HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   Detroit Red Wings (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34)
-   -   Step Back, Take a Deep Breath, and Look at the PA's Offer (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1304211)

RedWingsNow* 12-07-2012 12:03 PM

Step Back, Take a Deep Breath, and Look at the PA's Offer
 
Forget all the drama.

Look at what's offered. Why is the NHL angry

Why isn't this a done deal?

50/50
Make whole of $300M (about halfway between $182 and $390M)
8-Year Contracts with 25 percent variability
Pensions
8-Year CBA (With PA option at 6)
Cap Benefit Recapture -- Logical solution that penalizes teams if capdiving contract player retires too early


How can the NHL reject this? Why are people still crying about Fehr and the PA?

WingedWheel1987 12-07-2012 12:17 PM

Why cant the players accept the owners offer if they are so close? The players "want to play" right?

First time i have ever thought that the owners were negotiating in good faith and the players werent. I always thought the owners were just going to beat the players into the ground with a hammer until they got what they wanted. Now it looks like the players are the ones wielding the hammer.

GoAwayDanCleary 12-07-2012 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WingedWheel1987 (Post 56340875)
Why cant the players accept the owners offer if they are so close? The players "want to play" right?

First time i have ever thought that the owners were negotiating in good faith and the players werent. I always thought the owners were just going to beat the players into the ground with a hammer until they got what they wanted. Now it looks like the players are the ones wielding the hammer.

Because they want to find a nice median between the two. What ever happened to compromising in this world?

Run the Jewels 12-07-2012 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WingedWheel1987 (Post 56340875)
Why cant the players accept the owners offer if they are so close? The players "want to play" right?

First time i have ever thought that the owners were negotiating in good faith and the players werent. I always thought the owners were just going to beat the players into the ground with a hammer until they got what they wanted. Now it looks like the players are the ones wielding the hammer.

Eh, the owners have no idea what they want. First it was a 5 year CBA then it was 10 years. The NHLPA says "we are in complete agreement on the revenue split and dollar amount for make whole" which is the bright shiny object that always demands Gary Bettman's attention. The revenue split is the big picture reason why the NHL constantly locks the players out. It's always due to terrible franchises losing money. So hurrah, with a 50/50 split you'll possibly lose less money than you did last CBA! This could have easily been accomplished by lowering the cap floor and without missing a single NHL game.

While I don't see this deal being the magic elixir that makes terrible franchises magically profitable, I do not understand why the NHL owners need to freak out about rich owners who make tens of millions of dollars a year in pure profit and as a result spend up to the cap on their teams. Once again, a hard cap was designed to reign those teams in. Guess what? They are still making tens of millions of dollars a year in pure profit. And that's only going to continue to drive the salary cap up. And that money will be spent up to the absolute limit by the teams that have more money than they know what to do with.

Economics 101.

WingedWheel1987 12-07-2012 12:45 PM

The owners increased the amount for their make whole provision. They conceded ground and wanted CBA stability along with a limit on length of contracts. These are provisions that should not prevent the PA from accepting. Five years is a perfectly acceptable # for length of contract. Big name players can theoretically get two big money contracts.(certain players might get three) Free's up more money for players in the long run. This is just a greedy attempt to keep the top 1% as rich as possible while sacrificing the rest of the league. At least the owners dont pretend to be altruistic in their demands for more money. The players like to play it off like they are fighting for the little guy, when in reality they are doing the exact same thing as the owners.

Looks like Fehr fed them a spoonful of BS and told them that the players can get more concessions from the owners. That is a recipe for disaster.

David Stern called it nuclear winter if the NBAPA decertified. The NHLPA will have their nuclear winter and they will lose. Owners have a fallout shelter that can last for decades with enough food to feed a family of 40 for over a decade. Players have a one week supply of Ramen noodles in their basement.

RedWingsNow* 12-07-2012 01:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WingedWheel1987 (Post 56340875)
Why cant the players accept the owners offer if they are so close? The players "want to play" right?

First time i have ever thought that the owners were negotiating in good faith and the players werent. I always thought the owners were just going to beat the players into the ground with a hammer until they got what they wanted. Now it looks like the players are the ones wielding the hammer.

Wow..

Get real would you?

