HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Ladies and gentleman we are going on a strike or lock-out

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-18-2012, 02:59 PM
  #276
RC51
Registered User
 
RC51's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,694
vCash: 500
ok. this entire thing is Bettman's idea. We all know he is at the very front of all this idea of keeping The yotes in the dessert and away from Quebec city. He is running out of options as this fiasco unfolds at city hall in the dessert. The league is spending a ton of money every year to stop the Yotes from folding. SO Bettman is using the CBA to divert the attention away from his personal intention to keep them in the dessert.
WHY? the only thing I can come up with is that Bettman has been warned by ( THE BLACK HAND ) to sell the team to a front man. Now go back to the CBA, drag a ton of money out of the hands of the players then divert the CASH GAINS in the Yotes. NHL continues to pour MILLIONS in the dessert for free. It will all end up in the hands of the MOB.
Quebec city continues to build at the tax payers expense ( 400 Mil or so). When it's done building and ready to go, the MOB sells the yotes to Quebec city for MILLION again and the MOB get to wash a ton of money they need to make legal. Everything get pushed under the rug because Nordiques are back and the place is full every game. Bettman get his standing ovation for making the MOB and the other OWNERS more super rich at the expense of the Players and the Province of Quebec and the fans that will have to pay double the ticket price to pay back the City.

Now there you go , I worked it all out for you all.

RC51 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 03:45 PM
  #277
gillyguzzler
Registered User
 
gillyguzzler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,761
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RC51 View Post
ok. this entire thing is Bettman's idea. We all know he is at the very front of all this idea of keeping The yotes in the dessert and away from Quebec city. He is running out of options as this fiasco unfolds at city hall in the dessert. The league is spending a ton of money every year to stop the Yotes from folding. SO Bettman is using the CBA to divert the attention away from his personal intention to keep them in the dessert.
WHY? the only thing I can come up with is that Bettman has been warned by ( THE BLACK HAND ) to sell the team to a front man. Now go back to the CBA, drag a ton of money out of the hands of the players then divert the CASH GAINS in the Yotes. NHL continues to pour MILLIONS in the dessert for free. It will all end up in the hands of the MOB.
Quebec city continues to build at the tax payers expense ( 400 Mil or so). When it's done building and ready to go, the MOB sells the yotes to Quebec city for MILLION again and the MOB get to wash a ton of money they need to make legal. Everything get pushed under the rug because Nordiques are back and the place is full every game. Bettman get his standing ovation for making the MOB and the other OWNERS more super rich at the expense of the Players and the Province of Quebec and the fans that will have to pay double the ticket price to pay back the City.

Now there you go , I worked it all out for you all.
Who knew? The Black Hand in the dessert is at the root of this! Glad to know. Thanks! Now you gave me a craving for some DQ for desert.

gillyguzzler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 04:07 PM
  #278
HCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Wild West
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyReb View Post
And 90% of NBA contracts are guaranteed.

Again, people are picking and choosing the elements of the NFL and NBA deals that seem to be the "best" and by "best" they usually mean "best for the owners." They want the NHL to have a deal like the NFL and NBA do, just, you know, not like the NFL and NBA do.

I wonder what would happen if Donald Fehr took the NFL's and NBA's CBAs, threw them on the table and told the NHL to take the one they want, as is, no changes. I highly doubt that would fly.
I am not sure where you are coming from. Are you saying it is okay for the NHLPA to pick and choose those elements of the existing CBA that suit them but it is not okay for the NHL to pick and choose elements that they would like to change?

HCH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 04:12 PM
  #279
JohnnyReb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HCH View Post
I am not sure where you are coming from. Are you saying it is okay for the NHLPA to pick and choose those elements of the existing CBA that suit them but it is not okay for the NHL to pick and choose elements that they would like to change?
How do you get that impression?

People have been saying the players need to accept 50% because "all" the other major sports do (not counting MLB of course), but they disregard the other ways that the those leagues are different from the NHL, ways which benefit the players. If you want to pick the "best" aspects of those CBAs for the owners, then yes, the players should be able to pick the "best" aspects of those CBAs for the players. But of course people don't want that.

