HFBoards

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

Mark Recchi's advice to players is to sign CBA now

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-13-2012, 05:51 PM
  #76
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,824
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
But it's not gone forever, the players are at 57% b/c they WON that part of the last negotiation. If they stayed at 54% (which they started at after the last lockout) they would probably be fighting off 48% and come the next lockout, they will be fighting off 45%. I don't believe they are "losing" money in the long term, definitely in the short term though.
None of us know what this is going to cost the players in the short or long term until a new CBA is in place. Recchi's comments were bang on though in that the longer this goes the worse it's going to get for the players. He might be retired and "well off" but he also lost more money then most of us will never know because CBA BS and knows that is money you will never get back.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 05:52 PM
  #77
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 13,102
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
I think it's funny how some people think the players should just roll over to the righteous demands of the owners.

Time to update your worldview, peeps.
When you don't get paid, then what's the strategy? Hard to say you are rolling over, when their offer is around 2.1M per player average...

BLONG7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 05:52 PM
  #78
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,909
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
But it's not gone forever, the players are at 57% b/c they WON that part of the last negotiation. If they stayed at 54% (which they started at after the last lockout) they would probably be fighting off 48% and come the next lockout, they will be fighting off 45%. I don't believe they are "losing" money in the long term, definitely in the short term though.
You seem to think that the determination of the nhl owners to continue the lockout is based upon arbitrary percentages: that they just want to take a certain amount from the NHLPA.

In fact the nhl owners are all very capable businessmen whose determination to continue the lockout is based upon revenue lost due to the lockout vs. revenue they will gain from a better deal in the future. The reason the nhl has no problem continuing this lockout is because they made peanuts last season...about 5% overall profit with 18 owners losing money. If the nhl starts to make a sizeable profit in the future they will not have the incentive to lock out the players...pressure would be placed on Bettman to get playing and not lose revenue.

If the players were as astute business-wise as the owners are they would be playing right now, because their income is 100% profit: they made something like 1,500 million last year compared to the total nhl profit of something like 200 million.

CpatainCanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 05:55 PM
  #79
HH
GO HABS GO!
 
HH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLONG7 View Post
When you don't get paid, then what's the strategy? Hard to say you are rolling over, when their offer is around 2.1M per player average...
It's comical some players think they will stay united if this drags on. If there is one thing labor disputes have shown us is that unity is not any unions strong suit.

HH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 05:57 PM
  #80
deckercky
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 5,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve View Post
you missed the point. I assumed that most people on here, don't file for arbitration, unrestricted free agency and restricted free agency. I used those as an example.
Most people here are the equivalent of unrestricted free agents. If you wanted the NHL to resemble more of a pure market, contracts wouldn't be guaranteed (for the most part), there would be no drafts, and players would be free to go wherever. There's a lot of sacrifice from both sides that goes towards building a competitive league with some parity, but none of that is really at issue here.

deckercky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:02 PM
  #81
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,824
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryHabs View Post
It's comical some players think they will stay united if this drags on. If there is one thing labor disputes have shown us is that unity is not any unions strong suit.
Especially with the NHLPA. Too many players working in other leagues still earning a paycheck while the majority are out of work. Add to that the separation in earnings between the highest paid and the majority.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:04 PM
  #82
HH
GO HABS GO!
 
HH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
Especially with the NHLPA. Too many players working in other leagues still earning a paycheck while the majority are out of work. Add to that the separation in earnings between the highest paid and the majority.
Add to that over 40% do not have a contract for next year and 75% have one year left.

HH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:08 PM
  #83
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiems35 View Post
Yes, because if you don't support people who make millions to play a game, clearly your worldview is completely messed up....
No, it's the deferral to the owners is what is messed up.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:09 PM
  #84
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,824
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryHabs View Post
Add to that over 40% do not have a contract for next year and 75% have one year left.
I find it actually amazing we haven't heard more outcry from their members when you look at the numbers. It seems as though it's a small group of wealthy higher end earning players who are controlling the PA's direction. I would have a serious issue with this if I was part of that majority who don't have multi-millions in the bank to snuggle up to during this "extended" holiday.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:11 PM
  #85
HH
GO HABS GO!
 
