HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Lockout discussion thread

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-26-2012, 03:07 PM
  #926
Estimated_Prophet
Registered User
 
Estimated_Prophet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,160
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Patrick View Post
What pisses me off the most is that ridiculous grin they always have on each other's faces. Like "lockout? Lol....watch me leave in my Bentley". No rush, no sense of urgency. Bettman is especially guilty of this, even if the owners have the advantage at this specific moment, he should be forced to move on after this lockout passes. It is unacceptable for a league to go through 3 lockouts in less than 10 years IMO.


Gary Bettman was hired by the owners to make them money.......he has done that in spades. He has done absolutely everything they have asked of him. It took a lockout to implement a salary cap and it will take a second one to make the cap and economic system viable for all 30 teams. It was impossible to accomplish both of these goals with just one work stoppage.

Estimated_Prophet is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:29 PM
  #927
waffledave
waffledave, from hf
 
waffledave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,347
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post


Gary Bettman was hired by the owners to make them money.......he has done that in spades. He has done absolutely everything they have asked of him. It took a lockout to implement a salary cap and it will take a second one to make the cap and economic system viable for all 30 teams. It was impossible to accomplish both of these goals with just one work stoppage.
Next stoppage will result in Bettman locking them out again. Because no matter how much the owners cry, no matter what systems they put into place, the owners will find a way to overspend. They always find a way.

__________________
Yours in Christ,

waffledave
waffledave is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:31 PM
  #928
skipp18
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 308
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Estimated_Prophet View Post


It took a lockout to implement a salary cap and it will take a second one to make the cap and economic system viable for all 30 teams. It was impossible to accomplish both of these goals with just one work stoppage.
Will all due respect, this is nonsense. The last lockout all we heard from the owners was how "cost certainty" was going to fix everything.
They needed "cost certainty" in order to survive.

How is it possible that they got everything they wanted last time that was supposed to fix everything, revenue grew to an all time high at a record pace and still they are crying poor. Once again the owners are asking the players to save the owners from themselves.

skipp18 is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:35 PM
  #929
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Know what sucks most about the lockout, the most recent memory we have still is a 3rd last place finish, and if we lose a full year we wont have that 3rd overall pick in 2013. Also the Leafs will have a really good chance at number 1.

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:38 PM
  #930
CN_paladin
Registered User
 
CN_paladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westeros
Posts: 2,651
vCash: 500
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie
As expected, NHL cancels games thru end of Nov. Failing CBA progress, Winter Classic and All-Star Game likely cancelled in a week or so.

CN_paladin is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:39 PM
  #931
CN_paladin
Registered User
 
CN_paladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westeros
Posts: 2,651
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
Know what sucks most about the lockout, the most recent memory we have still is a 3rd last place finish, and if we lose a full year we wont have that 3rd overall pick in 2013. Also the Leafs will have a really good chance at number 1.
Why would the Leafs have a shot at first overall?

CN_paladin is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:42 PM
  #932
domdo345
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,104
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CN_paladin View Post
Why would the Leafs have a shot at first overall?
missed the playoffs last 3 years = most balls possible

domdo345 is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:47 PM
  #933
Hullois
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Québec
Country: Martinique
Posts: 1,305
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by domdo345 View Post
missed the playoffs last 3 years = most balls possible
Last time we made it to #5 with only 1 ball so let's hope we get lucky again!

Hullois is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:47 PM
  #934
PunkinDrublic*
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Sutton,Qc-Sudbury,On
Posts: 8,282
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
Know what sucks most about the lockout, the most recent memory we have still is a 3rd last place finish, and if we lose a full year we wont have that 3rd overall pick in 2013. Also the Leafs will have a really good chance at number 1.
So what, i would rather the Leafs get it than the blasted Columbus Blue Jackets.
Do you guys not like rivalries ?

