HFBoards

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

Bettman: Lock-out if there's no deal by sept. 15 | Part II.

View Poll Results: DO YOU THINK THE OWNERS WILL VOTE TO LOCKOUT THE PLAYERS?
YES, LOCKOUT 110 82.71%
NO, PLAY AND MAKE A TON OF MONEY 23 17.29%
Voters: 133. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-04-2012, 09:49 AM
  #51
Leo Trollmarov
I was in the pool!!
 
Leo Trollmarov's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,869
vCash: 555
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
I'm okay if they lock-out, burn a year of contracts, but the ones being hurt are the poor suckers working for the franchises that aren't hockey players. Guaranteed lay-off notices have already been delivered.

Hockey players with contacts in Europe will be okay, and league management will take care of themselves.
Burn a year of contracts? As in if the play those contracts won't have a year used off of them?

I would rather see hockey and have a year used, than have no hockey and a year used up.

Leo Trollmarov is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 11:02 AM
  #52
daveleaf
Registered User
 
daveleaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Dancer View Post
And what was the cost of shutting down Atlanta or Quebec and moving them to Winnipeg and Colorado?

And I'm still confused as this what this has to do with contraction which is where we started.
Who cares the cost. Cheaper loosing a few million now then tens of millions over the years.

You shouldn't be confused, for a guy that has been around as long as you have should have seen that the NHL does what it wants, makes it's own rules to satisfy it's agenda. Did it take years in the past for Winnepeg to fail for them to move to the Phoenix? Phoenix has been loosing money since the move but they are still there. As Bettman has said they are committed to Glendale. Were they committed to Quebec city? Didn't take long to load that bus did it? Been committed to Nasau a long time now, if that was Quebec a decade and a half ago would they have been this patient?

Now we are full circle. People realize that the grand old south is not what it was thought to be and here are these true hockey cities that would love a franchise but yet there are rules now apparently.

You get tied up in 'who is going to pay?' NHL didn't give a squat then so why should they now.


Last edited by daveleaf: 09-04-2012 at 11:13 AM.
daveleaf is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 11:32 AM
  #53
Northern Dancer
Registered User
 
Northern Dancer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveleaf View Post
Who cares the cost. Cheaper loosing a few million now then tens of millions over the years.

You shouldn't be confused, for a guy that has been around as long as you have should have seen that the NHL does what it wants, makes it's own rules to satisfy it's agenda. Did it take years in the past for Winnepeg to fail for them to move to the Phoenix? Phoenix has been loosing money since the move but they are still there. As Bettman has said they are committed to Glendale. Were they committed to Quebec city? Didn't take long to load that bus did it? Been committed to Nasau a long time now, if that was Quebec a decade and a half ago would they have been this patient?

Now we are full circle. People realize that the grand old south is not what it was thought to be and here are these true hockey cities that would love a franchise but yet there are rules now apparently.

You get tied up in 'who is going to pay?' NHL didn't give a squat then so why should they now.
Very silly to say, who cares the cost. What is your suggestion, just fold 6 teams, tell them they are out of business???

If it were not for Bettman's determination to keep franchises in place when losing money there would be no Calgary Flames, Edmonton Oilers, Ottawa Senators, Pittsburgh Penquins or Bufffalo Sabres in business right now. And that is just to name a few.

If there was a local buyer of either the Jets or the Nordique back then they would have never moved. There is local interest in Phoenix although because of Goldwater interference it is hard to close the deal.

I am not tied up in who is going to pay, I am intelligent enough to know there is no free lunch, that everything has a cost and you cannot just close franchises that are struggling for sport. The owner of that team is entitled to whatever the market will bear for his franchise. Somebody has to write a cheque.

There is no point wishing for something that is never, ever going to happen. (contraction)

Northern Dancer is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 11:48 AM
  #54
daveleaf
Registered User
 
daveleaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Dancer View Post
Very silly to say, who cares the cost. What is your suggestion, just fold 6 teams, tell them they are out of business???

