HFBoards

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

CBA Negotiations

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-05-2012, 01:00 PM
  #876
toughfighter83*
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 563
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Good.Like Bobby Ryan said yesterday, the players just want to jump ship to europe instead of trying to stay here and try to fix the issues..

This will get a new PA proposal pretty quickly since they don't want to lose all of the money this year
he's right, i mean if these players cared at all about playing hockey here, they would stay here and get a deal done, i think the nhl shouldnt let the players play anywhere because it wont get a deal done, it goes to show how much they are loyal to the fans and to this sport.

i hate to say this, i dont think players in nhl care about the fans because they get paid and it's all entertainment for other people, i dont think they would care if it was an empty arena, they would still play and not care. it's business to them that's all it is.

back in the old days, im sure alot of players did care about fans because they werent thinking about greed, they were thinking about winning and getting support for the fans, why do you think there was no lockouts in the 70s or 80s.

toughfighter83* is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 01:18 PM
  #877
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by toughfighter83 View Post
he's right, i mean if these players cared at all about playing hockey here, they would stay here and get a deal done, i think the nhl shouldnt let the players play anywhere because it wont get a deal done, it goes to show how much they are loyal to the fans and to this sport.

i hate to say this, i dont think players in nhl care about the fans because they get paid and it's all entertainment for other people, i dont think they would care if it was an empty arena, they would still play and not care. it's business to them that's all it is.

back in the old days, im sure alot of players did care about fans because they werent thinking about greed, they were thinking about winning and getting support for the fans, why do you think there was no lockouts in the 70s or 80s.
Bettman wasn't League President. If he had been, there would have been lockouts.

__________________
Down in the basement, I've got a Craftsman lathe. Show it to the children when they misbehave.
Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 01:22 PM
  #878
McNasty
Registered User
 
McNasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rutgers
Country: United States
Posts: 5,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by toughfighter83 View Post
he's right, i mean if these players cared at all about playing hockey here, they would stay here and get a deal done, i think the nhl shouldnt let the players play anywhere because it wont get a deal done, it goes to show how much they are loyal to the fans and to this sport.

i hate to say this, i dont think players in nhl care about the fans because they get paid and it's all entertainment for other people, i dont think they would care if it was an empty arena, they would still play and not care. it's business to them that's all it is.
.
Right, Clearly the players are the only party in this negotiation worried about money. Neither side care about the fans, if they were one of the sides would be less worried about negotiating leverage and more concerned with constantly engaging in meaningful negotiation, both sides are just pointing the finger saying you need to concede something!

McNasty is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 01:56 PM
  #879
CharlieGirl
Get well soon Kimmo
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,861
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
Bettman wasn't League President. If he had been, there would have been lockouts.
Nonsense. It's all the players' faults. If it weren't for them wanting to get paid some of the money they generate for the owners, they'd take whatever the league wanted to pay them and be damn happy about it.

They just don't care about the fans the way the owners clearly do. I mean, after the owners got the salary cap they wanted last time plus a 24% immediate rollback in salaries, we all got to enjoy lower ticket prices and free food from the concessions, right?

CharlieGirl is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 02:05 PM
  #880
Prongo
Beer
 
Prongo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 13,877
vCash: 500
Well they are meeting in Toronto this weekend. Hopefully they find some sort of common ground and try to work this out. Once that first canceled game goes by it really will settle in again that there will be no hockey.

Also not a fan of how the NHL owners are so quick to cancel the whole season.

There is just so much wrong with this whole process it's hard to put into words

https://twitter.com/JSportsnet/statu...96306951020546

Quote:
From Daly:"Yes we had a meeting. Nothing else to report at this time." #NHLlockout
Bettman also sat in during the meeting.


Last edited by Prongo: 10-05-2012 at 02:10 PM.
Prongo is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 02:09 PM
  #881
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
Nonsense. It's all the players' faults. If it weren't for them wanting to get paid some of the money they generate for the owners, they'd take whatever the league wanted to pay them and be damn happy about it.