PunkinDrublic* is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 04:00 PM
  #935
Player 61
#Winning
 
Player 61's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: West Island
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,143
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Player 61
Just be done with it! cancel the whole season already, it's useless played with games missing anyway!

http://montreal.ctvnews.ca/nhl-cance...mber-1.1012341

Player 61 is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 04:11 PM
  #936
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rosso Scuderia View Post
There's still a major difference though. There are hundred thousands of people in this world that can make a 25k$ per year job, while NHL hockey players.. or any other major sports players are the best in the world.

I know you think you work as hard as a teacher than Sidney Crosby but really.. its not even comparable.. Unless you're the best of the best teacher in this world and has a nobel prize.. than ok, it could be fair comparaison.
Of course there is a difference. The difference is in salary and in the type of work being done. That playing hockey is physically harder than being a mall cop or many, if not most, other types of jobs is not something being argued. Whether or not someone can be the best in their chosen profession and still be deserving of respect and still be considered as hard working in the sense of how well that person does his/her job IS being argued.

You are damn right I work as hard at my job as Crosby. I start 5 days a week at 7:45 and end anywhere from 4:45-7:00 at night depending upon coaching, tutorials, detentions, Leadership program responsibilities, school dances, parent/teacher interviews, corrections, etc... I also work over the week-ends. I can not tell you if I am one of the best teachers in the world or not, but I definitely can tell you I am as hard working as any other person who cares about what they do as a professional, be they a teacher, police officer, mall cop, or sports figure. Hard work is not determined by your salary. Neither is your level of success. I am a proud teacher, love what I do, and could leave for more lucrative careers any time I so desire. I never have, and never will. Enough about me (nobody here cares, and that is the way it should be). I just want respect for we "Joe Blows" when people are talking about how hard working players are. So, to reiterate, "yes", I work as hard as Crosby...if not harder.

Drydenwasthebest is online now  
Old
10-26-2012, 04:36 PM
  #937
Ozymandias
#firetherrien
 
Ozymandias's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hockey Mecca
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,441
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Yes, bias is what it is and yours is showing. The players want more money than the guys who pay the bills, they want 57% of all HRR BUT they also are not willing to include THEIR HRR in the entire pie. Why would any owner of a business put his money into a business where the people he hires can take the amount they want and don't even have to include the extra income they make due to the business they are a part of? People who blame the wners for wanting a fair and even share of the HRR, of their HRR, are definitely showing their bias...
No bias. Players did make offers at 50-50, the difference is that they spread out the lowering, so owners would have to respect their contracts. Actually, by denying the FACT that players did agree to the 50-50 shows your own bias.

For me, it is a mere question of bargaining pragmatism. Owners won big in the last CBA, and rightly so, for the league's sake. But this time around, they're unloading their own faults unto the players. The reason some teams aren't doing well financially is because rich owners don't want to share more of their profit, which is contradictory with the cap floor, and because of their stubbornness in keeping hockey teams in towns that shouldn't have hockey teams.

The mere fact that the league wasn't ready to negotiate on one of the player's counter offers that did have the 50-50 split, shows just how stubborn Bettman and some of the owners are.

Ozymandias is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 04:49 PM
  #938
CN_paladin
Registered User
 
CN_paladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westeros
Posts: 2,651
vCash: 500
A bit OT but as a hockey fan who doesn't follow any other sports besides hockey, I have a few questions about how Fehr's so called legacy in MLB:

1) Could someone please tell me in details if the 1994 MLB strike led by Fehr is actually responsible for driving the Expos out of Montreal?

2) Did the luxury tax system in the MLB really kill the parity after Fehr took over? Why didn't the MLB PA keep this cancer afterwards? Why do baseballs fans keep watching it if it's really a league where the richest 4 compete for the championship year in and out?


Last edited by CN_paladin: 10-26-2012 at 05:03 PM.
CN_paladin is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 04:54 PM
  #939
Poulet Kostopoulos
Registered User
 
Poulet Kostopoulos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
No bias. Players did make offers at 50-50, the difference is that they spread out the lowering, so owners would have to respect their contracts. Actually, by denying the FACT that players did agree to the 50-50 shows your own bias.

