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
09-19-2012, 10:39 AM
  #751
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,694
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RGY View Post
I would love to hear what your opinion would be if you were one of the players. In fact I would love to hear your opinion if you were a player who was around for the last lockout and now this one. I'm sure your sentiments would be different. They got bent over last time so this time around they are just trying to minimize how much they get bent over.

Ignorance is bliss.
If I was a player around for the last lockout I would realize how foolish sitting out a year was. How ultimately it gained me no leverage in negotiations and succeeded only in taking a year's salary off of my career earnings.

If anything, the ignorance is among the PA members in terms of what holding out will actually accomplish. When we look back on this deal, I have no doubt that they players will be viewed as having been "bent over" again.

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 10:40 AM
  #752
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather View Post
You ****ing kidding me right now? Who cares about the negotiation getting compromised? Thats a good thing. Make the players start talking and realizing what needs to be done.

Keep it up. I hope more former players come out and say something. Sink Fehr. Sink the PA. Sink their absurd stance. YEAH!
Man, you don't get it. Modano and Guerin didn't give a rats ass about the lower earning players in 2004. They wanted the right to unlimited earning potential. They ostracized guys like Commodore and Ferrance for speaking against the union... while they were actually invested in the process. They weren't thinking of the collective unless it benefited them at the time.

Now these former players are out, have no stake, and they're throwing their former brothers under the bus. Presumably for a cushy league job. It's not to help the union, it's to draw attention to themselves. Thinking this is an honorable choice speaks more about you.

In my opinion, this hurts negotiations. It emboldens the league to hold out longer, to stick to their demands. It doesn't get people to the table any faster.

DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 10:45 AM
  #753
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 30,992
vCash: 500
The players are willing to compromise in reducing their share. The NHL wants it done all at once with the players losing 20% of their salaries to escrow. No wonder why the Bruins were in a rush to re-sign their players. Boston thinks the players will accept 20% escrow. The NHL says it 10%-12% escrow. PA says it 15%-20%. The players had money taken out of their checks for escrow. They ended up losing a little more 3% of their salaries to escrow in the 2005 CBA. The players had most of their money returned to them expect for that 3% plus. That's the problem. Its not a rollback off the top but the players lose it in escrow. That's the problem. Whether its a rollback or big escrow,the players lose a big chunk of their salary. Fehr has to be careful in what he offers Bettman who is a little sneaky because he then wants more. The PA offered the 24% rollback in November 2004 and Bettman took it but still insisted on the cap. Fehr is no dummy. The PA should have taken the 24% off the table. Maybe they tried but Bettman insisted on the 24%. Bill Daly said the NHL made a mistake giving the players younger free agency. The players got that concession for accepting the cap and giving 24%. Now the players are expected to give up younger free agency,take a % cut in HRR and give up a big chunk of their salaries in escrow. What are the players getting back in return? Nothing?????

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 10:51 AM
  #754
Greg02
Registered User
 
Greg02's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 1,661
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
If I was a player around for the last lockout I would realize how foolish sitting out a year was. How ultimately it gained me no leverage in negotiations and succeeded only in taking a year's salary off of my career earnings.

If anything, the ignorance is among the PA members in terms of what holding out will actually accomplish. When we look back on this deal, I have no doubt that they players will be viewed as having been "bent over" again.
If they're just going to give in every time, what's to stop the owners from doing this again... and again... and again. At least putting up a fight hurts the owners too.

Greg02 is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 10:52 AM
  #755
HAPPY HOUR
Registered User
 
HAPPY HOUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 5,253
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
The players are willing to compromise in reducing their share. The NHL wants it done all at once with the players losing 20% of their salaries to escrow. No wonder why the Bruins were in a rush to re-sign their players. Boston thinks the players will accept 20% escrow. The NHL says it 10%-12% escrow. PA says it 15%-20%. The players had money taken out of their checks for escrow. They ended up losing a little more 3% of their salaries to escrow in the 2005 CBA. The players had most of their money returned to them expect for that 3% plus. That's the problem. Its not a rollback off the top but the players lose it in escrow. That's the problem. Whether its a rollback or big escrow,the players lose a big chunk of their salary. Fehr has to be careful in what he offers Bettman who is a little sneaky because he then wants more. The PA offered the 24% rollback in November 2004 and Bettman took it but still insisted on the cap. Fehr is no dummy. The PA should have taken the 24% off the table. Maybe they tried but Bettman insisted on the 24%. Bill Daly said the NHL made a mistake giving the players younger free agency. The players got that concession for accepting the cap and giving 24%. Now the players are expected to give up younger free agency,take a % cut in HRR and give up a big chunk of their salaries in escrow. What are the players getting back in return? Nothing?????
I'm sure the Leagues stance is.. "you get to be a millionaire plus perks in the greatest league in the world". "Don't like it. Go play in the K".

