View Single Post
Old
11-02-2012, 09:01 PM
  #165
Steve
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Guelph, Ontario, Can
Posts: 1,237
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flamingo View Post
I'm on the owner's side in this one, but I would normally support a labour group holding firm in solidarity for what what they believe is their right.

In this case, why do the signed contracts have to be honoured beyond the terms of the last CBA? And why especially the super-bonus-loaded contracts that were designed that way to reward the players outside of the obvious reduction they'd take in the next CBA?

I admit, I would take satisfaction in the over-paying GM's having to deal with those contracts... but I think they were negotiated with the CBA adjustment in mind, with outrageous amounts and up-front bonuses.
I agree with you. I just feel it's more of a right/wrong thing for me. CBA or not, in my opinion, you agree to something, you honor it. ie. Would you support the players if they wanted to roll back years on their contracts so they could simply file for UFA and leave town? I see this as a similar even from the players side.

I see what the owners are trying to do, and I can even agree and sympathize with them. I just think they made it, don't expect others to fix it because we all know, they will be working to get around it less than 24hours after it's done. They need make it right going forward and if you're a team, work together to get it there. I think the hard line of, this is what we want and when we want it, is just wrong.

Lastly, the reason I support the players is because they took a significant cut last time to help the owners get "cost certainty" which they have screwed up again. Will you support them if they lock out the players next time because "they feel they are just paying too much"? No other businesses are run with guaranteed profits.

Steve is offline