Again, I would like to see what would happen if Fehr said "you want to be like the NBA or NFL? Fine, let's be EXACTLY like the NBA or NFL."

I suspect the owners would be tripping over themselves to get out of those deals.

JohnnyReb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 05:39 PM
  #280
Miller Time
Registered User
 
Miller Time's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 8,322
vCash: 500
as frustrating... infuriating, as it would be to lose part or a full season...

imagine if the season gets shelved, and we end up in another draft lottery situation, where quite likely we'd end up in the lower-tier(assuming they used a similar formula to last time), thus getting a strong shot at a top-5 pick...

- end up with a top forward prospect like Mackinnon, Monahan, Barkov
- lose a year of Gomez/Kaberle/Bourque
- be in a much more favorable situation to move any of the above since they'd have 1(gomez/kaberle) or 2 (bourque) years left on their deals
- 1 extra year of development for our borderline NHL prospects (Leblanc/Geoffrion/Palushaj/Weber) and for our top young guys they'd surely find spots world-wide where they'd be in starring roles (Maxpac/subban/desharnais/eller) assuming they weren't ripping it up in the AHL.

from an organization pov, losing a year of NHL play might actually be a FF to having a legit contender since it would remove any pressure on the management team to make any "win now" moves, it would give us a great shot at another lottery pick (without having to suffer through a lottery-pick season), it would give our talented young assets an extra year to develop away from the intense pressure/scrutiny of Montreal, and it would bring the talented prospects we already have 1 year closer to being NHL assets (Gally, Gallagher, Beaulieu, Tinordi et.)


more I think about it, more it might actually turn into a "silver lining" for us... once you get away from the hole "year without NHL hockey" suckiness.

Miller Time is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 09:54 PM
  #281
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyReb View Post
So what is your COMPROMISE?

If you want to cut the player's share to 50%, what are you going to give the players?
They can lower the salaries on rookies and increase the lengths of ELC, and the age of free agency for players drafted in 2013 onwards.

That will transfer money from future players to current players. The NHLPA is made of current players so I can't see why they'd say no.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 10:04 PM
  #282
Mathradio
Go Roy Munson!
 
Mathradio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 9,562
vCash: 500
If lockout or strike there was, perhaps we can actually send off Tinordi to Magnitogorsk until the work stoppage ends...

Mathradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 10:06 PM
  #283
HCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Wild West
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,744
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnnyReb View Post
How do you get that impression?

People have been saying the players need to accept 50% because "all" the other major sports do (not counting MLB of course), but they disregard the other ways that the those leagues are different from the NHL, ways which benefit the players. If you want to pick the "best" aspects of those CBAs for the owners, then yes, the players should be able to pick the "best" aspects of those CBAs for the players. But of course people don't want that.

Again, I would like to see what would happen if Fehr said "you want to be like the NBA or NFL? Fine, let's be EXACTLY like the NBA or NFL."

I suspect the owners would be tripping over themselves to get out of those deals.
Leaving the NFL and NBA aside, I still have no idea on where you stand. The deal has to work on its merits for both sides and not whether it is better or worse than other pro sports deals. I have no idea where the cut-off needs to be in order to ensure that franchises are viable... which is far different that looking at gross league revenues.

From the players point of view, what is better. Is it 57% of revenues in a 24 team league or is it 46% of revenues in a 30 team league. That is one of the issues.

One of the issues the players might want to fight for is the number of franchises. The more franchises the more players.

If it works at 57% then I am happy with that, if it takes a reduction to 46% I am happy with that, too. I don't want this settled just so we can have a season next year, I would like to see something viable in place for the next 10 years... even if that means delaying the start of the season.

HCH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 10:11 PM
  #284
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Strik_IX View Post
What a well thought out rebuttal... idk answered with respect and facts and you basically ignore everything he said on the sole assumption that some of that info came from Fox?

