HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Adrian Dater-Gary Bettman deserves ALL of the blame

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-26-2012, 02:23 PM
  #101
Retail1LO
Registered User
 
Retail1LO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 5,233
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Retail1LO Send a message via AIM to Retail1LO Send a message via MSN to Retail1LO
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
All that reductionist and technical stuff may feel good to write and think, but it isn't a realistic evaluation of how negotiations work. The players already had jobs making millions of dollars, so they aren't going to be impressed by being "offered" jobs making (fewer) millions of dollars -- no matter how many people on a message board think they should be.

In the real world, if the league wants concessions by the players, they need to offer something new in exchange for those concessions. Their failure to do so is an abject failure in creativity and leadership.

I may be missing something minor, but isn't the number of things the owners have offered the players that the players didn't have in the last agreement .... zero? Literally, zero? That isn't negotiating.
LOL Not going to be impressed? No? Wait til they land in Europe. LOL

Retail1LO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:23 PM
  #102
MeestaDeteta
Registered User
 
MeestaDeteta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Saskazoo
Posts: 7,640
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
All that reductionist and technical stuff may feel good to write and think, but it isn't a realistic evaluation of how negotiations work. The players already had jobs making millions of dollars, so they aren't going to be impressed by being "offered" jobs making (fewer) millions of dollars -- no matter how many people on a message board think they should be.

In the real world, if the league wants concessions by the players, they need to offer something new in exchange for those concessions. Their failure to do so is an abject failure in creativity and leadership.

I may be missing something minor, but isn't the number of things the owners have offered the players that the players didn't have in the last agreement .... zero? Literally, zero? That isn't negotiating.
There is relatively little the owners can offer back in return, maybe a clause that indicates once a month owners will visit each player a give a few "atta boys" and pats on the back?

MeestaDeteta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:24 PM
  #103
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 11,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola View Post
Of course he does.

He has been in charge of this league for 19 years. He has created the current atmostphere.

But this is written in the USA and there is zero interest in the game there anyway.

In Canada Bettman got the big outlets completely in his pockets. Hence he can make those ridiculous 43% offers and get away with it completely without him or any owner facing any kind of scrutiny. Sometimes you get what you deserve, we hockey fans 110% idolize these media personality's at TSN and co. no matter how much they are willing to screw the fans to get tweets from the HQ close to the deadline.

But media can't reasonably have a impact on this Ola!?

No of course not, thats why none of the parties care at all about getting their propaganda in the papers/on the air. Or wait, they seem to care a ton about that...
There are more hockey fans in the US than there are people, period, in Sweden.

billybudd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:26 PM
  #104
Retail1LO
Registered User
 
Retail1LO's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: SE Pennsylvania
Country: United States
Posts: 5,233
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Retail1LO Send a message via AIM to Retail1LO Send a message via MSN to Retail1LO
Quote:
Originally Posted by txomisc View Post
Can you come up with anything of value to the players that the league could offer?
Yes. Not having to uproot their family to move to Europe, learn another language, and make even less money than they would to stay right here.

Conversely...not having a place to play while living in North America and having to get a job as a Walmart greeter.

Retail1LO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:31 PM
  #105
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,575
vCash: 500
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk Muller View Post
and that contract is over. It doesnt entitle them to that now.
That also means that the players do not have to agree to whatever the owners present.

That agreement is over. If the owners are being truthful about wanting a FAIR deal, then they wull have to negotiate for it.

Telling someone, take it or leave it is not a fair negotiation when both sides bring something equally valuable to the table.

Unless you think you can do what the NHLPA does, as well for less?

Didn't think so.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:34 PM
  #106
Greschner4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 754
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nailor Hopberle View Post
There is relatively little the owners can offer back in return, maybe a clause that indicates once a month owners will visit each player a give a few "atta boys" and pats on the back?
Then we aren't going to have hockey anytime soon.

Greschner4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:40 PM
  #107
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
The NHL's offer is to take back EVERYTHING they gave up in the last round of negotiations and is not willing to negotiate off of those points.

