View Single Post
Old
12-07-2012, 12:09 AM
  #375
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,708
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buffalo87 View Post
Oh you mean like the owners all of the sudden deciding yesterday that they wanted a 10 year CBA with the "opt out" option for themselves after 8 years...as opposed to the 5 year deal that had been discussed previous (and both sides essentially agreed on).

I'm tired and don't feel like doing to research to list all the things the players have conceded on but if you believe the owners have given more than they've taken, then I guess there's really no point in discussing this.



Forgive me if I don't thank the owners for deciding to just take less. This isn't "giving back" or "giving in" as you like to phrase it. It's simply keeping things the way they were (or on topic of the money issue, taking less money than they had demanded off the bat, but still much more than previously) and focus their hardlining on other topics. It's not "giving" the players anything.


EDIT: And as far as that quote, not it's not that out there. It probably is true, there probably is some level of cracking within the NHLPA. I can't imagine that guys like Matt Ellis, Pat Kaleta, or Cody McCormick (just to name a few Sabres) are terribly thrilled with the current situation. Guys like Crosby, Richards, and Miller (the "face" guys) can afford it, 4th liners or tweeners may not be able to afford to lose a year of their career like this.


The players benefit from the things the owners dropped. Why on earth would the owners give the players even more things to inflate their salaries. Arbitration means players have ways to artificially inflate their salaries. In some cases massively. Its an incredibly pro player system.

I'm amazed anyone thinks the players are being "screwed" in any way shape or form. Had they accepted the owners system they would still be making a ton of money, and unlike their play, its guaranteed. They would have only one meaningful restriction to their contracts and that would be the 5 years limit (7 for re-signing your own RFAs/UFAs). Something that impacts a very small percentage of players.


Folks we're not talking about poor coal miners fighting for health care and a living wage against the evil mine owner. We are talking about players that even at the bottom of the pay scale are millionaires. Matt Ellis has 1.9mil in career earnings. I don't begrudge him a penny of it. But lets not pretend these players are being put upon and are fighting the good fight as a union. I don't know too many union workers in the real world that can take several months off and not get paid so they can have a pissing match with their employer.

joshjull is online now   Reply With Quote