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.

Friedman Speculates on Teams Believed to be Hardliners

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-23-2012, 01:41 PM
  #151
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,945
vCash: 574
Quote:
Originally Posted by DL44 View Post
For players, you can sort of categorize various players based on their general comments to the media regarding the proposals (not talking about their thoughts on Bettman)


Hardliners, run thru a wall for Fehr - Cole, Crosby, Gorges
Moderate I, pro-PA but playing is equally important - Schnieder, Bieksa
Moderate II, pro-PA but playing likely more important - BizNasty
Just want to play, indifferent to the process -
Just want to play, Discontent with the PA - Hamrlik

700 players... you are going to see your full range...

If i were to guess
100 Hardliners, 100 Discontents
100 Moderate I's, 200 Moderate II's
200 Indifferent - This would likely be many of the very young bubble guys that have only been in the league a couple yrs or rookies - too busy developing their craft for when the game resumes.. or other players playing elsewhere, focused on other things, etc... These guys MIGHT check their PA app every once in awhile.. but otherwise are like - let me know when its it done.


I'm sure many can probably accurately place certain players in certain categories based on their comments...

Go ahead list others if you heard em..
Michal Neuvirth backed Hamerlik. Toews is a hardliner

cheswick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:07 PM
  #152
Seedling
Fan level 7?
 
Seedling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,497
vCash: 50
Ovechkin is definitely a hard liner, same with Ron Hainsey.

I am willing to net Scott Gomez just wants to play.

Edit: Ian White, definitely hard liner.

Seedling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:09 PM
  #153
saskriders
ColinGreening's#1fan
 
saskriders's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Calgary/Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,248
vCash: 1322
The vast minority, and the ones who control the process

saskriders is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:59 PM
  #154
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,306
vCash: 500
There are players like D. Boyle who see both sides as being intransigent.

For ages, agents have always espoused the principal that the "star" players drag the salaries of the rest of the group up. My take is that this is no longer the case in a linked, capped system. However, there have been quotes from agents since the 05 CBA that continue to espouse this line.

There can be some group think in the process where a minority can control the majority by marginalizing opposing opinion, even though the opposing opinion is that held by the majority (or plurality). Even though there have been conference calls by Fehr, it is entirely possible that a militant minority can control opposing opinion by effectively shouting down the opposition and the minority doesn't have to be controlled or directed by Fehr himself. And, Fehr's opinion is on the more militant side which would add weight to that minority.

Long ago, I was a volunteer subject in a replication of the Milgram experiment. I was not familiar with the experiment or its purpose before participating. The information presented to behave in accordance with the majority was presented as expert and the consequences of not going along was presented as not in my self-interest. I didn't go along and went back for their results to find that I was in a minority of 2% that didn't follow the "company" line.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:18 PM
  #155
NJDevs26
Moderator
Status quo
 
NJDevs26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 22,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by octopi View Post
Jacobs and Leonsis on the owners side to name a few.
Leipold too. And on the polar opposite side is Molson of the Canadiens, who is losing a **** ton of beer sales every day, so you know he wants to play.

NJDevs26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:20 PM
  #156
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJDevs26 View Post
Leipold too. And on the polar opposite side is Molson of the Canadiens, who is losing a **** ton of beer sales every day, so you know he wants to play.
Hardline owner Jacobs is probably losing more than most due to his various arena contracts to provide concessions.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:33 PM
  #157
Blue And Orange
#KevinLoweMustGo
 
Blue And Orange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,239
vCash: 500
Such a shame that Crosby and Ovechkin were the faces of the new post-2004/05 lockout era and became the hardliners of this lockout which coould potentially cancel the 2012/13 season.

I hate this world.

Blue And Orange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:56 PM
  #158
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue And Orange View Post
Such a shame that Crosby and Ovechkin were the faces of the new post-2004/05 lockout era and became the hardliners of this lockout which coould potentially cancel the 2012/13 season.