HH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,313
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
I find it actually amazing we haven't heard more outcry from their members when you look at the numbers. It seems as though it's a small group of wealthy higher end earning players who are controlling the PA's direction. I would have a serious issue with this if I was part of that majority who don't have multi-millions in the bank to snuggle up to during this "extended" holiday.
When you look at who is doing most of the talking to the media you will see that most of them are players that have long term contracts currently. (Crosby, Ovechkin, Toews, Boyle)

Only a few of them do not have a contract or have few years remaining. (Darche)

HH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:16 PM
  #86
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,214
vCash: 500
Every player who missed an entire year likely regrets the decision to do so. All players who miss an entire year this time will regret the decision as well.

What difference will it make? Instead of $10 million in career earnings for the average player they are holding out for $11 million? Who cares. They lose more by losing a full season.

Sign the freaking thing.

Ogopogo* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:20 PM
  #87
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,824
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogopogo View Post
Every player who missed an entire year likely regrets the decision to do so. All players who miss an entire year this time will regret the decision as well.

What difference will it make? Instead of $10 million in career earnings for the average player they are holding out for $11 million? Who cares. They lose more by losing a full season.

Sign the freaking thing.
Brad May basically talked about this about a month ago. He said he was a good soldier during his time as an active member during the lockout but that the money he lost he never saw and never will. He didn't say it but you could almost sense that his point was he wished he could go back and have a re-do.

MikeK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:21 PM
  #88
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,143
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLONG7 View Post
When you don't get paid, then what's the strategy? Hard to say you are rolling over, when their offer is around 2.1M per player average...
They'll get paid, one way or another. The question is whether they get paid more or less by not rolling over. And what will happen to the next generation of players (especially when it comes to making concessions regarding contract rights). Standing firm to this point, they've done themselves a favour, financially speaking.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:24 PM
  #89
pepty
Registered User
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 11,068
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I think they know that, which comes back to why there is no deal yet.

The HRR is almost settled, Make Partial or Make Whole, choose your language.

The RS has been tweaked, and there's a growth fund.

The last CBA had a variance factor, so fix that..... that realistically should address every need the league has. At some point, the GMs and management need to be accountable for the rest of it.
There are reports that they are at or near an agreement on revenue sharing.
But they are far apart on the financials according to most reports.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...-where-were-we

But what we have here is the chicken and the egg. The league wonít move on its player contacting rights until it has "make whole" figured out, and the NHLPA doesnít want to give an inch either on player contracting rights, feeling its willingness to go down to 50 percent of HRR at some point in the new deal is a large enough concession on its own.


) The core economic issue. The league offered $211 million in guaranteed money last week in a revised "make-whole" provision, payable via one-year deferred payments (plus interest), money that would be outside the cap system in order to try to make players whole on existing contracts. The union feels the money isnít enough (as one union source said, try $600 million instead). Instead, the NHLPA last week told the league it wants to guarantee that players on a whole donít earn a dime less than the $1.883 billion in total salaries earned last season plus 1.75 percent in interest on top of that.

pepty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:27 PM
  #90
the_fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,772
vCash: 500
Old school players know right from wrong unlike this new generation overpaid and overrated greed on skates. Only few current players deserve the money they get, the majority are way overpaid. Let em lockout and lose more money for what I care.

I hardly miss watching whiner Crosby or punk ass Ovechkin. I'm over the NHL because it became the dumbest major sport league in the world.

the_fan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:32 PM
  #91
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,966
vCash: 500
The HRR is NOT almost settled. It's still what is holding everything up. The players are still insisting on a de-linked structure.

PensFanSince1989 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:48 PM
  #92
rynryn
Progress to the Mean
 
rynryn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Minny
Country: United States
Posts: 22,993
vCash: 50
i think it's nice that all the current players are willing to lose one or more years of salary (and maybe their last years in the NHL) just so the kids coming up might have a better deal for the next six years or however long the term of the next CBA is. I'm sure they'll appreciate it.

rynryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:51 PM
  #93
therealdeal
Registered User
 
therealdeal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 3,931
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Only if you agree to a league's demands is that possible.

I'm tired of arguing this with you, but I think the difference is that you believe the NHL would be reasonable in their demands of a PA and thus not resort to a lockout. I do not hold that view. I'm pretty sure the PA knew over a year ago that the NHL was going to try to get 48-50% of perhaps a redefined HRR even, and target contracting rights. Bettman had indicated for quite some time he was going after the cap circumventing mechanisms.