If it were not for Bettman's determination to keep franchises in place when losing money there would be no Calgary Flames, Edmonton Oilers, Ottawa Senators, Pittsburgh Penquins or Bufffalo Sabres in business right now. And that is just to name a few.

If there was a local buyer of either the Jets or the Nordique back then they would have never moved. There is local interest in Phoenix although because of Goldwater interference it is hard to close the deal.

I am not tied up in who is going to pay, I am intelligent enough to know there is no free lunch, that everything has a cost and you cannot just close franchises that are struggling for sport. The owner of that team is entitled to whatever the market will bear for his franchise. Somebody has to write a cheque.

There is no point wishing for something that is never, ever going to happen. (contraction)
Very true. So why not allow them to sell the teams to individuals that will want to move them to other markets? Simple answer. Expansion fee! Bettman does not care because he got his money once and he would like to get it again.

NY can handle three franchises although two are doing quite poorly. Couldn't Toronto handle another franchise, we all know Hamilton would love one? There is no one in Quebec right now that would write a cheque to bring Pho to Quebec City?

It is foolish for me to say just fold the franchise and move on but this is exactly what we have done in the past. Was there not pro hockey in Seattle, Kansas City, Atlanta(twice), and the list goes on.

Point I am making is this. Instead of making these owners bleed as they are why not give them the opportunity to move. Charge them a relocation fee and have cities try and sell themselves on why they would support it and make it a financial windfall for them. If we want a 'true' free market then allow that. Allow a team in Hamilton.....might be the only decent hockey we see in the GTA. If Buffalo whines they have all the right to move if they like. Once a franchise moves then that option is done, folding the franchise is the only option.

If owners and players weren't so greedy we could all enjoy great hockey and let the game become exactly what we know it can.

daveleaf is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 05:04 PM
  #55
Suntouchable13
Registered User
 
Suntouchable13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Thornhill, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,735
vCash: 500
Maybe if Bettman really believes that we are the best fans in the world, he could reward us with a deal on time? Instead of taking us for granted.

Suntouchable13 is online now  
Old
09-04-2012, 05:40 PM
  #56
VanW27
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: halifax,n.s.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,259
vCash: 500
Any way the NHL goes with Replacement players? Gotta say I'd be interested in seeing it, and if the NHL wants to play hardball it makes some sense.

Would make for some very entertaining hockey with Journeyman players fighting to make a name for themselves.

VanW27 is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 07:27 PM
  #57
anderson3133
Registered User
 
anderson3133's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Kitchener
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanW27 View Post
Any way the NHL goes with Replacement players? Gotta say I'd be interested in seeing it, and if the NHL wants to play hardball it makes some sense.

Would make for some very entertaining hockey with Journeyman players fighting to make a name for themselves.
Scab workers?

anderson3133 is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 07:43 PM
  #58
Fenton
Registered User
 
Fenton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,479
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanW27 View Post
Any way the NHL goes with Replacement players? Gotta say I'd be interested in seeing it, and if the NHL wants to play hardball it makes some sense.

Would make for some very entertaining hockey with Journeyman players fighting to make a name for themselves.
They have a league already for those guys, it's called the AHL.

It's not as entertaining as the NHL.

Fenton is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 07:45 PM
  #59
Swervin81
Leafy McDreamy
 
Swervin81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Mississauga, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 24,979
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanW27 View Post
Any way the NHL goes with Replacement players? Gotta say I'd be interested in seeing it, and if the NHL wants to play hardball it makes some sense.

Would make for some very entertaining hockey with Journeyman players fighting to make a name for themselves.
Unless we lost a full season and we were slowly creeping into cutting into a 2nd season or anything that extreme, not a chance.

Swervin81 is online now  
Old
09-04-2012, 07:46 PM
  #60
MapleLeafsFan4Ever
Go Leafs Go
 
MapleLeafsFan4Ever's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,575
vCash: 500
If there is a lock-out I just hope it gets settled before the Winter Classic and wouldn't it be the Leafs luck that the NHL finally selects them for one of their signature events and it gets cancelled.