They just don't care about the fans the way the owners clearly do. I mean, after the owners got the salary cap they wanted last time plus a 24% immediate rollback in salaries, we all got to enjoy lower ticket prices and free food from the concessions, right?
Hey, that reminds me...didn't Bettman say ticket prices would go down after that lockout? Yeah, so much for that.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 02:54 PM
  #882
McNasty
Registered User
 
McNasty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Rutgers
Country: United States
Posts: 5,626
vCash: 500
Is it too optimistic that I'm happy just to hear that nobody is finger pointing after their secret meeting?

McNasty is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 02:55 PM
  #883
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by McNasty View Post
Is it too optimistic that I'm happy just to hear that nobody is finger pointing after their secret meeting?
Maybe they're secretly pointing.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 04:57 PM
  #884
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
Bettman wasn't League President. If he had been, there would have been lockouts.
Yes. Bettman is the reason for every single lockout in every sport. I also hear he is the reason for taxes

Krishna is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:00 PM
  #885
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Yes. Bettman is the reason for every single lockout in every sport. I also hear he is the reason for taxes
Remind me, how many lockouts did the NHL have before Bettman?

I find it strangely coincidental that there were absolutely none until he showed up, and now we have them every time the CBA expires.

I'd also appreciate if you didn't throw strawmen at me. Where did I blame him for anything BUT the NHL lockouts? It's his go-to negotiating move.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:05 PM
  #886
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
Remind me, how many lockouts did the NHL have before Bettman?

I find it strangely coincidental that there were absolutely none until he showed up, and now we have them every time the CBA expires.

I'd also appreciate if you didn't throw strawmen at me. Where did I blame him for anything BUT the NHL lockouts? It's his go-to negotiating move.
If you really want a reason why lockouts happen now, look at what happened about 5 or 6 weeks before the lockout and look at who is involved.

I'll wait for you to check into it

Krishna is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:08 PM
  #887
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Also, most other leagues have their CBA end about 3 or 4 months before the season starts while the NHL has it end 2 weeks before training camp. I posted about that before and it needs to be pushed back

Krishna is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:12 PM
  #888
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
If you really want a reason why lockouts happen now, look at what happened about 5 or 6 weeks before the lockout and look at who is involved.

I'll wait for you to check into it
What, you mean like the league making completely outlandish demands and then locking out the players when they don't sheepishly accept?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Also, most other leagues have their CBA end about 3 or 4 months before the season starts while the NHL has it end 2 weeks before training camp. I posted about that before and it needs to be pushed back

I would love to see the expiration date coincide with the opening of FA or something; it seems like that would make the most sense. I highly doubt Bettman or the owners will do that though, because it negates some of the impact of a lockout, unless the league just doesn't negotiate until September.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:13 PM
  #889
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
What, you mean like the league making completely outlandish demands and then locking out the players when they don't sheepishly accept?
1994 MLB player strike. It made the MLB look like a joke and the NHL wasn't going to allow it to happen to them.

Krishna is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:25 PM
  #890
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
1994 MLB player strike. It made the MLB look like a joke and the NHL wasn't going to allow it to happen to them.
How is it going to happen to them? It's against the CBA. If the players had gone on strike during the CBA the owners could have sued them and it puts them in a bad position if a mediator gets called in. The only way they players could have gone on strike is if they'd done so the moment the CBA expired, and then we'd have a fun "You can't lock me out, I'm on strike/You can't strike, you're locked out!" situation.

Strikes have been prohibited since the 1994-5 lockout in Article 7 of both CBAs. I imagine they'll continue to be prohibited.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:30 PM
  #891
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
How is it going to happen to them? It's against the CBA. If the players had gone on strike during the CBA the owners could have sued them and it puts them in a bad position if a mediator gets called in. The only way they players could have gone on strike is if they'd done so the moment the CBA expired, and then we'd have a fun "You can't lock me out, I'm on strike/You can't strike, you're locked out!" situation.

