Lockout thread #2: mediation done - no progress
View Single Post
11-18-2012, 12:45 AM
Falcons Rise Up
Join Date: Oct 2011
Originally Posted by
So here is where we were:
Players get 57%
Contracts are as we knew them
Players get 50%
Contract rules make it much more difficult for players to make money, more time to reach free agency, second contract will be significantly less valuable
I fail to see what the players are getting.
Someone explain to me how this works? Because if I'm Fehr, I do not sign this. There need to be at least some concessions. He can't take this back to the PA and say this was a victory.....which is negotiating 101. Bettman put Fehr in a corner, and now we're wondering why no deal is made. Both sides need to later say they won, otherwise, nothing gets done.
Bettman needs to make concessions. This loser lawyer is a terrible human being and I hate him with all my heart. How I feel about him is not relevant though. What is relevant is that he has lead to 3 lockouts, and that he is single-handedly ruining the sport for everyone. The amount of frustration he has caused was already immense, and if he erases another year of hockey, this guy needs to be fired.
I actually want the PA to stay locked out for the year, and if that happens, stay locked out for a second year. The owners won't be strapping on skates, and let's be honest, if Crosby is not on NHL ice, they will not be able to charge the outrageous prices they already do.
If I'm a rich guy, I call a bunch of other rich guys, and I start a league. I know it sounds crazy, but I think there's money to be made here. Ok, maybe not yet, and a league is a stupid idea because it takes a lot of invested capital, but at some point you'd think you can hire these guys for some exhibition games or something? I know I'd pay to watch an All-Star game in Edmonton...
Ok vent over. I hate this entire situation.
Okay, I have to stop you at the bolded.
The only difference on how much the players get collectively paid is based on the salary cap. It's been shown that teams will either spend to their internal cap or spend to the salary cap. That is the
thing that decides how much players get paid. When you say, "it's more difficult for them to make money" that is bull **** because the money is still being doled out. How it's spread out is irrelevant. In fact, shorter length contracts incentivizes players to produce through their whole length of contract. That part is designed so you aren't paying someone later for their work today. It's just getting rid of cap circumvention. And if you argue, "well managers could just not give those contracts out" well the one manager who does destroys parity. If they collude to not give those contracts out, then it's against the law. I dont even see why that part is an issue with these negotiations honestly.
But yeah, they lose 7% in this situation without significant returns.
View Public Profile
Matt Ryan's albums
Find More Posts by Matt Ryan