HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Lockout Discussion Thread 3.0

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-26-2012, 04:51 PM
  #226
NotProkofievian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
It's still not truly a 50/50 proposal. The whole problem with the players last proposal was if revenues stay the same, they'd be getting 57%. The owners will never agree to that stipulation.
I'm not sure what you mean. Could you provide an example of your point?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
I think the owners can and should be able to come up to 393 or close on the "make whole".
Yeah, and I think the players can work with a lower number than that, too. I think progress can easily be made here.

NotProkofievian is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:54 PM
  #227
MtlPenFan
Registered User
 
MtlPenFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,677
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotProkofievian View Post
The last CBA proposal by the players was to go down to 50% immediately, down from 57%, which was your 12%. Where the owners said "no way jose," was on the provisions. After the first year, the total dollar amount could not be lower on a given year, than the previous year. The make whole provision continues to be a gap between the owners, who wish to give 211 million over 2 years, and the players, who are asking for 393 over 4.




How does one person crossing a picket line damage the union? Hamrlik's a turn-coat, and is being treated as such.

I never said the shirts and garbage vitriolic comments from the players were helping anything, but they're about as effectual as booing Bettman has ever been.
But I was made to understand that the players are allowed to say whatever they wanted. Seems to me there's a caveat attached.

Players pat themselves on the back for not fining anyone who speaks out which is kind of nice, until you realize that being ostracized and making veiled threats is the alternative.

MtlPenFan is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 04:57 PM
  #228
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 5,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
One group goes to university for several years,
There's no deep difference between OHL+AHL or 4 years of vocational school, what a B. Ed. basically is. It's just a different label attached to the same thing: job training. Teachers, engineers, doctors, etc get graduation ceremonies. Professional athletes get the draft.

I did spend five years of graduate school to prepare me to become a better scientist ... how is that different from years in the OHL, AHL, etc? It's not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
The other group get paid while attending high school
I didn't know OHL players get paid a salary. I figured it was a stipend at best.

Thank you for the interesting tidbit. I am happy to hear they get a real salary. Do you know how much?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
is responsible for teaching the youth of the country.
There's no doubt that the entertainment industry as a whole (video games, movies, sports) play a huge role in socialization.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
they spend maybe 20 hours a week at the arena.
I don't know if you actually think being a pro athlete is a 20-hour-a-week job.

You remind me of someone who once told that being a university professor is a 10-hour-a-week job, because that's the total amount of time professors spend either in lectures or in office hours.

Do you actually believe that being Sidney Crosby or Travis Moen is a 20-hour-a-week job?

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:01 PM
  #229
Canadian_Brewtality
Registered User
 
Canadian_Brewtality's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,794
vCash: 500
never would i have thought this but i really think the season is done.

sad beyond words

Canadian_Brewtality is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:01 PM
  #230
NotProkofievian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
But I was made to understand that the players are allowed to say whatever they wanted. Seems to me there's a caveat attached.

Players pat themselves on the back for not fining anyone who speaks out which is kind of nice, until you realize that being ostracized and making veiled threats is the alternative.
I think that caveat is implicit in any labor dispute. You go against the union and you will be making 0 friends. The most the NHLPA can do is have a policy of not fining their players. If players can say what they want, I guess that would include telling each other to ****.

NotProkofievian is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:05 PM
  #231
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotProkofievian View Post
I'm not sure what you mean. Could you provide an example of your point?



Yeah, and I think the players can work with a lower number than that, too. I think progress can easily be made here.
The PA does not want to receive less money than they made last year, which meajs a certain amount of revenue growth is needed to actually reach 50/50. If the NHL fails to reach 3.3 billion in revenue again , the players would still get 1.8 billion under their proposal.

DAChampion, you're being deliberately obtuse now.

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:12 PM
  #232
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 5,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post

DAChampion, you're being deliberately obtuse now.
So you don't think being Sidney Crosby is a 20 hour a week job?

OK, so why did you imply it?

