HFBoards

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

No More Lockout Blues! - 2012 Lockout Part 2 [UPD: AGREEMENT REACHED!]

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-29-2012, 06:29 PM
  #51
LadyJet26
GO JETS GO!!!
 
LadyJet26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,015
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobotomizer View Post
Thanks...you don't have any idea how collective bargaining works.
Omg yes I ****ing do. I used to be a union rep thanks. Been apart (at my other now non union job) of de-certifying a union as well.

Most employees do not get locked out by their employers. Employees only go on strike when it's absolutely necessary. Most employees will work through on-going negotiations and without a contract. BC librarians have been for over a year already. My job we didn't get a new contract until around Christmas when I first started. Oh yeah and so did the University of Winnipeg professors; they worked without a contract as well.

I've never seen someone play hardball nearly as hard as the NHL has been with the PA. It's disgusting.

LadyJet26 is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 06:39 PM
  #52
Mathil8
▌▌▌│▌▌│▌▌▌│▌▌│▌▌▌│▌▌
 
Mathil8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba
Country: Canada
Posts: 484
vCash: 1117
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
Omg yes I ****ing do. I used to be a union rep thanks. Been apart (at my other now non union job) of de-certifying a union as well.

Most employees do not get locked out by their employers. Employees only go on strike when it's absolutely necessary. Most employees will work through on-going negotiations and without a contract. BC librarians have been for over a year already. My job we didn't get a new contract until around Christmas when I first started. Oh yeah and so did the University of Winnipeg professors; they worked without a contract as well.

I've never seen someone play hardball nearly as hard as the NHL has been with the PA. It's disgusting.
You honestly think that if the NHL let the players play during negotiations that the players would not strike right before playoffs under the guidance of Fehr??????? Or for that matter, anytime it suited them and gave the NHLPA needed leverage?


Last edited by Mathil8: 10-29-2012 at 06:56 PM.
Mathil8 is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 07:14 PM
  #53
PaperRockChamp
Registered User
 
PaperRockChamp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Wpg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,248
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by ps241 View Post
Below is an excellant post (IMHO) from the main board by Hazeoke39:


You have your lack/distrust of facts, I have my facts:

1. The NFL gives its players 47%. Albeit without a cap, MLB gives its players ~45%. The NBA gives its players 50%. ALL of these leagues make more in TV revenue, which is the one major source of money that has NO OVERHEAD COSTS for owners, meaning the NHL pays out more in overhead for every dollar they make back than in these other leagues. If any of these leagues are anything like the NHL, this would indicate players should actually get less than 50% in the NHL.

2. Forbes reports that the median NHL team is losing money. The average NHL team makes only $4M/year, well less than a reasonable return on investment on the market. For the NHL to thrive in the long-term, they need to be a reasonably successful investment. For a franchise you paid $300M for, a 1.33% return on investment won't cut it.

3. RS can help plug holes, but not holes this big. No other major sports league has adopted a RS program that relies on 3-4 teams getting pillaged to keep afloat half the league that's underwater. The NFL may have tremendous sharing, but it doesn't amount to tremendous redistribution - even the poorest teams are putting into the pot, and even the richest teams are taking out of it. Even under the most draconian, politically impossible RS program, where you take away 95% of Toronto's profit, you can only get the average team to $4M/year profit. Split that between several owners in some cases, and the average owner makes less than the average player, while being on the line for all liabilities of the franchise and fronting all of its capital. It's not just bad, it's insane. Even the players don't seem to think that RS can do that much, because they only proposed increasing it from 150 to 240, which the owners met them more than halfway on.

4. Back to owners losing money. Owners are the party that makes the least out of this deal by far, and that's why they have all the leverage. If ~25 games get cancelled, players will have lost $500M that they would have earned, the whole amount they were fighting for between the last two proposals. If ~25 games get lost, owners will lose ~30M, net. It would take 4 years of cancelled games before the owners would lose enough to make taking the players offer worth it. So yeah, the owners can damn well sit it out, and the players are going to have to have a come to Jesus moment where they realize the only people keeping them from making money is themselves.

So yeah, maybe the NHL isn't asking for their absolute, can't-operate-without-it, red line here. But the facts all indicate that they're fighting for something close. Hell, the facts indicate they might not even be asking for enough at this point - I think it's likely that they offered more than some owners were comfortable with (as is now rumored) because they knew losing games would hurt the tremendous growth momentum they had, and so were okay with operating a little more underwater for a 5 year term to not lose that.

