HFBoards

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

2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part V: The "Back to square one" Edition

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-23-2012, 06:11 PM
  #426
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
NHLPA source,sense NHL open to negotiating 'making whole' aspect but still holding firm on all other components of last offer 'as is'
https://twitter.com/aaronward_nhl/st...79465360527361

That is what Pierre LeBrun reported this afternoon after talking with Bill Daly.

The NHLPA should give on contract term limits. Those 13-14 year contracts are ridiculous. PA keeps 7 or 27 group III and arbitration after 4 years for players signing their ELCs at 18-20. Same system.

NHL throws money into the make whole.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 06:11 PM
  #427
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
NHLPA conf call ended around 6:45pm. Update on talks. We'll see what's next in a few days.
https://twitter.com/RenLavoieRDS/sta...80946574807040

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 06:20 PM
  #428
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,589
vCash: 500
The NBA has contract term limits. NFL contracts are not guaranteed so those contracts are short term deals. Only the big name free agents in MLB get long term dollars. Pitchers don't get long term dollars. What's the big deal about contract term limits? Not the 5 years proposed by the NHL. 7-8 years. I am a pro-PA guy but these guys can't be serious about the contract term limit stuff. Group III and arbitration should remain status quo. They made those gains for accepting the cap. Since the cap is staying,those should stay too. Those long term contracts with the dummy years at the end bringing down the AAV are BS.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 06:38 PM
  #429
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,589
vCash: 500
Quote:
NHL remains firm, willing to negotiate with the PA by only working off NHL offer tabled last Tues. NHL wants next meeting to be an end pt.
https://twitter.com/DarrenDreger/sta...87459301298176

An end point would be nice.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 06:46 PM
  #430
NYRangers16
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Westchester
Posts: 1,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltrangerfan View Post
I'm not sure which side is losing 1.6 billion this year? I assume you are not using Washington accounting which talks about saving 4 trillion dollars rather than saying 400 billion per yr multiplied by 10 years because the numbers seem larger?

I know that a year off will cost the players 1.7 billion in unpaid salaries.


The owners are facing a cost in missing a season as well. They also should be weighing the cost of settling versus not playing. If the owners are making emotional decisions about winning and losing they deserve whatever fate falls upon the league. The question is how much will they lose not to play the season? My guess... Far less than the players.

Respect is for suckers.
It may be for suckers but last time the players lost both(salary rollback/onerous terms, and respect of the wners). You may say that it doesn't matter, but at what point does losing respect lead to losing dollars? If the players don't fight it out the owners will keep on approaching cba negotiations this way. I'm not saying turn down a fair deal and certainly the sport needs more cost certainty in order to grow. I think the players get that. But the last memo Fehr released had the players losing 1.6b compared to current term. What did the NHL offer in return for that? Nothing? In fact, they wanted the players to offer up even more in systems issues.

Now, if you are a player, and you got schooled last time in negotiations, and you see the owners trying to rip you off again, what are you going to do? And what are the owners going to do next time if the players give in here? These negotiations have ramifications that may not seem economics related, but definitely will affect economics down the line. Weak unions give up what they currently have for nothing. Strong unions get concessions in return. If Bettman wants to drop salaries by 1.6b over the life of the agreement, what do players get in return? It's gotta be something...

NYRangers16 is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 06:47 PM
  #431
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RangerBoy View Post
This is probably going to result in a longer lockout. I don't think the players are willing to accept that deal without some actual changes

Levitate is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:13 PM
  #432
Jabroni
Moderator
The Corporate Mod
 
Jabroni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Country: United States
Posts: 6,543
vCash: 500
BizNasty with his words of wisdom.

Quote:
Paul Bissonnette ‏@BizNasty2point0
For you confused fans. Players will take a 50/50 split. The players will agree to that if owners honor all existing contracts. It's simple.

Jabroni is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:22 PM
  #433
IBleedNYRBlue
Registered User
 
IBleedNYRBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: New Jersey
Country: United States
Posts: 2,780
vCash: 500
So no meeting scheduled for this week?

wtf?

IBleedNYRBlue is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:26 PM
  #434
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,113
vCash: 500
Dear Biz Nasty,

If that's how you feel, then call them back and engage on getting them to fund the make-whole, you idiots! That's how you get the money due on those contracts.

Agree to 50/50. Defer a small percentage of the payments due under existing deals so that they come 1-3 years later via a league funded (or partially funded) make-whole, split the other issues as RB has suggested and you've got a done deal.

Should've been done weeks ago.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:37 PM
  #435
StaalWars
TeaOrrCoffey
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New York City
Posts: 1,167
vCash: 500
This will get done by the end of this week. Seems to me like both sides are getting a little bit antsy or at least significant portions of their constituencies are. They've approached the point now where both sides are too close to go nuclear and cause the loss of a full season.

Just get it done.

StaalWars is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:41 PM
  #436
RGY
(Jagr68NYR94Leetch)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 8,012
vCash: 500
I've given up, I don't care anymore. Screw the NHL.

