HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Notices

CBA Talk II: Shut up and give me YOUR money!

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-16-2012, 04:35 PM
  #426
Nash
Registered User
 
Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeteranNetPresence View Post
who said i am blaming him? all i said he was involved in 6 work stoppages. you're reading way too far into this
You indicated that Fehr was somehow more dispicable than Bettman due to being involved in 6 work stoppage to Gary's 3. First, you are wrong on the number and secondly you are disingenuous as Fehr was not the principle negotiator in all of those.

Nash is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:38 PM
  #427
Nash
Registered User
 
Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeteranNetPresence View Post
you do realise this has more to do with alan eagleson being in the owners' pockets than it does with any commissioner right?
It still doesn't excuse that Bettman uses lockouts as his primary negotiating tactic.

Nash is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:42 PM
  #428
Reverend Mayhem
Freeway's closed man
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,944
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
To be fair, as much as losing the last one sucked, 04-05 was necessary for the game. It was going nowhere fast. So much more skill, passion and athleticism in the game today as a result. It's the '94 and this one that were unnecessary and have and will hurt the game. Hockey was just reaching it's stride in '94 and they ruined that and set us back 10 years. Now, they are poised to do the same. 7 years of rebirth and growth, all for naught because the owners want to eat their cake and have it to.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 04:50 PM
  #429
VeteranNetPresence
Hey, Orpheus!
 
VeteranNetPresence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nash View Post
It still doesn't excuse that Bettman uses lockouts as his primary negotiating tactic.
if its his primary negotiating tactic than why did the NHL offer to meet with the PA during the season to discuss the upcoming CBA? it was the PA who declined these meetings, not bettman.

VeteranNetPresence is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 05:04 PM
  #430
medgett
Registered User
 
medgett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 562
vCash: 500
I've stayed off HF for the whole fall as a way of not getting too caught up in the frustration and anger that is the lockout. Now, I'm just too pissed off. I'm not going to say that I'll never watch a game again because the truth is that I love the sport and will continue to live and die with our team here. That said, I'm done putting my money into this league. I will watch every game at home in HD or with my buds at a pub or restaurant. I am not paying for any Canucks tickets from this point on. Usually, I attend 8-10 games a year. Additionally, I usually spend about $150/year on merch. Again I can easily go without buying any team gear. I know the rink will continue to be full and they'll still sell tons of nucks merch around town, but I just can't stomach the thought of handing any more money over to the NHL or its clubs.

It's obviously unrealistic to think that fans will adopt this strategy in any significant way, but I would like people to think about the message you send to the NHL, the owners and the players, when you're buying tickets or buying gear. By continuing to consume the product directly, you're saying its alright to screw us once every 6-8 years. As far as I'm concerned, I am quite content considering I'm going to have an extra 700-800 dollars to spend elsewhere in my life.

medgett is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 05:14 PM
  #431
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,174
vCash: 500
I fully support the 2 weeks rest... May as well try something new, before it's too late (season gets cancelled)... Fehr needs a fire lit under his ass, IMO, to negotiate off of the owner's proposal...

After 2 weeks, owner's present their best proposal (slightly less than what they would ultimately agree to - to allow room for a little bit of negotiation)... But, basically, an ultimatum proposal... Take it, or hockey gets cancelled for the year... I have to think that the NHL is going to give on the contractual things, or at least, form it in such a way that helps the current membership...

If the CBA is 10 years in length (as an example) why can't the contract length (as an example) be scaled like this:

this season: 10 year max; 2013/2014 season: 9 year max; 2014/2015: 8 years; etc... until 5 year max is reached... then 5 years max, going forward... The majority of the current membership should be under contract by then (or have the opportunity to do so, for the rest of their careers), while 5 years contract length for, basically, new membership... At this time, revenue should also be much higher than today... The point is, regardless of the details, I think the NHL has a way to appease current members contract-wise... I think there is one final real good NHL proposal that will make the NHLPA members pause, before the season gets cancelled... Present and negotiate this at the time leading up to Christmas, the season of giving... Of buying expensive presents, and the season of being grateful... If the NHLPA agrees (which I think Fehr would have pressure to do) hockey by January 1st! If the NHLPA disagrees, I think Fehr gets the pressure and inner NHLPA turmoil for a Final Final proposal (presented by the NHLPA) early January - to save the cancelled season... Finally, a NHLPA proposal off of the NHL proposal...

