HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Chicago Blackhawks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

And we are locked out again (No Progress ,, Talks collapse)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-26-2012, 03:25 PM
  #751
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,339
vCash: 500
Owners have other business ventures to keep them afloat. Their NHL teams are one investment on a list of many for all of them.

Jeez, who the hell even cares who's to blame. I am sick and tired of both sides treating us fans like crap, toying with us like no other professional league does with their fans. It's ridiculous.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:27 PM
  #752
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,421
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Hansen View Post
Owners have other business ventures to keep them afloat. Their NHL teams are one investment on a list of many for all of them..
Yuuuup.

Jeremy Jacobs has a net worth of 2.7BILLION dollars!
He sure needs more money in his pocket!!!

Maybe the owners should help out the owners, instead of the players helping out the owners.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 03:33 PM
  #753
Chris Hansen
Versteeg's Concubine
 
Chris Hansen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 10,339
vCash: 500
You're not going to suck me into this argument, Hawkaholic. I am just as disdainful for the socialist-minded "ZOMG IT'S ALL THE OWNER'S FAULT" as I am for the reactionary "EW, ALL THE SELFISH UNION'S FAULT."

Neither side has given me any reason whatsoever to waste my time defending them. Everyone involved in this ridiculous dispute is selfish, and none of them could possibly care any less about us fans. So why waste my time defending a side? Not like it really makes any sort of difference, but they have given me no reason to defend them. Fool me once (last lockout), shame on me. I took a side last lockout. I learned quite quickly never to do that again, because it's just wasting energy.

Now I do realize this is a message board, meant for discussion, so I'll just stop it there. But I really don't understand why people feel the need to defend either of these sides anymore.

All they have done is give us the finger. Again.

Chris Hansen is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 04:36 PM
  #754
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,618
vCash: 500
I hope season ticket holders get their money back quickly for the cancelled games, at least in the smaller markets.

I wish they would just cancel the WC already and be done with it.

I hope Santa gives them all coal for Christmas.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 06:45 PM
  #755
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,843
vCash: 500
More stupidity from another baby:

Patrick Marleau on Friday's NHL news: "The league had these games canceled already in the summer. They are just releasing that info now."

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 06:51 PM
  #756
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
More stupidity from another baby:

Patrick Marleau on Friday's NHL news: "The league had these games canceled already in the summer. They are just releasing that info now."
What's going on in SJ? Boyle with some whiny garbage a few weeks back too. Was expecting better from guys that were around the last lockout. Fehr didn't have enough time and guys like Marleau and Boyle are part of the reason.

The owners suck too.

I've decided that the officials should be blamed too, maybe their prolonged negotiation a couple years ago got the owners all worked up against labor.

The Bears better stay hot or this will be a nasty fall and a winter.

Maybe the charity game will cheer everybody up for a few days.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 09:01 PM
  #757
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BobbyJet View Post
More stupidity from another baby:

Patrick Marleau on Friday's NHL news: "The league had these games canceled already in the summer. They are just releasing that info now."
I really don't get why the players are bothering opening their mouths. They're making themselves look horrible. Some of the things they are saying is beyond ridiculous petty and pathetic. The issue is they have clearly taken this thing personal and not just as what it is, business. Best of all is they are constantly talking to the media but then claim the league is using the media to gain favor? Pot meet kettle.

While the public opinion won't mean anything in terms of solving the current CBA it will mean something when the games return. People will remember how these players who make millions of dollars to play a game went on about being treated like animals and being used and how the NHL was out to get them and it will drive many of the newer fans away.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Yuuuup.

Jeremy Jacobs has a net worth of 2.7BILLION dollars!
He sure needs more money in his pocket!!!

Maybe the owners should help out the owners, instead of the players helping out the owners.
So what, many players make millions in endorsements and other areas so should they not be allowed to make money too?

Your arguments show you have no real knowledge of the situation.

The owners are helping other owners, it's called profit sharing, it's being done. But why should the owners be the only ones to foot any kind of a bill.

If Tampa is losing money why should just the owners of the Bruins, Leafs and Rangers be affected but not the players on the Lighting who get paid by them?

