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
11-22-2012, 01:37 PM
  #701
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyDay View Post
T
Bad analogy. This isn't a schoolyard bully (which is what in my youth what many hockey players seemed to be ) these are people that are paying you millions of dollars. In today's economy these guys will never go back to $50k paychecks with the $1b in revenue that NBC alone shelled out.
So it's ok to bully someone as long as they have lots of money? The NHL is using the players short career as leverage to bully them into signing an unfair contract, it matters not how much money the players make.

Scurr is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 01:40 PM
  #702
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyDay View Post
I didn't say they were being nice in these negotiations just reminding it was the league that somehow restarted these talks.
You don't think the players would have started the talks at some point if the owners didn't?

It doesnt matter who started them, it matters who is making attempts to bridge gaps and the owners are creating them instead of working to close them.

Canucker is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 02:30 PM
  #703
Blackhawkswincup
Global Moderator
 
Blackhawkswincup's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chicagoland
Country: United States
Posts: 100,744
vCash: 340
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay Cee View Post
Rest assured Hamrlik is not the only one.
Yep ,, A 2nd brave soul has come out in favor of Hammer and against the NHLPA

Quote:
Roman Jedlicka ‏@jedli
Roman Hamrlik is not alone w/ his opinion. #Caps goalie Michal Neuvirth just said for our TV NOVA Sport: "I agree 100% with Hammer. Llockout is not about majority of players, i think. It is about several superstars with big contracts.
No doubt one of Fehr's attack dogs will attack the character/intent of Mr Neuvirth

Blackhawkswincup is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 04:33 PM
  #704
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
No doubt one of Fehr's attack dogs will attack the character/intent of Mr Neuvirth
Lockout/Strike...whatever....the "star players" don't get anything out of a prolonged stoppage. Regardless of the sport - they'll always get paid top dollar even if the owners have it their way 100%. Fail to understand Neuvirth's point - what interest is it from the "stars point of view" to 'hold out'?

I'm guessing the owners would like to control the cost of "ordinary joes" or guys that aren't "core players". Guys like Neuvirth who gets paid over a million dollars to be the backup goalie.

Would be nice to hear what individual owners have to say about the lockout - but you know that won't happen.


Last edited by Barney Gumble: 11-22-2012 at 04:57 PM.
Barney Gumble is online now  
Old
11-22-2012, 04:39 PM
  #705
Mr. Canucklehead
Mod Supervisor
Kitimat Canuck
 
Mr. Canucklehead's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kitimat, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,480
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barney Gumble View Post
Lockout/Strike...whatever....the "star players" don't get anything out of a prolonged stoppage. Regardless of the sport - they'll always get paid top dollar even if the owners have it their way 100%. Fail to understand Neuvirth's point - what interest is it from the "stars point of view" to 'hold out'?
Trying to look at it from Neuvirth's perspective...

Some of the NHL's proposed contractual changes probably don't have significant impacts on guys in the "Hamrlik/Neuvirth" ballpark. Things like cutting off length at 5-years, for example, probably don't mean much to a non-star player who has probably never signed a deal longer than 2 or 3 years. Only stars (in most cases) get those long contracts.

Some of the non-star players are also not as well suited to a long work stoppage, because they haven't made as much money as some of the stars have. Guys like Crosby pull in $8m+ a year, but there are more than a few players making sub-$1m per season that probably won't be as happy to wait out a long work stoppage.

I'm not saying Neuvirth is right about everything he said, but there is definitely room for some players to be discomfitted with the negotiations, just as there is for ownership groups who would rather a deal get done faster as well.

Mr. Canucklehead is online now  
Old
11-22-2012, 04:45 PM
  #706
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Canucklehead View Post
Trying to look at it from Neuvirth's perspective...

Some of the NHL's proposed contractual changes probably don't have significant impacts on guys in the "Hamrlik/Neuvirth" ballpark. Things like cutting off length at 5-years, for example, probably don't mean much to a non-star player who has probably never signed a deal longer than 2 or 3 years. Only stars (in most cases) get those long contracts.

Some of the non-star players are also not as well suited to a long work stoppage, because they haven't made as much money as some of the stars have. Guys like Crosby pull in $8m+ a year, but there are more than a few players making sub-$1m per season that probably won't be as happy to wait out a long work stoppage.

I'm not saying Neuvirth is right about everything he said, but there is definitely room for some players to be discomfitted with the negotiations, just as there is for ownership groups who would rather a deal get done faster as well.
-Hamrlik just came off a 4 year deal for 22.5million bucks with the Habs...the guy has made $59 million bucks in his career....he was makingg 5.5 million as a teams 4th best d-man...what a goof.