I predict a NHL-created proposal that gets agreed to just before Christmas... Or, a NHLPA-created proposal (off of the NHL framework) that gets agreed to AFTER the season has been announced to be cancelled... I can't believe either side will let hockey slip away for an entire season (or more)... Going to be an unsettling time for fans, but hold tight, IMHO... If they do let it go this year, all of NHL hockey deserves it's fate (both players and owners)...

I in the Eye is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 05:18 PM
  #432
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,174
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by medgett View Post
I've stayed off HF for the whole fall as a way of not getting too caught up in the frustration and anger that is the lockout. Now, I'm just too pissed off. I'm not going to say that I'll never watch a game again because the truth is that I love the sport and will continue to live and die with our team here. That said, I'm done putting my money into this league. I will watch every game at home in HD or with my buds at a pub or restaurant. I am not paying for any Canucks tickets from this point on. Usually, I attend 8-10 games a year. Additionally, I usually spend about $150/year on merch. Again I can easily go without buying any team gear. I know the rink will continue to be full and they'll still sell tons of nucks merch around town, but I just can't stomach the thought of handing any more money over to the NHL or its clubs.

It's obviously unrealistic to think that fans will adopt this strategy in any significant way, but I would like people to think about the message you send to the NHL, the owners and the players, when you're buying tickets or buying gear. By continuing to consume the product directly, you're saying its alright to screw us once every 6-8 years. As far as I'm concerned, I am quite content considering I'm going to have an extra 700-800 dollars to spend elsewhere in my life.
If there's no hockey this year, my friends and I aren't giving up on tickets, but we're selling every one (unless there's a particular game we want to go to) indefinitely... Not so much out of protest, but we just don't collectively feel like going... It's a sacrifice, when working long hours, to even make the trek downtown mid-week (or weekends)... We're busy guys, with lots of responsibilities and pulled time... Entertainment is a luxury... Often times, we'd prefer to just watch on tv... This NHL lockout is giving us the motivation to follow through on something we've collectively felt since after Game 7 of the Stanley Cup finals... We were just going through the motions all of last year... We weren't "into it" (going to the games) as we once were...

I in the Eye is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 05:24 PM
  #433
Nash
Registered User
 
Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VeteranNetPresence View Post
if its his primary negotiating tactic than why did the NHL offer to meet with the PA during the season to discuss the upcoming CBA? it was the PA who declined these meetings, not bettman.
From the All Star break on, the league did make that offer. I'm not privy to the NHPLA inner workings, but for some reason they felt no reason to negotiate during the season. I don't agree with this.

However, both sides had all summer to negotiate. I would venture to guess that if the union started negotiations with the league in February, they would have likely received an even more outrageous lowball first offer than they did. There would have been a huge amount of distraction and posturing midseason. The likelihood of several weeks or months off would have occurred as well. I don't actually believe we would be much farther along than we are today...and yes, that's because Bettman uses lockouts as his primary negotiating tactic to strong arm the union.

Nash is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 09:52 PM
  #434
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,673
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nash View Post
From the All Star break on, the league did make that offer. I'm not privy to the NHPLA inner workings, but for some reason they felt no reason to negotiate during the season. I don't agree with this.

