Differences Between the NHL's October 16th offer and current CBA
View Single Post
01-07-2013, 01:16 PM
Join Date: Jul 2010
Originally Posted by
The problem with your logic is anyone can make up anything about honor and say that their side won. I say the owners got honor and valor and all of that because because and if you disagree with me that therefore the owners won then you're just out of touch. It's all eye of the beholder crap. I say the union was completely dishonored by having to accept a deal that ended up paying them less than they would have gotten two months ago - shameful tail between the legs moment where they were forced to supplicate themselves to ownership. It's true because I say so and if you don't see it the way I do you're out of touch.
Don't judge a deal on that kind of ********. Count the dollars.
I dont think honor or valor or any other silly notion like that have anything to do with it as much as the idea that if we just let them get away with it this time then what will they try and pull next time and the league pushed them in that direction by starting asking for the moon. Sure you can justify it as starting off hard and working to a solution in the middle but asking for too much surely had a negative impact on these negotiations. I think the players really wanted to show the owners they were willing to fight for every inch of ground they were giving up to make them hesitant to try it again. I actually think the 10 year term of the CBA probably came about from that and likely it's a win for the PA.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Halibut