HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

2012-2013 Lockout Discussion Thread (Part II)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-09-2012, 05:51 AM
  #126
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
I understood the need for the 2004 NHL lockout. The league fought hard for salary controls. The players fought hard against a salary cap. The matter was philosophical and economical and personal for a league in need of financial change. Fast forward to now, six days before the likely lockout, and what have you heard from the NHL in recent years? Record revenues. Record attendance. Record advertising. Record sponsorship numbers. Those were their announcements, not ours. The league played — again their numbers — to 96.6% capacity last season. Their business is just fine, thank you. And that salary cap the players fought so hard against? It has been a non-factor regarding player salaries. If you can play in the NHL, you will be handsomely rewarded for doing so. If you can play well, the money is pretty close to stupid. The players have taken no steps backwards in seven years of prosperity. So the fight is about what? A division of obscene wealth. A rather large pie on the table and too many forks and knives to share appropriately. To lose one game, one loyal fan, over this, at this time in hockey history would be nothing short of disgrace.
http://www.torontosun.com/2012/09/08...-not-henderson

I agree with that.

More Larry Brooks whining

Quote:
The commissioner and his allies consistently refer to last year’s NFL and NBA lockouts, through which the owners in those respective leagues were able to get the players to agree to a smaller percentage take of revenue going forward.

Yet not a single player in either league lost money on an existing contract as a result of those settlements. According to information provided by the NFL Players Association, the average salary increased from $2 million to $2.25 million in the first season of the new agreement.

It is true that escrow has been part of the system under which the NHL and the players have operated the last seven years, as deputy commissioner Bill Daly mentioned the other day.

But the fact is the players received at least 97.51 percent of their contracts’ full value in five of those seven seasons, with the average escrow loss over their seven years amounting to 3.2 percent.

If the league were to offer to cap escrow on all existing contracts at 3.2 percent, the discussion immediately would be transformed into a serious negotiation on all other issues. An immediate offer to cap escrow at, say, 5 percent on all existing contracts would all but ensure a settlement within weeks that would allow the season to open as scheduled.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/more_...#ixzz25y4RaV67

The NFL cap decreased from $128M in 2009 to $120M in 2011. 2010 was an uncapped year. The cap for 2012 is also $120M. The NFL projects a flat cap of $120M for the next few years. The NFL contracts are not guaranteed.

Quote:
Broncos' QB Caleb Hanie was a couple hours from have $1 million salary guaranteed, but was released. $1 million turns to dust.
https://twitter.com/adbrandt/status/244520691150516224

Brooksie is complaining about NHL players losing $ to escrow and pointing in the average NFL salary increasing. If the NHL had a system of non-guaranteed contracts and the Rangers cut a player to save $1M on the eve of opening night,Brooks would write two columns complaining about it. The NHL average salary is still higher than the NFL $2.25M.

The NBA players lose money in escrow. Their escrow is capped at 10%. The NHL projects the players will lose 12%-13% in escrow. NHLPA projects 15%-20%. The players lost 3% of their salaries in escrow. 3%. The deductions were much higher.

Brooks says a cap of 5% on escrow. The NBA has a cap of 10%.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 07:41 AM
  #127
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,229
vCash: 500
RB- How much does a player on a 2-way loose if he is sent down to the AHL right before the season starts? About a mill...

Ola is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 08:12 AM
  #128
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
#CBA When asked about current labor talks, Sather said he's "always optimistic."
https://twitter.com/KatieStrangESPN/...84200899776512

Quote:
#CBA Tortorella also expressed optimism about labor peace. "I don't think they want to lose that momentum," he said of NHL's growth/revenue
https://twitter.com/KatieStrangESPN/...84755042840577

Quote:
#NYR Brad Richards says difference between now and 04-05 is sides are talking. Says there's a long way to go till season opens 10/11.
https://twitter.com/AGrossRecord/sta...83306699313152

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 08:19 AM
  #129
GAGLine
Registered User
 
GAGLine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 9,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
RB- How much does a player on a 2-way loose if he is sent down to the AHL right before the season starts? About a mill...
Not the same thing at all. It's still a guaranteed contract, but the contract states that the player will make less money if playing in the AHL. The only players on 2-way contracts are ELC players and borderline NHLers. Those players generally don't get sent down for financial reasons. They get sent down because they aren't good enough.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/76...ning-wednesday

Quote:
The decision to pass on the $28 million bonus owed to Manning and not to pick up the four remaining years on his contract means Manning will become a free agent.
Can NHL teams do stuff like that? No. Most they can do is stick players in the minors, though that may change in the next CBA. The players still get all their money, more even, since they aren't paying into escrow.

GAGLine is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 08:21 AM
  #130
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,432
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers88 View Post
Both the owners and Bettman are ruining the sport, since Gary Bettman is the essentially the face of the owners. There will be 3 lockouts with him as commissioner, something unprecedented in any other sport. Something is clearly not right with that.

