Blinkage, Linkage & Stinkage (CBA & Lockout Discussion) XVII
View Single Post
10-28-2012, 04:34 PM
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
Join Date: Mar 2011
Originally Posted by
The league making the initial offer they did wasn't a sign to show players it isn't fair after they wanted to keep playing under it. It was a shot across the bow, a low-ball, a message. It was also an absolute waste of time and kicked things off horribly.
See, I disagree with this strongly. The NHL sees half its teams losing money and no other pro sports league in NA paying more than 50%. I think they identify 50% as their red line. They see the PA at 57%, their end goal at 50%, and then the most logical thing in the world for them to do is start at 43%. Goal is exactly halfway between.
Everybody acts like the first offer was terrible because the union pretended to faint, howled to the media, etc., and refused to negotiate with it. But I put that on them. I think that's
bad negotiating. And the proof in the pudding for me is that they're paying the price now. Their people are losing money now, more money than they could even make back under their own proposal, because they refused to look at a pretty logical first offer and play ball. They're going to end up worse off in the long run no matter how this negotiation concludes, because they didn't get their membership on board, give them reasonable expectations about what the league's red lines would probably be, and prepare them to try and get there.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by haseoke39