You don't have to be Fehr to understand what that means to the PA.
I've enjoyed reading your post, but this is extremely disingenuous.

If the PA knew that the NHL was going to go after 50%, and the players were willing to go to that mark as well, then why wouldn't they have made that offer as early as February. The PA used non-negotiation as a tactic, I don't know why you won't admit that. This lockout is entirely equal between the two parties.

therealdeal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 06:59 PM
  #94
Wiems35*
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,133
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
No, it's the deferral to the owners is what is messed up.
Honestly, I don't care if one side gets "screwed over" anymore. Just PLAY!!!!

Wiems35* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 07:20 PM
  #95
TaketheCannoli
RIP
 
TaketheCannoli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 8,706
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealdeal View Post
I've enjoyed reading your post, but this is extremely disingenuous.

If the PA knew that the NHL was going to go after 50%, and the players were willing to go to that mark as well, then why wouldn't they have made that offer as early as February. The PA used non-negotiation as a tactic, I don't know why you won't admit that. This lockout is entirely equal between the two parties.
Help me understand why the players have to accept 50%?

Quote:
Originally Posted by rynryn View Post
i think it's nice that all the current players are willing to lose one or more years of salary (and maybe their last years in the NHL) just so the kids coming up might have a better deal for the next six years or however long the term of the next CBA is. I'm sure they'll appreciate it.
I don't believe for one moment that the current players are negotiating with a thought towards the next generation of players. I believe they are negotiating for their own benefit.

TaketheCannoli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 07:25 PM
  #96
Renbarg
Registered User
 
Renbarg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,124
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by TaketheCannoli View Post
I don't believe for one moment that the current players are negotiating with a thought towards the next generation of players. I believe they are negotiating for their own benefit.
Then they're doing a poor job. Most of the players will come out net losers with whatever deal they eventually signed compared to a 50-50 split that could have been done prior to the season starting.

Renbarg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 07:26 PM
  #97
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealdeal View Post
If the PA knew that the NHL was going to go after 50%, and the players were willing to go to that mark as well, then why wouldn't they have made that offer as early as February. The PA used non-negotiation as a tactic, I don't know why you won't admit that. This lockout is entirely equal between the two parties.
The NHLPA didn't start bargaining until September, the NHL still hasn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rynryn View Post
i think it's nice that all the current players are willing to lose one or more years of salary (and maybe their last years in the NHL) just so the kids coming up might have a better deal for the next six years or however long the term of the next CBA is. I'm sure they'll appreciate it.
Just like the players before them.

Scurr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 07:28 PM
  #98
pepty
Registered User
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 11,068
vCash: 400
Damien Cox responds to the attacks on Recchi:

Damien Cox ‏@DamoSpin.

Guess Bettman gets the day off as NHLPA and it's messengers demonize Recchi today. These guys NEVER look in the mirror.

Damien Cox‏@DamoSpin

Maybe instead of attacking Recchi the PA should ask guys like Ference, Stajan and Hamhuis hard questions about how Fehr hijacked the union.

pepty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 07:41 PM
  #99
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country: United States
Posts: 30,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystlyfe View Post
So, by that logic, the owners didn't participate in the 1992 strike? And the owners had no participation in the 1994 MLB strike?
No, you participate in something as a member. A strike action is directed at employers.

A lockout is directed at employees by employers.
Quote:
BOTH SIDES participate in a work stoppage, whether it's a lockout or a strike. To paint it as a unilateral move completely ignores all context.
To paint it as equivalent, which is your implication is what ignores not only context, but the actual meaning of the words.

Quote:
Let's re-hash those issues then. The NHLPA hired a man with a history of work stoppages and adversarial relations with owners as their head. The NHLPA blocked re-alignment. The NHLPA repeatedly delayed starting negotionations with the owners. That sure looks like the players participated in some of the circumstances leading up to the lockout. Are they solely to blame? No, obviously not. But they are most definitely active participants in this.
Sure! Let's!

The NHL hired a man with a history of locking out players, the only man to lose an entire professional league season, who also came from the very firm that seems to have made a name for itself in managing lockouts.

This is his third lockout if you're keeping track.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-13-2012, 07:49 PM
  #100
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,833
vCash: 500
Fugu, saying the owners are responsible for the lockout is like saying Burr is responsible for shooting Hamilton.

Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:02 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.