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:33 PM
  #233
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
So you don't think being Sidney Crosby is a 20 hour a week job?

OK, so why did you imply it?
You pick the one point out of my post? I was estimating the amount of time the average NHL player spends playing games, and practicing. I left out media relations, my bad, but nothing beyond that is required.

The reason I feel you are being obtuse is that I refuse to believe you can't see the difference between someone paying thousands of dollars out of their own pocket to attend school out of requirement, and someone being payed tens of thousands of dollars to "learn" the game of hockey right out of high school.

Your CHL question sounds like sarcasm, but if you were being sincere the minimum salary for a CHL player is $345 week if under 25 games played, and $390 a week if played more than 25.

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 05:58 PM
  #234
NotProkofievian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
The PA does not want to receive less money than they made last year, which meajs a certain amount of revenue growth is needed to actually reach 50/50. If the NHL fails to reach 3.3 billion in revenue again , the players would still get 1.8 billion under their proposal.
Uhhh, I may be mistaken here, but I'm pretty sure that the proposal was that they would go down to 50% of HRR immediately, whatever that may amount to, and then the year after that, they wouldn't be able to receive a dollar amount less than the year prior. This is just what I gleaned from Bob McKenzie. Do you have a link saying otherwise?

NotProkofievian is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:13 PM
  #235
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 5,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
You pick the one point out of my post? I was estimating the amount of time the average NHL player spends playing games, and practicing. I left out media relations, my bad, but nothing beyond that is required.

The reason I feel you are being obtuse is that I refuse to believe you can't see the difference between someone paying thousands of dollars out of their own pocket to attend school out of requirement, and someone being payed tens of thousands of dollars to "learn" the game of hockey right out of high school.

Your CHL question sounds like sarcasm, but if you were being sincere the minimum salary for a CHL player is $345 week if under 25 games played, and $390 a week if played more than 25.
$350/week is good, that's typical for an extended internship/stage. Didn't know that.

Stop thinking of pro sports as a "game", it's a job, a career requiring specialized skills.

The players spend a lot more than 20 hours a week on hockey, not including media interviews, I'm shocked you'd imply that. There's a lot more than games and practice. There's training at the gym a few hours a day (unless you're Gomez), there's travel times, etc. Being on an airplane 40 or 50 times a year -- that's rough.

There's also the fact that even when they're not working they're never really free; for a successful career they need to maintain a constant sleep schedule and never eat junk, never put their bodies in danger, etc.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:14 PM
  #236
Habbadasher
Registered User
 
Habbadasher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: My couch
Country: Germany
Posts: 1,587
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
They're already going after ordinary guys. It's not either or. The difference is that locking out Joe Blow doesn't make the news, and if it does people will feel more sympathy for him. That's not the agenda, the agenda is for locked out individuals to be villainized.

This is a lot more public. The four lockouts in three sports in 2 years have captured the public's imagination, and we can see most people's attitudes: "damn players make too much money". It's the same as when people say teachers make too much money. It's setting a precedent.

This is clearly an effective strategy. Just read most people's posts. Check out some of the other boards.
Now I understand, when people agree with you, they are enlightened, when they don't, they are victims of brainwashing.

The article you cite is full of personal attacks and factual errors.

For example, there are many meetings between the PA and NHL that were attended by Bill Daly or Gary Bettman (on the NHL side) only, yet this article says this law firm "are the lead negotiators". So they are leading by not attending? Oh, I see.