Yes owners are partly responsible but so are the players and for the players to act like and negotiate like they had no doing in some of these teams issues is ridiculous.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 09:22 PM
  #758
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,843
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post


So what, many players make millions in endorsements and other areas so should they not be allowed to make money too?
Which brings up another point. The player wants an all expense paid benefit, right down to accommodation and meals and most other expenses. They also want a big chunk of their employers earnings, over half in fact, yet the endorsements they receive as a result of that employment is strictly theirs. Should the employer be demanding a percentage of that endorsement money? Just asking. Ludicrous? Yes, as ludicrous as the players wanting 57 percent of revenue, no matter how they perform, and with no financial risk whatsoever.

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 10:24 PM
  #759
hawkeytown
Rookie User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Sweet Home Chicago
Posts: 4
vCash: 500
hopefully its back by December or January.
whats winter without hockey?

hawkeytown is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 11:33 PM
  #760
Pepe Silvia
Registered User
 
Pepe Silvia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 4,807
vCash: 500
Obviously both sides are at fault, but I'm not gonna lie, I'm about as anti-union as it gets. Some of the players' demands are pretty ridiculous. I love how Toews had an interview where he was trying to make everyone feel sorry for the players. Screw Donald Fehr and the NHLPA

Pepe Silvia is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 09:17 AM
  #761
Sleight Of Hand
Mean Streets
 
Sleight Of Hand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Panama
Country: United States
Posts: 9,438
vCash: 500
I feel both sides have a lot of blame to shoulder. the player by hiring Fehr. That alone left a bad taste in my mouth and showed what the players were thinking of strategy. Fehr=lost games in any sport. And the players not really wanting to put offers out there and trying to get the NHL to do all the work in that realm. All on the players and Fehr.

I am also sick of hearing 'the players gave up a lot last time' BS. So what? The league and economic climate is much different now than then, the 90's, etc. They saw the other 2 major leagues go 50/50 and HAD to know that is what is going to be happening. I don't think there is much sympathy from people the way things are out there economically now. And there are other leagues around the world that, quite frankly, should open their eyes up to how much salary they would see if there is no NHL. I guess, in the end, I hold the players >50% responsible.

I am enjoying watching football (soccer) where there is no union, they make good money and don't usually *****, and I find it entertaining. If there s no NHL I will be disappointed but there are many more options for entertainment. It is their loss....not mine.

Sleight Of Hand is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 10:16 AM
  #762
BobbyJet
Registered User
 
BobbyJet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Dundas, Ontario. Can
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,843
vCash: 500
Finally we hear some intelligence from a player. Ryan Miller with some words of wisdom - sounds like he should be in Fehr's spot. Partial quote from TSN:

"The two sides are close enough to a deal that missing the bulk of a season is wrong and missing an entire season is not only insane, it is a blatant disregard for the sport, the fans and the culture we have grown over decades -- just to satisfy egos, not the needs of either side," Miller added.

BobbyJet is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 01:36 PM
  #763
Hawkaholic
Registered User
 
Hawkaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: London, Ont.
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,421
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
So what, many players make millions in endorsements and other areas so should they not be allowed to make money too?

Your arguments show you have no real knowledge of the situation.

The owners are helping other owners, it's called profit sharing, it's being done. But why should the owners be the only ones to foot any kind of a bill.

If Tampa is losing money why should just the owners of the Bruins, Leafs and Rangers be affected but not the players on the Lighting who get paid by them?

Yes owners are partly responsible but so are the players and for the players to act like and negotiate like they had no doing in some of these teams issues is ridiculous.
Many players make millions in endorsements? If you consider under 5% of players 'many' then sure.

My arguments show I have no knowledge? Riiiight, keep believing that. Maybe you disagree with my arguments, but I have a really good idea of what is going on. Not one thing I have said is a lie.

The owners are helping other owners, but clearly not enough.

If Tampa is losing money, why should players not playing for the Lightning have to help them...thats a pretty weak argument. Not only that, with the last deal, the players are helping the owners quite a bit with their proposal over the entire agreement. They are willing to transfer up to 1.2BIL to the owners in their latest proposal.