However, both sides had all summer to negotiate. I would venture to guess that if the union started negotiations with the league in February, they would have likely received an even more outrageous lowball first offer than they did. There would have been a huge amount of distraction and posturing midseason. The likelihood of several weeks or months off would have occurred as well. I don't actually believe we would be much farther along than we are today...and yes, that's because Bettman uses lockouts as his primary negotiating tactic to strong arm the union.
That's just ridiculous. If the union started negotiating earlier they would likely have set the time for friendly negotiations. A whole lot of people blame Bettman for a cheap ass deal that set the tone - the tone was set waaaayyyy before that when the union made it clear it was not interested in negotiating.

Right now we have Bettman standing at one end of the "negotiating road" refusing to move to the middle because he's posses about lack of negotiations ti date so he's being a *****.

At the other end we have Fehr and his NHLPA car. Fehr says he's prepared to drive up to Bettman end to talk - well really he's just driving up there telling Bettman to get in and talk then just driving off when Bettman reaches for the door, telling Gary it was a joke an to get in then driving off again, and again, and again.

Bettman gets pissed and goes back to sitting, he's moved a little
* better RS - equiv of $20m per team for bottom 11 team, which I'm sure Bettman actually wants anyway
* make whole which I believe was always on the table if the players water to talk.

Fehr wants a delinked deal with guaranteed raises because that way he doesn't care if he trashes the NHL. Bettman might be a ***** but he cares about creating a segue with healthy budgets for teams.

Fehr does not give a shi+. If Fehr had started dealing two years ago he could have gotten a great deal for the players using 57% as leverage in conjunction with controls on long contracts. Instead he waited for the cap to get out of control, waited for long contacts to get out of control, and then waiting for for the 57% to cease to be before negotiating.

me2 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 10:40 PM
  #435
Chubros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,147
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
...
Fehr does not give a shi+. If Fehr had started dealing two years ago he could have gotten a great deal for the players using 57% as leverage in conjunction with controls on long contracts. Instead he waited for the cap to get out of control, waited for long contacts to get out of control, and then waiting for for the 57% to cease to be before negotiating.
Great point; I hadn't thought of that before. The NHLPA should have offered to negotiate before exercising their option to extend the CBA the summer before last.

Chubros is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:04 PM
  #436
Nash
Registered User
 
Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
That's just ridiculous. If the union started negotiating earlier they would likely have set the time for friendly negotiations. A whole lot of people blame Bettman for a cheap ass deal that set the tone - the tone was set waaaayyyy before that when the union made it clear it was not interested in negotiating.

Right now we have Bettman standing at one end of the "negotiating road" refusing to move to the middle because he's posses about lack of negotiations ti date so he's being a *****.

At the other end we have Fehr and his NHLPA car. Fehr says he's prepared to drive up to Bettman end to talk - well really he's just driving up there telling Bettman to get in and talk then just driving off when Bettman reaches for the door, telling Gary it was a joke an to get in then driving off again, and again, and again.

Bettman gets pissed and goes back to sitting, he's moved a little
* better RS - equiv of $20m per team for bottom 11 team, which I'm sure Bettman actually wants anyway
* make whole which I believe was always on the table if the players water to talk.

Fehr wants a delinked deal with guaranteed raises because that way he doesn't care if he trashes the NHL. Bettman might be a ***** but he cares about creating a segue with healthy budgets for teams.

Fehr does not give a shi+. If Fehr had started dealing two years ago he could have gotten a great deal for the players using 57% as leverage in conjunction with controls on long contracts. Instead he waited for the cap to get out of control, waited for long contacts to get out of control, and then waiting for for the 57% to cease to be before negotiating.
Okay. So since the union wanted to negotiate over the summer everything is their fault since they set the tone? Get real. It doesn't matter when the first meeting would have happened. If you honestly believe that Bettman would have started closer to reasonable, you are beyond naive.

Revenue sharing is something the league should be pushing, not the players. It just shows you the greed of the owners that they have to be pushed to share among themselves. They talk about sharing the burden with the players and having a partnership. They can't even do that among the 30 team owners. What a joke.