Players, on the other hand, seem to be living on some other planet where 57=50, revenues=profit, their contracts were never subject to the CBA, and they earned everything they got even if they earned more than their team could literally afford to pay them without robbing the owner's personal bank account. The wake up call has been sounding, and pretty soon they'll realize it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
Omg yes I ****ing do. I used to be a union rep thanks. Been apart (at my other now non union job) of de-certifying a union as well.

Most employees do not get locked out by their employers. Employees only go on strike when it's absolutely necessary. Most employees will work through on-going negotiations and without a contract. BC librarians have been for over a year already. My job we didn't get a new contract until around Christmas when I first started. Oh yeah and so did the University of Winnipeg professors; they worked without a contract as well.

I've never seen someone play hardball nearly as hard as the NHL has been with the PA. It's disgusting.

JUST COPYPASTA'ing to give you another chance to not miss ps241's post

PaperRockChamp is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 07:15 PM
  #54
Gm0ney
Registered User
 
Gm0ney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,767
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
Omg yes I ****ing do. I used to be a union rep thanks. Been apart (at my other now non union job) of de-certifying a union as well.

Most employees do not get locked out by their employers. Employees only go on strike when it's absolutely necessary. Most employees will work through on-going negotiations and without a contract. BC librarians have been for over a year already. My job we didn't get a new contract until around Christmas when I first started. Oh yeah and so did the University of Winnipeg professors; they worked without a contract as well.

I've never seen someone play hardball nearly as hard as the NHL has been with the PA. It's disgusting.
You kidding? I remember my union striking 11 years ago because the employer's offer of raises of 2.5%, 2.5%, 2.0% and 2.0% over four years was apparently a slap in the face. Then 9/11 happened and put everything in a little perspective. The union signed the offer and 4 years later I think they went on strike again (I'd moved on).

Gm0ney is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 07:16 PM
  #55
DespoticNewt
Registered User
 
DespoticNewt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,332
vCash: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathil8 View Post
You honestly think that if the NHL let the players play during negotiations that the players would not strike right before playoffs under the guidance of Fehr??????? Or for that matter, anytime it suited them and gave the NHLPA needed leverage?
That, and the NHL made it well aware that they were not prepared to work under the old CBA.

DespoticNewt is online now  
Old
10-29-2012, 07:48 PM
  #56
Holden Caulfield
Moderator
Perennial Skeptic
 
Holden Caulfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 12,058
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
Omg yes I ****ing do. I used to be a union rep thanks. Been apart (at my other now non union job) of de-certifying a union as well.

Most employees do not get locked out by their employers. Employees only go on strike when it's absolutely necessary. Most employees will work through on-going negotiations and without a contract. BC librarians have been for over a year already. My job we didn't get a new contract until around Christmas when I first started. Oh yeah and so did the University of Winnipeg professors; they worked without a contract as well.

I've never seen someone play hardball nearly as hard as the NHL has been with the PA. It's disgusting.
Well you other than the NBA which locked out their players last year...oh wait, the NFL locked out their players as well...
There are legitimate reasons that the NHL has NO choice but to lock out the players, and they have been discussed ad nauseum. Even the players have backed off their stupid "we can play through negotiations" ********, since they know that's exactly what it is...********. NHL had no choice but the lock out.

There is a HUGE STUPIDLY BIG difference between librarians, professors, teachers, construction unions and sports unions. Yes, most working classes work through negotiations. Those are necessary since the work needs to keep going, the employees need the money. So there is little incentive for either side to strike/lock out. When we are talking millionaires versus billionaires in a non-vital industry, it's an entirely different ball game. Nobody is getting hurt, if there's no hockey we loss some entertainment. This is not like having no teachers for our schools. This is not vital. And for the players, they are not living check to check.

Unless your experience is with pro sports unions, your experience is basically non-comparable at all, IMO. Just because it's unions versus employers does mean they are comparable. It's a completely different ball game.

Holden Caulfield is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 09:29 PM
  #57
Tintin's Ghost
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,128
vCash: 500
I've learned an awful lot about the mechanics of the lockout from reading this thread. A lot of well-spoken and well-informed people on here.

ps241...your last post on here really stands out as insightful, thanks for the read.