I hate this world.
Crosby seems to just obsess about contract rights (arbitration/entry level stuff) now. Really, on those issues, its Bettman, not any players, who are being needlessly intransigent (ie hardliners).

Keep thinking of a Garrioch article where he spoke with 3 anonymous governors about contract changes. All 3 said they don't like back-diving deals, but that, other than that, contract changes "mean nothing to me."

There's no question in my mind, though, that Ovechkin's one of the guys driving the bus on the economic issues that keep manifesting themselves in PA offers as de-linked proposals.

billybudd is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 07:28 PM
  #159
Blue And Orange
#KevinLoweMustGo
 
Blue And Orange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,239
vCash: 500
I agree with that the backdiving contracts need to be addressed. But the five year term limit and the salary arbitration demands the owners want are a little bit ridiculous. They need to back off on those demands.

A breakthrough can be made if they can back off from those. Just demand the 5% variance rule. I'm sure the PA would be willing to accept that and this should lead to a pathway for a deal to be made. IMO, there is a deal to be made soon.

Blue And Orange is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 07:34 PM
  #160
Freudian
Patty likes beef
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 28,900
vCash: 50
I suspect a lot of players are natively moderate but occasional hardliners depending on how the negotiations are going.

I think most of them love the life style of being NHL players and are just looking for the NHL to give them something so they can go back to playing. This is why I think Bettman has done a lousy job. He doesn't read the situation at all but think of it only in terms of what he can get out of the players, simply because he can.

When the players say contracting is important to them and they can't believe why the league has to have that too, I get the impression that players really need to get something they can point to as worth fighting for. A win so they can save face and feel they fought for a good reason. I don't think any of them burn passionately about anything in there with the exception of UFA age and arbitration.

I think there are a lot of moderates but Bettman is working really hard trying to turn them into hardliners. Which is good news for 2017-18.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 10:06 PM
  #161
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 49,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue And Orange View Post
I agree with that the backdiving contracts need to be addressed. But the five year term limit and the salary arbitration demands the owners want are a little bit ridiculous. They need to back off on those demands.

A breakthrough can be made if they can back off from those. Just demand the 5% variance rule. I'm sure the PA would be willing to accept that and this should lead to a pathway for a deal to be made. IMO, there is a deal to be made soon.
They likely will. I doubt the NHL seriously thinks they will be getting a 5 year max. I think they are probably going to settle for 7, maybe even 8.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 10:08 PM
  #162
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,363
vCash: 500
Yeah, Stl owner Tom Stillman needed Bettman to help him get a fair deal from our previous owner. There is no way he is one of the hardliners, he is probably supporting whatever Bettman wants to do which is probably the case with most the owners in the league. Cost of running a team has gone up while players salaries continue to rise, not hard to believe that most owners will endure a lockout to get a better deal.

Oshie97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 10:16 PM
  #163
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,363
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
I suspect a lot of players are natively moderate but occasional hardliners depending on how the negotiations are going.

I think most of them love the life style of being NHL players and are just looking for the NHL to give them something so they can go back to playing. This is why I think Bettman has done a lousy job. He doesn't read the situation at all but think of it only in terms of what he can get out of the players, simply because he can.

When the players say contracting is important to them and they can't believe why the league has to have that too, I get the impression that players really need to get something they can point to as worth fighting for. A win so they can save face and feel they fought for a good reason. I don't think any of them burn passionately about anything in there with the exception of UFA age and arbitration.

I think there are a lot of moderates but Bettman is working really hard trying to turn them into hardliners. Which is good news for 2017-18.
Have you heard some of the players comments lately? They think they offered a 50/50 split in their last offer. Retired players have came out telling them to end the lockout and take the pay cut buy they just keep drinking the cool aid thinking they will get a better deal the longer they wait.

Oshie97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 10:28 PM
  #164
Orrthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand View Post
They likely will. I doubt the NHL seriously thinks they will be getting a 5 year max. I think they are probably going to settle for 7, maybe even 8.