HAPPY HOUR is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 10:53 AM
  #756
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
If I was a player around for the last lockout I would realize how foolish sitting out a year was. How ultimately it gained me no leverage in negotiations and succeeded only in taking a year's salary off of my career earnings.

If anything, the ignorance is among the PA members in terms of what holding out will actually accomplish. When we look back on this deal, I have no doubt that they players will be viewed as having been "bent over" again.
You're jumping ahead a few steps. Sept 15 was a false deadline. Games aren't lost yet. They're close. No one is looking to miss a single game, let alone the whole season.

If you were a player, you might be pissed that you missed a season for the last CBA. Now the owners are telling you the last CBA is screwing the league over, give up more. You might be pissed that Minnesota schmoozed you and a week later sat across the table and told you that deal is crazy, you have to give back some of it. Nashville could have walked from Weber if that contract was so bad. Instead they willingly signed it and attempt to get it reduced.

Let's say Center Ice advertised the package as $80 for the season, and I bought it. Then a week later, they say it's actually $100. If I don't agree to the deal, I lose my $80 and I don't get to watch hockey. Would you just pay it, or would you fight it and seek some options? Sound illegal? Or at the least immoral? Is Center Ice right because they invested in the system, buy rights, pay employees and assume all the burden and risk? Maybe they made a mistake with the initial offer, or maybe that was their tactic all along. Get me invested and force a few more nickels out. Doesn't make it right either way.

I know it's not a perfect analogy, but we're talking about emotions and thought processes of 700+ individuals.

Make no mistake, the battle right now is over signed contracts. Double digit escrows to artificially reduce contracts is unacceptable. Lock in the cap until the split catches up, and we have hockey. I don't think players care about the cap. They just want what's coming to them.

DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 10:59 AM
  #757
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 30,992
vCash: 500
Both sides are at fault but the NHL is being too greedy. The NHL made a bad deal in 2005 and now the same jokers are the table trying to fix their mistakes. People blame the PA for stalling. Last time,the NHL and PA couldn't get a deal done after they began negotiations one year before the CBA expired. CBA's don't get done until the last minute or usually after a lockout. Why is anyone surprised there is a lockout? Its lockout 3.0 for Bettman. Fehr will get a better deal by waiting until the NHL has a pressure point. The owners will win but Fehr won't allow the players to get rolled.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 11:08 AM
  #758
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
The players are willing to compromise in reducing their share. The NHL wants it done all at once with the players losing 20% of their salaries to escrow. No wonder why the Bruins were in a rush to re-sign their players. Boston thinks the players will accept 20% escrow. The NHL says it 10%-12% escrow. PA says it 15%-20%. The players had money taken out of their checks for escrow. They ended up losing a little more 3% of their salaries to escrow in the 2005 CBA. The players had most of their money returned to them expect for that 3% plus. That's the problem. Its not a rollback off the top but the players lose it in escrow. That's the problem. Whether its a rollback or big escrow,the players lose a big chunk of their salary. Fehr has to be careful in what he offers Bettman who is a little sneaky because he then wants more. The PA offered the 24% rollback in November 2004 and Bettman took it but still insisted on the cap. Fehr is no dummy. The PA should have taken the 24% off the table. Maybe they tried but Bettman insisted on the 24%. Bill Daly said the NHL made a mistake giving the players younger free agency. The players got that concession for accepting the cap and giving 24%. Now the players are expected to give up younger free agency,take a % cut in HRR and give up a big chunk of their salaries in escrow. What are the players getting back in return? Nothing?????
Excellent post. I personally think that 24% powerplay in 2004 is why the players are so slow with negotiations. They're pouring over their offers carefully. Like playing chess, they're predicting how the league will turn their own offer against them.

I think they players would take less than 50% if there was a gradually drop. Say lock in last season's cap, $64+m. That's roughly 54-55% of expected revenue. Drop it 1% every year until year 7, getting it down to 48% for the PA. Cap actually could go over that $64m. If it's 50/50 split, lock in a cap number until 50% passes the ceiling. Drop the floor immediately. Increase revenue sharing. Link the floor and ceiling by a percentage rather than the same $16m.