Consider the old economic system. Look at the PA offered.

Now think about how pissy Bettman was yesterday.

Something doesn't add up.

The owners are going to "Die on This Hill" to win 5 year contracts when the PA has gone from Ifinity to 8?

WingedWheel1987 12-07-2012 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bob (Post 56342129)
Wow..

Get real would you?

Consider the old economic system. Look at the PA offered.

Now think about how pissy Bettman was yesterday.

Something doesn't add up.

The owners are going to "Die on This Hill" to win 5 year contracts when the PA has gone from Ifinity to 8?

Forget the old system. All that matters is what the owners are willing to give up today. They want five, not eight. This is all about protecting the superstars who under produce.

Adding to the post underneath this, five vs eight is a big deal. It basically ensures one giant pay day per career. You could do six, but after that you risk only one big pay day per career.

RedWingsNow* 12-07-2012 01:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WingedWheel1987 (Post 56341719)
The owners increased the amount for their make whole provision. They conceded ground and wanted CBA stability along with a limit on length of contracts. These are provisions that should not prevent the PA from accepting. Five years is a perfectly acceptable # for length of contract. Big name players can theoretically get two big money contracts.(certain players might get three) Free's up more money for players in the long run. This is just a greedy attempt to keep the top 1% as rich as possible while sacrificing the rest of the league. At least the owners dont pretend to be altruistic in their demands for more money. The players like to play it off like they are fighting for the little guy, when in reality they are doing the exact same thing as the owners.

Looks like Fehr fed them a spoonful of BS and told them that the players can get more concessions from the owners. That is a recipe for disaster.

David Stern called it nuclear winter if the NBAPA decertified. The NHLPA will have their nuclear winter and they will lose. Owners have a fallout shelter that can last for decades with enough food to feed a family of 40 for over a decade. Players have a one week supply of Ramen noodles in their basement.


Right now, if the owners agree to the PA's offer, they've won this thing big.

Why in god's name would they want to risk decertification?

Are they stupid?
The PA has given and given and given.

Compare their offer to what the league wants. Compare their offer to where we were a year ago in the old system..


The owners have won this thing. Why don't they accept the trophy and drop the puck?

I think it's because they lockout was always designed to go to a certain date, just like in the NBA.

I think the owners were hoping to run around Fehr to win more in the week and they got played.

Next week, the owners will agree to an offer. Book it.

They're dumb. But they're not stupid enough to give Fehr the decertification war he might just want...

Not when the difference is 5 years vs 8 years.

You gotta be kidding me.

jkrx 12-07-2012 01:15 PM

People should go to their bosses and demand revenue... Players should play and get payed what the owners tell them to. If they don't like it, try earning more elsewhere.

Rzombo4 prez 12-07-2012 01:40 PM

Objectively, the sides just aren't that far apart. They of course don't see that because things have become so emotional and personal. I think we might see one or two more offers between the sides and then we will have an agreement. Face it, it isn't Fehr's or Bettman's first rodeo. Both know exactly what they are doing.

TS Quint 12-07-2012 02:22 PM

What it sounded like was when the players and owners met on Tuesday the players said X,Y and Z are our problems. The owners said OK we can move and solve those problems. The players went back to Fehr and said the owners have come with solutions for X,Y and Z. Fehr then told them to go back and demand A,B and C. Fehr is looking to keep pushing until a date he has in his mind. Probably just before he thinks the owners are going to cancel the season.

The Zetterberg Era 12-07-2012 02:27 PM

Oh wow breaking news you are in line with the players CB.:laugh:

One can very easily say step back and look at the owners offer before it was cherry picked yesterday. Was that not a reasonable offer. That 300 million and a lot of the movement on contracts was contingent on some of the things they deemed valuable. The two sides basically got together and said what are your three most important things. The owners included all three of the players main components, the players included one. It is about that simple, so step back and look at it that way.

But by all means keep looking at this as a point by point give and take process. Certain things have a lot more weight, you heard that yesterday or at least I did, all I can really hope is the NHLPA did.

They got the owners to negotiate against themselves for a long time and it stopped yesterday, it was going to happen eventually.

jkrx 12-07-2012 03:05 PM

Whats hard with coming to a term where owners earn the revenue and things around that and pay players a salary like how it works at any job?

