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.

Spector: why not (now) play games while negotiating?

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-20-2012, 08:48 PM
  #26
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,995
vCash: 500
You know what the owners should do... They should say, Ok, let's start the Season, but the Playoffs may be a no-go if there is no deal by then. In that case, there will only be a President's Trophy Champion rewarded, so the fans should prepare for that eventuality.

Yes, yes, we all know that the owners live of the Playoffs and the money that can be made there. But we also know that Fehr and the players could call a strike by Playoff time. The simple fact is though that if the Season isn't saved, there will be no Playoffs anyway. So, for the benefit of the fans, the owners could play the Season as if they're seriously prepared to accept no Playoffs, and that the fans (and players) should treat all Regular Season games more seriously because the Regular Season results might represent the only "Champion" of the Season.

If the owners present that face, and present it convincingly enough (meaning that they themselves openingly accept that potential), then Fehr and the players will have less negotiating power with the threat of a strike come Playoff time.

Call Fehr and the players bluff, that's what the owners should do, for the sake of the fans and offerring the fans some NHL hockey to watch.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 09:53 PM
  #27
Iggy77
Registered User
 
Iggy77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ottawah View Post
Actually under the old CBA, which they would be playing under, that is incorrect. The players paychecks through the year are entirely irrelevant, just like the nominal dollar value of their contracts (other than comparing player to player). What matters is that the players are GUARANTEED 57% of revenue, and that includes playoffs. So it would be absolutely short sighted for the players to go out on strike for the playoffs, it would cost then far more than the owners (players 57% gross revenue, owners 43% minus all expenses). The paychecks they got during the year would be hit with an escrow bill that would make their heads spin ......
They've already shown they're willing to lose money (that they're not going to get back) to fight the NHL "on principle".

I think they'd gladly sacrifice that to stick it to the NHL and force favorable terms, Fehr would even try and get them compensated for lost revenues due to their strike.

They wouldn't hesitate for 1 second before going on strike.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
Fehr has a history of one strike and people assume he's no good for the sport but Bettman locks this game out like it's protocol and he's a saviour?
Goodenow went on strike in 1992 as well. No one's saying that Bettman is a savior but until there's trust and a serious willingness to negotiate a CBA for both sides we're going to get a lockout regardless what CBA is in place.

Iggy77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 10:20 PM
  #28
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,790
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
If only the players proposed to play the season for 50% while negotiating. But alas they don't want want to play.

me2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 10:27 PM
  #29
NJDevs26
Moderator
Status quo
 
NJDevs26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 22,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz View Post
What if a no-strike agreement was signed for the season?

Not that I think it would work anyway, since there would be 0 pressure to get a deal done and you'd be right back at the same spot next season.
The league would never agree to it now when they could have played under the same deal in September for a full season and they were the ones that declined the option on the last CBA. If anything it'd be worse for them to play under the same CBA now then in September when they could have avoided this fuss.

NJDevs26 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 11:46 PM
  #30
jumptheshark
Give the dog a bone
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,414
vCash: 1599
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhoenixx View Post
Because Donald Fehr will call a strike before the playoffs.

End of story.
Before anyone say "no he wont"

As an Expos fan I know for a fact he is not a man of his word. He told MLB fans he would play the season under the old CBA and well, we all know how that ended

__________________
not sure how--but the fish just jumped in the boat and put the hook in it's mouth
52299/14814
The twenty year rebuild is on!!! Embrace the suck
jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-20-2012, 11:48 PM
  #31
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in The Flood
 
Ragamuffin Gunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 15,526
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhoenixx View Post
Because Donald Fehr will call a strike before the playoffs.

End of story.
this

its not hard to understand why a league will NEVER play w/o a CBA again.

Ragamuffin Gunner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 12:10 AM
  #32
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country:
Posts: 29,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
Before anyone say "no he wont"

As an Expos fan I know for a fact he is not a man of his word. He told MLB fans he would play the season under the old CBA and well, we all know how that ended

It's hard to find support for this statement from MLB owners or those who dealt with him at the table. One recently cited article (which is now buried here in a thread about Fehr) says exactly the opposite, that he's a straight shooter and honest.

I know he's the devil incarnate now for Bettman's lockout (the third, but that's just a minor detail) on HFB, but I don't believe honesty is the issue. He's using what tactics he can to counter a very powerful foe, one that takes no quarter.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 12:23 AM
  #33
jumptheshark
Give the dog a bone
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,414
vCash: 1599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
It's hard to find support for this statement from MLB owners or those who dealt with him at the table. One recently cited article (which is now buried here in a thread about Fehr) says exactly the opposite, that he's a straight shooter and honest.

