HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   What's your status with the latest NHLPA proposal? (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1296173)

Ginu 11-21-2012 10:55 PM

What's your status with the latest NHLPA proposal?
 
Does anybody still believe the owners after the players went with a direct percentage and it was still rejected? The PA had a clause in there that revenue one year cannot be less than that of the previous year; but considering how the NHL added the rollback to the salary cap last CBA, they had to have a nugget in there for protection. Their premise, however, is now direct linkage and speaking the language of the NHL.

The NHL still rejected the NHLPA's proposal after 50 minutes. Does anybody still trust the owners?

Florida Ranger 11-21-2012 11:01 PM

Screw em all.

Butch 19 11-21-2012 11:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ginu (Post 55953221)
Does anybody still believe the owners after the players went with a direct percentage and it was still rejected? The PA had a clause in there that revenue one year cannot be less than that of the previous year; but considering how the NHL added the rollback to the salary cap last CBA, they had to have a nugget in there for protection. Their premise, however, is now direct linkage and speaking the language of the NHL.

The NHL still rejected the NHLPA's proposal after 50 minutes. Does anybody still trust the owners?

What choice to fans have? None.

The owners supply us with NHL hockey, period. End of story.

hotpaws 11-21-2012 11:01 PM

The players haven't offered anything different since the summer and i'm getting really tired of there stalling . If i was the league i wouldn't meet with the players until the 2nd week of Dec because it's obvious Fehr won't negotiate until the deadline to lose the season is close .

Ginu 11-21-2012 11:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Butch 19 (Post 55953327)
What choice to fans have? None.

The owners supply us with NHL hockey, period. End of story.

So you want the players to take whatever deal puts the game back on the ice?

MikeK 11-21-2012 11:06 PM

Serves Fehr right for waiting until the last minute to open up negotiations. Fehr seriously misjudged the situation, Bettman and the Owners. I think this last offer was just like the rest only worded differently. Fehr has cost the players a season and millions of dollars.

Paranoid Android 11-21-2012 11:30 PM

I don't trust either side. Never did. Where's the option for that?

Wingsfan2965* 11-21-2012 11:38 PM

Somebody should've told Fehr that he wasn't dealing with an idiot like Selig.

Like Bettman or not, he's good at what he does. Players are fighting a battle in which they have 0% of the leverage, why they still think they can win it is a mystery.

It's foolishness. The owners, whether right or wrong, are going to win, the players know it, and they'd rather lose money AND still be handed the deal the owners want. In the mean time we're the ones who get screwed out of hockey.

rt 11-21-2012 11:52 PM

I honestly can't believe the NHLPA has been offered anywhere near as sweet a deal as theyve been offered. I take their refusal to capitulate as a personal offense. I feel the NHLPA is shockingly entitled and i hope to see them humbled. Crawling around in the dirt forced to eat insects and filth humbled. That kind of humbled.

DyerMaker66 11-22-2012 12:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 (Post 55954045)
Somebody should've told Fehr that he wasn't dealing with an idiot like Selig.

Like Bettman or not, he's good at what he does. Players are fighting a battle in which they have 0% of the leverage, why they still think they can win it is a mystery.

It's foolishness. The owners, whether right or wrong, are going to win, the players know it, and they'd rather lose money AND still be handed the deal the owners want. In the mean time we're the ones who get screwed out of hockey.

But according to many people here Bettman doesn't do anything.:sarcasm:

Oshie97 11-22-2012 12:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hotpaws (Post 55953337)
The players haven't offered anything different since the summer and i'm getting really tired of there stalling . If i was the league i wouldn't meet with the players until the 2nd week of Dec because it's obvious Fehr won't negotiate until the deadline to lose the season is close .

