HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Washington Capitals
Notices

All-things CBA Negotiations

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-15-2012, 02:23 PM
  #26
Langway
Moderator
Intangibles
 
Langway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zoidberg Jesus View Post
Fun fact: 5 of the 31 player reps haven't signed yet (Alex Auld, Chris Campoli, Shane Doan, Dominic Moore, and Brandan Morrison). Also, none of them are Caps. And there are very few big name/big salary players.

Here's the list, for whoever's interested.
Ironically Auld did sign with Salzburg of Austria.

Langway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2012, 02:30 PM
  #27
Zoidberg Jesus
Trotzkyist
 
Zoidberg Jesus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: United States
Posts: 2,775
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Langway View Post
Ironically Auld did sign with Salzburg of Austria.
"So guys, how much of the revenue sharing is the Austrian Hockey League gonna see?"

Zoidberg Jesus is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-15-2012, 07:11 PM
  #28
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystlyfe View Post
By "negating their paychecks" I meant missing them because they're not playing.
Right. Both low end players and low end owners really can't afford a lockout, all I meant is that they've got different levels of risk involved in the nature of the deal that gets made (assuming it can be settled quickly). For those players, it's just get any agreement in place ASAP. For those owners they need to get the right deal done or they're screwed either way.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 06:42 PM
  #29
PSUCapsFan
Registered User
 
PSUCapsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Irvine, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 977
vCash: 500
Man i really hope there is hockey this year. Ovechkin is set to loose to full years of his career if things don't work out.

PSUCapsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-20-2012, 08:18 PM
  #30
Dream Big
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 4,316
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PSUCapsFan View Post
Man i really hope there is hockey this year. Ovechkin is set to loose to full years of his career if things don't work out.
All the players except those not yet signed will lose a full year. Not just Ovechkin. I don't think the contracts get rolled over anther year. And any players who are in the last year of their contract this year will be UFA's or RFA's at the end of the year regardless if they play or not.

This uncertainty is really messing me up. Usually by this time of year I have my vacations for the upcoming year figured out, flights booked. Hotels booked. I was wondering how much this impacts some of the other supporting industries in each city ie: airlines, hotels, taxis, restaurants, sporting goods stores, radio and television. Some of the smaller markets such as Phoenix won't be getting those hockey vacationers that fly in to see their favourite teams plus stay and drop $ in the community.

Dream Big is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-21-2012, 07:05 AM
  #31
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Strictly speaking, I believe the NHL and the PA would have to agree to have a year tick off of contracts in the event of a lost season. It's not automatic (since the wording is something like "league year") and in 04-05 they had to agree to have it count, didn't they?

I don't know that it would ever be much of a sticking point though.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 12:06 AM
  #32
HSHS
Losing is a disease
 
HSHS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Redondo Beach, Ca
Country: United States
Posts: 17,639
vCash: 500
I've never been so disheartened about hockey.

HSHS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 09:53 AM
  #33
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,663
vCash: 500
I expect a November/Dec start....


Disheartened, no. I've been expecting this since Fehr joined the NHLPA. This is a guy who advocated the World Series being cancelled so his side could win. He cares about himself and whoever he's representing at the time, nothing more. As soon as he signed I predicted a work stoppage (not that it's a big deal as many suspected Fehr would cause problems).

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:01 AM
  #34
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
 
NobodyBeatsTheWiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Old Town
Posts: 18,757
vCash: 500
Any work stoppage wouldn't be anything close to Fehr's fault.

This is all the owners, as evidenced by their completely absurd, bad-faith initial offer. They got pretty much everything they wanted in the last round of CBA negotiations and now they want more concessions.

NobodyBeatsTheWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:12 AM
  #35
BrooklynCapsFan
Waiting on the Isles
 
BrooklynCapsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Brooklyn, New York
Posts: 14,494
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HSHS View Post
I've never been so disheartened about hockey.
Hey. At least we're not getting shafted out of a lottery pick this time.

BrooklynCapsFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:16 AM
  #36
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
Any work stoppage wouldn't be anything close to Fehr's fault.

