HFBoards

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

Who's side are you on if you were forced to pick sides? The owners? ... or the NHLPA?

View Poll Results: Who's side are you on if you were forced to pick sides? The owners? ... or the NHLPA?
The owners 144 48.65%
The NHLPA 152 51.35%
Voters: 296. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-08-2012, 05:06 PM
  #201
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,463
vCash: 500
I really laugh at the idea that players don't take any risks to become players, that owners take all the risks.

Hello ?!?!?! Players are risking their entire lives. They devote all their free time in their youth to become players, they forego an education, and they risk debilitating physical impairments and mental degeneration, see Probert, Bob ;; all that for a probability of success which is less than 1% for teenagers giving a serious go at it; and probably ~15% or so even for drafted players.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
10-08-2012, 05:28 PM
  #202
sheed36
Registered User
 
sheed36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Helene Elliott @helenenothelen

why aren't NHL and union discussing the core economic differences? Daly: 'We would be happy to listen to the PA on economic or system issues


Helene Elliott @helenenothelen

(more Daly) but they don't appear to be inclined to bring anything new to the table. As long as that's the case, I'm not sure we have more


Helene Elliott @helenenothelen

(more Daly) to add. they got the last 2 substantive proposals from us." End Daly quote. End hopes of resolution anytime soon.
Why are the PA so hesitant to discuss this?

sheed36 is online now  
Old
10-08-2012, 05:48 PM
  #203
GordonGraham
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 1,861
vCash: 500
Im always on the players side

They signed contracts with their team for a said amount why should they have to to take a 5-10-15 % cut on that contract.

If the league wants to change the term of the contracts ($$$)the players should have the right to void them.

The Owners are the one who killed the system by offering 2nd contract guys huge money while those guys had no options(not even rfa no arbitration rights) also by offering 10+ years contracts to get around the cap.

If they cant make money they should spend to the cap floor instead of ceiling

GordonGraham is offline  
Old
10-08-2012, 07:00 PM
  #204
sheed36
Registered User
 
sheed36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordonGraham View Post
Im always on the players side

They signed contracts with their team for a said amount why should they have to to take a 5-10-15 % cut on that contract.

If the league wants to change the term of the contracts ($$$)the players should have the right to void them.

The Owners are the one who killed the system by offering 2nd contract guys huge money while those guys had no options(not even rfa no arbitration rights) also by offering 10+ years contracts to get around the cap.

If they cant make money they should spend to the cap floor instead of ceiling
Some teams are pretty much doing that now and still can't make money apparently.. The cap floor right now is higher that what the cap was in 2005 I believe. Getting rid of the cap floor would help struggling teams make money but how competitive would such a team be and would the fans come out to watch?

sheed36 is online now  
Old
10-08-2012, 07:01 PM
  #205
AntonCH
Registered User
 
AntonCH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,716
vCash: 500
Correct me if I'm wrong
It's the owners fault for the strike because they invited the union to start negotiations a year ago, the union declined, that can only point to the owners?
Although most are right about the contract rollbacks - they were doled out they should be honored.
However, the majority of the players in the PA should not delude themselves in thinking that they are anything more than guys lucky enough to play a kids game. Guys who can help fill arenas are maybe a dozen or less, the rest can be replaced and will one day - sooner than later - be forgotten.

It's easy to come to a resolution when both sides are eager to do so and are willing to bend. What we have here is a Mexican standoff between 2 people that have no emotional ties to the game. The PA hates Bettman, the owners want Fehr out. I think we better hunker down for a long one.

AntonCH is offline  
Old
10-08-2012, 08:39 PM
  #206
Conflicted Habs fan
Registered User
 
Conflicted Habs fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 539
vCash: 50
I'm anti-owner on this one. The players were basically told to take a pay cut and accept the new terms or else face a lockout. Of course the players are going to react to Bettman's ultimatum on the principle of honour. This is probably the most unnecessary lockout in professional sport. The only owners that are suffering are Bettman's southern expansion teams. How about lock them out? No-one is going to notice in Phoenix, Miami or Tennessee anyway

Conflicted Habs fan is offline  
Old
10-08-2012, 08:43 PM
  #207
haburger
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,158
vCash: 500
i think both sides are greedy losers.

haburger is offline  
Old
10-08-2012, 08:54 PM
  #208
sheed36
Registered User
 
sheed36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conflicted Habs fan View Post
I'm anti-owner on this one. The players were basically told to take a pay cut and accept the new terms or else face a lockout. Of course the players are going to react to Bettman's ultimatum on the principle of honour. This is probably the most unnecessary lockout in professional sport. The only owners that are suffering are Bettman's southern expansion teams. How about lock them out? No-one is going to notice in Phoenix, Miami or Tennessee anyway
I'd say the NHLPA members playing in those markets might notice.

sheed36 is online now  
Old
10-09-2012, 12:32 AM
  #209
MasterDecoy
Carlos Danger
 
MasterDecoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Beijing
Posts: 9,855
vCash: 1707
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheed36 View Post
I'd say the NHLPA members playing in those markets might notice.
and i take exception to someone taking pot shots at a team that almost sells out everynight - that's the one nobody would notice down in tennesse

MasterDecoy is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 05:58 AM
  #210
BaseballCoach
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
I'd go with the NHLPA because they're only millionaires opposed to billionaires. As long as they stop pretending to be normal people suffering without any money.
The average salary is indeed well over a million, in fact closer to $2.8M.