RGY is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:42 PM
  #437
vstk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: White Plains, NY
Country: Finland
Posts: 617
vCash: 500
I heard there is a KHL game in the works for around christmas in the new Barclay's center so if we don't get hockey this season at least theres something..

vstk is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:42 PM
  #438
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
That tweet from Biz is from the 18th just so people know. It wasn't something he just tweeted.

__________________
http://hfboards.com/image.php?u=53946&type=sigpic&dateline=1320361610
NYRFAN218 is online now  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:43 PM
  #439
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vstk View Post
I heard there is a KHL game in the works for around christmas in the new Barclay's center so if we don't get hockey this season at least theres something..
Yup on January 19th and the 20th. It's Dynamo Moscow and SKA St. Petersburg so you'll get to see Kovalchuk and Ovechkin among others if the lockout isn't solved for whatever stupid reason.

NYRFAN218 is online now  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:53 PM
  #440
BlueShirts88
Section 208 Row 15
 
BlueShirts88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BlueShirts88
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRFAN218 View Post
Yup on January 19th and the 20th. It's Dynamo Moscow and SKA St. Petersburg so you'll get to see Kovalchuk and Ovechkin among others if the lockout isn't solved for whatever stupid reason.
I would go to that. It isn't supporting the NHL in any way, and I want to see how hockey is played at Barclay.

__________________
"Matteau! Matteau! Matteau!"~H. Rose
BlueShirts88 is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:55 PM
  #441
E Nixson
Powered by Intel
 
E Nixson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 878
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jabroni1994 View Post
BizNasty with his words of wisdom.
Isn't it mathematically impossible for it to be a 50/50 split if contracts are honored without rollback?

E Nixson is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:57 PM
  #442
BlueShirts88
Section 208 Row 15
 
BlueShirts88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BlueShirts88
Quote:
Originally Posted by New England Hockey View Post
Isn't it mathematically impossible for it to be a 50/50 split if contracts are honored without rollback?
He means a 50/50 split going forward. Which is what I agree is fair, the owners have no right to take away from the players current contract -- especially when they offered it in the first place.

I just didn't like the way Bisonette went about that tweet ... it had a nasty "You fans are idiots" snare to it. I have a strong dislike for him.

BlueShirts88 is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:58 PM
  #443
Screw You Rick Nash
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
 
Screw You Rick Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 27,280
vCash: 3000
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers88 View Post
He means a 50/50 split going forward. Which is what I agree is fair, the owners have no right to take away from the players current contract -- especially when they offered it in the first place.

I just didn't like the way Bisonette went about that tweet ... it had a nasty "You fans are idiots" snare to it. I have a strong dislike for him.
Well they do have that right, since in all contracts it says that it will have to follow rules of a new CBA.

__________________
++++++++++[>+++++++>++++++++++>+++>+<<<<
-]>++++++.>+.+++++++++++++++.>+++++++++.<-.
>-------.<<-----.>----.>.<<+++++++++++.>-------------
-.+++++++++++++.-------.--.+++++++++++++.+.>+.>.

New and improved Hockey Standings
"A jimmie for a jimmie makes the whole world rustled." -31-
Screw You Rick Nash is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 07:59 PM
  #444
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
Dear Biz Nasty,

If that's how you feel, then call them back and engage on getting them to fund the make-whole, you idiots! That's how you get the money due on those contracts.

Agree to 50/50. Defer a small percentage of the payments due under existing deals so that they come 1-3 years later via a league funded (or partially funded) make-whole, split the other issues as RB has suggested and you've got a done deal.

Should've been done weeks ago.
Empty gestures for pr points from both sides....

Players say they will go 50/50 if contracts are honored but that's mathematically impossible
Owners say they will honor contracts if players drop to 50/50 immediately which is mathematically impossible

Both sides claim they are willing to give the other what they want but with the condition that makes it impossible. Either players take less $ on current deals or owners pay more than 50% or god forbid a compromise and both give a little. But as long as each side sticks to their demands then claims that they are willing to compromise are just bs pr rhetoric

CM PUNK is online now  
Old
10-23-2012, 08:00 PM
  #445
BlueShirts88
Section 208 Row 15
 
BlueShirts88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BlueShirts88
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaneone View Post
Well they do have that right, since in all contracts it says that it will have to follow rules of a new CBA.
Legally they do, but it's not moral and the players have every right to be angry. If I signed a contract for a specified amount and honor my end, I would expect to be paid that amount. It's not the players fault that certain teams can't support themselves.

BlueShirts88 is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 08:11 PM
  #446
trueblue9441
Registered User
 
trueblue9441's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bronx, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,399
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to trueblue9441
http://tvasports.ca/tvasports/hockey...23-202154.html

Quote:
However, this could change as players have asked the president of the NHLPA, Donald Fehr, arrange a meeting with the NHL on Wednesday told Mathieu Dandenault analyst for TVA Sports.
better than nothing

trueblue9441 is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 08:16 PM
  #447
Screw You Rick Nash
🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨🚨
 
Screw You Rick Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 27,280
vCash: 3000
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers88 View Post
Legally they do, but it's not moral and the players have every right to be angry. If I signed a contract for a specified amount and honor my end, I would expect to be paid that amount. It's not the players fault that certain teams can't support themselves.
Then why would you put in your contract that it would be subject to a new CBA?

