

There is a way out, and it is actually something the union was willing to do all along: play hockey.
...
Get back on the ice, start collecting ticket revenue again, start selling merchandise again, and put the game front and center instead of posturing, browbeating, and greed. Itís not only the best way to set about repairing the NHLís image, which believe it or not still has not hit rock bottom, it is the best way to make a deal.

ThePhoenixx 11-20-2012 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 55904093)

Because Donald Fehr will call a strike before the playoffs.

End of story.

HartsyMania 11-20-2012 12:04 PM

Anyone who suggests that it's a good idea for the players to play without a CBA is simply uninformed, and should research Fehr's history.

Buck Aki Berg 11-20-2012 12:05 PM

...then the players go on strike April 1.

Of course the players are going to say they want to play hockey. Not only do they win the PR war, they also end up with a hell of a good bargaining position when they go on strike at the end of the season and hold the playoffs hostage.

PeterSidorkiewicz 11-20-2012 12:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThePhoenixx (Post 55904205)
Because Donald Fehr will call a strike before the playoffs.

End of story.

What if a no-strike agreement was signed for the season?

Not that I think it would work anyway, since there would be 0 pressure to get a deal done and you'd be right back at the same spot next season.

ThePhoenixx 11-20-2012 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz (Post 55904267)
What if a no-strike agreement was signed for the season?

Not that I think it would work anyway, since there would be 0 pressure to get a deal done and you'd be right back at the same spot next season.

I think you answered your own question.

I might add that the same unworkable CBA would still be in place. Players would still be getting 57%.

cheswick 11-20-2012 12:09 PM

Bettman said it best, if the NHLPA has been so unwilling to negotiate while being locked out, if they were playing it would be even worse.

CREW99AW 11-20-2012 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 55904093)


No interest in seeing games start up without an agreement in place.For what, so we can go thru this nonsense again next season?

Also, I think losing paychecks puts a lot pressure on the players. Especially, with some playing in Europe and others sitting home.

Think Brad Boyes who took a cheap 1 yr deal, so he could ride shotgun with Tavares, is as fully committed to the cause as say Ovi, playing at home in the KHL?

Sanderson 11-20-2012 12:10 PM

Seriously, the reasons why that can't happen are so freakin obvious that it makes you wonder why Spector didn't think of them before he wrote that article.

It's not even all that much about a possible strike, the whole reason behind playing while negotiating doesn't make any sense. The players are hardly moving right now, why would they have any incentive to negotiate if they can continue to play under the old CBA?
The owners, on the other hand, have absolutely no reason to do that. They say the old CBA doesn't work as well as it's necessary. By continuing to play under it, they suddenly flip-flop on that issue, without getting any benefit out of it.

Buck Aki Berg 11-20-2012 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz (Post 55904267)
What if a no-strike agreement was signed for the season?

Short answer: labour relations between the league and PA are far to toxic for something like this to get off the ground.

KingsFan7824 11-20-2012 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz (Post 55904267)
What if a no-strike agreement was signed for the season?

I'm pretty sure Fehr wouldn't agree to that.

They can start playing while they negotiate if...

-Tickets are free
-Food and drink are free(but those workers get paid, they had nothing to do with this)
-Parking is free
-Merchandise is free
-Center Ice, etc, are free
-Players don't get paid

When they finally get a deal done, then everyone can start paying for everything again. No need to sign a no-strike agreement. No need to worry about Fehr and the PA striking before the playoffs. The owners don't make any money off their hockey team either.

ottawah 11-20-2012 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buck Aki Berg (Post 55904243)
...then the players go on strike April 1.

If played under the old CBA, then they would not do this, financial suicide. You can say it hurts the owners, but it hurts the players to as playoff money drives a huge part of the revenue. Players would get a huge escrow hit.

I do not think the players would do this as it represents a large drop in pay from what they are currently proposing.

I do not think the owners would want this because, as pointed out, it would leave them little desperation to negotiate.

Morris Wanchuk 11-20-2012 12:31 PM

And that right there is the one thing that would make me question my being a fan of the NHL.