A bunch of teams conducted business the last year with a 20% escrow in their projections. They are more reluctant to honor the contracts then some of the fans believe.

Regarding the free agency concession, it was widely believed the league was all too happy to drop it to 27. They thought flooding the market with more UFAs would decrease demand, drive prices down. They never predicted longer contracts. Teams were afraid of losing players after large investments with only a few prime years in the organization. Bettman isn't the best with details. He is typically burned by the details. Expansion was great... franchise fees and national market. He diluted the talent pool however and forced contracts through the roof. Didn't see that coming. He drowned his fledging franchises in payroll.

DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 11:14 AM
  #759
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,813
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
Both sides are at fault but the NHL is being too greedy. The NHL made a bad deal in 2005 and now the same jokers are the table trying to fix their mistakes. People blame the PA for stalling. Last time,the NHL and PA couldn't get a deal done after they began negotiations one year before the CBA expired. CBA's don't get done until the last minute or usually after a lockout. Why is anyone surprised there is a lockout? Its lockout 3.0 for Bettman. Fehr will get a better deal by waiting until the NHL has a pressure point. The owners will win but Fehr won't allow the players to get rolled.
NFL and NBA were locked out. Waiting got the unions better deals. As you've pointed out numerous times, waiting got the splits close to 50/50 with a phased reduction in cap. No rollbacks or double digit escrow on contracts.

NBA had 12/25 in their sights. That's their "Winter Classic". Hopefully this is more like the NFL. They're a TV driven economy. Missing games is unacceptable.

NHL is a ticket driven economy. NBC is indifferent about hockey during the football season. Owners lose money eventually with the gate, but starting late leaves room for a compressed full season. Players get an escrow check in October. They don't lose money until last few weeks of October.

DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 11:23 AM
  #760
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather View Post
Well, the players are the ones at fault here and their refusal to cave is why we are in a lockout right now.
ANd the owners handing out contracts that purportedly they cannot afford is not at fault? How can the owners crow about teh last CBA, pat each other on the back about the growing revenues, sign players to record contracts and then, several months (or even weeks) latter, start to cry poverty?

No, the owners are clearly not at fault. It is all the greedey players.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 11:24 AM
  #761
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 30,992
vCash: 500
LeBrun wrote this yesterday

Quote:
The league’s view was that raising the cap for this past offseason was an artificial inflation of the cap given that a new CBA was in the offing. Not surprisingly, the NHLPA declined the offer, very much in its rights under the expiring CBA to have the salary cap increase July 1 according to corresponding revenues. As such, the salary cap went up to $70.2 million for the July 1 opening of the market, and some teams went ahead and spent like drunken sailors.

From that moment on, the league and owners were intent on recouping some of that money in the ensuing CBA talks.

The summer’s free-agent spending under the new salary cap was an important factor in what now stands as the No. 1 philosophical battle between the sides.
http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...crucial-period

How many teams spent like drunken sailors? There weren't many players worthy of drunken sailor money but which teams spent big money? Minnesota gave 2 long term "cheating" contracts worth $98 million each and Philly gave Weber $110M. Those were the only crazy contracts. Both of those owners are close to Bettman. Recoup the money? What money? Its 3 contracts. The extensions to the entry level players start in 2013-14. Even with those extensions and some of the other extensions which begin next season,those teams don't have too much money committed for 13-14. Boston has $57M committed for 13-14. They gave 3 extensions for Seguin,Marchand and Lucic. Minnesota has $51M committed for 13-14. $57M in actual salaries. Even if the cap is set at $64.3M,those teams aren't close to $70.2M. What's the problem? Teams are allowed to spend 10% more between July 1-last day of training camp. Even it was kept at $64.3M and added the 10%,that's $70M. Teams are still below the $70M this summer and they could have adjusted their cap before the season just like other teams have done in previous years. The whole thing is weird. No team is at $77M.

The whole thing is a joke.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 11:32 AM
  #762
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,602
vCash: 500
It's absurd to think that any union is going to negotiate pay cuts for the people they represent when the industry those people are working for is increasing its revenues and profits each and every year. That the NHLPA is still not likely to win is almost beside the point. Taking that kind of a hit without any resistance just about makes it a fact that the union itself is of no use to those it represents--and the NHL and owners need the NHLPA--because without the NHLPA there is no bargaining agreement--no rules anymore on pay, free agency etc. etc. There would be no limits to what teams may or not pay and no protection for younger assets beyond the term they sign for. A player only bound to the team for the length of a contract he signs as a single individual. Without the NHLPA the wealthier owners would be eating the less wealthy owners. Crosby wouldn't be playing in ****ing Pittsburgh or Malkin.