-the guys who make under a million should be happy they make $700k, the average wage is $2.4....the PA is holding firm so these journeymen/non-stars can make a decent wage playing 5 mins/night.

arsmaster is online now  
Old
11-22-2012, 05:01 PM
  #707
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,174
vCash: 500
There's two or three more proposals to be made, before the season is cancelled, IMO...

First one, NHL responds to the NHLPA one... Heavily favoured towards the NHL, but, worth a shot... A warning shot, more than anything... A bullet next to the head of the players... Setting up, the final battle... One that gives on certain points, but still, not one that will make the players all that happy to accept... Doubt this one gets it done... I think it does shake the players though, IMO, more than they've been shaken to date...

Second one, "All or nothing" NHL proposal... The D-Day Proposal... A more moderate one (compared to what has been seen to date), still however, notably slanted towards the NHL side... If not accepted (on the major points) season gets cancelled... "Up to the players", Bettman says... This one might get it done, if NHLPA strongly negotiates off of this proposal...

If Second one not accepted, Bettman announces cancellation of season - but, there's a week before NHL can implement the plan for the end of the season (*wink* *wink*)... Holiday season is getting in the way, therefore, will take some time... Bettman hints if NHLPA sends something via this week, the NHL will try and get everyone together to hold a meeting to discuss it... Thus, "Post D-Day NHLPA Proposal"... The "White Knight" Proposal... One prepared by the NHLPA - under pressure from the moderates and non-star players to really, seriously, get a deal done... One that promises to save the season, and all of NHL hockey...

Up to 3 more kicks, before I give up hope... Regardless of how bad things look or sound in the meantime...


Last edited by I in the Eye: 11-22-2012 at 05:08 PM.
I in the Eye is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 05:13 PM
  #708
CCF23
Registered User
 
CCF23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Richmond, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,517
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CCF23
It's frustrating, but I still think we see hockey this year. It's to the point where they're close enough that it would be absolutely ridiculous to lose a full season. Having said that, neither side is going to accept what they'd be willing to at zero hour because they know there's still time to squeeze a bit more out of the other side.

This will go until mid-late December. At that point, the push will be on before the season is cancelled and both sides will get what they can and cut their losses. The only way a season is lost (in my eyes), is if it becomes so personal that both sides dig in...With these two sides that's certianly possible, but I think we get a 50 game season or so starting around Christmas.

CCF23 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 05:50 PM
  #709
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Canucklehead View Post
Trying to look at it from Neuvirth's perspective...

Some of the NHL's proposed contractual changes probably don't have significant impacts on guys in the "Hamrlik/Neuvirth" ballpark. Things like cutting off length at 5-years, for example, probably don't mean much to a non-star player who has probably never signed a deal longer than 2 or 3 years. Only stars (in most cases) get those long contracts.

Some of the non-star players are also not as well suited to a long work stoppage, because they haven't made as much money as some of the stars have. Guys like Crosby pull in $8m+ a year, but there are more than a few players making sub-$1m per season that probably won't be as happy to wait out a long work stoppage.

I'm not saying Neuvirth is right about everything he said, but there is definitely room for some players to be discomfitted with the negotiations, just as there is for ownership groups who would rather a deal get done faster as well.
These players who decide to play in the NHL know they are signing on to be in a union and occasionally there will be labour strife, if they don't want to deal with it, go play somewhere else. But if you do sign on with a union you accept the fact you could strike, you could get locked out and you could lose wages. If there were no union they wouldn't likely be making the wage they make as it is.

Some of these *******s should have had a good understanding of what was ahead and should have been better prepared for it instead of whining and selling their union brothers out because they lost a couple paychecks. Even if they make under $1m a year, thats more than enough to live very comfortably on, and enough that they should be able to have a nest egg saved for occasions like this...plus, a lot of the time a union will have a "Strike fund" set aside for workers who need help. The whining and snivelling serves nobody.

Canucker is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 05:55 PM
  #710
Nash
Registered User
 
Nash's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: North Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,915
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Yep ,, A 2nd brave soul has come out in favor of Hammer and against the NHLPA



No doubt one of Fehr's attack dogs will attack the character/intent of Mr Neuvirth
The stars probably gave up more in the last lockout than anyone. To place blame on them is incredibly stupid of Neuvirth. Before the lockout the stars were paid insanely high amounts. When the floor came in and the maximum contract amount per player was instituted, it is the second to fourth line players that have received the highest growth of salaries. Jagr, Bure, Tkachuk, Forsberg, etc all had $10,000,000+ contracts. Those were real average numbers, not inflated long term deals that saw them get big bonuses up front. The cap has gone from $40 to $70 million and those top guys aren't seeing as big of a benefit of the system as the other players are. Guys that play 5 minutes a game make a million dollars now. Third line players like Peverly and Kelly make over 3 million. If the players were to decertify, the stars would get up to $20 million a season with guaranteed contracts and the third and fourth liners would go back to AHL money with no guarantee.

