HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

A Bad Lawyer Can Drag A Case For Years, A Good Lawyer Even Longer (CBA/Lockout) XXVI

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-11-2012, 06:11 PM
  #51
trueblue9441
Registered User
 
trueblue9441's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bronx, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,407
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to trueblue9441
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
I agree that they should let up on that and UFA service but they've given a lot elsewhere.
well if they put a little more into the make whole pot and lighten up on those 2 things hopefully its enough for a deal. because you're right they have given a lot elsewhere

trueblue9441 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:13 PM
  #52
Gotaf7
Registered User
 
Gotaf7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Winterpeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 553
vCash: 50
The league will not need contract length restrictions as long as they get the 5% salary variation.

Gotaf7 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:15 PM
  #53
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 68,713
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
How exactly is the NHL willing to negotiate. They're demanding an immediate drop to 50/50, won't move on the main contract restrictions and refuse (so far) to pay for the already existing contracts. Simply because they've showed up and have budged on minor details doesn't mean they're any more willing to negotiate than the PA is.


And that's the point really... neither side here are angels but at the same time neither are devils either.
The NHL has increased their make whole offer time after time and it now stands at $211m. I believe the NHLPA then asked for a ludicrous $600m.

The NHL has said they wanted 50/50, yes, but they're willing to give money to the players so they get near to or the value of their current contracts.

Someone did a table and the NHL was actually pretty darn close to what the NHLPA was asking for/offering.

Shrimper is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:15 PM
  #54
CBJBrassard16
Sergei BobTrollsky
 
CBJBrassard16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 12,846
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mondo3 View Post
If the CBA isnt resolved by the time of the draft, does this have any implications?
Yes, there would be no draft if there is no CBA signed, unless the owners temperaroly lift the lockout for the draft.

CBJBrassard16 is online now  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:17 PM
  #55
azaloum90
Registered User
 
azaloum90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: The coop!
Posts: 2,600
vCash: 500
So, has any progress been made since last week?

Adam

azaloum90 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:17 PM
  #56
Orrthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gberg View Post
I wasn't saying that they were meeting in the middle, all of these are in NHL's favour. What I'm saying is.. I feel like that NHLPA has to hold firm on a few things (such as player contract rights and revenue sharing).
But the owners have completely caved on both those issues.

Orrthebest is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:19 PM
  #57
rdawg1234
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotaf7 View Post
The league will not need contract length restrictions as long as they get the 5% salary variation.
It's important to the extent that after year 7, the insurance cost is much higher, so some kind of limit is much better for the league.

Plus I just flat out hate contracts longer than 10 years or so. hoping the PA accepts 8 years maybe.

rdawg1234 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:20 PM
  #58
rdawg1234
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,588
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by azaloum90 View Post
So, has any progress been made since last week?

Adam
Ultimately yes, I'd say bits and pieces of the bigger issues have been solved.

Revenue sharing is seemingly solved. Certain contract issues are agreed on.

the HRR is definitely closer now between the sides, but a different language is still being spoken.

I would say before this week we were 60% of the way there, now we're 70-75%(random number im throwin out there).

Movement has been made but we've hit another wall, that walls name is fehr.

rdawg1234 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:22 PM
  #59
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spongolium View Post
Forget Fehr. The deal has been put out there publically, and the players should know about it if Fehr is being upfront. So over/under
Comfortably under.

If the sentiment was as overwhelming as you suggest, Fehr would not be taking the hard line he is.

Jack de la Hoya is online now  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:22 PM
  #60
AirheadPete
G-Dub
 
AirheadPete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 6,587
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotaf7 View Post
The league will not need contract length restrictions as long as they get the 5% salary variation.
That's what I'm.thinking. all.I would think they should be locked on is the 5% variance. Who gives a **** about everything else as long as they stop the backdiving as Bobby Mac, lebrun, etc.have said. But it.prolly.all.comes.down to settling make whole first before any of that stuff gets sorted as the tsn crew has also stated.

AirheadPete is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:24 PM
  #61
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 13,139
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orrthebest View Post
But the owners have completely caved on both those issues.
The owners didn't "cave" on revenue sharing.

Every bit they raise / subtract the revenue sharing number angers some owners and pleases others. That's as much an owner v. owner issue as it is an NHL v. NHLPA issue, IMO.

Jack de la Hoya is online now  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:24 PM
  #62
Confucius
Registered User
 
Confucius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
You really need to open your eyes if you think the PA is a bigger evil than the NHL here
I agree but the NHL PR machine is huge..... They may have posters everywhere

Confucius is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:24 PM
  #63
pepty
Registered User
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,079
vCash: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
You really need to open your eyes if you think the PA is a bigger evil than the NHL here
Bigger evil?

Do you mean biggest threat to the season and to the league?

i would say that is Fehr and in my opinion Bettman has to try to wrangle both the owners-his bosses-and the PA for the good of the league.

pepty is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:25 PM
  #64
thinkwild
Veni Vidi Toga
 
thinkwild's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyincognito View Post
They have to be GIVEN the proposal, that's the part you're not quite understanding. It doesn't matter what popular support would be unless they are given something. If the negotiating team isn't going to give anything to the reps, there is no potential for a vote. And since the reps work in tandem with the negotiating team, they would never send anything to a vote that the negotiating team doesn't want being sent to a vote.