Like I said, lets just agree to disagree.
This x 1000000000000000000

When all is said and done, this is really the only thing that matters. They're killing the game with their BS. They may have a right to more money, they may have legitimate gripes... it's how they're going about it that makes me (and probably 99.9% of other fans) sick.

They're playing a game of greed chicken... nothing more.

Riche16 is online now  
Old
09-09-2012, 08:37 AM
  #131
DekeR
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 490
vCash: 500
There should be an alternative agreement if and when the current CBA expires and a new agreement has not been reached. Say maybe 70% of the revenues being divided up equally among players and owners and the remaining 30% held in escrow and the former CBA remains in effect as to all the particulars and the games continue with no work stoppage.
This should make both parties so uncomfortable that they both should feel the pinch to hammer out a deal and the fans get their game.

DekeR is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 08:44 AM
  #132
92hatchattack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Jersey
Posts: 1,338
vCash: 500
I grow tired of this. October is not a month, Its a way of life for me. 2 very simply things I wait for every october. Sam Adams Octoberfest, and the mother ****ing New York RANGERS! Put them together and thats the reason I wake up in the mornings.

Now I am going to have to drink twice as much to make up for the lack of Rangers hockey. Ya know, with the craxy ways the courts operate these days we could all probably band together and sue the NHL for pain and suffering. We could probably win.

92hatchattack is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 09:00 AM
  #133
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
Truth is, avarice never has a fix. What the current stalemate tells us is that NHL owners simply want to cull out something close to 50 percent of the overall take, more closely mirroring what NFL and NBA owners won in their most recent collective rock fights with players.

Let us not forget, it was the salary-cap cost certainty of the NFL and NBA that led hockey owners to demand one last time.

As one team official noted to me last week, “Wait, didn’t we get what we said we needed from the players last time? At some point, maybe we’ve got to stop going that route, trying something else.’’
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/20...ahP/story.html

One more time.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 11:08 AM
  #134
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
From what I'm told the NHLPA and NHL are expected to have some more discussions tomorrow. The question remains are they Formal or Informal?
https://twitter.com/JoshRimerHockey/...28550174232576

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 03:14 PM
  #135
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,473
vCash: 500
Quote:
With less than a week remaining for the NHL and NHLPA to reach a deal on a new collective bargaining agreement, there has been little optimism that a lockout can be avoided.

However, several people within the New York Rangers organization expressed hope that an agreement can be reached in order for the puck to drop on time next month.

"The only thing I can say is that I want us to play hockey," Rangers owner James Dolan said when reached at the team's first annual charity dog walk in Riverside Park.

"I'm always optimistic," echoed Rangers general manager Glen Sather.
http://espn.go.com/new-york/nhl/stor...-silver-lining

How many times have Dolan and Cablevision #2 Hank Ratner called Bettman?

Quote:
No NHL meetings scheduled yet. Bill Daly tells the new Sunday @SBJSBD The Rap: "Needless to say, we remain a long way apart."
Quote:
Bill Daly to @SBJSBD - "We need to hear again from the Players' Association before this can move forward."
https://twitter.com/ChrisBottaNHL

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 03:40 PM
  #136
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GAGLine View Post
Not the same thing at all. It's still a guaranteed contract, but the contract states that the player will make less money if playing in the AHL. The only players on 2-way contracts are ELC players and borderline NHLers. Those players generally don't get sent down for financial reasons. They get sent down because they aren't good enough.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/76...ning-wednesday

Can NHL teams do stuff like that? No. Most they can do is stick players in the minors, though that may change in the next CBA. The players still get all their money, more even, since they aren't paying into escrow.
The players in the NHL and the players in the NFL are both guaranteed an exact piece of the pie, that's the same for both leagues.

The topic is how much less the players should take Y1 of new CBA. I think Brooksie made a legit point, if we are to compare NHL with NFL & NBA, let's also note that there wasn't a roll back in those leagues...

Ola is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 04:23 PM
  #137
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
The players in the NHL and the players in the NFL are both guaranteed an exact piece of the pie, that's the same for both leagues.

The topic is how much less the players should take Y1 of new CBA. I think Brooksie made a legit point, if we are to compare NHL with NFL & NBA, let's also note that there wasn't a roll back in those leagues...
Such a conveniently pro-player statement. If you want to note that, you should also make sure to note that both of those leagues feature non-guaranteed contracts. I'm sure the owners would be more than happy to agree to no roll-back if they were granted the ability to sign players to cancelable deals...