FissionFire 12-07-2012 03:07 PM

If 5 year contracts is such a stupid thing to hold out for, why not just have the players agree to it and call it a done deal? I mean since contract length isn't such an important issue in your opinion CB....

The fact that the NHL is willing to stand firm to the 5-year contracts isn't some grand revelation. At the very start of this the two points that every analyst agreed were the goals of the owners was the reduction of the players share of revenues (pretty much everyone assumed that it'd end up at 50/50 eventually) and contract length (5-year limit has been pretty much a firm stance from day 1). Why the PA would even think that an 8-year max term would be acceptable to the NHL when for months the league has been unwilling to move off of 5 years is beyond any rational thought. The only reasons the NHLPA would have for NOT accepting the 5-year limit are 1) ensuring top players get paid even if they underperform, or 2) ensuring top players get paid many many millions even if they get injured early in a long contract. Either way I don't see how fighting on contract length serves the interest of the majority of the NHLPA membership who likely will never even be offered a 5-year contract in their career, nonetheless an 8-year one.

You are a pro-union, pro-players guys CB. Do you really feel Fehr is acting in the best interests of the majority of the NHLPA membership by fighting the battle between 5 or 8 year contracts that will apply to likely at most the top 5% of the union or less? I never took you for a guy who'd support the trampling of the little guy in favor of the selfish desires of the elitist superminority.

RedWingsNow* 12-07-2012 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedWings19405 (Post 56345197)
Oh wow breaking news you are in line with the players CB.:laugh:

One can very easily say step back and look at the owners offer before it was cherry picked yesterday. Was that not a reasonable offer. That 300 million and a lot of the movement on contracts was contingent on some of the things they deemed valuable. The two sides basically got together and said what are your three most important things. The owners included all three of the players main components, the players included one. It is about that simple, so step back and look at it that way.

But by all means keep looking at this as a point by point give and take process. Certain things have a lot more weight, you heard that yesterday or at least I did, all I can really hope is the NHLPA did.

They got the owners to negotiate against themselves for a long time and it stopped yesterday, it was going to happen eventually.


Oh my god.
Just because you MAY be INLINE with the owners, doesn't mean I am in line with the PA.

I wanted the PA to go after the cap if they were going to fight.

If the PA was going to fight for two months or more, I wanted the owners to get smacked.

But that's not happening. The PA has lost.

Forget the crap. Open your eyes. And look at the deal.

RedWingsNow* 12-07-2012 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FissionFire (Post 56346699)
If 5 year contracts is such a stupid thing to hold out for, why not just have the players agree to it and call it a done deal? I mean since contract length isn't such an important issue in your opinion CB....

The fact that the NHL is willing to stand firm to the 5-year contracts isn't some grand revelation. At the very start of this the two points that every analyst agreed were the goals of the owners was the reduction of the players share of revenues (pretty much everyone assumed that it'd end up at 50/50 eventually) and contract length (5-year limit has been pretty much a firm stance from day 1). Why the PA would even think that an 8-year max term would be acceptable to the NHL when for months the league has been unwilling to move off of 5 years is beyond any rational thought. The only reasons the NHLPA would have for NOT accepting the 5-year limit are 1) ensuring top players get paid even if they underperform, or 2) ensuring top players get paid many many millions even if they get injured early in a long contract. Either way I don't see how fighting on contract length serves the interest of the majority of the NHLPA membership who likely will never even be offered a 5-year contract in their career, nonetheless an 8-year one.

You are a pro-union, pro-players guys CB. Do you really feel Fehr is acting in the best interests of the majority of the NHLPA membership by fighting the battle between 5 or 8 year contracts that will apply to likely at most the top 5% of the union or less? I never took you for a guy who'd support the trampling of the little guy in favor of the selfish desires of the elitist superminority.

No. I'm not Pro PA

I am anti-owner and anti-lockout.

So friend of your enemies, I suppose.

And no, I am saying right now that the deal the PA is offering is VICTORY for the owners.

That's what I am saying.

Fehr and the PA have lost. Look at the deal.

You guys are crying about 5 year deals vs 8 years and you supporting owners who want to DIE ON THAT HILL.