Personally, I find it tougher to support the players each time I see them stand behind Fehr and they look like they all cleaned up at the end-of-summer blowout sale at the Gap. And when one of their union brothers spouts off on Twitter about the hardships of being a 20-something millionaire. And Hainsey's interview on H&L seemed strangely angry which was really off-putting from my perspective. I honestly think if some of the players put in some time in the workforce, the real one not the KHL or SEL, they would shut up and, finally, lace up.

Tintin's Ghost is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 10:39 PM
  #58
Lobotomizer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,741
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
Omg yes I ****ing do. I used to be a union rep thanks. Been apart (at my other now non union job) of de-certifying a union as well.

Most employees do not get locked out by their employers. Employees only go on strike when it's absolutely necessary. Most employees will work through on-going negotiations and without a contract. BC librarians have been for over a year already. My job we didn't get a new contract until around Christmas when I first started. Oh yeah and so did the University of Winnipeg professors; they worked without a contract as well.

I've never seen someone play hardball nearly as hard as the NHL has been with the PA. It's disgusting.
Nope...you are still missing the point. Which librarian union currently earns 57 percent of the organization's revenue? What professor has the financial wherewithall to forgo working without a contract instead of refusing to negotiate?

As was posted, you are comparing apples and oranges.

Lobotomizer* is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 11:20 PM
  #59
LadyJet26
GO JETS GO!!!
 
LadyJet26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,015
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobotomizer View Post
Nope...you are still missing the point. Which librarian union currently earns 57 percent of the organization's revenue? What professor has the financial wherewithall to forgo working without a contract instead of refusing to negotiate?

As was posted, you are comparing apples and oranges.
I STILL UNDERSTAND THE BASIC ****ING CONCEPTS OF COLLECTIVE BARGINING!

It doesn't matter, aside from ****ing money, what kind of union it is. No union has ever allowed their members to miss this much ****ing time. I'm not ****ing stupid and everyone here acts like I don't know what I'm talking about. All unions still have the same basic concepts. That's all I was ****ing saying.

The U of W is probably the closest example of an employer playing hardball to the NHL. The government unfortunately basically told the profs to take a wage freeze while Mr. Numbnuts that runs the university gets a 7% (not exact) increase in salary along with every other useless administrator.

LadyJet26 is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 11:33 PM
  #60
wpgsilver
HFBoards Sponsor
 
wpgsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
I STILL UNDERSTAND THE BASIC ****ING CONCEPTS OF COLLECTIVE BARGINING!

It doesn't matter, aside from ****ing money, what kind of union it is. No union has ever allowed their members to miss this much ****ing time. I'm not ****ing stupid and everyone here acts like I don't know what I'm talking about. All unions still have the same basic concepts. That's all I was ****ing saying.

The U of W is probably the closest example of an employer playing hardball to the NHL. The government unfortunately basically told the profs to take a wage freeze while Mr. Numbnuts that runs the university gets a 7% (not exact) increase in salary along with every other useless administrator.
No one is saying you're stupid. I think that Holden put it well that these negotiations are very different that what you'll find outside the sports world.
I just can't think of any other field in which labour (which is effectively what the players are) is getting 57% of revenue.
You may have a firm grasp of collective bargaining in your field, this however differs greatly from your experience.

wpgsilver is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 11:46 PM
  #61
LadyJet26
GO JETS GO!!!
 
LadyJet26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,015
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpgsilver View Post
No one is saying you're stupid. I think that Holden put it well that these negotiations are very different that what you'll find outside the sports world.
I just can't think of any other field in which labour (which is effectively what the players are) is getting 57% of revenue.
You may have a firm grasp of collective bargaining in your field, this however differs greatly from your experience.
Really feels like people are calling me stupid. I feel like the only really true difference between my union and the PA is the money. Anyone know how much the PA charges for their services off every pay?

All collective bargaining has the same general principles regardless of what kind of union it is. The fact remains is both sides are being a bunch of freaking vaginas. I understand that there are differences, but the union still wants what's best for their players (and their crappy agents. Hate lawyers) and the NHL wants what's best for the 6 owners that make up their BOG. Most employers don't give revenue sharing. You'd be lucky to get a bonus. That was the point I was trying to get across. I still think the players deserve part of the revenue. They're the reason why there is HRR. My opinion on that will never change. The players are the reasons why I go and watch hockey. They're the reasons why I go out and buy merchandise and go to games. Not the owners that knew what they were getting themselves into and hired crappy management. I also feel like a ton of owners were forced into voting for the lockout. I find it really hard to believe that the Canadian teams really wanted a lockout. Jets being the new guys in town would vote yes because they don't want to look bad. I'm just tired of it all. They can take their stupid league and shove it up their collective *****. I hate Fehr. He didn't help MLB recover, that was the fans boycotting. How the PA things this guy is their saviour I'll never know.