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 07:09 PM
  #138
Zil
Registered User
 
Zil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 3,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
Such a conveniently pro-player statement. If you want to note that, you should also make sure to note that both of those leagues feature non-guaranteed contracts. I'm sure the owners would be more than happy to agree to no roll-back if they were granted the ability to sign players to cancelable deals...
Football contracts are non-guaranteed. NBA contracts are almost all guaranteed. The only non-guaranteed contracts you see in the NBA are guys on tryout deals at the very end of the bench. No significant player on an NBA roster has a non-guaranteed deal.

Zil is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 08:28 PM
  #139
CH2
Registered User
 
CH2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NH
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
"The NHLPA has informed the NHL that players are willing to play and continue to negotiate if an agreement isn't reached by Sept. 15th."

-Allan Walsh via twitter

This is getting fun.

CH2 is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 08:28 PM
  #140
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CH2 View Post
"The NHLPA has informed the NHL that players are willing to play and continue to negotiate if an agreement isn't reached by Sept. 15th."

-Allan Walsh via twitter

This is getting fun.
Except that will never happen. Owners lose leverage that way because they'd be playing. Owners will never do it.

Clowes Line is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 08:29 PM
  #141
CH2
Registered User
 
CH2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: NH
Posts: 1,360
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kreiders Underwear View Post
Except that will never happen. Owners lose leverage that way because they'd be playing. Owners will never do it.
It's the NHLPA trying to make the owners look bad. Very entertaining.

CH2 is offline  
Old
09-09-2012, 09:20 PM
  #142
NYRKING30
Registered User
 
NYRKING30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 1,854
vCash: 500
Chris Botta ‏@ChrisBottaNHL

NHL will not accept NHLPA's offer to play while negotiating. No meetings scheduled, but the posturing is in high gear. @SBJSBD

NYRKING30 is offline  
Old
09-10-2012, 04:42 AM
  #143
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,964
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CH2 View Post
It's the NHLPA trying to make the owners look bad. Very entertaining.
And they try to make the players look bad by saying they need to hear from the pa for this to move forward. Not that hard to talk.

Don't understand the smear campaign on the players here. The nba divides all that money amongst half the players. 50/50 split, eased the cap reduction with a frozen cap until revenues catch up. The owners didn't try to change contracts that aren't even dry yet. Sounds like the union is fine with that scenario, easy to build off that. I haven't heard anything about them resisting contract limits.

The nfl doesn't guarantee contracts, true. But they allow tons of bonus money in all forms. With the uneven earnings in the nhl, rich teams will blow the rest away every year. Yashin type holdouts will be common place instead of universally loathed.

There is a fair deal to be made, and the players' version is a lit closer to the happy middle. Hammer out the even revenue split, modify contract limits, freeze the cap until it catches up. Owners get richer starting now, the institution of honoring contracts is intact, and you reformed loopholes the teams abused. Play hockey.


Last edited by DutchShamrock: 09-10-2012 at 04:52 AM.
DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
09-10-2012, 04:57 AM
  #144
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,473
vCash: 500
Fehr is using labor laws to his advantage. Not a surprise.

Quote:
Under Alberta law, the NHL has to request the province appoint a mediator, who theoretically could work to have an agreement in place between the warring sides before the NHL owners can hold a lockout vote. A mediator was appointed by the province on Aug. 21.

The National Hockey League Players’ Association has filed a challenge to this, however. It argues that the NHL’s lockout vote would be defective because the league failed to take certain steps when it asked for a mediator for the dispute.

The NHLPA contends the league has shown no interest in using the mediator to try to get a resolution. It says the league insisted the mediator leave his task after three days with no meetings convened between the two sides. The law requires the mediator to wait 14 days.
Read more: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...#ixzz263kOFPR3

Quote:
The National Hockey League Players’ Association is prepared to use Quebec labour law, if necessary, to try to prevent the National Hockey League and the Canadiens from locking out Habs players on Sept. 15.

And the NHLPA is ready to move this week in a bid to stop any lockout of Canadiens players, with the NHL being on record as saying unless a new collective agreement is in place by next Saturday, it will lock out players from all 30 league clubs and postpone the start of training camps and, likely, at least the start of the 2012-13 season.

At issue, according to the NHLPA, is that the players’ union is not a group certified by the Quebec Labour Board. The NHLPA adds that, under Quebec law, an employer – the Canadiens, in this case – cannot lock out employees – Habs players, in this case – unless they are represented by a union certified by the QLB.
Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...#ixzz263kjhs1z

Fehr is trying to gain leverage.

[/B][/QUOTE]



Read more: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...#ixzz263kC6pyQ

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-10-2012, 06:20 AM
  #145
Kreider Typical
flex
 
Kreider Typical's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,532
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Fehr is using labor laws to his advantage. Not a surprise.



Read more: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...#ixzz263kOFPR3



Read more: http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...#ixzz263kjhs1z

Fehr is trying to gain leverage.