NHL contracts are now only insured for 5 years. Some teams can not afford to pay for extra insurance for the extra years. So having any contract length beyond 5 years gives an advantage to wealthy teams.

Orrthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 10:53 PM
  #165
NJDevs26
Moderator
Status quo
 
NJDevs26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 22,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tommy Hawk View Post
Funny that he lists Phoenix because they are owned by the NHL. So is he saying the NHL is a hardliner owner?
Basically yes lol...that's why Bettman only needs seven votes as opposed to eight to quash a CBA, the eighth vote is more or less fixed

NJDevs26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 11:41 PM
  #166
rockinghorse
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orrthebest View Post
NHL contracts are now only insured for 5 years. Some teams can not afford to pay for extra insurance for the extra years. So having any contract length beyond 5 years gives an advantage to wealthy teams.
It says 7 years here.

http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/D...ven-Years.aspx

rockinghorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 12:29 AM
  #167
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,306
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockinghorse View Post
That article is from 2008. LS has made a point about the landscape of insurance changing.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-24-2012, 01:51 AM
  #168
Orrthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 764
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockinghorse View Post

Check here: http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/sh....php?t=1286305

Orrthebest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 11:49 AM
  #169
Karl Pilkington
Registered User
 
Karl Pilkington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,964
vCash: 500
Hard LINEd or hard-HEADED?


Karl Pilkington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 12:03 PM
  #170
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,824
vCash: 350
http://www.montrealgazette.com/sport...720/story.html

But Molson added that he and other owners are being kept informed of the situation and that he has confidence in commissioner Gary Bettman and his small inner circle of owners.

Nine of the 10 most valuable franchises are sitting on the sidelines.


So according to this article: Boston ( because of greed ) and the teams losing money are the reason we have a lockout.

cbcwpg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 06:29 PM
  #171
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 49,030
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orrthebest View Post
NHL contracts are now only insured for 5 years. Some teams can not afford to pay for extra insurance for the extra years. So having any contract length beyond 5 years gives an advantage to wealthy teams.
I must admit, I didn't realize that at the time, but I still see the NHL moving on that issue, just maybe not as much, and certainly not as easy, as I first thought.

Fish on The Sand is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:53 PM
  #172
Saintpatrick
Registered User
 
Saintpatrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,384
vCash: 500
Jeremy Jacobs has entirely too much influence in the NHL it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of the hardliners.

Saintpatrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-26-2012, 07:57 PM
  #173
Saintpatrick
Registered User
 
Saintpatrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,384
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cbcwpg View Post
http://www.montrealgazette.com/sport...720/story.html

But Molson added that he and other owners are being kept informed of the situation and that he has confidence in commissioner Gary Bettman and his small inner circle of owners.

Nine of the 10 most valuable franchises are sitting on the sidelines.


So according to this article: Boston ( because of greed ) and the teams losing money are the reason we have a lockout.
Basically right on the money. Teams like the Habs, Leafs and NYR should throw their collective weight around. Molson comes off as one of the owners that would like to see the lockout resolved ASAP and is generally sympathetic to the fans and small business owners losing money.

Saintpatrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2012, 12:03 AM
  #174
pbgoalie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 401
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blueline Bomber View Post
Why should the teams that aren't really losing money annually have the power to decide how to handle a situation where many teams ARE losing money annually?

Sounds just like our recent election. Voting to tax OTHER people to fix things.

OOps, I'm in California that I'm referring to, although nationally not much different

pbgoalie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-27-2012, 06:20 AM
  #175
Davebo
beep beep
 
Davebo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,843
vCash: 500
Move those 'hardliner' teams to places that support ****ing hockey - problem solved. Stupid **********ers....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lizardking89 View Post
Jeremy Jacobs has entirely too much influence in the NHL it wouldn't surprise me if he was one of the hardliners.
Just another reason......

Davebo 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 11:56 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.