LadyJet26 is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 11:52 PM
  #62
wpgsilver
HFBoards Sponsor
 
wpgsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,166
vCash: 500
You keep saying the 6 owners that make up the BOG, am I missing something??

Every teams has a governor (and some have alternate governors) that makes up the BOG.
Not all owners are participating in negotiations, but I'm confused as to what 6 owners you're referring to.

wpgsilver is offline  
Old
10-29-2012, 11:55 PM
  #63
LadyJet26
GO JETS GO!!!
 
LadyJet26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,015
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by wpgsilver View Post
You keep saying the 6 owners that make up the BOG, am I missing something??

Every teams has a governor (and some have alternate governors) that makes up the BOG.
Not all owners are participating in negotiations, but I'm confused as to what 6 owners you're referring to.
I was mistaken on that part, but there are only a few that really run the show. The dbag in Boston in particular.

LadyJet26 is offline  
Old
10-30-2012, 10:39 PM
  #64
razorsedge
West Town Sports
 
razorsedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Fort Sask, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,692
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
Really feels like people are calling me stupid. I feel like the only really true difference between my union and the PA is the money. Anyone know how much the PA charges for their services off every pay?

All collective bargaining has the same general principles regardless of what kind of union it is. The fact remains is both sides are being a bunch of freaking vaginas. I understand that there are differences, but the union still wants what's best for their players (and their crappy agents. Hate lawyers) and the NHL wants what's best for the 6 owners that make up their BOG. Most employers don't give revenue sharing. You'd be lucky to get a bonus. That was the point I was trying to get across. I still think the players deserve part of the revenue. They're the reason why there is HRR. My opinion on that will never change. The players are the reasons why I go and watch hockey. They're the reasons why I go out and buy merchandise and go to games. Not the owners that knew what they were getting themselves into and hired crappy management. I also feel like a ton of owners were forced into voting for the lockout. I find it really hard to believe that the Canadian teams really wanted a lockout. Jets being the new guys in town would vote yes because they don't want to look bad. I'm just tired of it all. They can take their stupid league and shove it up their collective *****. I hate Fehr. He didn't help MLB recover, that was the fans boycotting. How the PA things this guy is their saviour I'll never know.
The players may be the reason why you go but the owners are the ones that provide the opportunity (and all the expenses that come with providing) to watch the NHL players.

I think the players are coming across childish and greedy. Bettman just needs to threaten contraction of a couple teams (coyotes?) and that should get the PA's signatures pretty quick. But of course it'll never come to that as long as he is commisioner.

razorsedge is offline  
Old
10-31-2012, 12:04 AM
  #65
LadyJet26
GO JETS GO!!!
 
LadyJet26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Winnipeg, MB
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,015
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by razorsedge View Post
The players may be the reason why you go but the owners are the ones that provide the opportunity (and all the expenses that come with providing) to watch the NHL players.

I think the players are coming across childish and greedy. Bettman just needs to threaten contraction of a couple teams (coyotes?) and that should get the PA's signatures pretty quick. But of course it'll never come to that as long as he is commisioner.
Teams like the Coyotes are why I don't like the NHL. They put teams in these markets and only care about the TV markets there. The problem with these markets is that they aren't ensuring the teams are well managed and eventually get good enough that will spark interest. Just because a market is huge doesn't make it a hockey market and I truly believe that where the Coyotes are situated it is not a hockey market. Glendale's retiring city council put that city into more debt and will probably never recover and the NHL doesn't care. They don't want to admit they made a mistake by putting a team in a wrong market. I was truly shocked when they actually said they were righting a wrong in giving Winnipeg another team. The only time I really see the Florida teams with a full arena are when Canadian teams are there. Bettman and the NHL are looking just as childish and greedy IMO. Bettman is the reason why I think there are lockouts at all. I've never liked him as commissioner and I really wish someone with both business and hockey experience would take that job. He doesn't get it and he never will. His Canadian and a couple American markets are all he has. I get the whole untapped market thing, but they're not marketing or making sure it's working. I hope Phoenix ends up in Quebec because Montreal has sucked since the Nords left.