Habbadasher is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:16 PM
  #237
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotProkofievian View Post
Uhhh, I may be mistaken here, but I'm pretty sure that the proposal was that they would go down to 50% of HRR immediately, whatever that may amount to, and then the year after that, they wouldn't be able to receive a dollar amount less than the year prior. This is just what I gleaned from Bob McKenzie. Do you have a link saying otherwise?
I'm on a tablet so I apologize for the brief nature of my posts, or if they are confusing, it's a pain typing out long posts on here. The players proposal stated they would never earn less than the $1.883 billion they received last year, regardless of what 50% of HRR ended up being. Not counting a shortened season obviously.

http://www.tsn.ca/story/?id=409277

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:20 PM
  #238
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 5,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habbadasher View Post
Now I understand, when people agree with you, they are enlightened, when they don't, they are victims of brainwashing.
Yes and no. Some people have said that the players are responsible for the lockout, or that the owners take all the risks, etc. Those people are brainwashed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Habbadasher View Post
The article you cite is full of personal attacks and factual errors.
If there are factual errors in the article, why can't you find one?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Habbadasher View Post
For example, there are many meetings between the PA and NHL that were attended by Bill Daly or Gary Bettman (on the NHL side) only, yet this article says this law firm "are the lead negotiators". So they are leading by not attending? Oh, I see.
No, it said Batterman was a lead negotiator in 2005, which is part of the public record:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004%E2...t#Negotiations

You need to work on your reading comprehension skills. I just checked your posting history. You're the guy who didn't know that the NHLPA's request that revenue sharing be increased from 140 million to 240 million counted as a 70% request. You also hallucinated that the NHL had offered tripling revenue sharing.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:23 PM
  #239
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
$350/week is good, that's typical for an extended internship/stage. Didn't know that.

Stop thinking of pro sports as a "game", it's a job, a career requiring specialized skills.

The players spend a lot more than 20 hours a week on hockey, not including media interviews, I'm shocked you'd imply that. There's a lot more than games and practice. There's training at the gym a few hours a day (unless you're Gomez), there's travel times, etc. Being on an airplane 40 or 50 times a year -- that's rough.

There's also the fact that even when they're not working they're never really free; for a successful career they need to maintain a constant sleep schedule and never eat junk, never put their bodies in danger, etc.
You could say that about any job. When I worked construction I could spend my free time at home eating better and getting stronger, it would help me get better at my job, but it was my free time, and I wasn't required to do it in order to keep my job, neither are hockey players. This is just arguing semantics though and we've gotten away from the real discussion, so I'll concede that I was wrong on myb20 hours a week estimate.

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:24 PM
  #240
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 20,919
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
I'm on a tablet so I apologize for the brief nature of my posts, or if they are confusing, it's a pain typing out long posts on here. The players proposal stated they would never earn less than the $1.883 billion they received last year, regardless of what 50% of HRR ended up being. Not counting a shortened season obviously.

http://www.tsn.ca/story/?id=409277
That's what I also thought.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:29 PM
  #241
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 5,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfan92 View Post
DAChampion, I am a little confused on these numbers you have here. That 4.5 million that was the result of the 24% rollback, right? So before you do the calculation on the additional 12.3% rollback, shouldn't you also account for the increase of that contract during the CBA term before doing the rollback? That massive difference is not so bad then, no?
Respectfully.
Both the owners and players benefit from increased total revenue. It is true that due to growth the players have 80% more since the 2005 lockout, and the owners have 180% more.

What changes in the negotiations, however, is how much goes to the players and how much to the owners.
In a free market, players get 72%.
Last season, players got 57%.
Now, owners are demanding a reduction to 50%.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:32 PM
  #242
NotProkofievian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
I'm on a tablet so I apologize for the brief nature of my posts, or if they are confusing, it's a pain typing out long posts on here. The players proposal stated they would never earn less than the $1.883 billion they received last year, regardless of what 50% of HRR ended up being. Not counting a shortened season obviously.

http://www.tsn.ca/story/?id=409277
No worries. However, that article was from Remembrance day, the 11, and that was a sunday. This was not the last player proposal, but the second to last player proposal. In the one they levied on wednesday, the 21st, I believe the deal was "50% right away, whatever HRR may be."