All negotiations are give and take, all I have seen from the NHL is take. Where is it exactly that they are giving in any of the proposale they have made?

Please do not say they went from 43/57 to 50/50 because at the end of the day, they are still TAKING
Meanwhile we're still waiting for the PA to ASK for something other than fixed raises and de-linked cap/revenue. To date they haven't ASKED for anything.

__________________
"Itís not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, itís as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Riptide is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:41 PM
  #108
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brrr -18, Gomez Cold
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,741
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
That also means that the players do not have to agree to whatever the owners present.

That agreement is over. If the owners are being truthful about wanting a FAIR deal, then they wull have to negotiate for it.

Telling someone, take it or leave it is not a fair negotiation when both sides bring something equally valuable to the table.

Unless you think you can do what the NHLPA does, as well for less?

Didn't think so.
its the owners business, they can do as they please. The players are in their full rights to go play in the KHL or any other league. Ones the owner, ones the employee. They arent equal no matter how much your little heart wants to believe that.

Whats a fair deal?

and no, the players do not bring something equal to the table. If it was that easy, the players would start their own league today. The reason they arent is because realistically they are incapable of it.

Kirk Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:48 PM
  #109
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redman View Post
The NHL proposal was a complete and utter joke. For them to insist on immediate salary rollbacks reeks of arrogance on one hand, despair on the other hand, and on both feet there are a pair of boots with the words "DISTRUST" written in large red lettering.

The despair is growing within the ownership community. They've already budged from 43% to 50%, with the same definition of Hockey Related Revenue as the old CBA. Fehr and the NHLPA offered the NHL a way out, but the despair emerged, probably from the small market owners, and the immediate rollbacks are still the sticking point. This tells me that there are a number of small teams that are really suffering economically at the moment, and the hard line they've taken means they need immediate cash infusions.

The distrust is growing. It's multi-faceted in nature. The players do not trusting the owners at all, and unless the owners get rid of the immediate rollbacks, there will be no CBA. I am 100% certain this is the lynchpin of the entire CBA. The big market owners do not trust the small market owners - the poison pill associated with retroactive contracts is clear here. The NHL and NHLPA distrust each other - the NHL has no idea how to deal with Fehr. Fehr has been very shrewd to this point - and the NHL caved in on the information front when they leaked the details of their contract offer because they were afraid that Fehr would be able to counter their narrative.

The CBA is nowhere near being settled after yesterday. Again, the center of gravity is the rollback of contracts. From the players perspective (they are 100% right), they are being asked to bail the owners out again because the owners and GMs are too stupid to run their businesses responsibly. In addition, the players feel betrayed because the last batch of free agents signed deals that would become 7-15% less valuable over an annual basis, and even more so as the length of contracts would be capped.

I have to think Snider has a few tricks up his sleeve here. ... I wouldn't be surprised if he has forced Bettman and the other owners to guarantee a Stanley Cup for the Flyers in exchange for his sucking these eggs. Before I get claimed as a conspiracy theorist, the NHL has done this before with the Penguins...in order to keep Mario Lemieux out of the public eye whining about this and that.


I just don't see a great deal of progress on either front here. I think the NHL hiring the Republican Parties spinmeister, the Joseph Goebbels of the 21st Century, is also another huge affront to not only the players, but also to the fans. To me, it just makes the narrative eminating from the NHL that much more unbelivable...and every fan of the NHL should have huge suspicions associated with the NHL leadership.
LOL. Don't let facts get in the way of your hatred towards the NHL and Bettman.

Riptide is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:48 PM
  #110
MtlPenFan
Registered User
 
MtlPenFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 11,190
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Nope.

More like

Parents: We have to tighten the purse strings

Child: Not happy. Can we reduce the allowence over time so i can get used to the new way things will be done?

Parents: No, and in addition, your curfue is no longer 10pm. You're not allowed to go out after dinner.

Child: What? Why?