So it doesn't MATTER if it would be a 2/3 - 3/4 majority. It's not going to be sent to vote and would not without a coup.
Which, if 75% of the players would want to sign that deal, we would have now.

But yes, the question is moot. It implies negotiations with Fehr are not going as they wish, and maybe if they could get rid of the tough negotiating committee and go right to the rest of the players, maybe those players could be fooled into accepting a bad deal.

The attempt is to plant the seed that there should be a player mutiny now. It is transparent and desperate and I interpret that as they are starting to crack.

Players expect the owners best offer in December. The owners expect the players best offer in December. The last waltz is coming soon.

thinkwild is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:26 PM
  #65
TieClark
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 4,004
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrimper View Post
The NHL has increased their make whole offer time after time and it now stands at $211m. I believe the NHLPA then asked for a ludicrous $600m.

The NHL has said they wanted 50/50, yes, but they're willing to give money to the players so they get near to or the value of their current contracts.

Someone did a table and the NHL was actually pretty darn close to what the NHLPA was asking for/offering.
And Donald Fehr said he thought they were close... the NHL disagreed. The fact is the players have moved a bit (they have after all agreed to lower their revenue share as long as their contract as honoured) and the NHL has moved a bit (they've accepted to honour SOME of the contracts) but at the end of the day both sides are asking for too much and neither has really budged drastically.

TieClark is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:30 PM
  #66
pepty
Registered User
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,079
vCash: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdawg1234 View Post
Ultimately yes, I'd say bits and pieces of the bigger issues have been solved.

Revenue sharing is seemingly solved. Certain contract issues are agreed on.

the HRR is definitely closer now between the sides, but a different language is still being spoken.

I would say before this week we were 60% of the way there, now we're 70-75%(random number im throwin out there).

Movement has been made but we've hit another wall, that walls name is fehr.
It gives me hope to see you optimistic that they're close and that some issues have been resolved.

pepty is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:37 PM
  #67
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,277
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin27NYI View Post
Correct me if I'm wrong but if there were that many players that would accept the deal, wouldn't the deal be accepted? Don is there just to advise and speak for them. If they want it then they get it.
It has to go to a vote first. And if Fehr and his group of players that are usually hanging around him, which seem to be the same group of 10-12 guys shoot it down before really giving it out to the rest of the PA as a vote then there isn't much they can do except start going out against it on Twitter, but they wouldn't do that I don't think. I have a feeling a lot of the players that are normally active on twitter that just aren't saying anything right now are the ones that are the ones that would be ready to vote in just about anything.

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:38 PM
  #68
abev
HFBoards Sponsor
 
abev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 3,582
vCash: 500
If the season is cancelled, does it remove a year off of existing contracts? E.g. does this year count event thought they didnt play? I forgot what happened last time.

abev is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:39 PM
  #69
SidTheKid8787
Registered User
 
SidTheKid8787's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,271
vCash: 500
Just caught this full Fehr scrum from today if anyone would like a looksee:

sorry wrong link. heres the right one:

http://watch.tsn.ca/nhl/clip804337#clip804337

SidTheKid8787 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:41 PM
  #70
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,048
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by abev View Post
If the season is cancelled, does it remove a year off of existing contracts? E.g. does this year count event thought they didnt play? I forgot what happened last time.
Most contracts were burned but some had their contracts slid.

Krishna is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:43 PM
  #71
Orrthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack de la Hoya View Post
The owners didn't "cave" on revenue sharing.

Every bit they raise / subtract the revenue sharing number angers some owners and pleases others. That's as much an owner v. owner issue as it is an NHL v. NHLPA issue, IMO.
Fehr asked for 250 million and no restrictions. The NHL wanted 180 million with restrictions. The current reports have it set at 250 million with no restrictions. One side got what they asked for the other side completely caved. Now if you want to argue that Bettman new more revenue sharing was needed and was going to cave anyway, well then I would agree.

Orrthebest is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:45 PM
  #72
SidTheKid8787
Registered User
 
SidTheKid8787's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 6,271
vCash: 500
And Bill Daly's full scrum from today:

http://watch.tsn.ca/nhl/clip804350#clip804350

SidTheKid8787 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:45 PM
  #73
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,450
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by abev View Post
If the season is cancelled, does it remove a year off of existing contracts? E.g. does this year count event thought they didnt play? I forgot what happened last time.
I think last time it removed a year off existing contracts.

Ari91 is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:50 PM
  #74
Guru Meditation
Service Unavailable
 
Guru Meditation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,178
vCash: 500
It's interesting to see Bettman attending fewer meetings. I wonder if he's been asked to do that. I doubt it's his own idea.

Guru Meditation is offline  
Old
11-11-2012, 06:50 PM
  #75
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,899
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TieClark View Post
You really need to open your eyes if you think the PA is a bigger evil than the NHL here
Depends what you mean by "evil." If "evil" means obstructing a deal, then, yes, the PA is a bigger evil. If "evil" means which side has a higher percentage of ******** in its membership, then it's the NHL by a landslide.

billybudd is online now  
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 04:15 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.