View Single Post
11-17-2012, 05:52 AM
Registered User
Ola's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,822
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Freudian, firstly, if you are going to use terms like givining up or give concessions -- you need a starting point. And that goes both ways.

You cannot seriously tell me that what has been the case the last 6 years is not what the parties are negotating off. Albeit at diffrent degrees, but still. I mean if Fehr would put a new issue on the table, that in relation to the old CBA was more favorable to the players, Bettman undoubtedly would see that as a "concession" and ask for something in return. It seriously just don't work any other way. If Bettman wants major concessions, because that is what he wants, he needs to motivate them, and he has of course also tried to do that. Its nothing wrong with that, but lets call a spade a spade. You and I are both Swedes, we have a simular situation here in Sweden with the Scandinavian airline SAS. The owners of the airline have given the unions an option to take a 25% pay cut or the owners say that they will bankrupt the airline. They say its a necessity, they can't compete with the low-price rivals and they note that the high salaries in SAS was created during the monopoly era of the 80s. But, they are not saying "eeeehhh what you made SEK 100.000 a month yesterday, so what? You will now get SEK 75.000 that is not a concession". The CEO, Rickard Gustafson, instead said quote "I know that we demand alot from our employees".

Your position (hey they start from scratch, to think anything else is "completely bizarre") on this issue is just not in touch with reality. There is no way any union ever in the world would accept that. This is not like a unique position by Fehr, anyone that ever leads the PA would of course be of the same position on this as Fehr is (if we give back something that we had previously, its a concession). And vise versa for Bettman. Of course.

Secondly, lets be honest here, the two parties are within spitting distance of each other on core economics. It needs some repeating, because anything else is BS (from either side):

The two parties are within spitting distance of each other on core economics.

The two parties are within spitting distance of each other on core economics.

The two parties are within spitting distance of each other on core economics.

Given the labour dispute history of the PA and the owners, its absolutely freakin' absurd on behalf of Fehr, Bettman, the PA and the owners, to even loose a single game on this diffrence (if one game/round is 1/100 of the total revenue of the league, one game is 30m).

Still, the NHL and Bettman and managed to set out the agenda to again be about economics. With a great deal of help from all media channels they have in their pockets. Because they do not want this to be about what it really is about.

There is just no way of come to any other conclusion than that what this really is about is contractual issues. The PA say "hey we went from 57 to 50, why should we give back in other ares too?". And I am sure there are 4-5, if not more, like teams in the position of EDM, CBJ and co, who tells Bettman that they will support an agreement he can negotiate if that agreements helps them to keep players they've gathered through a rebuild. With 7/27 and current arbitration you could rebuild for 5 years and still fail unless you manage to establish yourself untill your stars hit 25 y/o... (sure they have a good point).

So you have a chicken race on contractual issues. This is what this is about Freudian. Undoubtedly.
Originally Posted by sina220 View Post
So a few smaller market teams trying to keep rookies are setting the main agenda for the NHL?

No man, its about money. Its always about money. Its about more owners needing more money from hrr to at least break even. Its about balancing the books so every team at least has a chance to break even. That's what the NHL really wants. They've already admitted they'd concede contract issues if the nhlpa would bargain off of their linked 50/50 split. Fehr just wont do it.
From the time the parties got to where they are today (what's this, a week ago), untill now. Yeah, I definitely think to a large extent that is the case. I am sure Bettman has to take into account what a minority want to get out of this. And I am not so sure that minority is all that small. Just look at what's happend in the NHL lately. A few organizations has been able to attract most UFA's. And its been very tough for not-so-attractive-clubs to get something going.

Other factors would be not being the party the finally bends over and stuff like that.

Last edited by Ola: 11-17-2012 at 06:00 AM.
Ola is offline