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
10-24-2012, 04:01 AM
  #951
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,945
vCash: 500
I'm not surprised by this bad faith tactic on the part of the owners to directly pressure the players:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opin...e-players.html

Apparently they had team GMs etc directly call the players.

Sick.

The NHL has been growing by 7% a year, the players offered to go from 57/43 to 50/50 in a very rapid 3 to 5 year transition which the owners rejected over 10 minutes, and the owners are threatening to wipe out the season.

Really sick.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 05:59 AM
  #952
IceDaddy
24 and Counting
 
IceDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I'm not surprised by this bad faith tactic on the part of the owners to directly pressure the players:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opin...e-players.html

Apparently they had team GMs etc directly call the players.

Sick.

The NHL has been growing by 7% a year, the players offered to go from 57/43 to 50/50 in a very rapid 3 to 5 year transition which the owners rejected over 10 minutes, and the owners are threatening to wipe out the season.

Really sick.
you skipped a few facts in there my friend

IceDaddy is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 06:14 AM
  #953
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsRock View Post
you skipped a few facts in there my friend
Actually the most important facts of the most recent offer were included.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 06:25 AM
  #954
Fozz
Registered User
 
Fozz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 6,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blind Gardien View Post

Not so sure about Palushaj, say, but others like Locke, Aucoin, Conacher, whatnot, would probably be point-per-game NHLers in the league where they were given such privileged offensive roles.
No way. If those players had the talent to be point-per-game guys, they would be in that role now.

Fozz is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 06:33 AM
  #955
IceDaddy
24 and Counting
 
IceDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Actually the most important facts of the most recent offer were included.
Actually the players most recent offer was pretty much the same offer since the start.

They will go to 50-50 over time and only if the revenues go up by the 7%.

Its not hard to see why the owners rejected the offers.

IceDaddy is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 06:41 AM
  #956
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 8,945
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsRock View Post
Actually the players most recent offer was pretty much the same offer since the start.

They will go to 50-50 over time and only if the revenues go up by the 7%.

Its not hard to see why the owners rejected the offers.
You can't both honour the current contracts and lower the player share if there isn't any growth.


DAChampion is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 08:01 AM
  #957
IceDaddy
24 and Counting
 
IceDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
You can't both honour the current contracts and lower the player share if there isn't any growth.

The contracts now are not guaranteed. its based on 57% of the revenue. Thats why they have the escrow system. The PA have made several offers but all of them have kept roughly the 57% share.

Unless they accept that it will be 50-50 then we will be without hockey for quite some time.

IceDaddy is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 08:35 AM
  #958
habsfan92
Registered User
 
habsfan92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 320
vCash: 500
DAChampion, can you flush your toilet and tell me which way direction the water goes? I will wait......

NHLPA has proposals that eventually reaches 50/50. So they acknowledge that 50/50 is the target, so why waste everyone's time with more proposals, why not just focus on the meat of the NHL's deal where you want current contracts honoured and adjusted amounts not to be a part of future 50% player portions?

7% growth in the past doesn't guarantee continued growth at 7%, or any growth at all. I hope this lasts the whole year actually, NHLPA has lost it's purpose-fighting for a pension and good compensation for it's members. They have that and then some, but want more.

habsfan92 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 09:18 AM
  #959
Dr Gonzo
#1 Jan Bulis Fan
 
Dr Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bat Country
Posts: 4,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I'm not surprised by this bad faith tactic on the part of the owners to directly pressure the players:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opin...e-players.html

Apparently they had team GMs etc directly call the players.

Sick.

The NHL has been growing by 7% a year, the players offered to go from 57/43 to 50/50 in a very rapid 3 to 5 year transition which the owners rejected over 10 minutes, and the owners are threatening to wipe out the season.

Really sick.
If what Damian Cox wrote about Fehr is true, I'm surprised it took them even 10 minutes to reject those 'offers'

On Thursday, he walked into a significant meeting with several NHL owners 90 minutes late, plopped down two single sheets of paper, each with a different skeleton proposal to the owners that didn’t include any ideas on systemic issues, then verbally delivered a third proposal with no accompanying paperwork. For all three proposals, he acknowledged to the owners he hadn’t actually “run the numbers.”

This from the leader of a union in a $3 billion business.


Why even bother with 3 offers though? I've been involved in plenty of negotiations, of course nothing of the magnitude of these nego's, but presenting 3 skeletal offers really isn't productive if you are looking to keep the negotiations going. In my mind, the best way to get it going is to present one concise proposal.

And I am not sure I would agree that 5 years is a rapid transition, but I digress...