Players are willing to negotiate, more so than the owners who just laid a take it or leave it offer to the players.

The way you talk seems like you have a lot less knowledge than the avg person about it.

Hawkaholic is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 01:45 PM
  #764
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Players are willing to negotiate, more so than the owners who just laid a take it or leave it offer to the players.
I'm not sure how either side has proven a willingness to negotiate since both sides refuse to entertain the structure of the others' proposal.

Both sides have offered up garbage to the other side to this point. Of the small number of details we allegedly know about the offers presented to this point we know the players make ridiculous assumptions about growth that they'll have almost nothing to do with, and the owners want a ridiculous amount of money back right now without giving it back for years. If either side accepted the other's framework, I could see an argument for one being more willing to negotiate than the other.

hockeydoug is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 03:56 PM
  #765
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,632
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Many players make millions in endorsements? If you consider under 5% of players 'many' then sure.
If your argument you gave us 1 owner so their isn't much difference is there.

Plus any owners independent wealth have nothing to do with this. This is where you fail the most in this argument. You feel because an owner has money he should give up his own money out of his pocket to to run his team, which is ridiculous, why should an owner pay out of his pocket to pay his players 57% of what he makes when they are already making millions a year. But you see $ only and not how a business operates, you feel because owners have more $ then players they should pay it out. That's not how a business works. 1. Whether the players share is 100% or 10% or anywhere in-between for them it's all profit. Since a player doesn't put any of the money he makes back into the league it's all profit for him. For the owners they pay to run their team, so they pay for everything, travel, hotels, food, cost, equipment, player salaries, arena operating cost and everything else. For that very reason owners should be making much more then the players because they run the league and they should make enough from the NHL so they can run their team without paying out of their pocket and that is what this whole thing is about, many teams aren't making enough.
2. Owners are billionaires why shouldn't they have to pay out of their pocket. Why are the owners billionaires? because they are good and smart with their money, they won't continue to invest in a business that costs them money, the owners of those teams will sell those teams and no one will buy a team that can't generate a profit. So now teams are folding and the league is losing teams every year until eventually it's the 12-15 teams that could actually turn a profit left. Great atleast the players making an average of 2.4 million a year didn't take a pay cut.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
My arguments show I have no knowledge? Riiiight, keep believing that. Maybe you disagree with my arguments, but I have a really good idea of what is going on. Not one thing I have said is a lie.
Nothing you said is a lie doesn't mean everything you said is factual. Lots of what your saying is speculation and opinion. I love how you say the same thing to me at the end of your post, ohh burn
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
The owners are helping other owners, but clearly not enough.
The owners are proposing 200M in profit sharing for the upcoming year and then keeping it in the same proportion based on HRR. Well if they used the same math the players are using in the 5% growth over the life of a 5 year CBA that's almost 1.5 billion dollars in profit sharing, that's a lot of money and even more then what they are asking back from the players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
If Tampa is losing money, why should players not playing for the Lightning have to help them...thats a pretty weak argument. Not only that, with the last deal, the players are helping the owners quite a bit with their proposal over the entire agreement. They are willing to transfer up to 1.2BIL to the owners in their latest proposal.
No it's not, because of the structure of it all. The players aren't willing to transfer anything. That 1.2 BIL is what they would lose if they signed the 50-50 vs the 57%, well since the 57% deal doesn't exsist anymore they aren't losing anything. Right now players are making 7% of their salary based on escrow, well imagine if they signed a deal that cut their current salary but the 7% they owners want, they would be making 93% of their salary, which is much greater then 7% their making now. [/QUOTE]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hawkaholic View Post
Players are willing to negotiate, more so than the owners who just laid a take it or leave it offer to the players.
Neither side has shown a real want to but at least the owners are willing to make changes to their proposal. They have changed their demands and they have changed their proposals and tried to come up with neat ways to get the deal done including the "make whole" provision where they delay the payments to the players but in the end pay out the $ in the current contracts.