Take yourself out of the the Players vs Owners BS for five seconds and look.

TS Quint 12-07-2012 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bob (Post 56346885)
No. I'm not Pro PA

I am anti-owner and anti-lockout.

So friend of your enemies, I suppose.

And no, I am saying right now that the deal the PA is offering is VICTORY for the owners.

That's what I am saying.

Fehr and the PA have lost. Look at the deal.

You guys are crying about 5 year deals vs 8 years and you supporting owners who want to DIE ON THAT HILL.

Take yourself out of the the Players vs Owners BS for five seconds and look.

The problem is what the players want is a moving target.

RedWingsNow* 12-07-2012 03:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TS Quint (Post 56347209)
The problem is what the players want is a moving target.

Right now. Agree to it. And the owners win.

The owners have won this thing. They can try to win it a little more. But that comes with an incredible amount of risk.

The Zetterberg Era 12-07-2012 03:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bob (Post 56346759)
Oh my god.
Just because you MAY be INLINE with the owners, doesn't mean I am in line with the PA.

I wanted the PA to go after the cap if they were going to fight.

If the PA was going to fight for two months or more, I wanted the owners to get smacked.

But that's not happening. The PA has lost.

Forget the crap. Open your eyes. And look at the deal.

I have my eyes wideopen, just because people don't agree with you doesn't mean they don't see what is happening. We just have different opinions. You are absolutely a PA hardliner have been since the start. Don't pretend otherwise it is fine. I am pretty heavily owner at least I own it. I am frustrated with both sides in any event.

But they asked for three major points and gave them and then didn't get theirs back. My opinion is by the way this new 10 year CBA length is the sponsors pushing and it has gotten there because of what both sides have done. I would like to see them go to the 8 and 6 (fine meet at 9 and 7) if that wrapped up the deal, but that is about it. The 5 year contracts and 7 year option for the team is important to them. It makes sense given what a lot of these deals have done and the insurance issues moving forward. I would expect them to make some compromise on variance to make that happen.

For the record CB Owners and their advisors don't see decertification as a risk and I tend to agree with them. That is a very interesting route to take, but there are significant risks for the players in that course as well. You also have to vote to decertify and right now we aren't even sure because Fehr isn't allowing them to vote on anything if that will even carry. Putting this to a decertification vote might turn out to see 400 guys vote to not do it and then tell him to accept close to whatever deal was just out there. I haven't seen a lot that would indicate they love the idea of decertification as a whole. I guess we will find out soon though. James Duthie eluded to the fact he believed the vote on the owners proposal might have carried and would have at least been very close.

RedWingsNow* 12-07-2012 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedWings19405 (Post 56347465)
I have my eyes wideopen, just because people don't agree with you doesn't mean they don't see what is happening. We just have different opinions. You are absolutely a PA hardliner have been since the start. Don't pretend otherwise it is fine. I am pretty heavily owner at least I own it. I am frustrated with both sides in any event.

But they asked for three major points and gave them and then didn't get theirs back. My opinion is by the way this new 10 year CBA length is the sponsors pushing and it has gotten there because of what both sides have done. I would like to see them go to the 8 and 6 (fine meet at 9 and 7) if that wrapped up the deal, but that is about it. The 5 year contracts and 7 year option for the team is important to them. It makes sense given what a lot of these deals have done and the insurance issues moving forward. I would expect them to make some compromise on variance to make that happen.

Don't accuse me of lying.
I am anti-owner. Not Pro PA.
You may be Pro-owner. Good for you


In every single area, the PA has moved immensely to the owners' side

And I hate it.

But it's true.

If you want pretend that hasn't happened. be my guest.

I'm the Red Wings fan who has been constantly accused of Not Being a Red Wings fan because I am critical of "my team."

I'm critical of Fehr. He has disappointed me. He's done nothing but give concessions.

I've said countless times,
there are 3 options
1. Cave quick, don't miss games/.
2. Fight a long time and cave
3. Fight until victory/.

We're looking at #2. That's a criticism of Fehr and the PA (understanding the PA may have demanded this tactic from its counsel).

The owners apparently think they're going to keep getting more. But it's a dangerous game. it cost them $100M yesterday and it could cost them a lot more.