For me, it is a mere question of bargaining pragmatism. Owners won big in the last CBA, and rightly so, for the league's sake. But this time around, they're unloading their own faults unto the players. The reason some teams aren't doing well financially is because rich owners don't want to share more of their profit, which is contradictory with the cap floor, and because of their stubbornness in keeping hockey teams in towns that shouldn't have hockey teams.

The mere fact that the league wasn't ready to negotiate on one of the player's counter offers that did have the 50-50 split, shows just how stubborn Bettman and some of the owners are.
The players won big too with the last CBA -- their share went from 54% to 57%. No?

Poulet Kostopoulos is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 05:21 PM
  #940
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poulet Kostopoulos View Post
The players won big too with the last CBA -- their share went from 54% to 57%. No?
No.

Before the CBA, their share was at around 72%. That is where the player share of revenue goes in a free market system with no salary cap. The salary cap lowered the share to 54%. The CBA had an agreement that if revenue growth exceeded all expectations to a point where everybody would win, the players would get one sixth of their concessions back: player share would go to 57%.

It's still a net drop.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 05:32 PM
  #941
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
Know what sucks most about the lockout, the most recent memory we have still is a 3rd last place finish, and if we lose a full year we wont have that 3rd overall pick in 2013. Also the Leafs will have a really good chance at number 1.
I agree, if we had a season Montreal would probably be drafting around 1st, 2nd, or 3rd; and we would be trading vets for picks at the deadline, completing the rebuld by the start of the 2013-2014 season. Instead, the lockout will lead to a rebuilding aborted at the halfway market, and thus we are likely looking at 8th place finishes and years of 1st and 2nd round playoff exits even with Galchenyuk in the lineup.

Quote:
Originally Posted by YourBuddy View Post
So what, i would rather the Leafs get it than the blasted Columbus Blue Jackets.
Do you guys not like rivalries ?
Right now, last season's results show that Toronto and Montreal are approximately equal. The acquisitions of Alex Galchenyuk and Morgan Reilley maintain that approximate equality into the medium term.

However, if the Leafs get Nathan MacKinnon, and we get some 3rd line center at 20th overall who won't be productive until the 2015-16 season, then we won't just be in a rivalry with the leafs, we'll be on the losing end of a rivalry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Of course there is a difference. The difference is in salary and in the type of work being done. That playing hockey is physically harder than being a mall cop or many, if not most, other types of jobs is not something being argued. Whether or not someone can be the best in their chosen profession and still be deserving of respect and still be considered as hard working in the sense of how well that person does his/her job IS being argued.

You are damn right I work as hard at my job as Crosby. I start 5 days a week at 7:45 and end anywhere from 4:45-7:00 at night depending upon coaching, tutorials, detentions, Leadership program responsibilities, school dances, parent/teacher interviews, corrections, etc... I also work over the week-ends. I can not tell you if I am one of the best teachers in the world or not, but I definitely can tell you I am as hard working as any other person who cares about what they do as a professional, be they a teacher, police officer, mall cop, or sports figure. Hard work is not determined by your salary. Neither is your level of success. I am a proud teacher, love what I do, and could leave for more lucrative careers any time I so desire. I never have, and never will. Enough about me (nobody here cares, and that is the way it should be). I just want respect for we "Joe Blows" when people are talking about how hard working players are. So, to reiterate, "yes", I work as hard as Crosby...if not harder.
It's really amazing that you bring up the fact that you work weekends in a post where your main point is that you work harder than Crosby. Do you think Crosby doesn't work weekends? Do you think he doesn't work long hours?

Further, you confuse working hard with working long hours. They're not the same. Grading homework on the weekend is not mentally taxing it at all, I've done a lot of grading, it's very easy work you can do it with your brain turned half-off and with a glass of whiskey on your side and the TV playing in the background, and still pull of a perfect job at it. I would do grading when I was too exhausted from doing my real work. 1 hour of supervising detention? Not equivalent I'm sure.

I'm not sure, but I think that your perception of Sidney Crosby is that he works about 2 hours a week, i.e. the total amount of time he spends on the ice. That's the impression you give.