This is all the owners, as evidenced by their completely absurd, bad-faith initial offer. They got pretty much everything they wanted in the last round of CBA negotiations and now they want more concessions.
Well, it would be in the sense that the players have no leverage. They can't win. So how long the lockout lasts depends largely on how quickly they're willing to acknowledge that. They can't just fold immediately because it'll weaken their position even further the next time around, but if they're holding out for a win (and I don't think they are, Fehr's too smart for that) then they'll never play again.

I look at the owners positions, and while I agree that they could save us all a lot of pain by compromising I don't see a reason for them to do so. Why should the rich owners want to subsidize the poor owners with more revenue sharing? Why should the poor owners want to stay underwater by keeping the cap (and therefore the floor) high and growing quickly? They can both get what they want by giving less to the players.

I guess the previous CBA setup wasn't prepared for the rapid revenue growth that the NHL saw. Great for the guys on top, terrible for the guys on the bottom. Such is life.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:17 AM
  #37
Mystlyfe
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12,465
vCash: 500
NBTW, you can't be serious, right?

Fehr is doing everything in his power to put the owners over the barrel. He delayed negotiations for months, took a month after the owner's initial offer to give a counter offer (that wasn't even remotely based on the owner's offer, so there was no reason they couldn't give it the next day), and has repeatedly said that the players don't view mid-September as a deadline. He's doing everything he can to force the owners to lock the players out, because he knows he'll win the PR battle at that point. No league is going to allow the players to play without an active CBA because of what Fehr pulled with the MLBPA in 94.

The players are currently getting 57% of the HRR, well above the roughly 50/50 splits that are in each of the three other leagues. The closest comparable, the NBA, just settled on a 50/50 split after their recent lockout. The NFL's new CBA only guarantees the players 47% of revenue. The NHL owner's latest proposal was 46%, and grew to 50% over the final three years. I don't see how that's bad faith.

Mystlyfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:21 AM
  #38
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Hard to say good faith vs. bad without knowing how they're redefining HRR (because they are narrowing that down in these proposals), but I haven't seen that spelled out anywhere.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:23 AM
  #39
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,663
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
Any work stoppage wouldn't be anything close to Fehr's fault.

This is all the owners, as evidenced by their completely absurd, bad-faith initial offer. They got pretty much everything they wanted in the last round of CBA negotiations and now they want more concessions.
Bad faith offer? You know how negotiations work. Aim high, settle somewhere in between.

If you can't see that the system is failing still, then I don't know what to tell you man. I have always looked at the last CBA as a stepping stone to where the owners wanted to go all along. They had to get the salary cap in place first. That was huge. Now they can set out to further right the ship financially so all teams can compete fairly.


PS - never said it was Fehr's "fault", but to suggest he's not playing a HUGE role in this work stoppage is naive at best, moronic at worst.

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:28 AM
  #40
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
 
NobodyBeatsTheWiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Old Town
Posts: 18,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystlyfe View Post
NBTW, you can't be serious, right?

Fehr is doing everything in his power to put the owners over the barrel. He delayed negotiations for months, took a month after the owner's initial offer to give a counter offer (that wasn't even remotely based on the owner's offer, so there was no reason they couldn't give it the next day), and has repeatedly said that the players don't view mid-September as a deadline. He's doing everything he can to force the owners to lock the players out, because he knows he'll win the PR battle at that point. No league is going to allow the players to play without an active CBA because of what Fehr pulled with the MLBPA in 94.

The players are currently getting 57% of the HRR, well above the roughly 50/50 splits that are in each of the three other leagues. The closest comparable, the NBA, just settled on a 50/50 split after their recent lockout. The NFL's new CBA only guarantees the players 47% of revenue. The NHL owner's latest proposal was 46%, and grew to 50% over the final three years. I don't see how that's bad faith.
I'm completely serious.

The players were willing to extend the current CBA, which they got raked over the coals previously to sign.