100% agree, all they have done is reword offers this whole time. Fehr is treating this like a waiting game to get the best offer he can by stalling until the season is on the line. The players are now finding out that the lockout is going to cost them more than just taking the owners offer. This is why they asked for the league to pay for lost wages in the last proposal. In the end the owners will get what they want, the players will lose money, and the fans will get screwed.

octopi 11-22-2012 12:33 AM

My give a damn is busted. Where's that option?:p:

Kimota 11-22-2012 12:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rt (Post 55954333)
I honestly can't believe the NHLPA has been offered anywhere near as sweet a deal as theyve been offered. I take their refusal to capitulate as a personal offense. I feel the NHLPA is shockingly entitled and i hope to see them humbled. Crawling around in the dirt forced to eat insects and filth humbled. That kind of humbled.

Yea i'm shocked by all their getting in the proposal(like three years rookie entry contract to two years for example).

Also i've heard they agreed about the 50/50 split but the way they want to do it, doesn't it make it like the players would go from 57% to 56%? I mean that's a joke.

mranderson 11-22-2012 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ginu (Post 55953221)
Does anybody still believe the owners after the players went with a direct percentage and it was still rejected? The PA had a clause in there that revenue one year cannot be less than that of the previous year; but considering how the NHL added the rollback to the salary cap last CBA, they had to have a nugget in there for protection. Their premise, however, is now direct linkage and speaking the language of the NHL.

The NHL still rejected the NHLPA's proposal after 50 minutes. Does anybody still trust the owners?

My guess would be that the answer to this poll will depend mostly on how each forum user views this (additional) clause in the NHLPA offer:

Quote:

Originally Posted by NHLPA
The Upper Limit may not fall below 67.25M in any year of the agreement.

This is one of the major differences between the PA's and NHL's proposals regarding player share.

Those who view this difference in player share as being "immaterial *" (as per Don Fehr *) will likely choose one of the two "no" options.

Conversely, those who consider this as being a material difference will probably vote "yes."



* source: http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-l...sal_full_text/

Killion 11-22-2012 02:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mranderson (Post 55955667)
My guess would be that the answer to this poll will depend mostly on how each forum user views this (additional) clause in the NHLPA offer...

Do you now.... First of all mranderson, Welcome to hfBoards. I hope you find it a long strange trip, enjoy.... Second, no need to Bold for the readership. I understand you did so for shock value & dramatic effect, however, we have seen such tricks & pyrotechnics of the like in the past, and though novel, rather old hat.... now, would you care to explain why you felt it necessary to stoop to such dramatic pause? Outlining an entirely out of context unverifiable "source" in making such claims here, there & everywhere mine Scarlet Pimpernel? You do know who pays the freight at Sportsnet yes?

mranderson 11-22-2012 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Killion (Post 55955869)
Do you now.... First of all mranderson, Welcome to hfBoards. I hope you find it a long strange trip, enjoy.... Second, no need to Bold for the readership. I understand you did so for shock value & dramatic effect, however, we have seen such tricks & pyrotechnics of the like in the past, and though novel, rather old hat.... now, would you care to explain why you felt it necessary to stoop to such dramatic pause? Outlining an entirely out of context unverifiable "source" in making such claims here, there & everywhere mine Scarlet Pimpernel? You do know who pays the freight at Sportsnet yes?

Since you feel so strongly about my response, I hope you're willing to explain to me why you feel this was this taken out of context?

The section that I highlighted regarding player share was right there at the bottom of section 4. Furthermore, it was a statement released by the NHLPA. Sportsnet simply reported it.

Also, if you don't consider Sportsnet a reputible source, please do state why.

Killion 11-22-2012 03:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mranderson (Post 55955975)
...if you don't consider Sportsnet a reputible source, please do state why.

I dont think Sportsnet, TSN, the CBC are anything more than shills for the National Hockey League. Bought & paid for. I'll wait for the rubber to actually hit the road before Im biting on anything they have to advertise in the hopes that people will actually buy it.

mranderson 11-22-2012 09:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Killion (Post 55956049)
I dont think Sportsnet, TSN, the CBC are anything more than shills for the National Hockey League. Bought & paid for. I'll wait for the rubber to actually hit the road before Im biting on anything they have to advertise in the hopes that people will actually buy it.