Quote:
- Our players' share proposal is identical to yours in all material respects except for the amount of the transition payments added to the 50% share. There are no guarantees or fixed targets, other than a requirement that, beginning with the second year of the Agreement, players' share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season.
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409992

NotProkofievian is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:40 PM
  #243
Kriss E
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 20,919
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotProkofievian View Post
No worries. However, that article was from Remembrance day, the 11, and that was a sunday. This was not the last player proposal, but the second to last player proposal. In the one they levied on wednesday, the 21st, I believe the deal was "50% right away, whatever HRR may be."



http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409992
But it doesn't clearly say they'd agree to the roll back.

Kriss E is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:42 PM
  #244
NotProkofievian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss E View Post
But it doesn't clearly say they'd agree to the roll back.
From the very next line.

Quote:
Player share will equal 50% of HRR, plus these fixed dollar payments attributable to the first four years of the agreement:
The only difference is the make whole provision.

NotProkofievian is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:48 PM
  #245
habsfan92
Registered User
 
habsfan92's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Both the owners and players benefit from increased total revenue. It is true that due to growth the players have 80% more since the 2005 lockout, and the owners have 180% more.

What changes in the negotiations, however, is how much goes to the players and how much to the owners.
In a free market, players get 72%.
Last season, players got 57%.
Now, owners are demanding a reduction to 50%.
Your answer doesn't address my post. After the initial rollback from last cba, average salary went up about 28%, so you must factor this also. You numbers are getting a bit selective.
And if the owners have 180% more, that kind of shows how unbalanced it was before. So if the players have 80% growth then they didn't do too shabby.

habsfan92 is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:54 PM
  #246
NotProkofievian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfan92 View Post
Your answer doesn't address my post. After the initial rollback from last cba, average salary went up about 28%, so you must factor this also. You numbers are getting a bit selective.
And if the owners have 180% more, that kind of shows how unbalanced it was before. So if the players have 80% growth then they didn't do too shabby.
Yeah, but you can't really say that because players salaries went up in isolation from the incremental NPV of having no salary cap.

NotProkofievian is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:57 PM
  #247
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotProkofievian View Post
No worries. However, that article was from Remembrance day, the 11, and that was a sunday. This was not the last player proposal, but the second to last player proposal. In the one they levied on wednesday, the 21st, I believe the deal was "50% right away, whatever HRR may be."



http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409992
Sorry.

That link also says the players share in dollars may not be less than the prior year.

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 06:59 PM
  #248
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 5,853
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habsfan92 View Post
Your answer doesn't address my post. After the initial rollback from last cba, average salary went up about 28%, so you must factor this also. You numbers are getting a bit selective.
And if the owners have 180% more, that kind of shows how unbalanced it was before. So if the players have 80% growth then they didn't do too shabby.
I don't know where the 28% number comes from. Can you explain?

The league isn't going to have 8% annual growth forever.

Also, it wasn't unbalanced before, it was a free market. They're not the same thing. In a free market players get 72%.

DAChampion is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:00 PM
  #249
NotProkofievian
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 2,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Protest the Hero View Post
Sorry.

That link also says the players share in dollars may not be less than the prior year.
Correct. However, it says "starting in the second year of the agreement." Meaning they agree to the drop to 50% right away for the first year, whatever that may amount to. However, they also stipulate that starting in the second year, the player share in absolute dollars may not be less than the year before.

Quote:
Our players' share proposal is identical to yours in all material respects except for the amount of the transition payments added to the 50% share. There are no guarantees or fixed targets, other than a requirement that, beginning with the second year of the Agreement, players' share, expressed in dollars, may not fall below its value for the prior season. This proposal allows us to determine players' share regardless of the effects of the lockout and its aftermath.

NotProkofievian is offline  
Old
11-26-2012, 07:05 PM
  #250
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NotProkofievian View Post
Correct. However, it says "starting in the second year of the agreement." Meaning they agree to the drop to 50% right away for the first year, whatever that may amount to. However, they also stipulate that starting in the second year, the player share in absolute dollars may not be less than the year before.
That's because of the shortened first season. The point is that the owners will never agree to something like that, in the chance that revenues fall.

Protest the Hero 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 03:46 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.