The owners' initial offer wasn't anything close to a good faith offer. It was patently absurd, and there was no way the players would ever accept anything close to it.

The players' counter-offer actually gave up money that they're currently getting--so they're the only side willing to give anything up from the current CBA.

NobodyBeatsTheWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:32 AM
  #41
NobodyBeatsTheWiz
Happy now?
 
NobodyBeatsTheWiz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Old Town
Posts: 18,757
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapitalsCupFantasy View Post
Bad faith offer? You know how negotiations work. Aim high, settle somewhere in between.

If you can't see that the system is failing still, then I don't know what to tell you man. I have always looked at the last CBA as a stepping stone to where the owners wanted to go all along. They had to get the salary cap in place first. That was huge. Now they can set out to further right the ship financially so all teams can compete fairly.


PS - never said it was Fehr's "fault", but to suggest he's not playing a HUGE role in this work stoppage is naive at best, moronic at worst.
Yes, bad faith. The owners knew the players wouldn't accept anything close to their initial offer. That's bad faith negotiating. I understand you want to get everything you can in negotiations, but you have to present an offer that's got a chance of being at least considered.

If I walk into a BMW dealer and offer $5000 for a new 3 series, that's not aiming high, that's a bad-faith offer.

Pinning anything specifically on Donald Fehr's shoulders is simply sensationalizing the situation. Obviously, whoever was in charge of player negotiations would have a major contribution to any potential lockout, simply due to his role.

NobodyBeatsTheWiz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:37 AM
  #42
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,663
vCash: 500
They lost out last time, and they're still at 57% of HRR. Much more than other leagues in the US. It should be clear that results from the last lockout weren't enough to have a competitive and healthy league.

It should further clarify just how bad the system BEFORE the last lockout was.

Just because the players gave some small concessions (compared to where the owners want to be to run a healthy league), doesn't mean it was a good faith counter-offer.

If the owners make a half-assed counter offer, giving back some money, will that suddenly sway you like the player's half-assed offer clearly did? Come on man....

Ultimately this comes down to the players currently receiving too much of the overall revenues and the owners not having a revenue sharing plan that will sustain the lower half of the league who can't compete financially or on the ice with the teams that spend to the cap.

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:49 AM
  #43
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,663
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
Yes, bad faith. The owners knew the players wouldn't accept anything close to their initial offer. That's bad faith negotiating. I understand you want to get everything you can in negotiations, but you have to present an offer that's got a chance of being at least considered.

If I walk into a BMW dealer and offer $5000 for a new 3 series, that's not aiming high, that's a bad-faith offer.

Pinning anything specifically on Donald Fehr's shoulders is simply sensationalizing the situation. Obviously, whoever was in charge of player negotiations would have a major contribution to any potential lockout, simply due to his role.

Your BMW analogy doesn't work at all. There's a clear market value AND cost of manufacturing a BMW. A $5k offer isn't bad faith, it's simply dumb because it doesn't even cover the cost of the car and has no chance of being accepted.

High level/big corporation negotiations work much differently and I don't think you have a grasp of those nuances. I've been privileged enough to have been in on some corporate takeover/mergers discussions and negotiations and if you don't think the guy with the clear upper hand isn't making painful, insultingly low offers when negotiations start...you're fooling yourself.

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:50 AM
  #44
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
I'm completely serious.

The players were willing to extend the current CBA, which they got raked over the coals previously to sign.

The owners' initial offer wasn't anything close to a good faith offer. It was patently absurd, and there was no way the players would ever accept anything close to it.

The players' counter-offer actually gave up money that they're currently getting--so they're the only side willing to give anything up from the current CBA.
The current CBA was a non-starter, and both sides knew that. Meaningless PR fluff from Fehr (though still worth doing, obviously, as PR is about all the players have to work with). The players got raked over the coals when the cap was much lower. With the cap where it is now, ownership is the side that's hurting (albeit only at the low end).

