View Single Post
12-09-2012, 05:14 PM
Enlarged member
WhiskeySeven's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 23,408
vCash: 300
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
More and more people are starting to realize that Fehr is screwing the players, the owners, and the fans with his BS.
Fehr is a consultant and he can be replaced at any time. Fehr's role is greatly confused by you people. I can't speak for all the players but it's clear that they feel a) insulted by the initial offers and b) feel like they're losing at every corner.

Now can you disagree with both points? Forget the supposed "realities", just how they feel.

DAChampion seems to have decided that the owners are wrong simply because they have more money than the players. Everything done to show him that the owners are not actually in the wrong falls on deaf ears.
The money has a lot to do with it. A majority of the owners don't take a LIFE risk with their team. They don't even stake too much of their own money. For the players it literally their life, and their average career isn't even that long.

Again, this brings up lots of issues but mostly it ha to do with where you feel the owners fall. Are they investors or are they business owners in the modern sense? Are the players the product or are they employees of these businesses? Can me or you compare our work and job to theirs?

I am "envious" of the players getting to play a game I would love to be able to play for money. I would love to play hockey for my beloved Habs. I would also love to play football for my beloved Cowboys.
The players trained all their lives and sacrificed a lot to get to where they are. Much more than your parents or you were willing to sacrifice (so it seems). They sacrifice a lot every year. Being on the road for so long is a major issue that most people would not be able to comply with. Having to stay in tip-top shape is a major issue that most people would be able to comply with. Being a public figure is a significantly major issue that most people wouldn't even consider.

This is all clear, obviously, but it seems as though most of the anti-PA folks are glossing over these realities.

I am on the owners' side not out of "envy" for the players, but because I believe that the owners deserve 50% of the HRR, just like I believe the players deserve 50% of the HRR.
Why do you feel the owners are owed 50% of the fans' money?

I also think that a 10 year CBA and a 5 year limit on contracts helps to maintain some sort of competitive balance in the league.
The current offer in it's current state is massive ground lost for the players - I think we'd all agree. So the players are hesitant to give to an unknown system that clearly starts off disadvantaging them from the get-go.

I don't know where I stand on this but I can still consider it from the players' perspective and it makes a bit of sense.

I prefer the parity we have in Hockey to the garbage we see in Baseball.
Baseball is really, really competitive even with its whack financial structure. It's boring as hell to watch though, but that has nothing to do with it.

I want all NHL fans to have a team with a chance at succeeding and doing well, not just my beloved Habs, the Leafs, and the Rangers. I do not want to see the NHL become the next MLB where the richest teams can win far more often than not, and the little teams are basically feeder teams for the stronger ones.
Then you'd hate the current owners. The owners would've encouraged even more revenue sharing if theu were interested in parity.

Finally, I also refuse to agree that the players are the only ones "giving" in this process. When you consider all of the perks the players are given by the owners that are not part of the players' salaries, it is offensive to hear anyone on the players' side claim they get nothing.
Ok, from June '12 to Dec '12 the amount of the pie the players are to receive got smaller. This is not arguable.

The owners ensure that their players fly FIRST CLASS, not COACH. The owners put the players in very expensive rooms, get them great food, the best trainers, etc... SOME people want to dismiss that, take it for granted, but they need to realize that it all COSTS LOTS OF MONEY! Where does that money come from? Not the payers, that is for certain. The players "get" almost everything they could desire and more.
Actually if an owner wanted to skimp on stuff it would be his prerogative but his franchise would clearly not be appreciated as there are other teams which would. It's call competition. And the money comes from the fans, not the owner. Owners put very little of their money after the initial purchase - it's an investment not a continuous cost and for the most part the entire thing pays for itself and then some.

So what's your point with this?

So, I am not with the owners because I am "envious" of the players. I am with the owners because I think they hold the moral high ground in this particular instance.
Elaborate on this.

When the players were getting peanuts and not being as well cared for as they are today, I was in agreement with the players. The pendulum has swung the other way, too far, and so I am with the owners.
Didn't the pendulum swing last lockout? Salary cap and a huge reduction in the HRR-pie seems awfully like they gave up a lot - no? Now there are record revenues overall but problems with lower-revenue teams but to make up the difference they're going for the players. Seems wrong.

I hope people like DAChampion can finally stop insulting people to obfuscate their lack of an argument, and we can all finally stick to the facts of the debate.
I refrained from insulting you, let's see if we can come to a real discussion. But if you don't address ALL my questions you'll be dismissed.

WhiskeySeven is offline