I know he's the devil incarnate now for Bettman's lockout (the third, but that's just a minor detail) on HFB, but I don't believe honesty is the issue. He's using what tactics he can to counter a very powerful foe, one that takes no quarter.
Sorry, but I was a huge baseball fan and expos fan and I remember watcing tv in April when Fehr said the players would play the full season under the expired contract. The only fact I know is that on August 12th 1994 Fehr played a large part in killing the Expos.

MLBPA did not get their way in court over the anti trust lawsuit that got rejected.

Fehr said they would play the full season and they didn't and most fans turned against bim.

Up to this point the owners were viewed as the evil ones--this moved changed it

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 12:28 AM
  #34
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country:
Posts: 29,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jumptheshark View Post
Sorry, but I was a huge baseball fan and expos fan and I remember watcing tv in April when Fehr said the players would play the full season under the expired contract. The only fact I know is that on August 12th 1994 Fehr played a large part in killing the Expos.

MLBPA did not get their way in court over the anti trust lawsuit that got rejected.

Fehr said they would play the full season and they didn't and most fans turned against bim.

Up to this point the owners were viewed as the evil ones--this moved changed it

I thought the strike was stopped after the court ruled that the MLB's unilaterally changed and imposed CBA was illegal?

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 12:40 AM
  #35
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,364
vCash: 500
[mod] The fact that Fehr would use the playoffs as hostage, some owners are losing less money while being locked out. The teams that do turn profits still see this as a win, as the % of reduced salaries over god knows how long will be more money than the revenue of a couple seasons. Not me reason whatsoever for the owners to do this.


Last edited by mouser: 11-21-2012 at 12:47 AM. Reason: We can make a point without blanket derogatory comments
Oshie97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 12:45 AM
  #36
jumptheshark
Give the dog a bone
 
jumptheshark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: hf retirement home
Country: United Nations
Posts: 52,414
vCash: 1599
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I thought the strike was stopped after the court ruled that the MLB's unilaterally changed and imposed CBA was illegal?
What happened was MLB baseball was supposed to pay 7mill to players pension fund for current players (not former)--leading up to the payment date--Fehr and MLBPA filed several lawsuits forcing MLB to go to court and to cause more lawyers fees. MLB told fehr if he continued to force MLB to pay more legal fees they would withhold the payment. The lose would have only been interest. MLB was paying the pensions (via the fund) of former players, the payments would have been in a bank account (it was suggested by two owners that one reason why they did not pay the money was that they suspects Fehr was using the pension fund to fund the multiple law suits) when the owners did not pay the money. Fehr used that as the reason why they called for the strike in the middle of the season. Fehr denied he was using the pension fund as a war chest against the owners, but some people did not believe him and it should be mentioned that the pension fund rules changed and a third party now overseas the accounts that are addressed for the players pension

jumptheshark is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 01:14 AM
  #37
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,428
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I thought the strike was stopped after the court ruled that the MLB's unilaterally changed and imposed CBA was illegal?
That didn't happen until spring '95 - Judge Sotomayor issued the injunction on March 31 - when MLB was planning to start the '95 season with replacement players.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 02:00 AM
  #38
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country:
Posts: 29,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kdb209 View Post
That didn't happen until spring '95 - Judge Sotomayor issued the injunction on March 31 - when MLB was planning to start the '95 season with replacement players.

It's a good thing I don't follow baseball. The one league with an anti-trust exemption and they somehow manage to lose on collusion cases.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 02:01 AM
  #39
HockeyShack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 316
vCash: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
Fehr has a history of one strike and people assume he's no good for the sport but Bettman locks this game out like it's protocol and he's a saviour?
The one strike basically meant he'd do it again.

I dislike Fehr because everything I've read and listened to has said he has not negotiated in good faith. Meaning he really never wanted to get a deal done. One could argue based on the crap proposals the NHL has given they aren't either, but atleast they produced a full workable plan to save all 82 games. The Players never did that.

HockeyShack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 02:06 AM
  #40
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Country:
Posts: 29,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyShack View Post
The one strike basically meant he'd do it again.

I dislike Fehr because everything I've read and listened to has said he has not negotiated in good faith. Meaning he really never wanted to get a deal done. One could argue based on the crap proposals the NHL has given they aren't either, but atleast they produced a full workable plan to save all 82 games. The Players never did that.

Everything you've read and listened to.... who said all these things?