MapleLeafsFan4Ever is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 08:03 PM
  #61
VanW27
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: halifax,n.s.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swervin81 View Post
Unless we lost a full season and we were slowly creeping into cutting into a 2nd season or anything that extreme, not a chance.
The NFL did it and their PA was pretty quick to get back on the field afterwards.

VanW27 is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 08:09 PM
  #62
egd27
#freethebigpicture
 
egd27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 4,097
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suntouchable13 View Post
Maybe if Bettman really believes that we are the best fans in the world, he could reward us with a deal on time? Instead of taking us for granted.
Do people really believe that Bettman is acting unilaterally and is making all the decisions on behalf of the league?

egd27 is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 08:12 PM
  #63
VanW27
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: halifax,n.s.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenton View Post
They have a league already for those guys, it's called the AHL.

It's not as entertaining as the NHL.
Idk, theres not much time now but I would think you could see a lot of higher end players from euro leagues. Plus any unsigned prospects would be eligible, add in the potential of current FA's signing on and I would think you would see a lot of lesser NHLers cross the picket line pretty quick.

It wouldn't be the NHL but it would be better quality then the AHL, and like I said these would be players that are hungry and wanting to prove they can be fulltime NHLers. If nothing else I think it would be entertaining in the short term.

VanW27 is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 08:30 PM
  #64
CoolBlue*
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanW27 View Post
Any way the NHL goes with Replacement players? Gotta say I'd be interested in seeing it, and if the NHL wants to play hardball it makes some sense.

Would make for some very entertaining hockey with Journeyman players fighting to make a name for themselves.
Most people wouldn't be able to even tell the difference in the on ice product there are already so many scrubs playing in Gary Bettman's watered down 30 team NHL anyway.

Was reminded by a radio report over the weekend that Fehr was the union clown boss that led the MLBPA into their lost year in 1994 and we all know the damage that did to the game of baseball i hope Fehr has learned a few things and takes the owners best offer effective Sept 15th.

Times have changed since the last NHL lockout in 2004/2005. Now many homes have over 300 different digital channels to select from through an HDPVR box and HDTV. If the scrubs get their dumb greedy butts locked out again i won't miss the NHL anywhere near as much as the last time.

CoolBlue* is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 08:45 PM
  #65
VanW27
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: halifax,n.s.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,259
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolBlue View Post
Most people wouldn't be able to even tell the difference in the on ice product there are already so many scrubs playing in Gary Bettman's watered down 30 team NHL anyway.

Was reminded by a radio report over the weekend that Fehr was the union clown boss that led the MLBPA into their lost year in 1994 and we all know the damage that did to the game of baseball i hope Fehr has learned a few things and takes the owners best offer effective Sept 15th.

Times have changed since the last NHL lockout in 2004/2005. Now many homes have over 300 different digital channels to select from through an HDPVR box and HDTV. If the scrubs get their dumb greedy butts locked out again i won't miss the NHL anywhere near as much as the last time.
Funny you mention the 94 MLB lockout, they went to spring training the following season with replacement players. It wasn't long before a deal got done after that.

VanW27 is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 09:19 PM
  #66
CoolBlue*
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 188
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VanW27 View Post
Funny you mention the 94 MLB lockout, they went to spring training the following season with replacement players. It wasn't long before a deal got done after that.
Given the fact that the scrubs have already been locked out and an entire year wasted in their last CBA negotiations in 04/05...perhaps...this time around...replacement players is something the NHL should seriously be looking at if there's no deal by September 15th.

CoolBlue* is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 09:51 PM
  #67
CoolBlue*
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 188
vCash: 500
From my perspective here's something i'd love to see in the new CBA to improve the on ice product for NHL fans...

My perfect NHL...