Parents: Also, you can't have any friends over....ever

Seems to be what I am seeing.
Really? This is what you're going with?

MtlPenFan is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:55 PM
  #111
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brrr -18, Gomez Cold
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,741
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Nope.

More like

Parents: We have to tighten the purse strings

Child: Not happy. Can we reduce the allowence over time so i can get used to the new way things will be done?

Parents: No, and in addition, your curfue is no longer 10pm. You're not allowed to go out after dinner.

Child: What? Why?

Parents: Also, you can't have any friends over....ever

Seems to be what I am seeing.
you seem to think everyone is equals in this. However you have no problem stating how we cant do the NHLPA's job so they deserve this.

Well, NHLPA cant do what the owners do, so they deserve what they want. See how easy that is.

The NHL can run their business in any fashion they want as long as it doesnt break the law just like a parent can raise their kids any way they want.

The NHLPA is just like children, wanting everything, paying for nothing and stamping their feet any time they dont get what they want.

Kirk Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:56 PM
  #112
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,575
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Meanwhile we're still waiting for the PA to ASK for something other than fixed raises and de-linked cap/revenue. To date they haven't ASKED for anything.
If I'm on the Players side of the ledger, I want to address the reduced salary issue. I want to talk through the make whole process because while I may not like everything else they have offered, in my mind, they are talking points that can be ironed out which means I believe there's room on my side to move on those issues.

As it is, the NHL has told them, unless all of those talking points are accepted as offered, there's no sense in discussing the make whole provision.

The NHLPA has been focusing on what SHOULD be the main issue that is affecting the NHL.

The NHL has held that discussion hostage by telling the NHLPA we are not even going to discuss Make Whole without complete acceptance of the other issues.

Guess what happened the last time the NHLPA agreed to that tactic? A Salary Cap was implemented AND the players gave up 24%.

Why should that tactic be any different now when the Owners have folloed their own playbook to a T.

I can see it now.

Players agree to all provisions outside of Make Whole, Owners continue the strong arm tactics and the players get bent.

What are the owners concerned with that they do not want to negotiate without pre-conditions?

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:57 PM
  #113
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,631
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gm0ney View Post
I'm convinced there's something else going on here. Pride may be the tool Fehr and the PA hawks are using to keep the players unified at the moment, but that's not their endgame. Fehr and the other professionals at NHLPA headquarters certainly know their math...so what's going on?

I believe the PA's goal is to get rid of the cap. Replace it with the MLB-style luxury tax. Run the numbers on an NHL with no cap - pre-2005 player salaries were accounting for 73% of league revenues. Those are the Good Old Days that Don Fehr and the NHLPA want to return to.

If an uncapped NHL results in player salaries around 70% of HRR, then the players win a lot more than the $1.65 - $1.8 billion they give up by sitting out this season. 70% of $3.3 billion = $2.31 billion. So we're talking about +$660,000,000 per season going forward. You make up the loss of one season in 2.5 years...
I agree that that is Fehr's ideal league... however after the NHL lost a season to get the cap, there's not a chance in hell they give it up.

Riptide is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:57 PM
  #114
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,575
vCash: 500
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
Really? This is what you're going with?
it's no different than what he proposed.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:59 PM
  #115
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
The league will be there.

There's 3.3 billion reasons annually that tells me the owners won't close up shop before offering some concessions.

Silly argument.
That and the fact that people are honestly saying that the players should be grateful to play in the league? The players didn't fluke into jobs in the NHL. This isn't some low skill job that these guys are lucky to have. They are highly skilled athletes who were good enough to be recruited by multiple teams willing to give them a lot of money to play. So really, are the owners doing the players a favour or vice versa. I don't know why people keep saying that these guys are lucky to have these jobs. It's not a logical argument. The jobs exist and owners need employees to do them and not people who play every Wednesday night at 10pm at the local arena. They need players who other people will pay to watch. Not everyone could do it, not even if given the chance.