I just want a deal done. I miss decent hockey. I love the Gophers and the Vancouver Giants, but they're both teams I have to travel to go and see. If I had the Moose I wouldn't be complaining nearly as much. Guess I'll have to go to Vancouver to see a few Giants games (I hate the Wheat Kings. Don't ask me why. When I moved back here the Giants hadn't played a game yet). I hate both sides now. All the owners do is whine about money and then go out and sign contracts before a lockout. Cry me a river. The smart players are keeping their mouths shut and I'm sick of the players on twitter retweeting their greedy ass agents. Fair deal my ass. You just want more money. The NHL is pathetic if they can't fix anything and have to go to a lockout every time their contract ends.

Edit: Players help owners increase team value. ie: Jets. Went from the bottom of the league to the middle of the pack in a year.

And the fans being ignored and being called stupid and ignorant by the NHL really grinds my gears. Not all of us are stupid and ignorant. Sad thing is, we're not like MLB fans who put their collective feet down. NHL fans aren't like that and we never will be. Especially Canadian NHL fans. Owners cry cash poor and are willing to take money from fans even though there is no ****ing season. And there won't be. I'm in that acceptance phase right now and frankly I don't know if I even care.


Last edited by LadyJet26: 10-31-2012 at 12:10 AM.
LadyJet26 is offline  
Old
10-31-2012, 12:21 AM
  #66
wpgsilver
HFBoards Sponsor
 
wpgsilver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,166
vCash: 500
How did the Jets players help increase team value in any way?
The only change was ownership and location.
I don't see ANYWAY you can say the jets were financially successful this year but not the year before because of the players.

wpgsilver is offline  
Old
10-31-2012, 12:26 AM
  #67
Lobotomizer*
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,741
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CanucksnWpg View Post
I STILL UNDERSTAND THE BASIC ****ING CONCEPTS OF COLLECTIVE BARGINING!

It doesn't matter, aside from ****ing money, what kind of union it is. No union has ever allowed their members to miss this much ****ing time. I'm not ****ing stupid and everyone here acts like I don't know what I'm talking about. All unions still have the same basic concepts. That's all I was ****ing saying.

The U of W is probably the closest example of an employer playing hardball to the NHL. The government unfortunately basically told the profs to take a wage freeze while Mr. Numbnuts that runs the university gets a 7% (not exact) increase in salary along with every other useless administrator.
Unions may be the same no matter what the business - what group that you have participated in negotiations with had 30 separate owners with each attempting to earn money to keep their individual corporation profitable?

Apples and oranges.

I also want this joke to end...get a deal done.

Lobotomizer* is offline  
Old
10-31-2012, 08:15 AM
  #68
buggs
Registered User
 
buggs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: flatlands
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,865
vCash: 128
Quote:
Originally Posted by razorsedge View Post
The players may be the reason why you go but the owners are the ones that provide the opportunity (and all the expenses that come with providing) to watch the NHL players.
This should be rather readily apparent in Winnipeg. I love watching the players no question but without a couple of guys that spent considerable time, effort and money to bring a team back to Winnipeg we'd be watching teams from other cities on television only (ok, web too). Without an ownership group, ergo 'owners', there is no hockey in Winnipeg. It applies in a lot of other centres as well.

buggs is offline  
Old
10-31-2012, 09:13 AM
  #69
SCP Guy
Registered User
 
SCP Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: The Peg
Country: Portugal
Posts: 1,960
vCash: 50
First thing first....we as fans will NEVER get a break in prices....we will always be asked to pay more and more and more by both players and ownership!

So if you ask me if I would prefer TNSE make an extra 10 mil a year or each Jets player make an extra 450k a year???....I would say here is your 10 mil Mr.Chipman and company

I cheer for my pocket 1st
My team 2nd
and the players 3rd


SCP Guy is online now  
Old
10-31-2012, 10:14 AM
  #70
Gm0ney
Registered User
 
Gm0ney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,767
vCash: 1300
Quote:
Originally Posted by SCP Guy View Post
First thing first....we as fans will NEVER get a break in prices....we will always be asked to pay more and more and more by both players and ownership!