Again, won't comment on good faith vs. bad without understanding just how seriously they want to redefine HRR, but the truth is the owners' initial offer might not have been that extreme. As noted, within the context of other leagues 50% is probably a reasonable outcome, so if status quo is the players' position (57%?) then that initial ownership offer was just about a mirror image of that (again, with the caveat that the HRR definition could swing that dramatically). Personally I think the other issues, contract term etc. are all secondary, issues there to give the sides pieces to bargain with, so I kind of ignore them. If you think they're more serious then of course weigh them as you will.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:56 AM
  #45
Mystlyfe
We're Touched
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 12,465
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
I'm completely serious.

The players were willing to extend the current CBA, which they got raked over the coals previously to sign.
And still gives them a substantially higher cut of revenue than their peers in other major NA sports. Taking home 57% of a rapidly ballooning revenue stream is a great deal for the players. Of course they were willing to extend it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
The owners' initial offer wasn't anything close to a good faith offer. It was patently absurd, and there was no way the players would ever accept anything close to it.

The players' counter-offer actually gave up money that they're currently getting--so they're the only side willing to give anything up from the current CBA.
They "gave up" money (no rollbacks or increase in escrow was included in their proposal) to ensure the CBA in their offer was as short as possible, and to put in a clause to jump back to 57% after just three years. They may have "given up" something, but their proposal was equally unlikely to be signed as the owner's initial offer. Not to mention they wanted a luxury tax rather than a true hard cap.

Mystlyfe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 10:59 AM
  #46
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,663
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brs03 View Post
The current CBA was a non-starter, and both sides knew that. Meaningless PR fluff from Fehr (though still worth doing, obviously, as PR is about all the players have to work with). The players got raked over the coals when the cap was much lower. With the cap where it is now, ownership is the side that's hurting (albeit only at the low end).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystlyfe View Post
And still gives them a substantially higher cut of revenue than their peers in other major NA sports. Taking home 57% of a rapidly ballooning revenue stream is a great deal for the players. Of course they were willing to extend it.
Wait, you mean you guys aren't easily enamoured by the player's counter offer?


It's so transparent....they offered to extend the current CBA. LOL....DUH.....it's completely in their favor, of COURSE they're willing to extend the status quo of runaway salaries and cap limits.

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 11:09 AM
  #47
Langway
Moderator
Intangibles
 
Langway's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,694
vCash: 500
All of the offers so far have been opening salvoes (crap). Eventually both sides will get real...eventually.

Langway is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 11:10 AM
  #48
brs03
Coo coo ca cha!
 
brs03's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Maryland
Country: United States
Posts: 12,216
vCash: 500
Ironically, I think the current CBA structure could have worked well for this coming, as I don't think the league is going to grow nearly as much over the next 7 years as it did over the last 7. But as a starting point, given where things are now (57%), it's just too high.

brs03 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 11:26 AM
  #49
CapitalsCupFantasy
HFBoards Sponsor
 
CapitalsCupFantasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,663
vCash: 500
I mean, do a 5 second Google search if you have to....almost any negotiating book says start with your "skies the limit" offer and work down from there...

You never get what you ask for so bold and agressive is the way it goes early on.

CapitalsCupFantasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-30-2012, 03:36 PM
  #50
Gumby
Registered User
 
Gumby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: By the beach!! FL
Posts: 2,822
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NobodyBeatsTheWiz View Post
Any work stoppage wouldn't be anything close to Fehr's fault.

This is all the owners, as evidenced by their completely absurd, bad-faith initial offer. They got pretty much everything they wanted in the last round of CBA negotiations and now they want more concessions.
Nail hit directly on head!

Fehr and the players offered to play while this is getting worked out, it was Bettman who said no deal Sep 15, no hockey.

If the owners are so bent on helping the "small markets" then lower the % to around 50-52% and let the larger markets share some of their revenues like other sports do.

I was firmly on the owners side in '04, but like stated above, they got what they wanted (players totally caved) and 8 years later with revenues almost tripling in that time, it's still not enough for them....I have 0 sympathy for them this time and am glad the union has a guy like Fehr who won't let them get steamrolled by these greedy bahstards again.

Gumby 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 03:21 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.