Strikes have been prohibited since the 1994-5 lockout in Article 7 of both CBAs. I imagine they'll continue to be prohibited.
Simply put, the NHL wasn't going into 1994, 2004, or 2012 without a signed CBA whether or not the players tried making PR moves by saying they would play without one. Article 7 doesn't apply when there is no current CBA. As I've posted here and a few others have posted on the business board, the NLRB allows strikes when there's no existing CBA. When one expires, you CAN still go by the same terms of the previous one but the no strike clauses do not matter. If they did, why did the MLBPA go on strike?

Krishna is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:32 PM
  #892
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Looks like the NHL and PA met today with secret meetings

Plan to meet this weekend as well

Krishna is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:41 PM
  #893
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Simply put, the NHL wasn't going into 1994, 2004, or 2012 without a signed CBA whether or not the players tried making PR moves by saying they would play without one. Article 7 doesn't apply when there is no current CBA. As I've posted here and a few others have posted on the business board, the NLRB allows strikes when there's no existing CBA. When one expires, you CAN still go by the same terms of the previous one but the no strike clauses do not matter. If they did, why did the MLBPA go on strike?
The fact remains that a player strike is extremely unlikely. The fact also remains that the league uses lockouts as a go-to negotiating tactic. It's just what Bettman does. He was brought in to be a hardliner and take it to the players after the players won rights to some profits from their own likenesses in 92, and that's exactly what he's done every time the CBA expires. The players stood up for themselves once, and the owners have given Bettman their leave to extract as much flesh from the players as he can every time a CBA is up. Bettman was brought in to take it to the players, just like Fehr has been brought in to try and take it to the league in response. It's a 2 decade long feud and the league needs it to stop, but there really isn't any end in sight; if anything it's escalating.

The league (based on appearances, at least...who knows what their true intentions are) wants to grind down the players and treat them like it's the 80s again, but after losing 2 straight labor disputes I don't know that the players going to take this one lightly.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Looks like the NHL and PA met today with secret meetings

Plan to meet this weekend as well
Yeah, someone mentioned that earlier. Making them "secret" certainly raises some eyebrows. Time to start fashioning tin hats.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:41 PM
  #894
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
@Real_ESPNLeBrun: Told that NHL strongly urged NHLPA in meeting today to come up with new offer. In turn, NHLPA also asked league to come up with new offer...

@Real_ESPNLeBrun: In short, both sides expressing to each other that it's time to compromise

Krishna is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 05:45 PM
  #895
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
@Real_ESPNLeBrun: Told that NHL strongly urged NHLPA in meeting today to come up with new offer. In turn, NHLPA also asked league to come up with new offer...

@Real_ESPNLeBrun: In short, both sides expressing to each other that it's time to compromise
Time to see 55% of HRR adjusted down to the 50ish neighborhood over time, while the league drops some of their FA demands. Who knows what will happen with HRR and the cap, I have no guesses.

Edit: I wonder if this will be a 5 or 10 year agreement? Bettman isn't a dumb businessman overall, some experiments aside he's been excellent at growing the league. I wouldn't be surprised if he'd like an agreement closer to 10 years to promote stability...that would help him keep his TV deals rolling in. I imagine networks don't like the risk of losing large chunks of programming every 5 years. I also imagine a longer agreement would require a slower rising Cap so it doesn't run away again; it's going to be interesting to see what adjustments they make now that they have experience with it.


Last edited by Beef Invictus: 10-05-2012 at 05:58 PM.
Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 06:01 PM
  #896
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
The fact remains that a player strike is extremely unlikely. The fact also remains that the league uses lockouts as a go-to negotiating tactic. It's just what Bettman does. He was brought in to be a hardliner and take it to the players after the players won rights to some profits from their own likenesses in 92, and that's exactly what he's done every time the CBA expires. The players stood up for themselves once, and the owners have given Bettman their leave to extract as much flesh from the players as he can every time a CBA is up. Bettman was brought in to take it to the players, just like Fehr has been brought in to try and take it to the league in response. It's a 2 decade long feud and the league needs it to stop, but there really isn't any end in sight; if anything it's escalating.