Nash is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 05:59 PM
  #711
VinnyC
vancity, c-bus, 'peg
 
VinnyC's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Na'ē panjā
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
These players who decide to play in the NHL know they are signing on to be in a union and occasionally there will be labour strife, if they don't want to deal with it, go play somewhere else. But if you do sign on with a union you accept the fact you could strike, you could get locked out and you could lose wages. If there were no union they wouldn't likely be making the wage they make as it is.

Some of these *******s should have had a good understanding of what was ahead and should have been better prepared for it instead of whining and selling their union brothers out because they lost a couple paychecks. Even if they make under $1m a year, thats more than enough to live very comfortably on, and enough that they should be able to have a nest egg saved for occasions like this...plus, a lot of the time a union will have a "Strike fund" set aside for workers who need help. The whining and snivelling serves nobody.
Negotiating tactics that result in lost games (and therefore wages) are NOT a precondition to better wages in the long haul.

Like other NHLPA members Hamrlik and Neuvirth can and should voice their opinion if they believe the union's negotiating tactics are leading them to the wrong direction. "Union solidarity" is a load of **** if everyone is losing because of it and no one is trying to steer the boat to better waters because of some sort of self-righteous sentiment.

And they're the ones whining? We've all heard about Barch complaining about work conditions while sipping on his wine at his private farm, Toews saying it's all about Bettman wanting to bully the players and White resorting to name-calling.

VinnyC is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 06:09 PM
  #712
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 19,568
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinnyC View Post
And they're the ones whining? We've all heard about Barch complaining about work conditions while sipping on his wine at his private farm, Toews saying it's all about Bettman wanting to bully the players and White resorting to name-calling.
Well you ain't hearing a peep from the individual owner's because of the muzzle put on them by league HQ. Why is that? Wouldn't have anything to do with strengthening their bargaining position does it?

Barney Gumble is online now  
Old
11-22-2012, 06:10 PM
  #713
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinnyC View Post
Negotiating tactics that result in lost games (and therefore wages) are NOT a precondition to better wages in the long haul.

Like other NHLPA members Hamrlik and Neuvirth can and should voice their opinion if they believe the union's negotiating tactics are leading them to the wrong direction. "Union solidarity" is a load of **** if everyone is losing because of it and no one is trying to steer the boat to better waters because of some sort of self-righteous sentiment.

And they're the ones whining? We've all heard about Barch complaining about work conditions while sipping on his wine at his private farm, Toews saying it's all about Bettman wanting to bully the players and White resorting to name-calling.
This is a very short sighted viewpoint. Union solidarity has gotten them to where they are today. They may lose money in the short term, but the less they go backwards now the more they will gain in the end. EVERYONE is taking a hit right now, the last thing the union needs is greedy chicken****s whining because they've missed a few paychecks...go back and play in Europe and don't come back.

Canucker is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 07:00 PM
  #714
Reverend Mayhem
Freeway's closed man
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,810
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Hate to keep being a bother, but can someone explain to me what de-certification/certification is?

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 07:02 PM
  #715
CCF23
Registered User
 
CCF23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Richmond, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,517
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CCF23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Hate to keep being a bother, but can someone explain to me what de-certification/certification is?
Quote:
Definition: Decertification of a union means that union loses the power to collectively bargain on behalf of its members. Such a move has some potential benefits - the NFL Players Association decertified in an attempt to avoid a lockout - and a number of risks attached.

The biggest benefit is legal. Interactions between unions and management are governed by labor law. Many of the collectively-bargained elements of the NBA/NBPA relationship - the salary cap and NBA draft for example - are perfectly legal under that set of rules.

The relationship between the league and players in the absence of a union would be governed under anti-trust law. And that gives the players a wide range of options, including an anti-trust lawsuit.
The players would file an anti-trust suit.

CCF23 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 07:02 PM
  #716
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Hate to keep being a bother, but can someone explain to me what de-certification/certification is?
http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-l..._gary_bettman/

arsmaster is online now  
Old
11-22-2012, 07:07 PM
  #717
Reverend Mayhem
Freeway's closed man
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,810
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF23 View Post
The players would file an anti-trust suit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arsmaster View Post
Thanks. That sounds good and bad at the same time. Mainly bad though.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 09:20 PM
  #718
Lard_Lad
Registered User
 
Lard_Lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
Thanks. That sounds good and bad at the same time. Mainly bad though.
Well, if the players decertified, they still couldn't reach an agreement, and the court decisions in the antitrust case (months later, after the case works its way through the courts in both countries) weren't favourable to the league, the outcome would probably be a completely free market - no caps, no draft, no guaranteed contracts, no minimum salaries, etc.