So IMO--asking the NHLPA to knuckle under here and accept whatever it's offered is not going to benefit anyone--not the players, not the owners and not the fans. If the NHLPA rolls over here--why would you stay in it? If the players were to decertify their union there would be ****ing anarchy (not necessarily a bad thing IMO). Too bad for the owners that Allan Eagleson is no longer there to fix everything for them.

eco's bones is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 11:48 AM
  #763
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 30,992
vCash: 500
An arbitrator ruled signing bonuses are due regardless of a lockout.

The Rangers lost an arbitration case filed by Holik and Ortmeyer. The 2005 lockout didn't end until late July 2005. The Rangers owed Holik and Ortmeyer signing bonus money.

Quote:
Perhaps the most dishonorable episode in recent Rangers' history was settled yesterday when arbitrator Richard Bloch ruled that the Blueshirts must indeed pay Bobby Holik and Jed Ortmeyer their respective signing bonuses the team withheld during and after the 2004-05 NHL lockout.

Holik will receive $3.52M, representing the $2M he was owed on July 1, 2005 and the post-rollback $1.52M he was owed on July 1, 2006, under terms of the five-year, $45M contract he signed with the Rangers on July 1, 2002.

Ortmeyer will receive the $150,000 he was owed on July 1, 2005 as part of the three-year, $1.2M contract under which he was working at the time.
Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/range...#ixzz26w0g4UrS

If the lockout wipes out the entire season,Minnesota still owes Suter and Parise a combined $20M on July 1,2013. Nashville owes Weber $13M next July 2013. So where is that money coming from if they missed the entire 12-13 season and need to sell tickets for 13-14 after losing a 2nd season is lost because of a lockout? Who is buying tickets for the 13-14 season after missing 12-13? Who knows when the lockout will be settled if they miss an entire season? The NHL teams still need to stroke a check for those signing bonuses next summer.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 11:51 AM
  #764
Cliffy1814
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 564
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by eco's bones View Post
It's absurd to think that any union is going to negotiate pay cuts for the people they represent when the industry those people are working for is increasing its revenues and profits each and every year. That the NHLPA is still not likely to win is almost beside the point. Taking that kind of a hit without any resistance just about makes it a fact that the union itself is of no use to those it represents--and the NHL and owners need the NHLPA--because without the NHLPA there is no bargaining agreement--no rules anymore on pay, free agency etc. etc. There would be no limits to what teams may or not pay and no protection for younger assets beyond the term they sign for. A player only bound to the team for the length of a contract he signs as a single individual. Without the NHLPA the wealthier owners would be eating the less wealthy owners. Crosby wouldn't be playing in ****ing Pittsburgh or Malkin.

So IMO--asking the NHLPA to knuckle under here and accept whatever it's offered is not going to benefit anyone--not the players, not the owners and not the fans. If the NHLPA rolls over here--why would you stay in it? If the players were to decertify their union there would be ****ing anarchy (not necessarily a bad thing IMO). Too bad for the owners that Allan Eagleson is no longer there to fix everything for them.
One reason that fans are a little more "anti player" than they were a few weeeks back is that the last couple of proposals seem to have come from the owners. Just because there is a "wide gap" is not a reason to not try. That may be perception more than reality, but the owners seem to be doing a little better on propoganda front.

Two points not often mentioned in all these discussions. One pro owner, and one pro player. Both are difficult to quantify but are very real in my opinion.

The "pie" being fought over. The league went back to old HRR canculation which is good. Every game that gets lost, that pie will theoretically shrink. So if the players are willing to sacrifice half a season to get 52% vs 49% blended over life of deal, that 52% of overall pie could be less than the 49% they could get today. i.e would you rather have 49% of $18B renevue over 5 years or 52% of $14B revenue over same period?
The biggest improvement to the game post lockout last time was rule changes / increased speed. I don't think the league has another level to push to drive revenues up if there is a prolonged work stoppage. The TV deal is brand new. what's going to happen to advertising dollars the last two years of the next CBA. The league has set a precedant for labor strife and lost games/revenue.