The league (based on appearances, at least...who knows what their true intentions are) wants to grind down the players and treat them like it's the 80s again, but after losing 2 straight labor disputes I don't know that the players going to take this one lightly.



Yeah, someone mentioned that earlier. Making them "secret" certainly raises some eyebrows. Time to start fashioning tin hats.
I'm not even sure if I want to continue arguing if you can't even admit that the playerse have any wrong doing ever.. At least Jeh(Jack De La Hoya) can admit that they would strike if it got to that point

Krishna is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 06:04 PM
  #897
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
I'm not even sure if I want to continue arguing if you can't even admit that the playerse have any wrong doing ever.. At least Jeh(Jack De La Hoya) can admit that they would strike if it got to that point
I've never claimed they can do no wrong; hell, in this very thread I've pointed out instances of their own stubbornness. However, I just don't see how they can strike. I don't know how it's possible. The league simply won't allow themselves to be in a position where it happens. That's their right. Unfortunately for the players, there is no way for them to avoid a lockout, either. I'm not a fan of the lockout as a negotiating tactic, because it keeps me from seeing games. I'm not a fan of strikes, either, but they're far less likely and occur far less often. I'd love to see the CBA expiration pushed back to midnight on July 1st, but I'm doubtful Bettman wants to negate the impact of the lockout; past precedent has shown Bettman and the owners have no issue with missing games to pressure players.

If the league had allowed the players to continue playing while negotiating, they would have made them sign another no strike/no lockout clause.

Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 06:04 PM
  #898
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Invictus View Post
Time to see 55% of HRR adjusted down to the 50ish neighborhood over time, while the league drops some of their FA demands. Who knows what will happen with HRR and the cap, I have no guesses.

Edit: I wonder if this will be a 5 or 10 year agreement? Bettman isn't a dumb businessman overall, some experiments aside he's been excellent at growing the league. I wouldn't be surprised if he'd like an agreement closer to 10 years to promote stability...that would help him keep his TV deals rolling in. I imagine networks don't like the risk of losing large chunks of programming every 5 years. I also imagine a longer agreement would require a slower rising Cap so it doesn't run away again; it's going to be interesting to see what adjustments they make now that they have experience with it.
They should get it like this..

year 1 : 54%
2: 53%
3: 51%
4-10: 50%

A 10 year agreement would work better for the league so there's no real ******** feelings between parties each time there's a CBA to be signed

Krishna is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 06:16 PM
  #899
Beef Invictus
Global Moderator
Beefitor
 
Beef Invictus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Centreville
Country: Lord Howe Island
Posts: 37,565
vCash: 156
I'm also interested in seeing if the NHLPA tries to push the owners into re-evaluating revenue sharing. Right now it seems the owners are looking at the players' pockets as a solution to problems on their own side; if I'm a player I'd want the owners to start looking to problems on their side of the fence....make them build a compost pile instead of hurling their garbage into the players yard.

It's probably too late to push for that this time. If the owners come at the players hard again next time while complaining about issues on their side to justify it, I think the players would have to push for the owners to do something. That's where having more time between CBA expiration and the start of the season would be awesome, because that dispute would get really messy.


Last edited by Beef Invictus: 10-05-2012 at 06:23 PM.
Beef Invictus is offline  
Old
10-05-2012, 06:46 PM
  #900
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 101,904
vCash: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by toughfighter83 View Post

back in the old days, im sure alot of players did care about fans because they werent thinking about greed, they were thinking about winning and getting support for the fans, why do you think there was no lockouts in the 70s or 80s.
Bill Wirtz basically controlled players union ,, Eagleson was just puppet

Blackhawkswincup 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 10:28 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.