That's not that bad for us (being one of the big markets), great for the superstar players who'd get a lot more money, bad for the fringe players who'd see a big cut in what they make, and probably deadly for some of the US teams that are in trouble now - although some might be able to scrape by with bare-bones salary structures and perpetual 20-win seasons.

Lard_Lad is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 09:56 PM
  #719
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by VinnyC View Post
Negotiating tactics that result in lost games (and therefore wages) are NOT a precondition to better wages in the long haul.

Like other NHLPA members Hamrlik and Neuvirth can and should voice their opinion if they believe the union's negotiating tactics are leading them to the wrong direction. "Union solidarity" is a load of **** if everyone is losing because of it and no one is trying to steer the boat to better waters because of some sort of self-righteous sentiment.

And they're the ones whining? We've all heard about Barch complaining about work conditions while sipping on his wine at his private farm, Toews saying it's all about Bettman wanting to bully the players and White resorting to name-calling.
Yes, the players are the elitist whiners, not 70 billion dollar Comcast, or Philip Anschutz, who spends his personal 7 billion dollar fortune campaigning against evolution and homosexuality.

Because I know I watch hockey for those guys, and they're just not getting a fair deal making so much money

Proto is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 10:01 PM
  #720
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,286
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blackhawkswincup View Post
Yep ,, A 2nd brave soul has come out in favor of Hammer and against the NHLPA



No doubt one of Fehr's attack dogs will attack the character/intent of Mr Neuvirth
Still haven't heard you defend the laughable claim by the league that they're losing money.

Proto is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 10:04 PM
  #721
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,286
vCash: 500
When will Donald Fehr come clean about his role in Benghazi?

Proto is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 10:09 PM
  #722
LiquidSnake
Agent of Chaos...
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,581
vCash: 883
I'd love to hear the opinions of Aquilini, Katz and the some significant owners. I'm sure they wouldn't be happy either and talk a ton of **** about loser owners like Leipold who is broke in Minny, pays $200 mil and now sits in on the meetings.

It's like sitting in a board room with millionaires and having the guy who is worth 20k being the only one allowed to give financial advice.

LiquidSnake is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 10:11 PM
  #723
LiquidSnake
Agent of Chaos...
 
LiquidSnake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 26,581
vCash: 883
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
This is a very short sighted viewpoint. Union solidarity has gotten them to where they are today. They may lose money in the short term, but the less they go backwards now the more they will gain in the end. EVERYONE is taking a hit right now, the last thing the union needs is greedy chicken****s whining because they've missed a few paychecks...go back and play in Europe and don't come back.
Agreed. **** off and stay there. We don't want you here anyways. Neuvirth is probably more upset he lost his starting job

LiquidSnake is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 10:30 PM
  #724
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 17,304
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
So it's ok to bully someone as long as they have lots of money?
How do unions treat scabs?

Cole bullying Hamrlik for having an opinion.

If the NHL as threatening to black ball players that didn't support them you might have a case.

Quote:
The NHL is using the players short career as leverage to bully them into signing an unfair contract, it matters not how much money the players make.
Using leverage is automatically bullying. These aren't feeble 3rd world factory workers who's families will starve in a lockout.

These are powerful well off people, capable of hiring million dollar+ lawyers, having a heated discussion on equal terms. The owners are withholding pay until they get a deal they want, the players are withholding labour by not signing until they get a deal can accept.

Both sides are just playing hardball.

me2 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 10:59 PM
  #725
arsmaster
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 16,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
How do unions treat scabs?

Cole bullying Hamrlik for having an opinion.

If the NHL as threatening to black ball players that didn't support them you might have a case.



Using leverage is automatically bullying. These aren't feeble 3rd world factory workers who's families will starve in a lockout.

These are powerful well off people, capable of hiring million dollar+ lawyers, having a heated discussion on equal terms. The owners are withholding pay until they get a deal they want, the players are withholding labour by not signing until they get a deal can accept.

Both sides are just playing hardball.
In what way did Cole "bully" Hamrlik?

Calling him selfish? Hamrlik admitted he was.

I'd say what Hamrlik did was worse and then his catty little statement about his signing bonus and his agent shows the owners exactly what they want to see.

Hamrlik comes off like an idiot here, especially with his response today...the guy who has made $59m going around his brethren that fought for his ability to make that money (especially his contract he signed post 2004 lockout with MTL) shows his integrity.

arsmaster 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 10:58 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.