Playing a season with the potential of it having no ending.

Mightygoose 11-20-2012 12:52 PM

Really silly article, go back to 1994 and ask an Expos fan to boot and you get your answer

Halibut 11-20-2012 12:53 PM

The real question is why they havent turned to some kind of arbitrator. It's obvious they need some kind of outside help, doesnt need to be binding arbitration but some one from the outside with no ties to either side to try and push the discussion forward.

OneMoreAstronaut 11-20-2012 12:58 PM

Good God, are there still people out there trying to toot this horn?

PeterSidorkiewicz 11-20-2012 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Halibut (Post 55905253)
The real question is why they havent turned to some kind of arbitrator. It's obvious they need some kind of outside help, doesnt need to be binding arbitration but some one from the outside with no ties to either side to try and push the discussion forward.

I think that's called a mediator as opposed to an arbitrator, but I could be wrong. I agree completely, an outside mediator is needed for a fresh perspective and new ideas.

cbcwpg 11-20-2012 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz (Post 55904267)
What if a no-strike agreement was signed for the season?

Not that I think it would work anyway, since there would be 0 pressure to get a deal done and you'd be right back at the same spot next season.

Would never have happened. The players ( and Fehr ) say they were more than happy to keep playing under the old CBA because they would still be getting their 57%, which is one of the major problems in the first place.

So the NHL would have said no to the NO-Strike because they don't want to keep playing under the old CBA.

And IMO the NHLPA never would have offered the NO-Strike because this would be giving up a huge negotiating tack, being the fact they would go on strike just before the playoffs to force a deal.

txpd 11-20-2012 02:33 PM

some here might no know what spector has to know. the players get all their paychecks in the regular season. they essensially work in the playoffs for pure glory.....not paid.

the owners make their money with home playoff games. you can see that just cant workout.

it also proves that most canadian fans didnt pay attention to the expos because fehr did get them to play. the expos were likely world series bound and fehr called a strike that cancelled the entire post season.

PeterSidorkiewicz 11-20-2012 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by txpd (Post 55909873)
some here might no know what spector has to know. the players get all their paychecks in the regular season. they essensially work in the playoffs for pure glory.....not paid.

the owners make their money with home playoff games. you can see that just cant workout.

it also proves that most canadian fans didnt pay attention to the expos because fehr did get them to play. the expos were likely world series bound and fehr called a strike that cancelled the entire post season.

Wasn't there issues of the league trying to ensure the Expos didn't make the post season? The scheduling of games in Puerto Rico, not allowing callups while players were injured, but other teams were allowed callups, then the deal with the scum bag Marlins owner?

nekyvGkOPaiWICTscLl6 11-20-2012 03:42 PM

Sounds like Spector has no idea how unions function when in hard-pressed negotiations.

Freudian 11-20-2012 03:44 PM

"Sporting News will present radicalóand, in most cases improbableóproposals designed to get the league back on track and ensure its long-term health."

ottawah 11-20-2012 05:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by txpd (Post 55909873)
some here might no know what spector has to know. the players get all their paychecks in the regular season. they essensially work in the playoffs for pure glory.....not paid.

the owners make their money with home playoff games. you can see that just cant workout.

Actually under the old CBA, which they would be playing under, that is incorrect. The players paychecks through the year are entirely irrelevant, just like the nominal dollar value of their contracts (other than comparing player to player). What matters is that the players are GUARANTEED 57% of revenue, and that includes playoffs. So it would be absolutely short sighted for the players to go out on strike for the playoffs, it would cost then far more than the owners (players 57% gross revenue, owners 43% minus all expenses). The paychecks they got during the year would be hit with an escrow bill that would make their heads spin ......

tony d 11-20-2012 05:15 PM

Playing without a deal would be a step backward IMO. We're already this far into the lockout, might as well stay locked out until they reach a deal.

MarkGio 11-20-2012 09:25 PM

Fehr has a history of one strike and people assume he's no good for the sport but Bettman locks this game out like it's protocol and he's a saviour?


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:25 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.