Adios:

Columbus
New York Islanders
Dallas
Florida
Phoenix
Nashville
Anaheim
New Jersey
Colorado
Carolina

20 Team NHL
2 Divisions of 10
Top 8 in each division make playoffs
4 pre season games
NHL season starts Oct 1st
NHL season ends no latter than May 15th
Changes made to allow more NHL trades
Olympic size ice surface's added to all arenas
If any player attempts to injure he is suspended as long as injured player is out
No touch iceing
Cheerleaders in all arenas
Move Tampa to new arena in Quebec
No points awarded for regulation tie
No more NHL teams in the GTA this is Leafs town


Last edited by CoolBlue*: 09-04-2012 at 10:04 PM.
CoolBlue* is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 10:07 PM
  #68
Pi
Registered User
 
Pi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,222
vCash: 50
^^^

6/10 teams you want Adios'd have won Stanley Cups. Not that easy..

20 teams.. 16/20 makes the playoffs? 80% chance of making the playoffs before the season even begins? Not going to happen, ever.

All other things are decent and I'd definitely want those.

Pi is offline  
Old
09-04-2012, 11:01 PM
  #69
New Liskeard
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 9,335
vCash: 500
The irony in all this, is it was the NHL that insisted on a cap system to allow for cost certainty, and to allow for further fincial gains through growth (but the cost was a lost season). Now with this very same model they fought so hard for, further concesions are expected by the owners from the players, to address this flawed system. Excellent article in the Globe and Mail today talking to this very same point. I have no sympathy for these owners, for forcing a a system down the players throats, experienced excellent growth and revenues, yet are crying poor, and not willing to support their fellow NHL owners but would rather that fall to the players to fix.

New Liskeard is offline  
Old
09-05-2012, 12:30 AM
  #70
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,578
vCash: 500
Weren't the players ready to agree to a hard cap of $49M in '04?

Bet that looks real good to the owners now.


With the obvious solution being a 50/50 split in revenues, how did we get here?

Ownership never imagined the growth of the game during the last 7 years. Otherwise they would have jumped at a $49M cap with no floor. It only took 2-3 years before the players were winning with a cap of over $50M at 57% of revenue. At a $49M cap, as of last year the owners would be keeping over 50% of revenue. No wonder they are playing hardball.

The players already took a 24% haircut, saw how much they could have lost had ownership agreed to their offer back in '04. They thought they got hosed but they got lucky. Since they capitulated last time, I can't fault them for standing pat with the deal they have now.


The real losers are the people counting on paychecks directly related to the NHL.

Millionaires in a P*ssing match with Billionaires and the only losers are the little people that that make their lives possible.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
09-05-2012, 07:42 AM
  #71
Leafsman
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,527
vCash: 500
Question?

With the likeliness of the NHL lockout happening, will they broadcast more MArlies games on TV???

Leafsman is offline  
Old
09-05-2012, 07:55 AM
  #72
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 58,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CoolBlue View Post
Given the fact that the scrubs have already been locked out and an entire year wasted in their last CBA negotiations in 04/05...perhaps...this time around...replacement players is something the NHL should seriously be looking at if there's no deal by September 15th.
I doubt you'd see any good players in that league. And I'm not even certain they could use any AHL players who are members of the NHLPA.

Wouldn't it make more sense for the networks to pick up some KHL games with rosters of the worlds best players in it?

__________________
http://kuklaskorner.com/index.php/ps...e_corsi_issues

Desjardins estimates that about 40% of the game is captured by Corsi analysis.
ULF_55 is offline  
Old
09-05-2012, 08:01 AM
  #73
achtungbaby
Registered User
 
achtungbaby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Dancer View Post
Very silly to say, who cares the cost. What is your suggestion, just fold 6 teams, tell them they are out of business???

If it were not for Bettman's determination to keep franchises in place when losing money there would be no Calgary Flames, Edmonton Oilers, Ottawa Senators, Pittsburgh Penquins or Bufffalo Sabres in business right now. And that is just to name a few.