Also, I know its a big portion of the argument as money always is, but there is way more to this contract than just the 50/50 split. It's like the NHL says "hey we offered 50/50, why don't the players accept" and the sheep follow and say "yeh, why don't they?" How about because every other aspect of the contract sucks?

shakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 02:59 PM
  #116
Deebo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,254
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
That also means that the players do not have to agree to whatever the owners present.
They don't, they can sit out while one year of their limited careers goes by while making no money or try and find other employment. I bet 90% of them they will make nowhere even remotely close to the same money they could have made even if they accepted the ridiculous opening proposal from the NHL.

But like you said, its up to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
That agreement is over. If the owners are being truthful about wanting a FAIR deal, then they wull have to negotiate for it.

Telling someone, take it or leave it is not a fair negotiation when both sides bring something equally valuable to the table.
They aren't bringing things that are equally valuable to each other though. The NHL is bring the capacity to pay the players a great deal more money than they could earn doing anything else.

The PA is bringing the capacity for most of the owners to make very little more money than they would make without the NHL.

The most profitable team in the league turned a profit of what? 80 million? One of the companies that own 37.5% of the team made a 1.75B in profit in 2011.

Do you think they care financially that their NHL team isn't playing, its a drop in the bucket.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Unless you think you can do what the NHLPA does, as well for less?

Didn't think so.
Do you think NHLPA members can go find another employer that will pay 700 people whose only skill is playing hockey an average of 2.4 million.

Deebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:03 PM
  #117
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Casablanca
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk Muller View Post
The NHL can run their business in any fashion they want as long as it doesnt break the law just like a parent can raise their kids any way they want.
hate to break it to you, this
is the 21st, not 19th Century..


Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:08 PM
  #118
Cliffy1814
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NathanHortonFan View Post
Maybe, just maybe they are "dragging this thing on" because the NHL's offers are still terrible.
If that is the case then so be it.
Let's all stop acting like Fehr and the NHLPA are 12 year olds then. They aren't holding this thing up because their feelings got hurt because the first offer was so bad from Bettman.
I despise Fehr and even I know he isn't that stupid.

Cliffy1814 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:08 PM
  #119
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brrr -18, Gomez Cold
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,741
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
hate to break it to you, this
is the 21st, not 19th Century..

hate to break it to you, thats business.

Are you seriously that naive to think that all these corporations/owners of major companies, retail chains, etc etc truly give a damn what 99.9% of their employees want or care if they are being treated "fair" or get "fair compensation."

one day the real world will welcome you

Kirk Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:12 PM
  #120
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,575
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk Muller View Post
its the owners business, they can do as they please. The players are in their full rights to go play in the KHL or any other league. Ones the owner, ones the employee. They arent equal no matter how much your little heart wants to believe that.

Whats a fair deal?

and no, the players do not bring something equal to the table. If it was that easy, the players would start their own league today. The reason they arent is because realistically they are incapable of it.
Without the talent that the players bring to the table, there would be no league.

Yes, the Owners provide the venue in which a player gets to display his talent. Fans come to those venue's to see that player....not the owner or the venue.

I could give a rats rear end what the building looks like as long as the team is good.

As for a fair deal?

An eight year deal with a 50/50 split for 6 years reached after a 2 year step down process. Year 1 55% to the players, Year 2 52.5% to the players, Years 3-8 50/50.

Limit the amount of Bonus Money available to kids on ELC's.

Continue to allow for long term contracts with a provision that no contract signed before the age of 30 can take a player beyond his 35th birthday. No contract year can start where a player turns 35 in season.

Do not allow for throw away years. Contract must pay out equal sums through the term.

Tweak the Arb System. As stated in previous posts, the idea of the Arb. System makes sense, but is problematic when on one party has walk away rights and the other doesn't. It's problematic when 99% of the time, one side benefits more than the other. Either the teams have to do a better job of arguing their case, or specific provisions need to be put into place to make winning the case more difficult.