Dr Gonzo is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 09:28 AM
  #960
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
Why even bother with 3 offers though? I've been involved in plenty of negotiations, of course nothing of the magnitude of these nego's, but presenting 3 skeletal offers really isn't productive if you are looking to keep the negotiations going. In my mind, the best way to get it going is to present one concise proposal.
IMO the three proposals are just a clear way for the union to communicate its priority. That is, to preserve current contracts. Owners have a lot of leeway (hence the three options presented) to structure the rest of the deal, just leave current agreements alone.

Roulin is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 09:39 AM
  #961
Dr Gonzo
#1 Jan Bulis Fan
 
Dr Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bat Country
Posts: 4,410
vCash: 500
If they were 3 true proposals, sure, I can understand how it would perhaps open up some options, but in all reality from my experience would just murk the waters further.

That being said, from what I can see, they weren't even proper proposals. The PA admitted they didn't run the numbers on them. That's bush league, wouldn't you agree?

I'd say it's better to present one proposal that you have ran the numbers on, that is concise and complete.

Dr Gonzo is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 09:59 AM
  #962
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
If they were 3 true proposals, sure, I can understand how it would perhaps open up some options, but in all reality from my experience would just murk the waters further.

That being said, from what I can see, they weren't even proper proposals. The PA admitted they didn't run the numbers on them. That's bush league, wouldn't you agree?

I'd say it's better to present one proposal that you have ran the numbers on, that is concise and complete.
Yes, definitely better to have accounting done from all angles. That said, I don't think the union had any expectation that the owners would accept any of it's proposals. It was instead offering different frameworks to work within.

So far, the players find the "make whole in year 3" framework unacceptable. Same from the owners, as far as the "delay the 50% target" framework. Until they agree on that framework, I don't know that a complete proposal is realistic or helpful. But at least the two sides appear to be getting closer, 50% is the agreed target, in one way or another.

Roulin is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 11:57 AM
  #963
Hullois
Suck it Trebek
 
Hullois's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Québec
Country: Martinique
Posts: 2,241
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsRock View Post
The contracts now are not guaranteed. its based on 57% of the revenue. Thats why they have the escrow system. The PA have made several offers but all of them have kept roughly the 57% share.

Unless they accept that it will be 50-50 then we will be without hockey for quite some time.

Right, players are not idiots, they know that, but the end result is a pay cut. Owners signed those deals knowing that they would try to get out of them just a couple of weeks after the signature, and that is wrong.

The "salaries were never guaranteed" argument is laughable. Way to spin the owners out of the mess they created themselves.

Hullois is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 12:34 PM
  #964
idk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Gonzo View Post
If they were 3 true proposals, sure, I can understand how it would perhaps open up some options, but in all reality from my experience would just murk the waters further.

That being said, from what I can see, they weren't even proper proposals. The PA admitted they didn't run the numbers on them. That's bush league, wouldn't you agree?

I'd say it's better to present one proposal that you have ran the numbers on, that is concise and complete.
It's not bush league at all. Fehr has to keep up the pretence of negotiations, but in reality he's not interested in negotiating right now. With so many teams actually saving money by not playing games (and the big name teams - Montreal, Toronto, Boston, New York and Detroit - kept in line with the promise of not having to share revenues with the weak sisters of the league) Fehr knows the lockout is not really a problem for Bettman. Fehr has no leverage, no good reason to force the owner's to accept his offers. And he knows it. So why bother working hard on meaningless proposals?

Fehr is biding his time. He is waiting until he has some leverage. My best guess is that will happen either before the Winter Classic (although look at the teams playing this season - neither Toronto nor Detroit is hurting for funds and while losing the Winter Classic will cost them money it's not like Philadelphia, Pittsburgh (who are both just a couple million a season this side of solvent) or Washington (who lose 7.5 million a season in operation) are playing) or at the cancellation of the season (when Bettman will have to convince the profitable owners - the Canadiens stand to lose in excess of 40 million if the season is cancelled, although they are the second most profitable team in the league behind the Leafs). This is a dangerous game - Bettman and the owners have shown a willingness to sacrifice a season to get cost certainty and there's no assurance that this type of tactic will work. But Fehr is a savy guy and I figure he realizes that if he can't win this round then he might as well find his successor because if he cedes power to Bettman he'll always be forced to cede power to Bettman.


Last edited by idk: 10-24-2012 at 01:11 PM.
idk is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 01:07 PM
  #965
IceDaddy
24 and Counting
 
IceDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hullois View Post
Right, players are not idiots, they know that, but the end result is a pay cut. Owners signed those deals knowing that they would try to get out of them just a couple of weeks after the signature, and that is wrong.

The "salaries were never guaranteed" argument is laughable. Way to spin the owners out of the mess they created themselves.
And the players that signed big, long term contracts signed in the summer because they knew that after the summer the rules might be different.

