View Single Post
11-30-2012, 10:28 AM
Registered User
CapnCornelius's Avatar
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 10,986
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
What I stated was accurate. The NHLPA is just as greedy and corrupt as Bettman and the owners of the large market teams.
Define "greedy"? Last I saw, one side is clearly taking a cut already (the players) and the other is not content with that, they are holding out for a bigger cut.

The NLHPA hasn't proposed a solution, and as I said in many other posts, neither have the owners.

They knew from day one that their "solution" wasn't going to be approved. Same from the owners.
This false equivalence is hillarious. Fehr hasn't made a ton of proposals in this negotation, certainly. But what he did do when pushed was come to the table with a deal that even Bettman now agrees how far apart they are. A reasonable group of owners/commissioner would see that and go, "alright, we're X apart, let's get them to Y and call it a day." Instead, the league is being wholly unreasonable about both the amount and the contracting issues, which should be a minor concern.

To make matters worse, one of the guys leading the charge for the take no prisoners approach is none other than Craig Leipold. This is the rocket scientist who spent $200 million over the summer. On 2 players. Now suddenly he's crying poor. One of the lowest, most disengenous things I've seen. Hands these guys these contracts and apparently had his fingers crossed and now wants to grab back a portion of the contracts he offered. Nothing on the players side compares to this.

Ultimately the NHLPA wants every team to make no profit. After all profit is greed. Every dollar of profit should go to union members.

Frankly I don't give a crap what you think, but players demanding 50%+ of league wide revenue is obscene.
Yes, the players all hope to bankrupt the entire league. Then they'll really show the owners!

Apparently you didn't pay attention to what Fehr accomplished as head of the MLBPA and neither did guys like Leipold or JPMac. To the contrary of what you are suggesting, Fehr is quite aware that teams need to make money in order to be able to spend money. If owners don't turn profits, eventually there won't be very many owners. So, while in the short run it would be great for players to make 100% of the profits, it wouldn't be a sustaining model. I'm sure Sydney Crosby would like the Penguins to exist long enough to pay him his full contract.

Which is why it was Fehr who raised revenue sharing. He was quite successful in improving the lot of the small market teams while with the MLBPA and it appears he's taking a similar approach here. So, your complaint is unfounded if not directly contradictory to all evidence available from the current negotiation.

Also, 50% revenue to compensation ratio is hardly unheard of. Most small businesses run above that (closer to 70%). Most financial institutions run above that. Fortune 500 companies that aren't financials? Maybe not, but they are at a different level than most businesses.

Sorry, as things have progressed in this negotiation it is quite clear that one side is being less reasonable by far and it is the owners led by Bettman who gets cart blanche to run this thing unless 23 teams vote him down.

CapnCornelius is offline