The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
replacement players are not needed to bust the union, the 700 guys who are already there will fracture themselves...they learned nothing from last time...
a) Football is insanely popular and their fans care more about the team and the idea of the league.
b) Football had no competing leagues where the star players could go and compete while still getting paid a very good salary.
No, it worked for football because a few of the star players crossed the picket line. The rating and attendance for the replacement games were terrible.
About 60% of NHL players are of "replacement player" quality. That is how all pro sports unions are broken. From the inside out by the players with the most to lose.
About 60% of NHL players are of "replacement player" quality. That is how all pro sports unions are broken. From the inside out by the players with the most to lose.
Most of them, just want to play...up to Gary and Don know, and the clock is ticking...let's hope they can save the season...
The lack of talent available; Any player under NHL contract is being locked out, therefore those in junior, the AHL, or ECHL whom have signed can not play. The only players available would likely be those whom have given up on the NHL dream (the scab factor)
As mentioned the extreme attendance drop. The talent level would be lower than that of the AHL, ECHL, CHL, and college hockey so fans would likely still tune into those leagues unless they are die hards of a particular hockey team.
This for me is the biggest factor for a replacement player league. Not sure what talent would play, but it would not be the next level talent after the NHL. On top of the above any players playing overseas would be off-limits as well due to the IIHA transfer agreement.
Football kind of worked because they could just get the next tier of players, this is not the case for the NHL.
I wouldn't pay a lot of money to watch but I would be interested, especially if they could make for a more exciting game.
Yes, the NHL as we knew it had the best players in the league but too many times over the last decade I shelled out hundreds of dollars to watch games with little or no offense or physical play.
I often wonder why I pay hard earned money to watch a league and players that couldn't care less about me, play a game with hardly any goals or physical play.
The idea of replacement players is a good idea in theory..
however in the real world it simply cant work.
So in a situation where there are replacement players where do these players come from? The AHL.. So that who plays in the AHL? Guys from the ECHL? fine who plays in the ECHL? Rec League players?
Plus anyone player who would cross the picket line would be absolutly stigmitized by the Players Union. How can some kid from the AHL who has high hopes of playing in the NHL ever play another game in the League again after crossing a picket line.
I wouldn't pay a nickel, wouldn't go if I was offered the tickets for free, and I would never spend another dime on the league. I definitely wouldn't watch replacement players. If I watch when the regular players come back, it would only be on free streaming sites.
The idea of replacement players is a good idea in theory..
however in the real world it simply cant work.
So in a situation where there are replacement players where do these players come from? The AHL.. So that who plays in the AHL? Guys from the ECHL? fine who plays in the ECHL? Rec League players?
Plus anyone player who would cross the picket line would be absolutly stigmitized by the Players Union. How can some kid from the AHL who has high hopes of playing in the NHL ever play another game in the League again after crossing a picket line.
Haven't some players already crossed a picket line in a way? Its true that many of these leagues do have unions but most aren't powerful and I don't believe the NHLers playing there even join them. Anyone who left for a non-union league should pretty much forfeit their NHLPA membership. The fact that so many players are willing to abandon their fellow brothers to play in leagues where the players have little rights while their brothers are sitting at home without work is shameful. That's far from union solidarity. It makes me think that these players do not value unions and/or don't understand what they are there for.
In the real world, what would happen if UAW auto workers were in a similar situation and a group left to work for a foreign automaker. Do you think their UAW brothers and sisters would welcome them back with open arms once an agreement was made? Of course not. They would be shunned and called every name in the book for abandoning their fellow members in a time of solidarity.
The idea of replacement players is a good idea in theory..
however in the real world it simply cant work.
So in a situation where there are replacement players where do these players come from? The AHL.. So that who plays in the AHL? Guys from the ECHL? fine who plays in the ECHL? Rec League players?
Plus anyone player who would cross the picket line would be absolutly stigmitized by the Players Union. How can some kid from the AHL who has high hopes of playing in the NHL ever play another game in the League again after crossing a picket line.
If he's good nobody is gonna care what he did, no team is gonna ostracize a guy who could be a 30-40 goal scorer because he crossed the picket lines as an AHLer.
The idea of replacement players is a good idea in theory..
however in the real world it simply cant work.
So in a situation where there are replacement players where do these players come from? The AHL.. So that who plays in the AHL? Guys from the ECHL? fine who plays in the ECHL? Rec League players?
Plus anyone player who would cross the picket line would be absolutly stigmitized by the Players Union. How can some kid from the AHL who has high hopes of playing in the NHL ever play another game in the League again after crossing a picket line.
I think you would see players cross the line if the owners wait out a whole year and have the owners keep the same proposition they have now for next year, don't blink and allow anybody to play. I think guys who have one year or two years left would be tempted.