However, people need to realize that the career of most players is relatively short. Average 5-6 years. Most, not all, but most had to sacrifice other opportunities to get to the bigs, and the prospect of having an after-career at anywhere near these incomes is near zero.

The bottom line for me is that in 2005, the owners got the salary cap system they were seeking. With a few tweaks, they should be good to renew, but they are being very overly-ambitious instead,

It is not a moral issue for me. All actors in this play are entitled to look out for themselves. But I think the owners' original position is further from the optimal settlement point than the players' original position was.

Just my opinion.

BaseballCoach is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 06:11 AM
  #211
Whitesnake
Habs of steel
 
Whitesnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Lorraine, QC
Country: Canada
Posts: 47,378
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
just one thing: bettman and the owners don't really have a choice but to lock the players out. invited a year ago to negotiate? nothing. taking two weeks to receive a counter proposal? still nothing...

fehr is ****ing around because they are getting an escrow paycheck this month and his next best point of leverage is the winter classic.

and the players that are saying "yeah, we'll just play without a CBA, then we can figure something during the season" need to get shot in the face to save humanity's gene pool. it an absolutely moronic thing to say and when they're saying that, they are either lying through their teeth, or they have been so brainwashed by fehr that you could probably shoot a remake of dawn of the dead in the PA's office right now...

the owners don't want to play without a CBA because one: it gives all the leverage to the players, and two: fehr will just pull the stunt he pulled in 94, going on strike before the playoff.

the owners have a framework in place that needs tweaking - not reworking, tweaking. this is the same framework that has the league pulling record REVENUES (for the economically retarded challenged, revenues does not equal profits), most of which is spent on player salaries anyways - salaries which have never been higher by the way! the players have benefited tremendously from the last CBA and now they refuse to propose a plan within the same framework as the last one? **** right off. and besides, the day employees start dictating to the employers how to structure their business is the day richard simmons suddenly acts macho, i like strawberry ice cream and the boston bruins (precisely in that order)
Not sure why you respond to me with the "they have to play WITH a legit CBA" response as in no way am I discussing that. My point was that with Bettman, once you sign a CBA, you know it's never going to be good enough in 5 years as we'd go back in lockout.

Whitesnake is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 08:04 AM
  #212
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sheed36 View Post
Why are the PA so hesitant to discuss this?
Those are Daly's words. If you ask the NHLPA, they made a couple of offers that THEY feel are valid. Because the NHL doesn't see them as valid doesn't mean they're not. What you need to read in there is that they players didn't offer anything that the owners like/want.

You can trust Bettman and Daly as much as you would trust a starving dog in front of a freshly cooked steak.

EDIT: Quote from this morning...

Quote:
Responding to Daly, NHLPA Special Counsel Steve Fehr said: "For more than a month, the owners have not wanted to meet to discuss the core economic issues unless it is on their terms, that is unless the players have yet another offer that includes significant concessions for them."

Source...

Habsterix* is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 08:24 AM
  #213
ECWHSWI
5M? insulting!!!
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 15,200
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
just one thing: bettman and the owners don't really have a choice but to lock the players out. invited a year ago to negotiate? nothing. taking two weeks to receive a counter proposal? still nothing...

fehr is ****ing around because they are getting an escrow paycheck this month and his next best point of leverage is the winter classic.

and the players that are saying "yeah, we'll just play without a CBA, then we can figure something during the season" need to get shot in the face to save humanity's gene pool. it an absolutely moronic thing to say and when they're saying that, they are either lying through their teeth, or they have been so brainwashed by fehr that you could probably shoot a remake of dawn of the dead in the PA's office right now...

the owners don't want to play without a CBA because one: it gives all the leverage to the players, and two: fehr will just pull the stunt he pulled in 94, going on strike before the playoff.

the owners have a framework in place that needs tweaking - not reworking, tweaking. this is the same framework that has the league pulling record REVENUES (for the economically retarded challenged, revenues does not equal profits), most of which is spent on player salaries anyways - salaries which have never been higher by the way! the players have benefited tremendously from the last CBA and now they refuse to propose a plan within the same framework as the last one? **** right off. and besides, the day employees start dictating to the employers how to structure their business is the day richard simmons suddenly acts macho, i like strawberry ice cream and the boston bruins (precisely in that order)
you mean product, right ?