If there was a local buyer of either the Jets or the Nordique back then they would have never moved. There is local interest in Phoenix although because of Goldwater interference it is hard to close the deal.

I am not tied up in who is going to pay, I am intelligent enough to know there is no free lunch, that everything has a cost and you cannot just close franchises that are struggling for sport. The owner of that team is entitled to whatever the market will bear for his franchise. Somebody has to write a cheque.

There is no point wishing for something that is never, ever going to happen. (contraction)
You've been harping on this contraction thing for awhile now but this is just absurb. Yes, the remaining owners would have to pay out the contracted teams. Yes, it will probably never happen. But you're right, an owner of a team is entitled to whatever the market will bear for his franchise, which is why Atlanta basically tossed the keys to the business on Gary's desk. Which is also why Phoenix choose bankruptcy rather than lose even more for another season.

Would teams buy out other teams? No idea. I do know that they don't like handing money over for every sad sack franchise year after year. 10 years of doing that and pretty soon we're talking a billion dollars, or basically the money it would cost to buy them out.

The point is, you don't know and I don't know. Let's both act like that when giving our opinions.

achtungbaby is offline  
Old
09-05-2012, 08:16 AM
  #74
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 58,531
vCash: 500
http://espn.go.com/nhl/attendance/_/sort/homePct

Move Phoenix to Quebec.
Move Dallas to GTA/Hamilton.
Move Islanders to a NHL arena - anywhere.
Put Columbus on notice, I think they'll be okay with a team game going forward.

Implement a luxury tax.
Allow cash for players (like they used to).
Allow buy-outs with no cap hit (small market team can unload a player to a rich team for a price).
Allow the trading of cap space.

50/50 split with agreed upon HRR.
UFA no change.
ELC no change.
Signing of draftees 3 years for 18 year olds, 2 years for 19 year olds, 1 year for 20 year olds, as of September 15th.
Under 20 year old junior players to the AHL when appropriate, max 2 per team.
Cost of living allowance for AHL players from NHL teams, not to count against cap.

Salary Cap for team management/administration, anything over a predefined percentage of revenue has a luxury tax applied, and a loss of draft picks.

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
09-05-2012, 08:29 AM
  #75
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 58,531
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by achtungbaby View Post
You've been harping on this contraction thing for awhile now but this is just absurb. Yes, the remaining owners would have to pay out the contracted teams. Yes, it will probably never happen. But you're right, an owner of a team is entitled to whatever the market will bear for his franchise, which is why Atlanta basically tossed the keys to the business on Gary's desk. Which is also why Phoenix choose bankruptcy rather than lose even more for another season.

Would teams buy out other teams? No idea. I do know that they don't like handing money over for every sad sack franchise year after year. 10 years of doing that and pretty soon we're talking a billion dollars, or basically the money it would cost to buy them out.

The point is, you don't know and I don't know. Let's both act like that when giving our opinions.
The contracted teams could put their assets up for sale, including players under contract. Biggest offer takes the asset.

How much would Phoenix get offered for OEL? How much would the Rangers/Flyers pay for that asset?

What other assets do they have? A franchise permit for Phoenix, where history shows the lowest support for any team, even though it is a winning team? What is the value of a franchise guaranteed to be a money loser. I think it is ND who says it is so bad there that the prespective new owner won't even use his own money but is looking for other chumps to buy in. Any bets part of the agreement is the option to relocate?

If a franchise location cannot break even the usual solution is a closing the franchise sell off. We have a couple Sears locations in Calgary going through that right now. All assets are for sale. They can't exist in this market, so they're closing down. Market decides, we aren't talking a government run subsidy with equalization payments here. Not a necessity of life.

Are we to believe having a lower floor would encourage more butts in the seats in Phoenix? It isn't like a family pack of 4 tickets, hot dogs and a drink for $100 is very much more than taking your family to the movies.

ULF_55 is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:57 PM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.