View Single Post
Old
08-22-2012, 03:53 PM
  #52
CharlieGirl
Get well soon Kimmo
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Exiled One View Post
I'll amend my first statement to read "compensated professionals".


I'm not sure if they want it, but if I was a player, I'd vote for it. If I was a parent, I'd advise my kid to vote for it. If I was an agent, I'd advise my client to vote for it. If I was an owner, I'd advise my players to NOT vote for it. In fact, if I was an owner, I'd probably threaten my players to not vote for it in every way legally allowed.

BTW, though I'm obviously an NCAA fan based on my logo, I don't think a union helps NCAA hockey at all. If the compensation packages increased, more kids would probably choose that route, not less. I'm just for honesty and fair compensation... that's it.
The fact is that most players won't gain any benefit from the education package as it's being proposed, and there are conflicting comments about changes to the weekly stipend the players receive. In return, they stand to lose a lot of the perks they currently enjoy (cell phones, training, gas allowance in some cases). Finally, there is a chance that a union such as this will result in some franchises folding.

I do believe that the current $50 per week for 16-17 year olds should be updated. I don't have a problem in extending the window where a player can access his education package.

From discussions with other OHL fans I know, adding $1.50 per ticket per game to fund a union will not sit well. If the players want a union, let them pay for it out of their own pockets. In no way should it come at the expense of the fans, and personally, I want no part of any of my money going to support a union.

And God help them if there is ever a work stoppage.

CharlieGirl is offline   Reply With Quote