ETA:There's also a difference between working hard and working well. I remember some teachers would work really hard, and we'd make them start crying and nothing would get done. Others would walk into the room and command our respect. The latter probably didn't work as hard, but there is no doubt they were worth more, unfortunately those were exactly the people who tended to leave the profession, as they were the ones most likely to have superior options. In the case of people who are the best in the world at what they do, it is both, they work hard and they work well.


Last edited by DAChampion: 10-26-2012 at 06:05 PM.
DAChampion is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 05:39 PM
  #942
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 6,354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CN_paladin View Post
A bit OT but as a hockey fan who doesn't follow any other sports besides hockey, I have a few questions about how Fehr's so called legacy in MLB:

1) Could someone please tell me in details if the 1994 MLB strike led by Fehr is actually responsible for driving the Expos out of Montreal?

2) Did the luxury tax system in the MLB really kill the parity after Fehr took over? Why didn't the MLB PA keep this cancer afterwards? Why do baseballs fans keep watching it if it's really a league where the richest 4 compete for the championship year in and out?
Donald Fehr has nothing to do with the Expos leaving Montreal.

When the 1994 strike happened, the Expos were number 1 in the MLB because they had a good team with good players. In the summer before the 1995 season, the Expos owners, one of the richest ownership consortiums in the league and included companies like Bell Canada and Royal Bank of Canada, didn't bother offering contracts to Larry Walker, Marquis Grissom, John Wetteland and Ken Hill. They let them walk, and didn't even try to keep them. In subsequent seasons, players like Pedro Martinez, Moises Alou, and Vladimir Guerrero would walk as well.

The Expos could have survived in the MLB just fine after the 1994 strike and indeed a lot of small-to-medium market teams are doing ok. However, the Expos owners were never willing to invest money. For the owners, it was always about picking a payroll such that they would make 1 million a year, which is what they did. A lot of revenue sharing would go into the Expos, they would have a payroll of 20 million or so, and the owners would pocket 1 million dollars. This pissed off the other owners.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 05:42 PM
  #943
HarlemsFinest
teh gallys!!1
 
HarlemsFinest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,488
vCash: 500
it's true, no one has to care about the fan's feelings. but they should be wary of losing the fans. because they care about their own bottom line...which in the end, is us. we are their revenue. we are the demand to their supply. so yes, they have to care about the fans.

HarlemsFinest is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 06:17 PM
  #944
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneSharpMarble View Post
The original argument was that drydenwasthebest thought that becoming a teacher was harder than making the NHL. Many laughs ensued and we moved on.
Wow, now you have to lie about what I said to try and make yourself look better. I never stated it was harder to become a teacher than an NHL player. I love how your hyperbole gets greater with each retelling of your story. First you started telling people:

Quote:
OneSharpMarble

Au contraire this individual has argued that he has worked just as hard to become a teacher as Sidney Crosby worked to make the NHL. I couldn't make this **** up.
Now you tell people I stated that I claimed to work "Harder" than Crosby. So, which did I write? Did I say it was "harder" or "as hard as"? No worries, I can help.

Yes, I did work as hard as Crosby or any other player in the NHL to become a teacher. I have no problem standing by that statement. I dedicated myself to my chosen profession, went through all of the hard work, did my degrees, performed at the minor league level (student teaching), and worked my way into the profession through hard work. I don't see how you can deny any of that. I did 2 university degrees and worked 2 jobs throughout the entire time, averaging 4 hours of sleep per night to ensure I was not a financial burden to my family and to pay for my education.

I WORKED as HARD as anyone to get to where I am at. I hope you can finally understand what that means. Somehow, I doubt OneDullPiece ofGlass will ever get it. Sigh...

Drydenwasthebest is online now  
Old
10-26-2012, 06:32 PM
  #945
ECWHSWI
P.K. is perfect.
 
ECWHSWI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 14,904
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by waffledave View Post
Next stoppage will result in Bettman locking them out again. Because no matter how much the owners cry, no matter what systems they put into place, the owners will find a way to overspend. They always find a way.
this.