Make whole is a joke as well. How about honor the deals you sign. The union isn't pushing to permanently delink revenues to salaries. They aren't fighting to turn back the clock. They want to find an amicable way to both honor their existing contracts and get to a 50/50 share. Temporarily delinking the revenue until it grows to the point that the salaries equal 50% is a great compromise to get what the owners say they want, a 50/50 split.

Why should they players automatically take on the burden of a salary rollback? Why should the owners not be held accountable for honoring the contracts that they are legally obligated to fulfill? Why did head office allow outrageous cap circumvention deals to be signed up until the day of the lockout?

So the players have given proposals that will get them to the owners 50/50, but it will take time for the revenues to catch up to the 50/50 split number needed to link revenues back to a cap. Now the owners want reduced length and variance on year to year with deals. I want to see this too. Moving ELCs from 3 to 2 years sounds good for the players, but it gives them less leverage on negotiating their next contract with only a rookie and sophomore campaign. Combine that with the league wanting to move arbitration rights from year 4 to 5 means they want far more restrictive bargaining rights for young players. They also want to take a year back on free agency.

So as it stands, the league has only conceded to get to a more reasonable position from their first ludicrous offer. Whereas the players have conceded heavily from the previous CBA. That is the framework for the new deal. To think otherwise is a total crock and if you believe the league has made concessions, good on them for managing to sell you their Koolaid.

And to claim that Bettman is working solely for the good of the league and that Fehr is trying to destroy it is a bit much. The league also included a provision in their offer to sell cap space. Wasn't the whole purpose if the cap to both link revenues and create parity. Selling cap space, even a small amount, is one step closer to having the league trend backwards to the have and have nots.

Nash is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:06 AM
  #437
Carl Carlson
Registered User
 
Carl Carlson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,352
vCash: 500
I think they'll iron out a deal by mid Dec. If not then the season will likely be lost and the league would be set back in some markets to the point where I don't think they will recover. I hope the players and owners are smart enough to realize that.

Carl Carlson is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 01:20 AM
  #438
Shareefruck
Registered User
 
Shareefruck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,925
vCash: 500
Am I supposed to read the thread title with the weird emphasis on the YOUR? Sounds weird.

Shareefruck is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 02:28 AM
  #439
Chubros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,147
vCash: 500
Michael Russo has a good article out that shows how far the NHL believes the PA's proposal to be from the league's 50/50 + make whole offer.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/179740001.html

If the charts, which apparently were created by the league, accurately reflect the PA's stance, then it is indeed asking for a full year's pay plus a raise from last year for playing a partial season. Is this what the players have in mind when they say they just want their contracts to be honoured?

Chubros is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 04:56 AM
  #440
vanuck
Griffiths Way Goons
 
vanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Country: Hong Kong
Posts: 10,000
vCash: 250
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chubros View Post
Michael Russo has a good article out that shows how far the NHL believes the PA's proposal to be from the league's 50/50 + make whole offer.

http://www.startribune.com/sports/179740001.html

If the charts, which apparently were created by the league, accurately reflect the PA's stance, then it is indeed asking for a full year's pay plus a raise from last year for playing a partial season. Is this what the players have in mind when they say they just want their contracts to be honoured?
Now THAT would be ridiculous.

vanuck is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 08:41 AM
  #441
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,673
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nash View Post
Okay. So since the union wanted to negotiate over the summer everything is their fault since they set the tone? Get real. It doesn't matter when the first meeting would have happened. If you honestly believe that Bettman would have started closer to reasonable, you are beyond naive.
You are deluded if you believe the union intended to negotiate at all, the wanted no negotiations and 57% season with the option of striking. It is clear Fehr is just pissin about ATM. He rebuffed serious talks for years, why start now? He could have cut a great deal long ago if he was smart, when things were great for leave and people were happy. If the league low balled him 2 years ago he'd have won the PR and pressured then into a sweet deal for the PA. 2 years a $60m cap and lots more healthy teams plus way fewer lifetime deals to deal with puts the negotiating power in Fehr's hands - wasted opportunity to get a good deal done and keep the game growing. Now the NHLPA is going to get a worse split %, worse conditions and much lower HRR as well. Poor outcome for the players.