Point two that is rarely mentioned is owners increase in franchise value...This goes for football, baseball, etc...when revenues and salaries are increasing, franchise values will be increasing as well. Owning an NHL franchise is akin to owning a rental property. You will show a small loss, hope to break even in real dollars, and maybe gain a little enjoyment. The real financial payioff comes when you sell it for a profit.
I know there are some isolated teams where this is not the case, but I guarantee that if Columbus went to a few WCF, they too would see a huge increase in franchise value.

Cliffy1814 is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 12:17 PM
  #765
Bleed Ranger Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather View Post
They aren't negotiating though. Nobody is doing anything.

I don't understand how both sides can talk to each other directly and still spout the posturing ********. REAL TALK. START TALKING REAL
I dont know if your tantrums are just from selfishness or having little to no idea about the art of the negotiation - probably both if I had to guess.

The #1 reason theres not much going on right now is because no blood has been drawn...meaning, no players have lost a paycheck, no owners have lost gate receipts. You'll see things pick up when that starts to happening.

In the same realm, when it comes to a negotiation, you better be damn sure you have all your i's dotted and t's crossed with your constituency before you sit across the table from the opposition. I'd imagine thats whats going on now - on both sides. They're talking internally, about different avenues, and what the other side's next move might be. This is $3.3B we're talking about, dont you think thats a bit complex?

Donald Fehr is not going to pull a Goodenow. That guy could've ****ed up a cup of coffee. Hes not going to lose his constituency and get bent over by Bettman.

Bleed Ranger Blue is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 12:47 PM
  #766
eco's bones
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Elmira NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,602
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
I dont know if your tantrums are just from selfishness or having little to no idea about the art of the negotiation - probably both if I had to guess.

The #1 reason theres not much going on right now is because no blood has been drawn...meaning, no players have lost a paycheck, no owners have lost gate receipts. You'll see things pick up when that starts to happening.

In the same realm, when it comes to a negotiation, you better be damn sure you have all your i's dotted and t's crossed with your constituency before you sit across the table from the opposition. I'd imagine thats whats going on now - on both sides. They're talking internally, about different avenues, and what the other side's next move might be. This is $3.3B we're talking about, dont you think thats a bit complex?

Donald Fehr is not going to pull a Goodenow. That guy could've ****ed up a cup of coffee. Hes not going to lose his constituency and get bent over by Bettman.
Good post. I suspect that's a very accurate analysis. The NHLPA is going to try as hard as possible to keep all the players updated--the owners will also want to unite behind a plan--neither of them are going to tip their hands to the fans--they are going to do their best to make the other side look like *******s.

eco's bones is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 12:58 PM
  #767
Tawnos
Moderator
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 10,039
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
LeBrun wrote this yesterday



http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...crucial-period

How many teams spent like drunken sailors? There weren't many players worthy of drunken sailor money but which teams spent big money? Minnesota gave 2 long term "cheating" contracts worth $98 million each and Philly gave Weber $110M. Those were the only crazy contracts. Both of those owners are close to Bettman. Recoup the money? What money? Its 3 contracts. The extensions to the entry level players start in 2013-14. Even with those extensions and some of the other extensions which begin next season,those teams don't have too much money committed for 13-14. Boston has $57M committed for 13-14. They gave 3 extensions for Seguin,Marchand and Lucic. Minnesota has $51M committed for 13-14. $57M in actual salaries. Even if the cap is set at $64.3M,those teams aren't close to $70.2M. What's the problem? Teams are allowed to spend 10% more between July 1-last day of training camp. Even it was kept at $64.3M and added the 10%,that's $70M. Teams are still below the $70M this summer and they could have adjusted their cap before the season just like other teams have done in previous years. The whole thing is weird. No team is at $77M.

The whole thing is a joke.
Plus, wasn't it Bettman who instructed the GMs to act as if the 70.2m number was correct?

Tawnos is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 01:14 PM
  #768
DutchShamrock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 4,813
vCash: 500
- I kind of disagree about only 3 crazy contracts this summer. Prust, anyone? There is no reason for Seguin and Hall getting that kind of money as non-arb RFAs. Sather has the cash and he's using his leverage on MDZ. The poster child of unchecked spending is one of a few GMs that plays hardball with RFAs.

The GMs were scrambling on Saturday to ink a contract hoping a rollback is possible. Players were rushing to sign before drastic limits get implemented.