ECWHSWI is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 06:33 PM
  #946
idk
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by skipp18 View Post
Will all due respect, this is nonsense. The last lockout all we heard from the owners was how "cost certainty" was going to fix everything.
They needed "cost certainty" in order to survive.

How is it possible that they got everything they wanted last time that was supposed to fix everything, revenue grew to an all time high at a record pace and still they are crying poor. Once again the owners are asking the players to save the owners from themselves.
The situation's a bit more complex than that. The cost certainty values established by the last CBA have done wonders for league revenues but not every team has seen the same kind of increases. Right now hockey profits come in at somewhere about 127 million. However if you remove the big three teams (Toronto, Montreal and the Rangers) league revenues drop to -44 million (yes, 44 million in the hole). Expand the big three to the big five (add Vancouver and Edmonton) and that number drops to a loss of 86 million. Only eight teams make more than 5 million a season (the above, plus Detroit, Chicago and Colorado) and only twelve actually turn a profit (those eight plus the Flyers, Ottawa, Calgary and Boston).

That's less than half the teams turning a profit. Is some of the reason for it owners who spend foolishly? Of course. The Wild, who have the second highest payroll in the league finished last season about six million in the red. But of the five teams with the lowest revenue in the league (the Coyotes, Columbus, Tampa Bay, Anaheim and the Islanders) two are below the salary floor (Phoenix and the Islanders) and two are
very close (Anaheim (within two million) and Columbus (within four million)).

The problem is that some teams are very rich and some teams are not. Montreal, Toronto and the Rangers account for 130% of the league's total revenue. And that skews the numbers very badly. This is a problem, but there are three solutions:
  • Reduce the cap and floor by seven percent. This will probably not save Phoenix from being a "have not" team, but it would bring Columbus and Anaheim very close.
  • Increase cost sharing. Not palatable to the owners of the profitable teams. Molson bought the Canadiens for 500 million dollars and Bell probably paid a similar amount for the Leafs (although it's harder to figure out, as MLSE owns several sports investments). True North bought the Thrashers/Jets $170 million. Why should Geoff and Bell sacrifice their ROI to finance the ROI for True North, who paid much less to get in the game?
  • Contract. Kill off the teams that are weak.

Of these three options the league wants the first, the players want the second and no one wants the third. Which one is more fair to us? Probably the compromise that gets us back to hockey soonest. But it's not as simple as "everything was fixed last time, why are we here again".

idk is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 06:40 PM
  #947
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
No bias. Players did make offers at 50-50, the difference is that they spread out the lowering, so owners would have to respect their contracts. Actually, by denying the FACT that players did agree to the 50-50 shows your own bias.

For me, it is a mere question of bargaining pragmatism. Owners won big in the last CBA, and rightly so, for the league's sake. But this time around, they're unloading their own faults unto the players. The reason some teams aren't doing well financially is because rich owners don't want to share more of their profit, which is contradictory with the cap floor, and because of their stubbornness in keeping hockey teams in towns that shouldn't have hockey teams.

The mere fact that the league wasn't ready to negotiate on one of the player's counter offers that did have the 50-50 split, shows just how stubborn Bettman and some of the owners are.
Actually, there was a never a 50/50 split offered that was an honest and true 50/50. There was a 50/50 split that would not include 13% of the players' salaries which would get paid to the players. The 50/50 split was for the remaining 87%. The other supposed 50/50 offers only happened IF CERTAIN conditions were achieved. Here are the basics of the Players' offers:

Option 1: Players share only goes to 50% IF league revenue hits 4.12 billion. That may or may not happen.

Option 2: IF revenue grows at a 5% clip, then the players share drops to 50/50 in year 5. They say if league revenues grow at a greater percent the drop to 50/50 will happen faster. Of course, they leave out the reality that if league revenue percentages increase at less than 5% or even drop, then the split never hits 50/50.

Option 3: Has existing salaries reflecting the old deal 57/43, and the new salaries reflecting the new 50/50 deal. Essentially, some of these old contracts may take years to expire..13% paid out over and above the new 50/50 cap. Again, the owners have to wait for their share of the revenue to even out.