That's a pretty extreme view that you have on TSN, Sportsnet, and CBC.

In any event, details of the NHLPA proposal itself came from a memo released by the NHLPA itself.

Now with respect to the OP and the whole issue of the NHLPA finally proposing a linked proposal: When you factor in the minimum cap amount must be $67.5 M, that sort of defeats the pupose of having linkage in the first place.

PensFanSince1989 11-22-2012 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mranderson (Post 55958437)
That's a pretty extreme view that you have on TSN, Sportsnet, and CBC.

In any event, details of the NHLPA proposal itself came from a memo released by the NHLPA itself.

Now with respect to the OP and the whole issue of the NHLPA finally proposing a linked proposal: When you factor in the minimum cap amount must be $67.5 M, that sort of defeats the pupose of having linkage in the first place.

Now, I could be wrong, but I do not believe the upper limit cap really affects the split of revenue. Having it at the guaranteed minimum f $67.5 million just means that if revenues aren't high enough to support it, that players will lose a bunch of money to escrow. Seems like a transitional rule to me, to make it so teams don't have to go dumping players to get under the cap. Instead, they'll just let escrow take care of it. And this is similar to how the NHL handled the transition (at least in earlier proposals) no? Just keep the high salary cap and let escrow take the money away.

PensFanSince1989 11-22-2012 09:53 AM

Though calling Sportsnet a mouthpiece for the NHL is laughable.

optimus2861 11-22-2012 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PensFanSince1989 (Post 55958757)
Now, I could be wrong, but I do not believe the upper limit cap really affects the split of revenue. Having it at the guaranteed minimum f $67.5 million just means that if revenues aren't high enough to support it, that players will lose a bunch of money to escrow.

No, the PA covered that one too. They added a clause that says their share in absolute dollars can not decline from any year to the next. The league probably laughed at that one in private before telling them "Hell no" in the bargaining room.

I can't answer the poll question; I'm still on the owners' side but there are elements in the PA proposal to negotiate from. At this point I feel the two sides really ought to stop talking to reporters, sit in the room, beat the crap out of each other and come to an agreement where neither side gets everything they want but they each get enough that they can live with it.

PensFanSince1989 11-22-2012 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by optimus2861 (Post 55958821)
No, the PA covered that one too. They added a clause that says their share in absolute dollars can not decline from any year to the next. The league probably laughed at that one in private before telling them "Hell no" in the bargaining room.

I can't answer the poll question; I'm still on the owners' side but there are elements in the PA proposal to negotiate from. At this point I feel the two sides really ought to stop talking to reporters, sit in the room, beat the crap out of each other and come to an agreement where neither side gets everything they want but they each get enough that they can live with it.

Yes,but that's a different clause. the $67.5 Million upper limit isn't really de-linkage.

The Phil 11-22-2012 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ranger de FLA (Post 55953323)
Screw em all.

Dear lord, this!


We are going to lose a second full season in less than a decade. How could anyone possibly support either side? We're the only fans who get this sort of treatment.

Ari91 11-22-2012 10:03 AM

That nugget of protection that you like to call it is delinkage. The players have proposed a 'we want part of all revenue growth but you can keep all the losses to your self, we still want our money'.

The players have still offered a framework that the league said they aren't prepared to accept. Those supporting the owners are bias, similarly, your take on the PA proposal is also bias. It's a step forward going 50/50 and negotiating off make whole and I do think that the premise of the economics are workable - mainly by eliminating such clauses which you like to call nuggets for protection.

The players had the opportunity to negotiate make whole back in October and potentially save an 82 game season and lose no games or money. They decided to play the waiting game with the league only to find that that false deadline wasn't so false after all. Players aren't entitled to compensation because their gamble of waiting didn't pay off.

saffronleaf 11-22-2012 10:06 AM

**** 'em both.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:00 PM.

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.