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 09:10 AM
  #214
bcv
My french sucks.
 
bcv's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,905
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterDecoy View Post
just one thing: bettman and the owners don't really have a choice but to lock the players out. invited a year ago to negotiate? nothing. taking two weeks to receive a counter proposal? still nothing...

fehr is ****ing around because they are getting an escrow paycheck this month and his next best point of leverage is the winter classic.

and the players that are saying "yeah, we'll just play without a CBA, then we can figure something during the season" need to get shot in the face to save humanity's gene pool. it an absolutely moronic thing to say and when they're saying that, they are either lying through their teeth, or they have been so brainwashed by fehr that you could probably shoot a remake of dawn of the dead in the PA's office right now...

the owners don't want to play without a CBA because one: it gives all the leverage to the players, and two: fehr will just pull the stunt he pulled in 94, going on strike before the playoff.

the owners have a framework in place that needs tweaking - not reworking, tweaking. this is the same framework that has the league pulling record REVENUES (for the economically retarded challenged, revenues does not equal profits), most of which is spent on player salaries anyways - salaries which have never been higher by the way! the players have benefited tremendously from the last CBA and now they refuse to propose a plan within the same framework as the last one? **** right off. and besides, the day employees start dictating to the employers how to structure their business is the day richard simmons suddenly acts macho, i like strawberry ice cream and the boston bruins (precisely in that order)
It's not like it never happened before...

bcv is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 09:30 AM
  #215
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,463
vCash: 500
If the players give the owners everything they want;

If the players accept having another ~24% reduction in their salaries, from 57 to 43% of hockey related revenues;

Then the owners will simply force another lockout in 5 or 6 years demanding the players share be lowered from 43% to 33%.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 10:04 AM
  #216
swimmer77
What's an ROW?
 
swimmer77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: in water
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,385
vCash: 500
If I have to choose a side it would be with the players. They take huge risks and for the most part of have short careers. And they make a lot of sacrifices along the way.

Having said that for the sake of the fans and fringe NHL players I wish they'd come to a resolution today yet.

I actually find both sides funny. The NHLPA I guess gave too much away the last time and is trying to make up for lost time. The owners allowed their GM's to sign ludicrous contracts and are trying to make up for lost time. So I guess I'll just make plans to go to Hershey Bears games, watch the youngins' and forget about the grown ups.

swimmer77 is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 10:08 AM
  #217
GoHomez
Registered User
 
GoHomez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 8 km from the Globe
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fufonzo View Post
I'm with the owners.

I don't see the players having much of a leg to stand on. They just play the game. Owners take all the risk and are the reason a certain city even has a team to watch.

All the NHL players in the world could die tomorrow, and they'd just end up replacing them with the next best players and we'd all still watch. The players themselves really don't matter in the end.
That could be said for just about everyone walking the face of the earth, let alone the team owners. Heck, Ford survived Henry Ford and Apple will survive without Steve Jobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fufonzo View Post
The skill level in hockey even 30 years ago was awful in comparison and people still watched and were just as into it as they are now (if not moreso).
Step into the History of Hockey section and say that the '82 Oilers and Islanders lacked skill.
Worse nutrition, conditioning, game plan? Yes.
Less skill? No freaking way!

It gets pretty hard taking the rest of your post seriously...

GoHomez is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 10:24 AM
  #218
Frozenice
the random dude
 
Frozenice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bcv View Post
It's not like it never happened before...
The owners and players could of agreed to extend the CBA for another full season or agree to changes to the CBA and sign it for a full season. There are many other options than what Bettman was offering.

Frozenice is online now  
Old
10-09-2012, 10:33 AM
  #219
GoHomez
Registered User
 
GoHomez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: 8 km from the Globe
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,153
vCash: 500
Without taking anyone's side, lets crunch some numbers.
Attendances:
Phoenix is at the bottom with an average of 12,420 per game while the median is at ~17,800 per game.
Over the course of 41 home games, Phoenix draws 220,000 less spectator.
That's 220,000 less people buying tickets, food, paying for parking, jerseys, caps and so on...
While more than half the teams, 16 exactly, have attendance percentage above 100%, Phoenix comes in at 72,5%. Every fourth seat is empty.
Now, when you don't sell out, you're in a tough spot to increase prices.

But still, 16 teams sell out every home game on average, 21 has attendance average over 95%!
Then there is a steep drop down to 87%. Isles and Columbus are around 80, Dallas is at 78% and Phoenix dead last, drawing 57% of what Chicago does....

According to Forbes, Phoenix lost $25M last season with a cap hit of roughly $55M. Now I know cap hit does not eual total salaries, but let's pretend this flaw numbers are correct, Phoenix needs to slash their player salaries nearly in half to sniff break even. A total pay roll of $30M results in a average salary just north of $1M per player.