It does work both ways.

IceDaddy is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 01:25 PM
  #966
Bad Natey
#feelthelove
 
Bad Natey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Habville
Country: Canada
Posts: 48,004
vCash: 500
I honestly hope there is no season and the NHL losses 20%-30% of its fans. Would be a nice slap in the face to both of them.

Bad Natey is online now  
Old
10-24-2012, 01:53 PM
  #967
Dr Gonzo
#1 Jan Bulis Fan
 
Dr Gonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Bat Country
Posts: 4,410
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by idk View Post
It's not bush league at all. Fehr has to keep up the pretence of negotiations, but in reality he's not interested in negotiating right now. With so many teams actually saving money by not playing games (and the big name teams - Montreal, Toronto, Boston, New York and Detroit - kept in line with the promise of not having to share revenues with the weak sisters of the league) Fehr knows the lockout is not really a problem for Bettman. Fehr has no leverage, no good reason to force the owner's to accept his offers. And he knows it. So why bother working hard on meaningless proposals?

.

There's a difference between working hard, and performing due diligence.

Presenting skeletal proposals that haven't been verified is definitely bush league.

Especially since they turned around and whined that the NHL didn't spend more than 10 minutes reviewing them before rejecting the offers.

A very see through tactic, and pretty weak IMO.

Dr Gonzo is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 01:54 PM
  #968
IceDaddy
24 and Counting
 
IceDaddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,763
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawkeyeCB View Post
I honestly hope there is no season and the NHL losses 20%-30% of its fans. Would be a nice slap in the face to both of them.
no you dont.

you will be back cheering on your team as soon as this is all over, just like the rest of us toolbags.

IceDaddy is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 02:09 PM
  #969
Hullois
Suck it Trebek
 
Hullois's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Québec
Country: Martinique
Posts: 2,241
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsRock View Post
And the players that signed big, long term contracts signed in the summer because they knew that after the summer the rules might be different.

It does work both ways.
No, it doesn't. Owners already had an idea of what they would try to get in the new CBA, players didn't, plus nobody forced them to offer those deals, they were going after UFAs just as aggressively as usual.

They created a mess that is preventing us from watching hockey right now. I am all for the 50/50 split, but it is wrong to try and renegociate deals that you JUST signed en toute connaissance de cause.

Hullois is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 02:28 PM
  #970
Kriss E
HFB Partner
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 26,665
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsRock View Post
no you dont.

you will be back cheering on your team as soon as this is all over, just like the rest of us toolbags.
I love hockey, but I'm very displeased with the way both sides keep going back and forth at one another without admitting that the Fans are the sole reason why they're in the position of making millions and millions of dollars.
Without the fans, they don't get the big arenas, they don't get big sponsors, they don't get TV deals, a lot less media covered, they don't get publicity. Yet, fans are casually mentioned, but really they are pretty much given a big F.U from both sides.
If the lockout ends and things go on as they did, then really, what messages would the fans be sending?

Fans should boycott a part of the season or something like that to send a message that those lockouts are simply unacceptable.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 02:42 PM
  #971
overlords
Be quiet and drive
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Far Away
Posts: 26,414
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsRock View Post
no you dont.

you will be back cheering on your team as soon as this is all over, just like the rest of us toolbags.
Thankfully, in this age, there are ways to watch and root for your team without financially supporting them.

overlords is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 02:48 PM
  #972
Hullois
Suck it Trebek
 
Hullois's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Québec
Country: Martinique
Posts: 2,241
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by overlords View Post
Thankfully, in this age, there are ways to watch and root for your team without financially supporting them.
That's my plan... I'll be watching the games on TV no doubt, but no tickets, jersey, or even NHL13 for a couple of years

Hullois is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 02:50 PM
  #973
Lars The GOAT Eller
PSN: WildGranlund
 
Lars The GOAT Eller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,681
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Lars The GOAT Eller
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hullois View Post
That's my plan... I'll be watching the games on TV no doubt, but no tickets, jersey, or even NHL13 for a couple of years
Watching on TV still supports them

Lars The GOAT Eller is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 02:51 PM
  #974
Hullois
Suck it Trebek
 
Hullois's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Québec
Country: Martinique
Posts: 2,241
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoingItLeBlancWay View Post
Watching on TV still supports them
Withdrawal is too rough

Hullois is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 03:13 PM
  #975
overlords
Be quiet and drive
 
overlords's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Far Away
Posts: 26,414
vCash: 500
Since this thread is approaching the 1000 post mark, I'm just going to close it and encourage everyone to continue this conversation in the lockout thread. Thanks.

overlords 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 12:32 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.