View Single Post
Old
11-05-2012, 09:47 AM
  #228
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
If the players had walked out from the playoffs there could have been significant legal penalties. All the NHL had to do was to reach a walkout-prevention agreement before starting the season -- they didn't try.

The players had a chance to negotiate before the season. They decided to play hardball and get pissy by being "insulted" by the same offer the owners were living with. As such, why would the owners give up the leverage of withholdiing player salaries to allow the players to do what they want? It doesn't make sense. The owners tried to negotiate before the season was lost. The owners even made an offer after the season was postponed to get a full season. The players refused, again. So, yes, they "tried".

At some point you will have to start following the news.

At some point you will have to turn the other half of your brain on and stop drinking and watching TV while posting online. I have been following. When I posted what you replied to, the owners had just made an attempt to sweeten their offer to the players and the players had not offered anything substantial in return (http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=408711 I actually posted my reply the afternoon that the article this links to was posted). I am up to date, but I also have a job that requires my full, non-alcohol addled attention to do, so sometimes I might not be as up-to-date as I would like. This was not one of those times, though... (Do you really like this snarky back and forth crap?!?!)

Both the players and the owners have made offers, and the players have offered a long-term 13% cut in salaries versus trend as a concession. It is up to the owners to make concessions now. The players are not asking for much: they want their contracts honoured.
Yes, both have made offers. The owners have done far more moving from their original position than the players. now, that is probably because the owners initial "offer" was designed to spark discussion, not be truly successful. However, at least an offer was made. The players have been the ones who have not been putting offers on the table that would have a remote chance of success. Fehr is trying to win a pissing match, not truly negotiate. After what was reported about the players 3 counter offers being a simple basic outline on a single piece of paper, it seems like the players are the ones not trying hard enough.

By the way, the players are just as guilty as the owners of signing those pre-CBA expiration contracts. They were as aware as the owners that any salary stipulated in those contracts could get rolled back in CBA negotiations. If they didn't get anything in the contract to prevent such a thing from happening, tough luck.

Drydenwasthebest is offline