If NHL is hell bent on keeping Coyotes in Phoenix, cutting salaries won't get them all the way, they need increased revenue sharing as well.
Or relocate, or fold.
Maybe NHL has grown too big and there is no market to support 30 teams? That will of course lead to less players having jobs in the NHL, but maybe also a better product?
Either way, both sides has to give.

GoHomez is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 10:42 AM
  #220
skipp18
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 313
vCash: 500
Last time I was somewhat sympathetic with the owners. They said the system needed to be fixed, they came to the table with a huge report showing the gravity of the situation.
The players gave in, the owners got everything they wanted including the salary cap which was supposed to give them the "cost certainty" they needed.

This time I'm with the players. So what happened since the last lock out: League revenues have increased dramatically, so how come the system is broken again. The owners are basically asking the players to clean up their own mess for them and for the players to save the owners form themselves.

skipp18 is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 11:02 AM
  #221
sheed36
Registered User
 
sheed36's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Those are Daly's words. If you ask the NHLPA, they made a couple of offers that THEY feel are valid. Because the NHL doesn't see them as valid doesn't mean they're not. What you need to read in there is that they players didn't offer anything that the owners like/want.

You can trust Bettman and Daly as much as you would trust a starving dog in front of a freshly cooked steak.

EDIT: Quote from this morning...
And you think Don and Steve Fehr are any different?

sheed36 is online now  
Old
10-09-2012, 11:08 AM
  #222
optimus2861
Registered User
 
optimus2861's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bedford NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,634
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by skipp18 View Post
This time I'm with the players. So what happened since the last lock out: League revenues have increased dramatically, so how come the system is broken again. The owners are basically asking the players to clean up their own mess for them and for the players to save the owners form themselves.
This. Last time around I was nearly 100% pro-owner. This time they're just being dicks. That first offer was the proverbial gauntlet to the face of the NHLPA. The NHL has a significant revenue-disparity problem which keeps pulling up the salary cap ceiling & floor; the league doesn't even want to acknowledge it, let alone fix it. I keep coming back to Bettman's comment several weeks ago that the NHLPA's revenue-sharing ideas in their first proposal were "a distraction" - that was the tell. The league has no interest in actually fixing their economics to make their smaller/weaker markets viable. They are using the smaller markets as a pretext with which to beat the crap out of the NHLPA, and perhaps on a personal level, they simply don't want to let Donald Fehr beat them.

This lockout is 100% the owners' fault, specifically the hardliners amongst the owners, the likes of Jacobs & Snider.

We may well lose this season, and probably another one in 5-6 years after whatever new CBA emerges expires, because the hardliners will want to bend the PA over the table again. They're the proverbial scorpions; it's their nature. Until a new, more reasonable group of owners takes control at NHL HQ (and I don't know how, when, or even if that ever happens), the league's behaviour will not change.

optimus2861 is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 12:13 PM
  #223
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 23,235
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habsterix View Post
Those are Daly's words. If you ask the NHLPA, they made a couple of offers that THEY feel are valid. Because the NHL doesn't see them as valid doesn't mean they're not. What you need to read in there is that they players didn't offer anything that the owners like/want.

You can trust Bettman and Daly as much as you would trust a starving dog in front of a freshly cooked steak.

EDIT: Quote from this morning...
Seems like you picked a side. There is no right or wrong. Who's better Bettman or Fehr? Neither.
One side is saying something, the other something else. It's like two kids debating on who started first.
Both are pathetic to have let it go to another lock out.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 12:17 PM
  #224
NJHABSFAN
Registered User
 
NJHABSFAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Swamps of Joisey
Country: United States
Posts: 183
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcal64 View Post
The owners locked out the players because if they didn't, the players would have played the regular season, then went on strike during the playoffs, since they don't get paid and the owners make most of the profits during the playoffs. The owners would have had no leverage, with the players holding all the power.

Please don't listen to Fehr saying the players wanted to play, he didn't mention anything about the players wanting to play in the playoffs without a contract. I find it a joke that rich players are playing in Europe for practically free, taking away the livelyhood of fringe players. I wish they have replacement players, so that the players that lost their jobs with the NHL players going to Europe, come over here and take the NHL players jobs.
I agree I don't care about the players I cheer for a corporation (The Emblem on the sweater.)

NJHABSFAN is offline  
Old
10-09-2012, 12:27 PM
  #225
SouthernHab
Registered User
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 9,871
vCash: 500
More food for thought.

Eliminate all of the bias you have one way or the other and look objectively where we are at.

Owners - Not earning any hockey revenue from the arenas.
Players - Playing in other Leagues and earning money.
Donald Fehr - Earning **** loads of money regardless of outcome.
Fans - Once again left holding the empty bag.

Drop the bias and dwell on reality.

SouthernHab 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 10:49 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.