The players have refused to negotiate off any of the NHL proposals and only used their own and in their recent 3 deals, 2 where complete garbage and the third they didn't even crunch the numbers on. How do you offer a deal to the owners and when they ask, so $ wise what do that mean over the life of the deal and you answer "I don't know" I don't sign that deal either.

Most importantly the owners wanted to negotiate over a year ago but the players refused, so for the players to come out now and act like the owners had played this all along is a joke and a flat out lie to everyone. The players are the ones who stalled the talks and then tried to blame that on the owners.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 10:29 AM
  #766
Belenos
Registered User
 
Belenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Biel, Switzerland
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 595
vCash: 500
Patrick Kane arrived in Switzerland today: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...6563866&type=1

Belenos is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 11:29 AM
  #767
UsernameWasTaken
Let's Go Blue Jays!
 
UsernameWasTaken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belenos View Post
Patrick Kane arrived in Switzerland today: https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?...6563866&type=1
he looks pretty haggard for his age (23). I wonder whether it's fatigue from travelling or whether his lifestyle is starting to catch up with him.




UsernameWasTaken is offline  
Old
10-28-2012, 01:00 PM
  #768
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,624
vCash: 500
^ Could just be some jet lag. He looks fine to me.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 01:23 AM
  #769
sketch22
Registered User
 
sketch22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,307
vCash: 50
To save space I am just quoting the first sentence of the section I am addressing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
Plus any owners independent wealth have nothing to do with this....
Except professional sports teams are not like other businesses. In most businesses the employees and the product are separate entities. In Pro sports the employees (the players) are the product. the NHL isn't like McDonald's where the employees are interchangeable because the product has value no matter who is behind the counter. A better example would be that the Owners are investors and the players are the company. Sure the Owners are risking their money, but they aren't actually generating any revenue for the company. The players aren't risking their own money, but are generating the revenue. Also the players only get a cut of HRR, not total revenue.
Ask yourself this. If the Russian players did follow thru on the threat to stay in the KHL even after the lockout ends how much money do you think the Capitals would lose without Ovechkin and Backstrom? How much more money do you think the Yotes would have lost next season if Doan hadn't resigned? How much more money would the Preds have lost if they didn't match Weber's offer sheet? The players drive the NHL, not the Owners.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
The owners are proposing 200M in profit sharing for the upcoming year and then keeping it in the same proportion based on HRR...
An increase of only $50 mil from the previous year. While making roughly $230 million more overall based on the players only getting 50% of the pie. So the Owners keep saying teams are losing money and need financial help, but less than 1/4 of the money they are saving is earmarked for the teams that need it most.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
No it's not, because of the structure of it all...
So you think the players should take a bad deal, because right now they are making less than they could be. Then shouldn't the Owners agree to the players demands, because right now they are also making less than they could be?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
Neither side has shown a real want to but at least the owners are willing to make changes to their proposal....
The make whole provision is horrible for the players. In the current proposal the money to pay the players back wouldn't come from the Owners it would come from other players by lowering the cap in those years to less than 50%. So while the players currently under contract would be getting paid back there would be less money available for other players to get new contracts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
The players have refused to negotiate off any of the NHL proposals and only used their own...
And the Owners have refused to negotiate off any of the deals the players have proposed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Psycho T View Post
Most importantly the owners wanted to negotiate over a year ago but the players refused....
The only reason the NHL season hasn't started yet was because the Owners locked the players out. They didn't have to lock the players out. They could have allowed the season to start while negotiating a new deal, but they chose to lock the players out. This isn't a strike. The Owners chose to go down this path just as much if not more than the players did.

sketch22 is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 03:40 AM
  #770
Sir Psycho T
More Cowbell!
 