Quote:
Make whole is a joke as well. How about honor the deals you sign. The union isn't pushing to permanently delink revenues to salaries. They aren't fighting to turn back the clock. They want to find an amicable way to both honor their existing contracts and get to a 50/50 share.
no they aren't. They can have 50-50 and guarantee existing contracts, they just don't want it because those big deals eat too much of the other players share of the 50%. They are just looking for > 50%. They can even trash the sport so long as they are delinked because they are immune from the finances going down the tube because of the lockout. Both sides "negotiating" sucks ATM and both sides need suffer through linkage for screwing the fans and weaker HRR that will follow.


I'm really starting to question if Fehr intends to destroy the finances of the league. Fehr doesn't give a **** about teams finances, he doesn't care if they go under or if they are in trouble, so long as the players get paid. In fact I am starting to wonder if that may be his intention - trash the game and the fan base so badly the owners will never stand up to the union again. Just like he did in 94.

Quote:
Temporarily delinking the revenue until it grows to the point that the salaries equal 50% is a great compromise to get what the owners say they want, a 50/50 split.
50-50 was never offered in any of their 3 deals. Just a koolaid illusion of it. Delinking just rewards crap.

Quote:
Why should they players automatically take on the burden of a salary rollback? Why should the owners not be held accountable for honoring the contracts that they are legally obligated to fulfill?
The players signed them knowing theit might change. Luongo admits straight up he intends defrauding the system. Parise, Suter and Weber knew the was coming when the signed their deals - if they were so upset with what the CBA might do to existing deals they could gave waited until after the CBA was signed.

Quote:
Why did head office allow outrageous cap circumvention deals to be signed up until the day of the lockout?
maybe because it was legal, maybe that's why they are trying to fix it. Cracks me up to see the same people and players blaming the league for allowing it and complaining the league should have stopped are now the ones complaining about the league trying to stop it.

Quote:
So the players have given proposals that will get them to the owners 50/50, but it will take time for the revenues to catch up to the 50/50 split number needed to link revenues back to a cap.
Which offer was this the guaranteed a linked 50% split relatively quickly?

Quote:
Now the owners want reduced length and variance on year to year with deals. I want to see this too. Moving ELCs from 3 to 2 years sounds good for the players, but it gives them less leverage on negotiating their next contract with only a rookie and sophomore campaign.
I'm on the players side with ufa age, elcs etc. Even fine with 7-8 year contracts so they as they are evasions proofed.

Quote:
So as it stands, the league has only conceded to get to a more reasonable position from their first ludicrous offer. Whereas the players have conceded heavily from the previous CBA.
guaranteed pay rises and a 57% HRR split? [/quote]That is the framework for the new deal.
Quote:
To think otherwise is a total crock and if you believe the league has made concessions, good on them for managing to sell you their Koolaid.
and Fehr's rope a dope seems to be working on some fans. We are still waiting for the union to start serious discussions.

Quote:
And to claim that Bettman is working solely for the good of the league and that Fehr is trying to destroy it is a bit much. The league also included a provision in their offer to sell cap space. Wasn't the whole purpose if the cap to both link revenues and create parity. Selling cap space, even a small amount, is one step closer to having the league trend backwards to the have and have nots.
not the way the NHL has it worked out. Salary goes with cap space, that hurts weak teams since they don't have cash to burn. Meanwhile rich teams don't have cap to burn. If teams find a way to abuse it the next CBA will remove it.

me2 is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 08:44 AM
  #442
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,338
vCash: 500
I laugh every time I hear the PA was desperate to have the option of striking, but the man who has headed up two lockouts in 7 years is the golden boy of this negotiation.

You guys are funny.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 09:55 AM
  #443
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,593
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I laugh every time I hear the PA was desperate to have the option of striking, but the man who has headed up two lockouts in 7 years is the golden boy of this negotiation.

