Owner-Player meeting only, no Bettman or Fehr (UPD: 12/4 in NYC)
View Single Post
12-01-2012, 12:23 PM
Join Date: Mar 2002
Originally Posted by
Number of people on each side doesn't matter because the split will be the same under any agreement. What the side gains will be split the same, what they lose will be split the same.
Players should have said enough on October 26th when it was clear that by allowing any games to be cancelled, they would inevitably make less money than if they took the deal (sure, they should have fought for the contracting stuff in the time they had and seen what they could have gotten, but that was secondary). That reality for them is compounded by the fact now that future HRR is probably going to take some hit as a result of this.
Will the pie need resplit in 6-8 years? We'll see. But that shouldn't have any bearing on what happens in this negotiation. The fact is, about half the owners in the league are hurting right now while players are doing better than ever. No other sports league in NA was paying more than 50% of revenue. The objective of both sides in every negotiation should be "how do we allocate our resources to have the healthiest, fastest growing product we can?" Scaring the other side into not asking for concessions from you has nothing to do with helping achieve that goal.
So if in 6 years teams are failing, you see what you can do to fix it. Players get half their jobs from owners who pay out of their own pocket just to keep their teams afloat. If players aren't interested in helping those folks, they don't know their own self-interest.
If I'm a small market owner, I don't believe decertification is going to move past the "look at us we're really gonna do it" stage. The players will never go through with it. They'll be endangering 100% of what they make to fight for something like 5% for only a couple years.
I differ on a couple of things here.
1) HRR will take a hit, but this is a loss to both sides, some people really only focus on the players losing money. I read somewhere the leafs and Habs made almost $400M between them in the past 3 years (sure they're the 2 biggest but they're losing a boatload)
2) The pie being split again is a huge deal. A significant number of players will be a part of the next one too. Although the league argues the last CBA is over and you don't use it in negotiations. Next CBA they will try to cut from 50/50 (or whatever they agree to), if it were 60/40, it would be worked off that number. These percentages never really disappear for this reason, not that I believe it's worth losing a season for.
3) Decertification - do I think it will ever come to be? no. That being said, I think it helps the players more than the owners. They're used to paying medical/travel/hotels etc... so why would they stop if they want to be competitive? Just let your team fail? The issue is the owners are screwing the owners here. if i'm a mid range player 20g-30a-50pts and I want $X guaranteed with benefits, you think Vancouver, LA (b/c of their success), Philly, Pitts etc.. won't give me whatever I want? (Ask Minnesota) The small markets have to try to compete with the big markets. The big markets, I believe don't care about this CBA and want to play b/c they're making money regardless. Do the big markets want higher profits? Absolutely, but have no interest in protecting the small teams. They'll destroy them if they had the chance.
Suggestion to the players to protect another lockout, every contract should ask for signing bonuses to be handed out 1-2 months after the next CBA ends.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Steve