The majority of owners got rich by being smart and taking risks, end of story. (Our owner inherited a company from a smart risk taker, but he seems pretty well groomed)
Molson may be well-groomed, but he inherited his wealth. That was my first point: a huge swath of wealth is from inheritances and government subsidies. It doesn't come from "brilliance". If Geoff Molson had been so well-raised by middle class parents he wouldn't be Geoff Molson.

The facts idk pulled up largely rebut his argument (e.g. Lehman Brothers) and in any case were just a copy/paste job, probably from wikipedia, though in his case he may have used conservapedia.

Let's look up the pacific vision.
Anaheim Ducks: Owned by Disney. This company is backed by government. See the Mickey Mouse Protection Act.
LA Kings: Philip Anschutz and Edward Roski Jr, both inherited wealth.
San Jose Sharks: Owned by a consortium. HP Pavillon arena, a prize asset, was financed by the government.
Dallas Stars: Tom Gaglardi, inherited wealth.
Phoenix Coyotes: Not applicable.


Last edited by DAChampion: 07-18-2012 at 10:18 PM.
DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 10:14 PM
  #285
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathradio View Post
If lockout or strike there was, perhaps we can actually send off Tinordi to Magnitogorsk until the work stoppage ends...
Didn't half the league go to Europe last time?

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 10:18 PM
  #286
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HCH View Post
Leaving the NFL and NBA aside, I still have no idea on where you stand. The deal has to work on its merits for both sides and not whether it is better or worse than other pro sports deals. I have no idea where the cut-off needs to be in order to ensure that franchises are viable... which is far different that looking at gross league revenues.

From the players point of view, what is better. Is it 57% of revenues in a 24 team league or is it 46% of revenues in a 30 team league. That is one of the issues.

One of the issues the players might want to fight for is the number of franchises. The more franchises the more players.

If it works at 57% then I am happy with that, if it takes a reduction to 46% I am happy with that, too. I don't want this settled just so we can have a season next year, I would like to see something viable in place for the next 10 years... even if that means delaying the start of the season.
It's really hard to see the owners contracting the league.

Yes the losing teams lose money, but if you get rid of 6 teams the TV contracts are going to crash. It could mean the difference between a large TV contract and no TV contract.

Further, there are several decent relocation options. Quebec City, Seattle, Cleveland,
are possible choices for relocation. The largest city in North America without a pro sports franchise is Las Vegas, and their metropolitain population is ~2 million.

DAChampion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 10:56 PM
  #287
Mathradio
Go Roy Munson!
 
Mathradio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 9,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Didn't half the league go to Europe last time?
Spread out over dozens of leagues... but Tinordi's situation is such that, if a KHL team other than Metallurg Magnitogorsk wanted to sign him (until he hits KHL UFA age, which is 28) Magnitka has to trade him away first.

Mathradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-18-2012, 11:21 PM
  #288
Takashi
Registered User
 
Takashi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 952
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathradio View Post
Spread out over dozens of leagues... but Tinordi's situation is such that, if a KHL team other than Metallurg Magnitogorsk wanted to sign him (until he hits KHL UFA age, which is 28) Magnitka has to trade him away first.
Won't Tinordi play with the bulldogs even if there's a lockout in the nhl?

Takashi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 08:27 AM
  #289
JohnnyReb
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 599
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HCH View Post
Leaving the NFL and NBA aside, I still have no idea on where you stand.
This is where I stand.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HCH View Post
The deal has to work on its merits for both sides and not whether it is better or worse than other pro sports deals.
I jumped into this thread in response to those who were saying that the NHLPA "has to" accept a 50-50 split, because that's what "all" the other major sports do. Not only is that not true (baseball of course doesn't), but I was trying to say that if you want to play the "but the other leagues" card then the NHLPA too can play the "but the other leagues" card. Just because the other leagues do it doesn't mean it is good or right for the NHL. Would a 50-50 split be better for the NHL owners? Sure. Would a cap floor set at 95% of the ceiling? Not so much. As you say, what is the breaking point, and what are you going to give up to get that? Free agency at 25? 95% floor? Another season lost to a lockout?