You guys are funny.
I think Bettman's position could be eroding. Interesting article from Philly here.

http://mobile.philly.com/sports/?wss...viewAll=y#more

I have mixed feelings about saving the season, at this point. If they go over the NHL fiscal cliff it would serve them all right.

I hate what these guys have done to the game.

ddawg1950 is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 10:37 AM
  #444
west in the east
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,456
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
I laugh every time I hear the PA was desperate to have the option of striking, but the man who has headed up two lockouts in 7 years is the golden boy of this negotiation.

You guys are funny.
He's not, but Fehr is not a negotiator and I do not know how he got a reputation as a good one. He just sits an waits. A good negotiator finds solutions and does not cause greater harm to his clients. Looking at the big picture, he's only benefiting a very small percentage of players right now, if at all. When looking at net career salary, if the season is cancelled, they'll never make that money back. It does not benefit lower-salaried players, or ones with shorter careers. Further, the damage which could be done to some teams could result in fewer jobs for the players or, at least, less revenue to pay salaries from. These are things he should have in mind, but evidently does not.

Betman deserves a lot of the blame, but Fehr can take an equal serving of that. The theory that he's just trying to have a baseball like win is gaining credibility.

west in the east is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 11:35 AM
  #445
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,338
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by west in the east View Post
He's not, but Fehr is not a negotiator and I do not know how he got a reputation as a good one. He just sits an waits. A good negotiator finds solutions and does not cause greater harm to his clients. Looking at the big picture, he's only benefiting a very small percentage of players right now, if at all. When looking at net career salary, if the season is cancelled, they'll never make that money back. It does not benefit lower-salaried players, or ones with shorter careers. Further, the damage which could be done to some teams could result in fewer jobs for the players or, at least, less revenue to pay salaries from. These are things he should have in mind, but evidently does not.

Betman deserves a lot of the blame, but Fehr can take an equal serving of that. The theory that he's just trying to have a baseball like win is gaining credibility.
Since most players are striking it rich on their second contracts I'd say very much that Fehr is battling for the majority of the union.

arsmaster is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:11 PM
  #446
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 101,111
vCash: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nash View Post
It still doesn't excuse that Bettman uses lockouts as his primary negotiating tactic.
NHL wanted to begin talks in January ,, NHLPA refused

Every league without a CBA will lock out players especially after 1994 when Fehr and MLBPA went on strike (No CBA)

Bettman and NHL tried for almost an entire year to begin talks ,, NHLPA refused

Blackhawkswincup is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:13 PM
  #447
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
NHL wanted to begin talks in January ,, NHLPA refused

Every league without a CBA will lock out players especially after 1994 when Fehr and MLBPA went on strike (No CBA)

Bettman and NHL tried for almost an entire year to begin talks ,, NHLPA refused
The NHL still isn't bargaining, ramming this stuff down the PA's throat starting in January last year wasn't going to go over any better.

Scurr is online now  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:15 PM
  #448
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 101,111
vCash: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
The NHL still isn't bargaining, ramming this stuff down the PA's throat starting in January last year wasn't going to go over any better.
The NHLPA is the one's who are not attempting to end this with there garbage stall tactics and refusal to even get close to 50/50 split

Blackhawkswincup is offline  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:27 PM
  #449
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
The NHLPA is the one's who are not attempting to end this with there garbage stall tactics and refusal to even get close to 50/50 split
The NHLPA has come a lot closer to 50% than the NHL has come to being reasonable with contract restrictions. You've obviously chosen your side, no sense arguing about it.

Scurr is online now  
Old
11-17-2012, 12:41 PM
  #450
shortshorts
The OG Kesler Hater
 
shortshorts's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,611
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
The NHLPA has come a lot closer to 50% than the NHL has come to being reasonable with contract restrictions. You've obviously chosen your side, no sense arguing about it.
I'd like you to explain how any of the NHLPA offers have come closer to 50%.

shortshorts 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 12:32 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.