Why on earth should the owners agree to wait on receiving their fair share or accept a deal where they may never get to that 50/50 level?

Drydenwasthebest is online now  
Old
10-26-2012, 07:07 PM
  #948
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,398
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post

It's really amazing that you bring up the fact that you work weekends in a post where your main point is that you work harder than Crosby. Do you think Crosby doesn't work weekends? Do you think he doesn't work long hours?

Actually, I believe I have stated I work as hard as Crosby. I have no doubt that Crosby works hard and does work some week-ends. So do I.

Further, you confuse working hard with working long hours.

No, I did not confuse them, I include them as part of the whole picture. I do both.

They're not the same.At least we can agree on that.

Grading homework on the weekend is not mentally taxing it at all, I've done a lot of grading, it's very easy work you can do it with your brain turned half-off and with a glass of whiskey on your side and the TV playing in the background, and still pull of a perfect job at it. I would do grading when I was too exhausted from doing my real work. 1 hour of supervising detention? Not equivalent I'm sure.

Well, THAT is a most telling paragraph about who you are and how you work. I actually DO care about my job and students enough to show their work the respect it deserves by paying full attention to what they give me. If I simply was an Educated Academic I guess I could turn my brain off, get drunk, watch TV and still correct my students' work. Unfortunately, I am a lowly teacher who actually takes the time to read what his students give him carefully to ensure they get the right type of feedback to help them develop. If you do your work with half a brain while drinking and watching TV, no wonder you can not imagine people who care about, and are good at, their jobs actually working hard...LOL. This paragraph says SOOOOOO much about YOU. I will never be able to convince you that I work hard if that is how you work and perceive others' work habits to be like.

I'm not sure (Clearly the most honest statement you have made about your ability to understand what I wrote...), but I think that your perception of Sidney Crosby is that he works about 2 hours a week, i.e. the total amount of time he spends on the ice. That's the impression you give.

I can help with that. Hockey players in the NHL do not spend over 50 hours per week on hockey. Many "Joe Blow" types do that and more. Most of what Crosby does, millions of people do for fun. I work tons of hours, but still spend hours per week in a gym working out to keep in shape, on top of engaging in martial arts regularly. Crosby works very hard at what he does. He is in better physical shape than I am. He does not necessarily work harder at his chosen profession just because he works harder PHYSICALLY.

ETA:There's also a difference between working hard and working well. I remember some teachers would work really hard, and we'd make them start crying and nothing would get done. Others would walk into the room and command our respect. The latter probably didn't work as hard, but there is no doubt they were worth more, unfortunately those were exactly the people who tended to leave the profession, as they were the ones most likely to have superior options. In the case of people who are the best in the world at what they do, it is both, they work hard and they work well.
Well, we completely agree on that point.

Keep in mind, there is no insult in saying I work as hard at my job as Crosby does at his. If you can not see that, the problem is with you. You might want to turn your full brain on and stop drinking while watching TV when working...or at least don't tell people that when trying to argue with them about how much harder your job is than someone else's...LOL!!... Thank you so very much for that whole "reply", it made my entire day!

Drydenwasthebest is online now  
Old
10-26-2012, 07:26 PM
  #949
Et le But
Moderator
 
Et le But's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: New York
Country: Argentina
Posts: 17,615
vCash: 500
http://www.ontariohockeyleague.com/a...-league/130013

Soon we won't even have junior hockey, because apparently 16 year olds are entitled to regular salaries.

Et le But is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 07:31 PM
  #950
guest1467
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 24,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Further, you confuse working hard with working long hours. They're not the same. Grading homework on the weekend is not mentally taxing it at all, I've done a lot of grading, it's very easy work you can do it with your brain turned half-off and with a glass of whiskey on your side and the TV playing in the background, and still pull of a perfect job at it. I would do grading when I was too exhausted from doing my real work.

This is the epitome of why there is so much hatred towards profs from undergrads.


Last edited by overlords: 10-26-2012 at 07:36 PM.
guest1467 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 04:01 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.