- Yeah, I suppose fans are a bit more anti-player this week. But the League's first offer was on another planet. The players, philosophically, started with a creative offer. Structurally, it has the components to get something done: limited player salary growth, phased reduction, increased revenue sharing. The numbers were high, but for a first offer following the League's abomination, it was expected.

It's about perception, but the league is getting props for simply making a realistic offer. They got as close to the middle as the PA, but the union is taking heat.

-It's a slow process and fans are imploding over it. But the deal is there. Expect the Union to make a very realistic, very cooperative offer. There's 700 members and, as Rangerboy put it, a sneaky commissioner. It's doesn't happen overnight. It'd be nice if they locked themselves in a room a month ago but this is how sports negotiations go.

DutchShamrock is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 02:02 PM
  #769
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleed Ranger Blue View Post
Donald Fehr is not going to pull a Goodenow. That guy could've ****ed up a cup of coffee. Hes not going to lose his constituency and get bent over by Bettman.
I think that gets lost along the way. Fehr does not have a history of getting bent over in these. In fact, he has always done well for his constituents. Which is why the NHL has hired him. Make no mistake, he has the players drinking the same kool-aid, from the same trough.

This time around, there are LOTS of teams that will loose money. This is not last time, when not playing means loosing less money. I am not saying that the owners break, but my guess is that when this gets done, it will be much closer to center. As to when, well, that is anyone's guess. However, if the owners think that they will get Fehr to blink by canceling the season, they are sadly mistaken. And when teams like Tampa Bay and Buffalo begin to loose real money, there will be enormous pressure placed on Bettman.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 02:05 PM
  #770
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 14,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DutchShamrock View Post
- I kind of disagree about only 3 crazy contracts this summer. Prust, anyone? There is no reason for Seguin and Hall getting that kind of money as non-arb RFAs.
Let's not forget Evander Kane getting a 6 year/$30m deal and 6 years each for Hartnell and Simmonds, to the tune of over $50m in total.

True Blue is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 02:42 PM
  #771
Staals Eye
once TortsKindaGuy
 
Staals Eye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 812
vCash: 822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fire Sather View Post
You ****ing kidding me right now? Who cares about the negotiation getting compromised? Thats a good thing. Make the players start talking and realizing what needs to be done.

Keep it up. I hope more former players come out and say something. Sink Fehr. Sink the PA. Sink their absurd stance. YEAH!
:EDIT: Never mind, I don't want to get in trouble. Just thank god your not on my unions negotiating committee!

Staals Eye is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 03:10 PM
  #772
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 30,992
vCash: 500
Bettman was quoted at a BOG meeting in late spring that it was business as usual. Bettman could not have instructed the GMs to be cautious because Fehr would have gone after him for collusion. None of the teams are in a tough spot with their 12-13 and 13-14 commitments if the cap is returned to the 11-12 number. Escrow was 8.5% for 11-12 with the cap at $64.3M/57% and the players are getting most of their money back next month. There has to be a way to drop the players share from 57% to 54% in year 1 and they don't take a beating on escrow. Revenue is expected to increase to $3.5B in 12-13. The players are insisting they get the same $1.8B in 12-13 they got in 11-12 while the owners want immediate cuts. The NHL won't discuss anything until the players agree to their cuts first. Fehr is staking out his position by wanting the same money. The NHL complains about the NHLPA not budging from their offer b/c Bettman will want more and more. Its only September 19 and look what I got from Fehr will be Bettman's reaction. Let's see what more I get by the end of November.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 03:10 PM
  #773
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 30,992
vCash: 500
From: @SunGarrioch
Sent: Sep 19, 2012 4:06p

There are no meetings planned and there have been no discussions today between NHL and NHLPA. We are one week from last official talks.

sent via web
On Twitter: http://twitter.com/SunGarrioch/statu...13312373997568

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 03:26 PM
  #774
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 30,992
vCash: 500
Players money in 11-12. 3.3B and 57% is $1.89B. Revenue increases to $3.5B in 12-13 and the players get 54% in year. That's $1.89B. Bettman offered 49% in the first 3 years and 47% in years 4-6.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 03:30 PM
  #775
Jabroni
Moderator
The Corporate Mod
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,280
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
From: @SunGarrioch
Sent: Sep 19, 2012 4:06p

There are no meetings planned and there have been no discussions today between NHL and NHLPA. We are one week from last official talks.

sent via web
On Twitter: http://twitter.com/SunGarrioch/statu...13312373997568
Aren't Fehr and Daly supposed to talk later?

Jabroni 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 11:16 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.