Sir Psycho T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Redwood City, CA
Posts: 3,632
vCash: 500
[QUOTE=sketch22;55365373]



Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
Except professional sports teams are not like other businesses. In most businesses the employees and the product are separate entities. In Pro sports the employees (the players) are the product. the NHL isn't like McDonald's where the employees are interchangeable because the product has value no matter who is behind the counter. A better example would be that the Owners are investors and the players are the company. Sure the Owners are risking their money, but they aren't actually generating any revenue for the company. The players aren't risking their own money, but are generating the revenue. Also the players only get a cut of HRR, not total revenue.
Ask yourself this. If the Russian players did follow thru on the threat to stay in the KHL even after the lockout ends how much money do you think the Capitals would lose without Ovechkin and Backstrom? How much more money do you think the Yotes would have lost next season if Doan hadn't resigned? How much more money would the Preds have lost if they didn't match Weber's offer sheet? The players drive the NHL, not the Owners.
1. There are many industries and business's where the person is the product and in almost all of them someone else is still the financial force behind them, actors need producers to pay for movies, musicans need record companies to release their product. If NHL players want to keep more of the profit then they should out the owners they work for and run the teams themselves.

Except players only play for a matter of years, which ruins your other point, if players leave then they leave as they have thousands of times before. Players move on, retire, get injures, etc. The owners are still there. No player can play for as long as an owner can own. So sure those teams would take a hit as others teams in the past have whey they lose superstars for whatever reason, but as with other teams they would move on as would the league.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
An increase of only $50 mil from the previous year. While making roughly $230 million more overall based on the players only getting 50% of the pie. So the Owners keep saying teams are losing money and need financial help, but less than 1/4 of the money they are saving is earmarked for the teams that need it most.
Who cares, it's an increase, its more then the players are willing to give back and it's the players salaries in the last few years as the reason we are here, guess what, the Coyotes are hurt by what they have to pay their players not what the Maple Leafs make. The owners are willing to share their profits with other teams.

So what should the Leafs pay for every team in the league because they generate more money, then they don't generate any profit, but that doesn't matter as long as the players get as much as they want right?


Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
So you think the players should take a bad deal, because right now they are making less than they could be. Then shouldn't the Owners agree to the players demands, because right now they are also making less than they could be?
No their not, how could the players be making more? Sorry but the players have been over paid. Again they need to stop looking at 2004 and wake up and get with the real world. They play in a sport that generates less $ then any of the major sports in the world but they make a MUCH higher % of that revenue then any other athletes in the world. That's a joke, take your feelings out of it and look at it simply in a business matter, when you make the least they should be making the most. They should also look and see that every other league pays its players 50% or less, why the hell should the NHL players make more, they aren't any more important to their sport then any other athletes so they shouldn't be making more. Lastly take a look at the world, in 2004 the world economy was booming, now it's in a serious recession. Instead of *****ing about 04 and then complaining about what you could be making work out a deal for now.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
The make whole provision is horrible for the players. In the current proposal the money to pay the players back wouldn't come from the Owners it would come from other players by lowering the cap in those years to less than 50%. So while the players currently under contract would be getting paid back there would be less money available for other players to get new contracts.
The're will be less money anyway. The % of money the players are making is going to do down no matter what. If the players are worried about that then they should take the % cut now. But a % will be cut it's up to the players when.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
And the Owners have refused to negotiate off any of the deals the players have proposed.
I'll say it again, when the players have no clue what the $ breaks down to in their third proposal to the league I wouldn't work off it either. Seriously how pathetic is it when you prospose something and don't know anything about it. It's shows you have no interest in ending this thing and are just going through the motions.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
The only reason the NHL season hasn't started yet was because the Owners locked the players out. They didn't have to lock the players out. They could have allowed the season to start while negotiating a new deal, but they chose to lock the players out. This isn't a strike. The Owners chose to go down this path just as much if not more than the players did.
Why in hell would the players negotiate if their making 57% of the revenue and playing hockey.

Again the owners have tried for the last 2 years to negotiate with the players who have refused. The only way the owners could really get the negotiating table would be to lock them out. If the players had negotiated with the owners when they first tried to, the lockout and salary roll backs could have been avoided. But the players chose to not to again and again and now this is the result. Sure the owners locked out the players, because they had too not because they wanted too.

Remember during the lockout the owners are losing money as most of them are still running their franchises even without any hockey, while players are getting escrow checks at least and many of them are in Europe so still the players have less drive to negotiate because their getting paid.

In the end I want hockey back, but I want it back in a way that it will continue to prosper for years to come.