FissionFire 12-07-2012 03:32 PM

Look at what? The Owners have never budged on 5-year contracts from Day 1 so why it is hard to believe that it is one of their top priorities for the CBA negotiation? You can't just go into a bubble and ignore that. The fact that the NHL "won" is immaterial since everyone knew from the start they would win and gain concessions from the NHLPA, it was just a matter of how much they'd "win". Saying that the owners should be happy that they "won" is rather hollow since they really never had any realistic scenario where they could "lose".

Owners want 5-year contracts. Owners have never budged one iota from demanding 5-year contracts. It seems unlikely the union will be able to negotiate any type of middle ground on this issue and should instead concede that point and try to get a concession in return for it. You can't just ignore that.

Rzombo4 prez 12-07-2012 03:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkrx (Post 56346629)
Whats hard with coming to a term where owners earn the revenue and things around that and pay players a salary like how it works at any job?

That was life before the salary cap! Now you seem to be supporting a group of individuals seeking an even stronger salary cap? What exactly do you want?

Run the Jewels 12-07-2012 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jkrx (Post 56342657)
People should go to their bosses and demand revenue... Players should play and get payed what the owners tell them to. If they don't like it, try earning more elsewhere.

Yes, I am sure in return the owners would gladly:

1. Eliminate the draft so players would be free to sign wherever they like.
2. No contracts which would allow the player to sign elsewhere during any offseason at their liking. Unfettered free agency!
3. No salary cap! Let the free market decide how much a player is worth! (that worked so well, didn't it? the owners did such a good job that a salary cap wasn't necessary! such captains of industry!!)

You obviously do not understand that hockey is not a free market, like the larger economy. Players are tied to the team that drafts them. Then that team owns their professional hockey rights. In order for the team to maintain those rights they need to give something back to the players. Should Sid Crosby play for the Penguins if the Penguins owner decides he only wants to pay him $1 million per year? That's a heck of a lot of money! Shouldn't Sid be happy just to be so richly rewarded? Why on earth would he ever need more than that?

If the owners are as all knowing as you seem to think why are we on our third straight lockout? Once the owners realized the CBA didn't work, shouldn't they have simply locked the players out while the last CBA was still in effect?

The Zetterberg Era 12-07-2012 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Captain Bob (Post 56347581)
Don't accuse me of lying.
I am anti-owner. Not Pro PA.
You may be Pro-owner. Good for you

Not that it will really matter, but I am anti-union. That is across all walks. While a lot of people dislike the pro sports unions because of the wealth of the constituents at least they aren't trying to dictate policy for society as a whole like the UAW or CCPOA. I don't begrudge people for joining them but I rarely agree with a lot of positions taken by them.

I understand a lot of what they are asking for, 50/50 and to be honest a little north of 50 for the owners makes sense to me. They own the business. But pretty much I guess my anti-union feelings are bleeding over. So you see because I seem to more often than not think like the owner, agree with the owners, I must be pretty pro-owner. You see how that works? If almost everything you say is in complete agreement with the players you are pro NHLPA.

You are basically saying because you think they should actually want to break the cap and go even harder that makes you not pro PA. I guess but at this point that would be like me saying I see no problem with the first owners proposal in July (for the record I did). I am disappointed the owners didn't just keep after that offer so I am no longer pro-owner they are not smashing them hard enough. I was hoping they would do it in such a fashion the union would break altogether and sports unions would no longer be around.

RedWingsNow* 12-07-2012 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by FissionFire (Post 56347593)
Look at what? The Owners have never budged on 5-year contracts from Day 1 so why it is hard to believe that it is one of their top priorities for the CBA negotiation? You can't just go into a bubble and ignore that. The fact that the NHL "won" is immaterial since everyone knew from the start they would win and gain concessions from the NHLPA, it was just a matter of how much they'd "win". Saying that the owners should be happy that they "won" is rather hollow since they really never had any realistic scenario where they could "lose".

Owners want 5-year contracts. Owners have never budged one iota from demanding 5-year contracts. It seems unlikely the union will be able to negotiate any type of middle ground on this issue and should instead concede that point and try to get a concession in return for it. You can't just ignore that.

Die on the Hill then.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:52 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.