Read more: http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...#ixzz263kC6pyQ
sneaky sneaky... not sure if this is a good or bad sign...

if this works what does it do? does it just force those two (potentially three) Canadian teams to play-- or does it just delay their votes until the ~14 days of mediation are forced and run out-- meaning that they have those extra two weeks to try working out another deal?


Last edited by Kreider Typical: 09-10-2012 at 06:58 AM.
Kreider Typical is offline  
Old
09-10-2012, 07:46 AM
  #146
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,964
vCash: 500
I'm going to come off as a bit whiny and pro-player during this process, but it basically boils down to this:

The league wanted the current CBA so badly, they were willing to lose a year of hockey to get exactly this deal. They dressed it up as "cost certainty" for the fans and ensured "parity" for the league when it's never been more expensive for the fans and competitiveness is the same level.

Regardless, the league fought hard for their terms, and they also spend energy and lawyer grey matter figuring out loopholes in their terms. They offered these contracts and fought hard to sign players to those very contracts. Up until a year ago the league would take any opportunity to tell anyone that would listen just how great this league was doing. How much money they were earning and how it's never been better.

Now the league's precious CBA, the one that we lost hockey over, is killing the sport (just like the previous one was, that caused the lockout). The contracts are outrageous and break the spirit of the CBA.

The league's solution is attack the players. But if you're keeping count, the problem is with a CBA that the owners insisted on and contracts that teams offered with their owner's approval. Sounds like the issues are on one side of the equation. I don't see how going after the players is going to change a thing.

Sure, lowering the floor will help until it raises back to a point where it drowns poor teams again. Limiting contracts will help until someone figures out a new loophole that reinvents the business again. Not real solutions. Maybe because there isn't a problem other than they see an opportunity to make more money. Fine, but not at the expense of a season.

It's a load of BS. With this past CBA, the split went 56% to the PA. They threw in a bone that if revenues hit $2B, the split went to 57%. Because if there was that much money in play, the owners would be swimming in cash like Scrooge McDuck. Now they're poor. It's close to $3B in revenue, and they offer what, 46% to the players? It doesn't add up.

Bettman knows one way of conducting business. He pitches, lies to the media and waits until he gets his way. No back and forth, no bargaining in good faith. When has he not gotten something done without a lockout? I've seen every other sport be absolutely nasty, bitter and childish in the media, but they sit down and actually bargain and compromise. They get something done.

DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
09-10-2012, 07:55 AM
  #147
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DutchShamrock View Post
The league wanted the current CBA so badly, they were willing to lose a year of hockey to get exactly this deal. They dressed it up as "cost certainty" for the fans and ensured "parity" for the league when it's never been more expensive for the fans and competitiveness is the same level.

Regardless, the league fought hard for their terms, and they also spend energy and lawyer grey matter figuring out loopholes in their terms. They offered these contracts and fought hard to sign players to those very contracts. Up until a year ago the league would take any opportunity to tell anyone that would listen just how great this league was doing. How much money they were earning and how it's never been better.
Agreed. What galls me is that we lost a season of hockey so that the owners could get their "cost certainty". They basically broke the players and got everything that they wanted. You cannot possibly paint the players as the bad guys in this situation. And now, they have the audacity to complain again as Nashville signd Webber to $120m and the Wild sign two players to $192m.

Bettman is a part of the problem, and not the solution. I cannot believe that the owners would continue to employ someone who is utterly incapable of bargaining with the union without locking them out. A sport cannot face a lockout every single time that a CBA expires.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-10-2012, 08:39 AM
  #148
SupersonicMonkey*
DROP THE PUCK
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,193
vCash: 500
I have a question.

For the big market clubs: Rangers, Leafs, Canucks, Flyers, Bruins,...so on...

If they felt the same as Dolan, what would prevent them ftom threatening the NHL that they'd leave the league during a lockout.

What would Bettman and his **** buddies do? Fine Dolan?

SupersonicMonkey* is offline  
Old
09-10-2012, 09:13 AM
  #149
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,473
vCash: 500
If the Quebec Labor Board rules the Habs can't lockout the players,Bettman will appeal. If they lose the appeal,they have a problem. The NHL will either be forced to open camps without a new CBA or they have to negotiate a new CBA. Fehr is looking some leverage. They already have an issue with Alberta labor law. The PA is looking at British Columbia and Manitoba labor law trying to threw a monkey wrench into the NHL lockour plans. The NHL can't lockout players from just 27 or 29 teams.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-10-2012, 09:17 AM
  #150
Deathdealer
Registered User
 
Deathdealer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Poughkeepsie
Country: United States
Posts: 161
vCash: 500
all i know is im not spending a dime on the nhl untill this crap is over, and if they strike im not watching and or going to a game for a month, and also not buying nhl 13.

Deathdealer 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 03:54 AM.

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.