Keep UFA age at 27 years old. The balance I would propose here is eliminate the time of service portion of the current equation. Straight forward 27 years old you are a UFA. in the league at 18? UFA at 27.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:14 PM
  #121
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,834
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coolburn View Post
Thats where he falls short then. There is no "perfect" CBA for either side. He should've figured this out already and should be continuing to have discussions with the players instead of refusing to meet.
Why should be meet if be feels the NHLPA is only doing it for PR and won't actually discuss your offer? It's clear they aren't accepting the players delinked offers, and they shouldn't, IMO.

PensFanSince1989 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:14 PM
  #122
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 28,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
If I'm on the Players side of the ledger, I want to address the reduced salary issue. I want to talk through the make whole process because while I may not like everything else they have offered, in my mind, they are talking points that can be ironed out which means I believe there's room on my side to move on those issues.

As it is, the NHL has told them, unless all of those talking points are accepted as offered, there's no sense in discussing the make whole provision.

The NHLPA has been focusing on what SHOULD be the main issue that is affecting the NHL.

The NHL has held that discussion hostage by telling the NHLPA we are not even going to discuss Make Whole without complete acceptance of the other issues.

Guess what happened the last time the NHLPA agreed to that tactic? A Salary Cap was implemented AND the players gave up 24%.

Why should that tactic be any different now when the Owners have folloed their own playbook to a T.


I can see it now.

Players agree to all provisions outside of Make Whole, Owners continue the strong arm tactics and the players get bent.

What are the owners concerned with that they do not want to negotiate without pre-conditions?
Yet strangely the players ended up making considerably more money under the imposed, unfair, agreement than they would have under the agreement they proposed...

LickTheEnvelope is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:14 PM
  #123
Cliffy1814
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
which they would have gotten under the old agreement.

Next?
The old agreement expired though.
As of now they get nothing. They aren't bargaining off of the old agreement. That is over. New set of circumstances. Players don't deserve additional give backs because they had them last time. If they agree to 50/50 that does not mean the owners must give them something else.
They are welcome to try to bargain that (which they have thus far done a woeful job doing), but it's not their borth right.

This sense of entitlement that permeates our society and the NHLPA is amazing.

Cliffy1814 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:16 PM
  #124
Cliffy1814
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
Yet strangely the players ended up making considerably more money under the imposed, unfair, agreement than they would have under the agreement they proposed...
And the reality is that if the game grows and prospers they will continue to see astronomical pay raises in a linked system (which they are ironically fighting against).

Cliffy1814 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 03:18 PM
  #125
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brrr -18, Gomez Cold
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,741
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Without the talent that the players bring to the table, there would be no league.

Yes, the Owners provide the venue in which a player gets to display his talent. Fans come to those venue's to see that player....not the owner or the venue.

I could give a rats rear end what the building looks like as long as the team is good.

As for a fair deal?

An eight year deal with a 50/50 split for 6 years reached after a 2 year step down process. Year 1 55% to the players, Year 2 52.5% to the players, Years 3-8 50/50.

Limit the amount of Bonus Money available to kids on ELC's.

Continue to allow for long term contracts with a provision that no contract signed before the age of 30 can take a player beyond his 35th birthday. No contract year can start where a player turns 35 in season.

Do not allow for throw away years. Contract must pay out equal sums through the term.

Tweak the Arb System. As stated in previous posts, the idea of the Arb. System makes sense, but is problematic when on one party has walk away rights and the other doesn't. It's problematic when 99% of the time, one side benefits more than the other. Either the teams have to do a better job of arguing their case, or specific provisions need to be put into place to make winning the case more difficult.

Keep UFA age at 27 years old. The balance I would propose here is eliminate the time of service portion of the current equation. Straight forward 27 years old you are a UFA. in the league at 18? UFA at 27.
Well great, the players can go display their talents at the local rinks because there is only no league without them. Or they can all move to Siberia, i mean KHL or Europe where many seem to be hating it already.

Of course, the league is solely dependent on these players. The magic hockey fairy pays their insurance, the venues, the travel, the food. Or why dont the players do this on their own accord if the owners play such a small role?

Kirk Muller is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:59 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.