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 02:26 AM
  #41
KEEROLE Vatanen
Failures Of Fenwick
 
KEEROLE Vatanen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 17,198
vCash: 500
yes good idea, so Fehr can have the players strike and we lose the SCF, and set the sport back another 10 years

KEEROLE Vatanen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 02:45 AM
  #42
zorz
Registered User
 
zorz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 3,886
vCash: 500
Easy question. If the games were played, there would no pressure from the fans on the players to accept league's proposal or something very close to it. League'd have to do real negotiation. And that's exactly what owners don't want.

zorz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 04:40 AM
  #43
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,405
vCash: 500
Jesse Spector seems just as clueless as Marc Spector. I'm guessing they are related somehow.

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 05:36 AM
  #44
backs4mvp
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Burlington, On
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,909
vCash: 500
As was mentioned earlier; Playoff revenues are included in HRR. That means players would receive 57% of those revenues. After the playoffs, players either receive one last additional cheque, or they write one themselves. How would it benefit the players in striking at that point? It wouldn't.

Hockey isn't being played because the owners wanted to start negotiations 10 months before they actually started, and the NHLPA wanted no part in that. I was very much on the players side before finding that out.

backs4mvp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 07:29 AM
  #45
saffronleaf
Registered User
 
saffronleaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country:
Posts: 3,040
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhoenixx View Post
Because Donald Fehr will call a strike before the playoffs.

End of story.
Lock the thread. The first post hit the nail on the head. Fehr did it before with MLB, which is America's national pastime. What makes you think he wouldn't do it without flinching when it comes to a fringe regional niche sport that few care about? From these negotiations, it is evidently clear that he isn't among the few that care, anyways.

saffronleaf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 08:39 AM
  #46
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,350
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
"Sporting News will present radical—and, in most cases improbable—proposals designed to get the league back on track and ensure its long-term health."
It's amazing how even after this is pointed out, people still jump all over these columns.

rojac is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 09:07 AM
  #47
Sanderson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Hamburg, Germany
Posts: 4,718
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rojac View Post
It's amazing how even after this is pointed out, people still jump all over these columns.
And why shouldn't they?
Just because you add such a comment doesn't mean no one might have an opinion on the matter.

To use hyperbole: If someone says "I have a rather radical idea to reach a solution for the mess in the middle east" and then continues to propose simply killing everyone in the area so they can't kill each other anymore, people damn well have the right to say how ridiculous the idea is.

You can't just hide all the bs you can come up with behind such a claim. It's like saying something insulting in public, getting called out on it and then bringing up the excuse that it wasn't meant to be taken seriously. With that kind of excuse you never know what is supposed to be the actual thought and what is just a weird idea.

Sanderson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 09:38 AM
  #48
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,685
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
Bettman said it best, if the NHLPA has been so unwilling to negotiate while being locked out, if they were playing it would be even worse.
Ya because the NHL's 43% offer was really something to write home about. They only began seriously negotiating a month ago. The entire NHL approach has been how hard can they squeeze the PA and then settle for the best they could get.

Fehr's entire game plan has surrounded this point. If you know your opponent's game plan, you plan your strategy around it. Sure the PA could have taken whatever the NHL gave them so we could play but there's reasonable and not reasonable.

I truly don't see how anyone really believes anything the NHL says. The economics may be such that the players should be taking less than 50% considering the financial state of many of the NHL markets, but don't for a second try to tell me the NHL was serious about negotiating until October, trying to make the players sweat to take a bad deal. This whole "the players haven't been serious about negotiating while being locked out" argument is bullocks.

Since then the majority of media people have sided with the players.

And the NHL still hasn't conceded a single thing from the previous CBA after asking the players to go from 57% to 50%. And that's what it comes down to. What do the PA have to negotiate with? Nothing based on what the NHL's offered.

Ginu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 10:43 AM
  #49
WingsFan95
Registered User
 
WingsFan95's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
Fehr has a history of one strike and people assume he's no good for the sport but Bettman locks this game out like it's protocol and he's a saviour?
The 1994 MLB strike was and still is by many, considered to be the worst in sports history.


So, it's like comparing a serial killer to a guy who assassinated the president.

WingsFan95 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-21-2012, 10:56 AM
  #50
Keep Your Head Up
Registered User
 
Keep Your Head Up's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Québec city
Country: Canada
Posts: 86
vCash: 500
OP :

Because Gary Bettman doesn't want to

/thread

Keep Your Head Up 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 10:18 AM.

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.