So if you ask me if I would prefer TNSE make an extra 10 mil a year or each Jets player make an extra 450k a year???....I would say here is your 10 mil Mr.Chipman and company

I cheer for my pocket 1st
My team 2nd
and the players 3rd

It's not even a question of "an extra $10 mil" for TNSE - all the small market Canadian teams were in big trouble when the dollar dropped below $0.70 in the early 2000's. Having a cap tied to revenues is one way of protecting the Jets - and the larger the owners' share, the better. Who knows what the Canadian economy is going to look like in 5-10-15 years? A return to $0.65 dollars? Mad Max? Dubai? Zombies? Whatever the case, I think a strong hockey market that can average 15000+ attendance with average-or-better ticket prices should be able to at least break even without making the playoffs...that's not so crazy.

Gm0ney is offline  
Old
10-31-2012, 12:30 PM
  #71
SensibleGuy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,788
vCash: 50
hmmmm....zombies on ice...hmmmm...

SensibleGuy is online now  
Old
10-31-2012, 03:56 PM
  #72
s1g
Registered User
 
s1g's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 330
vCash: 500
Well, this isn't good.

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

Quote:
The commish has three groups of owners: the ones who want to play; the ones in the middle, including Tampa and Nashville, who want a better collective bargaining agreement but recognize not playing is worse; and the hardliners. It would be a mistake to underestimate the last group. There are several who would rather cancel the season than accept a bad deal because they are hemorrhaging money and need immediate satisfaction.

While the players believe Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs is calling the shots, an educated guess at the final group includes but may not be limited to Anaheim, Columbus, Florida, the Islanders, Phoenix, St. Louis, Washington and Dallas -- enough to block any agreement from getting done (It's tough to lock it down because owners are forbidden to discuss this stuff. Attempts to talk to a couple were politely shot down).

This group is the biggest challenge for both the commissioner and the players.
The Islanders aren't in a hurry to play. They're moving to Brooklyn anyways. I don't think they care if they piss off the fanbase in Long Island. Leonsis won't care about whether or not the Caps play, since he's got plenty going on with his other businesses (owns the Verizon Center, Washington Wizards). Phoenix doesn't care about the Coyotes fanbase as they probably already have their bags packed for Quebec. And Jacobs - well, he owns TD Garden, which is also home to the Boston Celtics. Even if the Bruins don't play a single game this year, he's still going to get paid by the Celtics whenever they use his arena.

Yup, I don't think we're going to see hockey this year. These owners won't miss hockey since they're not making money off of it anyways. They're not going to miss a few million bucks of profit when they're making a ton off other stuff anyhow.

s1g is offline  
Old
11-01-2012, 07:28 AM
  #73
puck stoppa
Registered User
 
puck stoppa's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,893
vCash: 500
Thats a great point. Most of the owners do not make money owning an NHL team anyway, so why rush is their thought. They won't have to lose money this year, unless theyre pissed that they can't use it as a tax write off.

puck stoppa is online now  
Old
11-01-2012, 12:47 PM
  #74
SensibleGuy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,788
vCash: 50
If the players as a group allow the cancellation of the entire season thinking that they can back the owners into a corner and get a better deal, they will have grossly, grossly mis-calculated. This is already only going to get worse for the players, but if they lose a whole season of their careers and a billion dollars in hrr they will never recoup that loss...they'd honestly be better off signing a deal that cut their salaries in half immediately.

SensibleGuy is online now  
Old
11-01-2012, 02:29 PM
  #75
s1g
Registered User
 
s1g's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SensibleGuy View Post
If the players as a group allow the cancellation of the entire season thinking that they can back the owners into a corner and get a better deal, they will have grossly, grossly mis-calculated. This is already only going to get worse for the players, but if they lose a whole season of their careers and a billion dollars in hrr they will never recoup that loss...they'd honestly be better off signing a deal that cut their salaries in half immediately.
I think this is exactly what the owners want. Bettman and the owners know the fans will come back no matter what happens. Look at what happened last time. The lockout didn't hurt the game at all. Lose a season, but save $50-60 million on payroll? Yes please! Have the players come back on their hands and knees and make them take even less than 50%? Sure, why not.

The fact that the owners don't even want to meet unless they get to dictate what's talked about in the negotiating room leads me to believe that they're fine with losing the season. There's no sense of urgency, and it's already November.

I'm actually rooting for the season to not even happen anymore, since the absence of hockey doesn't even hurt anymore. Jets get a better shot at getting a higher pick, leaves me more time to watch basketball and football, plus it saves me a ton of money by not having to attend Jets games. Hopefully people on the waiting list get sick of the whole thing and start dropping off too. I'd like to move up that list quicker.

s1g 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 06:46 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.