I have a strange feeling that this is the NHL's plan "B". Gary will try everything to make it work with the PA but I'm thinking a couple more weeks and things will shift to plan "B".
jessespector 7:54am via Tweetbot for iOS If the NHL uses replacement players, would you rather see hockey played by zombies, werewolves, yetis, vampires, centaurs, or mermen?
US Federal Law allows employers to hire temporary replacements during a lockout, but may not hire permanent replacements. So to answer the OP's question, yes they could.
The NHL floated the idea during the 2004 lockout, but was only willing to seriously consider this if the lockout extended into the 2005 season. The most recent example of this was the NFL referees lockout. We all know how that ended...
The extent of my understanding on this situation is from what I've read on here. I haven't researched the information myself.
The league can declare an impasse. There are key points that have to be met in order for the court to allow the impasse. If it's allowed, the court will deem that the last CBA proposal offered by the league to take effect immediately. At this point, with a CBA court ordered, players in the union now have the option to go back to the league and in addition, the league can sign any players or bring up players from the minors under the CBA in effect. Basically it would comprise of replacement players and potentially any PA member willing to cross the 'picket line' so to speak.
I'd imagine that the owners haven't exercised this option yet either because they need to build their resume enough to show evidence that they have tried to negotiate or because the league doesn't believe in the concept of replacement players working. Keep in mind, while replacement players could put pressure on the players to get a deal done, replacement players will be an inferior product that probably won't draw as much AND if it seems likely that it will bring in lower revenues, the owners probably don't want to assume those player salaries and expenses. Maybe they could use it as a last resort or if they're really willing to lose more money for what they feel is teaching the PA a lesson. However, if this card is pulled out, I should think it would be a last resort because even if it does force all of the PA back to the NHL to play, it will only breed more mistrust. But if we're lucky, it could teach both sides that there are boundaries set and if you're willing to push, you can call the bluff on the table and end up paying for it and maybe then we'll see this league and union use some other measure of negotiating other than playing chicken.
Last edited by HockeyCrazed101: 11-16-2012 at 08:34 AM.
Dill Daily was on hockey central at noon a few months back and they asked him if hiring replacements was possible. He said that yes it was technically possible but it was complicated and they had no intentions of doing that.
The extent of my understanding on this situation is from what I've read on here. I haven't researched the information myself.
The league can declare an impasse. There are key points that have to be met in order for the court to allow the impasse. If it's allowed, the court will deem that the last CBA proposal offered by the league to take effect immediately. At this point, with a CBA court ordered, players in the union now have the option to go back to the league and in addition, the league can sign any players or bring up players from the minors under the CBA in effect. Basically it would comprise of replacement players and potentially any PA member willing to cross the 'picket line' so to speak.
I'd imagine that the owners haven't exercised this option yet either because they need to build their resume enough to show evidence that they have tried to negotiate or because the league doesn't believe in the concept of replacement players working. Keep in mind, while replacement players could put pressure on the players to get a deal done, replacement players will be an inferior product that probably won't draw as much AND if it seems likely that it will bring in lower revenues, the owners probably don't want to assume those player salaries and expenses. Maybe they could use it as a last resort or if they're really willing to lose more money for what they feel is teaching the PA a lesson. However, if this card is pulled out, I should think it would be a last resort because even if it does force all of the PA back to the NHL to play, it will only breed more mistrust. But if we're lucky, it could teach both sides that there are boundaries set and if you're willing to push, you can call the bluff on the table and end up paying for it and maybe then we'll see this league and union use some other measure of negotiating other than playing chicken.
Once a union has been certified to represent a company's workforce, the company is legally bound by the National Labor Relations Act to meet with the union at reasonable times and to bargain in good faith. However, neither side is mandated to make concessions. Though there are clear federal laws regarding impasses, the determination of an impasse has often been decided in court. To determine if the union and management are at an impasse, the NLRB (National Labour Review Board) or the courts may examine such exigencies as the length of the negotiations, the bargaining histories of each party, rejection of a final offer, the importance of the issues creating deadlock and if the negotiations have truly been in good faith from both sides.
If the negotiations go to an impasse, it will be the NHLPA making a claim, as so far it has been the NHL Owners that have been refusing to negotiate.
Furthermore, the NHL owners have a clear history. They got what they wanted with the last CBA, which the NHLPA has already said they would agree to play under on a temporary basis while negotiations on a new CBA are performed.
There is no way a court of law or the Review Board would side with the NHL Ownership Group on this issue. The NHLPA has already offered many concessions, the NHL has made virtually no concessions and is making no effort to make a deal happen.
Even further, the ownership group isn't even unanimous on the idea of the new CBA having all their provisions, many owners want the season to start, but everything is being clamped down by the Sunbelt Teams and a few extremely greedy ownership groups like the Boston Bruins.