As I said, people are picking the best aspects of the other CBAs, and by best they mean "best for the owners." If you think the union needs to be crushed and that players should "just be happy to play hockey" then fine. Not much point in further discussion. But if you think that the deal needs to be fair and palatable to both sides, then "but the other leagues do it" is probably not the best way to go.

JohnnyReb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 08:38 AM
  #290
24Cups
Registered User
 
24Cups's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathradio View Post
If lockout or strike there was, perhaps we can actually send off Tinordi to Magnitogorsk until the work stoppage ends...
Or ... we could have him play in Hamilton where he is likely to be anyway. (Maybe I missed a cryptic link to a previous post)

24Cups is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 11:23 AM
  #291
SOLR
Registered User
 
SOLR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto / North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TakiHaque View Post
Won't Tinordi play with the bulldogs even if there's a lockout in the nhl?
Yes he will...and in a strong AHL filled with the borderline NHLers, just like 2004.

SOLR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 12:59 PM
  #292
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
as frustrating... infuriating, as it would be to lose part or a full season...

imagine if the season gets shelved, and we end up in another draft lottery situation, where quite likely we'd end up in the lower-tier(assuming they used a similar formula to last time), thus getting a strong shot at a top-5 pick...

- end up with a top forward prospect like Mackinnon, Monahan, Barkov- lose a year of Gomez/Kaberle/Bourque
- be in a much more favorable situation to move any of the above since they'd have 1(gomez/kaberle) or 2 (bourque) years left on their deals
- 1 extra year of development for our borderline NHL prospects (Leblanc/Geoffrion/Palushaj/Weber) and for our top young guys they'd surely find spots world-wide where they'd be in starring roles (Maxpac/subban/desharnais/eller) assuming they weren't ripping it up in the AHL.

from an organization pov, losing a year of NHL play might actually be a FF to having a legit contender since it would remove any pressure on the management team to make any "win now" moves, it would give us a great shot at another lottery pick (without having to suffer through a lottery-pick season), it would give our talented young assets an extra year to develop away from the intense pressure/scrutiny of Montreal, and it would bring the talented prospects we already have 1 year closer to being NHL assets (Gally, Gallagher, Beaulieu, Tinordi et.)


more I think about it, more it might actually turn into a "silver lining" for us... once you get away from the hole "year without NHL hockey" suckiness.
Be careful in what you wish for. These gems could also end up in Toronto...or Boston.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 01:01 PM
  #293
Deaner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 101
vCash: 500
I can't help but think that this Weber offer sheet will have dire implications for the new CBA negotiations. I am now expecting a protracted battle. Whether Nashville matches or not, the money being thrown around should strengthen Fehr's resolve. If a small market team is able to match a 110$M contract - after the head whiner himself, Leipold, doled out 198$M - why should the PA make any concessions to a league crying foul abut finances?

The new wrinkle I foresee because of the Weber deal is massive dissension within the owners. With changes needed to the revenue sharing system, how is Bettman going to be able to get a consensus with all this (presumed) bad blood within his own camp? How will Geoff Molson feel, having recently invested a ~half billion in his team, if his payments into revenue sharing double or triple? How will the Jacobs, Snider, et alia of the league feel if a new deal with teeth legislates away their competitive advantage (lots and lots of cash to burn)?

Obviously, the scenarios are quite different, but the one comment of Fehr's from the 1994 MLBPA strike that sticks out was something to the effect of "The only reason this (strike) is happening is because large market teams (the Yankees) and small market teams (the Expos) simply couldn't come to an understanding on how to divide revenue between themselves."

Deaner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 03:44 PM
  #294
CH4
Registered User
 
CH4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Chicoutimi
Posts: 1,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOLR View Post
Yes he will...and in a strong AHL filled with the borderline NHLers, just like 2004.
who is eligible to go back to hamilton? I guess PK, Eller, Paccio and desharnais aren't, right?

CH4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 07:03 PM
  #295
Mathradio
Go Roy Munson!
 