Sir Psycho T is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 04:18 AM
  #771
Belenos
Registered User
 
Belenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Biel, Switzerland
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 595
vCash: 500
facebook.com/ehcb.ch
Quote:
English infos on Patrick Kane's arrival
Patrick Kane arrived in Biel on Sunday - with his mother. After his arrival at the airport in Zürich, he was taken to the EHC Biel Arena where he made his first steps on Biel ice. "The ice quality is very good," Kane said to Swiss media. Before being presented to the media, he received his keys to the new apartment, in the same building as Tyler Seguin's apartment. Afterwards there was some time left to give the first interviews in Switzerland. Meanwhile, the youngest EHC Biel junior team was playing at the Biel Arena, they won the game 18:1.

There are some new impressions for Patrick Kane in Switzerland. Russia or other leagues were no opportunities for Kane. Many good players signed in Switzerland, which impressed him alot. "I am really excited, even if a lot is unknown to me", Kane said. He has the feeling that he made the right choice. "The fast paced Hockey here in Switzerland as well as the larger ice rink correspond to my style of playing hockey." Also he will not take it easy with EHC Biel. "I know what expectations you have here and I certainly want to do my best." He wants to concentrate on EHC Biel. "It's a new challenge and a new experience." Today Kane will have his first practice with the team and will meet his new coach, Kevin Schläpfer.

Questions regarding EHC Biel jerseys:
Dear Fans from overseas,we've been asked a few times how you can order Kane, Micflikier, Pouliot or Seguin jerseys: send your request (size, home or away) and address to hotline@ehcb.ch - we'll handle each order individually.

Cost is U$ 150.00 plus approx. $ 30.00 shipping fees.Payable with PAYPAL ONLY. No credit cards, wire transfers or checks.

Belenos is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 08:10 AM
  #772
Belenos
Registered User
 
Belenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Biel, Switzerland
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 595
vCash: 500

Belenos is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 08:19 AM
  #773
unbridledid
Registered User
 
unbridledid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 445
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Belenos View Post
Seguin and Kane on the same line.... sweeeeeeeeet.

unbridledid is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 08:58 AM
  #774
Belenos
Registered User
 
Belenos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Biel, Switzerland
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 595
vCash: 500
They won't play on the same line tomorrow. Seguin will play with his linemates he played with the last months and Kane will play with former Oiler and Phoenix Coyotes player Marc-Antoine Pouliot.

Belenos is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 09:11 AM
  #775
hockeydoug
Registered User
 
hockeydoug's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Country: United States
Posts: 1,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by sketch22 View Post
Except professional sports teams are not like other businesses. In most businesses the employees and the product are separate entities. In Pro sports the employees (the players) are the product.

The players drive the NHL, not the Owners.
I've seen these comments written elsewhere, I believe NHL hockey is the product. Players don't sell the sport in the U.S. like the other sports because they don't have the sponsorships (as individuals, across the entire league) to raise their profile enough to the point the league or individual franchises benefit significantly by comparison. It seems to be a little different in Canada to my understanding. In the U.S. only a very small group of players are even recognized outside of their home cities, assuming they're even recognized there.

Right or wrong, this is an area where the owners have had huge leverage on the players. The players can't argue well that they've been very influential in the growth of revenue in the U.S. especially.

I disgree with the statements that say the owners take 100% of the risk or that players are the product. I've seen both written or referenced often so I don't really blame anybody for using them in an argument depending on how they clarify their position. Players don't drive much growth and individual franchise owners don't take all that much risk in the majority of circumstances.
Quote:
The only reason the NHL season hasn't started yet was because the Owners locked the players out.
So the 90s strikes were only because of the players?
Quote:
They could have allowed the season to start while negotiating a new deal, but they chose to lock the players out. This isn't a strike. The Owners chose to go down this path just as much if not more than the players did.
The players get their blame. This mess takes two. The PA knew (if they even paid attention) this CBA was not going to be extended by the owners after the 2010 season, that's why they started to hustle to elect a head. The PA has done nothing to prevent this mess that was years in the making right in front of them. Both sides split the blame.

hockeydoug 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 04:13 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.