If that wasn't in there, how certain could anyone be that the players would have gotten the same amount of money?

The players knew this would happen just as much as the owners did, except they were clearly blinded by all the greedyness to care.

Screw You Rick Nash is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 08:25 PM
  #448
ltrangerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers16 View Post
It may be for suckers but last time the players lost both(salary rollback/onerous terms, and respect of the wners). You may say that it doesn't matter, but at what point does losing respect lead to losing dollars? If the players don't fight it out the owners will keep on approaching cba negotiations this way. I'm not saying turn down a fair deal and certainly the sport needs more cost certainty in order to grow. I think the players get that. But the last memo Fehr released had the players losing 1.6b compared to current term. What did the NHL offer in return for that? Nothing? In fact, they wanted the players to offer up even more in systems issues.

Now, if you are a player, and you got schooled last time in negotiations, and you see the owners trying to rip you off again, what are you going to do? And what are the owners going to do next time if the players give in here? These negotiations have ramifications that may not seem economics related, but definitely will affect economics down the line. Weak unions give up what they currently have for nothing. Strong unions get concessions in return. If Bettman wants to drop salaries by 1.6b over the life of the agreement, what do players get in return? It's gotta be something...
I understand your points. I understand that the players are attempting to receive their contracts in full. I suspect they believe that if they show the owners they are committed to the end the owners will have to take this new reality into their thinking.

Yes, the owners do have franchise values on the line. I believe these values are a bit over 7 billion. Clearly, not playing any games will cost the owners a bit of cash flow now and could very well put a dent into their asset values. What is a business worth without any games? The owners do have far greater assets to support any losses rather easily. The players are in a far more difficult spot. The trick for the players is to find the number that will force the owners to concede but not to cost them too much that will force them to close down the league.

I do not view the players as employees. My view is that the CBA makes them quasi partners with the owners. As the revenues rise the pot for the players increases. If profitability continues to shrink, over the next few years, the owners will offer a lower cut to the players in the next CBA. It's a given. In the past number of years we saw many owners lose all discipline when signing players. Winning is everything. The players were the beneficiaries. They are currently receiving higher compensation than they would if the teams were all run as a business. On one hand the players are the beneficiary of the spending sprees and on the other hand they would be complaining about their compensation if the owners paid them more in line with their profitablity (say 30% lower pay?).

The unions are at their strongest when industry is at it's height of growth and profitability. The key is to have a work stoppage when ownership has as much to lose as the members. Right now I believe the NHL has most of the cards since the money is moving heavily in the players direction. The owners aren't netting 1.7 billion. Forbes last report shows the teams netting 180 million.

If the CBA didn't exist I would look at the players as being simple employees. If my current understanding is right higher league revenues above contracts would accrue to the players. At least that's how the system should work. That's how loose partnerships work.

ltrangerfan is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 08:28 PM
  #449
BrooklynRangersFan
Change is good.
 
BrooklynRangersFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Country: United States
Posts: 10,113
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers88 View Post
Legally they do, but it's not moral and the players have every right to be angry. If I signed a contract for a specified amount and honor my end, I would expect to be paid that amount. It's not the players fault that certain teams can't support themselves.
Uh-huh, and every single agent going into those negotiations - especially the flurry of down to the wire deals this summer - didn't know that the owners on the other side were counting on some relief from the forthcoming CBA negotiations and didn't then leverage that assumption to score their clients deals that otherwise wouldn't have been on the table (either in terms of dollars or years)? They didn't have very frank conversations with their clients explaining this fact?

I know if I were a player's agent I would've been saying something like: "listen Tyler, this is a deal that's only on the table because the CBA is expiring. Under a new CBA, this wouldn't be nearly this easy. You wouldn't be looking at $35MM and a NTC; heck, you might not even be able to score your big money long term deal until your third contract. The reason Jacobs is willing to give you this deal is that he'll be able to get some of it back in the new CBA. And you know what? That's fine. You may lose 3-5% of the first couple of years. Who cares? You're still locking in something like $33MM guaranteed. Under the new CBA, everyone may do business like the Rangers when it comes to second contracts. Take the deal and run."

I am so tired of the "moral" argument about the "sanctity" of the players' contracts. 1) Legally they are all subsidiary to the CBA, 2) everyone involved in negotiating them knows this and 3) everyone who negotiated a deal in the last two years - on both sides - was factoring the pending CBA battle into their thinking.

BrooklynRangersFan is offline  
Old
10-23-2012, 08:35 PM
  #450
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by trueblue9441 View Post
Yup.

Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
After the NHLPA conf call today, the PA asked for a meeting with the NHL Wednesday or at one point this week.

NYRFAN218 is online now  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:24 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.