Mathradio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 9,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 24Cups View Post
Or ... we could have him play in Hamilton where he is likely to be anyway. (Maybe I missed a cryptic link to a previous post)
Tinordi is a Magnitogorsk draftee so his VHL/KHL rights are held by that one KHL team (unless someone here knows something about foreign draftees in the KHL CBA that I don't.) While the KHL, especially in the event of a NHL lockout/strike, is of a higher level of play when compared to the AHL, the VHL is not. And KHL ELCs, while they last 3 years at his age, may (and, in Tinordi's case, should he sign an ELC in Russia, will) contain an out clause.

Hamilton may very well see borderline-NHLers, but I wonder if those boosted AHL teams will still give youngsters significant ice time. Also, would Tinordi be good enough to see NHL callups if a work stoppage didn't last an entire season?

Mathradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 07:15 PM
  #296
HeShootsHeScores
Registered User
 
HeShootsHeScores's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,426
vCash: 500
So, how are we gonna spend the usual emotionally filled 280 hours of les canadiens hockey on tv if there is indeed a lockout? That's when 50% of the quebec population will realize they consume hockey as an emotional habit, just like it does with junk food. There should be some sort of funny survey if a lockout happens for real. Or Hf could hire a psychologist.

HeShootsHeScores is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 07:17 PM
  #297
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 14,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deaner View Post
I can't help but think that this Weber offer sheet will have dire implications for the new CBA negotiations. I am now expecting a protracted battle. Whether Nashville matches or not, the money being thrown around should strengthen Fehr's resolve. If a small market team is able to match a 110$M contract - after the head whiner himself, Leipold, doled out 198$M - why should the PA make any concessions to a league crying foul abut finances?

The new wrinkle I foresee because of the Weber deal is massive dissension within the owners. With changes needed to the revenue sharing system, how is Bettman going to be able to get a consensus with all this (presumed) bad blood within his own camp? How will Geoff Molson feel, having recently invested a ~half billion in his team, if his payments into revenue sharing double or triple? How will the Jacobs, Snider, et alia of the league feel if a new deal with teeth legislates away their competitive advantage (lots and lots of cash to burn)?

Obviously, the scenarios are quite different, but the one comment of Fehr's from the 1994 MLBPA strike that sticks out was something to the effect of "The only reason this (strike) is happening is because large market teams (the Yankees) and small market teams (the Expos) simply couldn't come to an understanding on how to divide revenue between themselves."


If the Preds match, I assume it would be strictly to preserve their investment. They obviously can't afford to pay that slary, so they'll sign Weber and then negotiate a trade. Of course, they'll be spending the next few days trying to find a trading partner because they wouldn't want to be stuck with the contract. In any event Weber won'be a Predator next week.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 08:28 PM
  #298
Mathradio
Go Roy Munson!
 
Mathradio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 9,562
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teufelsdreck View Post
If the Preds match, I assume it would be strictly to preserve their investment. They obviously can't afford to pay that slary, so they'll sign Weber and then negotiate a trade. Of course, they'll be spending the next few days trying to find a trading partner because they wouldn't want to be stuck with the contract. In any event Weber won'be a Predator next week.
I thought that, once an offer sheet is matched, a team had to keep the player for an entire season before they could trade him...

Mathradio is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 09:12 PM
  #299
Corncob
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller Time View Post
imagine if the season gets shelved, and we end up in another draft lottery situation, where quite likely we'd end up in the lower-tier(assuming they used a similar formula to last time), thus getting a strong shot at a top-5 pick...
Why do people keep saying stuff like this? If they used the same formula for a draft lottery as last time then we'd have the minimum number of balls in it, same as last time.

I'm not even sure which part you're missing, how the lottery worked last time, or the fact that we've made the playoffs twice in the last three years...

Corncob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-19-2012, 09:35 PM
  #300
Frozenice
the random dude
 
Frozenice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,534
vCash: 500


Here's what the odds should be.

Frozenice is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:34 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2014 All Rights Reserved.