Thread: OT: NHL vs. NHLPA
View Single Post
09-21-2012, 01:14 PM
Registered User
TheHudlinator's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,105
vCash: 50
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
It seems like you're brewing up a complex potion using no ingredients. The video doesn't say all that. It's basically a few player's -- who aren't needed for negotiations -- claiming that the players want to play hockey, while the owner's want to lock out hockey. It's an oversimplification for sure, but they're not wrong.

So the player's haven't changed their proposal, so they are at least equally to blame? But had the player's put together an offer equal to the owner's proposal, we'd have a much bigger gap of revenue being negotiated right now, so in turn, the players are negotiating fairly. For example, if the player's emulated the owner's offer and proposed 70+% of HRR, I guarantee they would've moved from that postion during this negotiation period back to at least 57%. But they never asked for concessions from the owners! Similiarly, had the owner's said we'll take 43% HRR long-term, but need concessions now, then the owner's would look like they haven't changed their proposal. So when moving from bloody slaverly to only "dictatorship" appears like movement in negotiations, it's still no better than those moving from dictatorship to more dictatorship.
I said it pisses me off because they act like they aren't equally at fault when they wouldn't negotiate last season and Fehr has left the negotiations multiple times so I don't feel bad for them and I am tired of them acting like the victim.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote