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
11-28-2012, 08:36 PM
  #851
west in the east
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Vancouver
Country: Ireland
Posts: 3,429
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MajorCanuck View Post
I heard somewhere NHL contracts already contain clauses that basically state that the contract is subject to change with future CBAs. otherwise the league wouldnt even try to do roll backs with getting sued by the players
Likely true. In any event, the cba changes the contracting climate.

LeBrun also has a good article with comments from Ted Lindsey which basically state that players like hamerlik are not wrong. Worth a read

west in the east is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 11:17 AM
  #852
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,841
vCash: 500
If you trust the Forbes numbers, the teams in the NHL made 300 million last season and franchise values have risen drastically in the past 7 years. This sure helps the NHL's argument

Proto is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 12:17 PM
  #853
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,689
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
If you trust the Forbes numbers, the teams in the NHL made 300 million last season and franchise values have risen drastically in the past 7 years. This sure helps the NHL's argument
NHL players made about 1,700 million last year...and you think the situation favours the owners who made a net profit of 300 million? Take out Toronto, New York, and Montreal and you'll see most teams are treading water or sinking.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 12:45 PM
  #854
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,841
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
NHL players made about 1,700 million last year...and you think the situation favours the owners who made a net profit of 300 million? Take out Toronto, New York, and Montreal and you'll see most teams are treading water or sinking.
Yes, I think it suggests the league is justified in asking to reduce the revenue share to 50% over the course of three seasons, but I don't see how it any way justifies their "ask" on contracting rights. The NHL is already making money. It's just poorly distributed because there are some terribly run franchises.


Last edited by Proto: 11-29-2012 at 12:51 PM.
Proto is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 12:48 PM
  #855
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,841
vCash: 500
Also note that the fact the teams made 300 million dollars is in addition to the fact that franchise values rose dramatically. This is an unseen profit that is under-reported in the media and basically ignored by the NHL when it spins its economics.

As I posted earlier, in MLB, the Dodgers went from a 450 million dollar purchase to a 2.15 billion dollar sale in the course of 8 years. Even if that team didn't make much money over that period of time, the value of the franchise rose by over 600%. The value of the Leafs increased by 92% (!!!) to 1 billion dollars in the past YEAR.

If they stop front-loading contracts, which hampers yearly income, then the league will be even healthier.


Last edited by Proto: 11-29-2012 at 02:10 PM.
Proto is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 12:53 PM
  #856
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 18,655
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
Take out Toronto, New York, and Montreal and you'll see most teams are treading water or sinking.
Take a closer look at one of the so-called "problem childs" of the NHL:

http://www.defendingbigd.com/2012/11...-money-revenue

Quote:
Originally Posted by west in the east View Post
Likely true. In any event, the cba changes the contracting climate.

LeBrun also has a good article with comments from Ted Lindsey which basically state that players like hamerlik are not wrong. Worth a read
Good thing Gordie Howe thought for himself rather than future players - like Hamrlik is complaining about - back when Lindsay tried forming an association.


Last edited by Barney Gumble: 11-29-2012 at 01:00 PM.
Barney Gumble is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 02:12 PM
  #857
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 8,841
vCash: 500
Quick and dirty math: according to Forbes, average team's value increased by just shy of 11% between 2011 and 2012 and only a handful of teams saw their value depreciate.

Proto is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 02:37 PM
  #858
Scurr
Registered User
 
Scurr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Whalley
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,201
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Quick and dirty math: according to Forbes, average team's value increased by just shy of 11% between 2011 and 2012 and only a handful of teams saw their value depreciate.
Getting to 50% of HRR should also going to have a positive impact on franchise values, probably offset by a loss of momentum and inability to keep labour peace.


Last edited by Scurr: 11-29-2012 at 04:57 PM. Reason: labour piece lol
Scurr is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 03:43 PM
  #859
Reverend Mayhem
1 for you, 19 for me
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,024
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Bob McKenzie ‏@TSNBobMcKenzie
Sounds as if there's no traction or progress coming out of the mediation session. Official statements to follow, no doubt.
I'd think that would spell the end of the season. I just don't see them coming to an agreement any time soon, something very significant that changes either the owners or the players stance would need to happen.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 03:52 PM
  #860
CCF23
Registered User
 
CCF23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Richmond, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,454
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CCF23


This league is a joke and I'm embarrassed to be a fan. If I could willingly flip an "on/off" switch somewhere inside of me and just choose to not care I absolutely would.

CCF23 is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 03:58 PM
  #861
Reverend Mayhem
1 for you, 19 for me
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,024
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF23 View Post


This league is a joke and I'm embarrassed to be a fan. If I could willingly flip an "on/off" switch somewhere inside of me and just choose to not care I absolutely would.
Yeah, if we lose the season I'd hope everyone is held responsible. Just such an unnecessary lockout in the first place and completely avoidable, losing 1 day of games is ridiculous, 1 whole season is just absolutely stupid. Bettman, Fehr, owners/players everything needs to be changed or hauled out. If I was the owners, I would tell Bettman to not let the door hit him on the way out. If I was a player, I'd congratulate Fehr and myself for taking a season away from my career.

And for those who support this lockout and were in the league in 2003-04...please just give your head a shake. We need more Roman Hamrliks and Dan Boyles.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:00 PM
  #862
DL44
Registered User
 
DL44's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Left Coast
Posts: 5,001
vCash: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
Quick and dirty math: according to Forbes, average team's value increased by just shy of 11% between 2011 and 2012 and only a handful of teams saw their value depreciate.
Can't wait to see the increase in the Isles franchise value after their announced move to Brooklyn.

This move will be a huge revenue boost.. in potential luxury box sales alone.. they go from a stadium with 31 to one with 100..

Instant 'have' team ... also helps that the move will also be correlating with the maturation of their young stud D prospects... so should be a legit product on the ice by then as well.

DL44 is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:13 PM
  #863
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 17,496
vCash: 500
I don't feel bad for either side, this is what happens in contentious labour disputes. However if you are looking to point a finger at someone it has to be primarily directed towards Bettman and owners. They haven't negotiated in any manner of "good faith" and have tried to ram one sided offers down the player's throats. Players aren't obligated to accept major concessions in virtually all areas in order to further line their billionaire owners' pockets.

I also don't agree with players going overseas to take jobs away from other players who had those spots. Those guys shouldn't be displaced just because some NHL stars are looking for work. If players are that desperate to play and earn a paycheck, arrange their own NHLPA tournaments or something, don't steal jobs.

Canucker is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:32 PM
  #864
Reverend Mayhem
1 for you, 19 for me
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,024
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Agreed, Canucker. I feel to some extent these players going overseas are saying, "Sort this out yourselves, we just want to play." why not sort out a deal at home playing here and get this abomination over with?

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 04:33 PM
  #865
Scottrockztheworld*
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,301
vCash: 500
I don't know about you guys but I'm embarrassed to call myself an NHL fan now. 3 lockouts in less then 20 years... Questioning if I should even bother anymore. Its clear money is more important then the fans or the game. All of them are pathetic! What really pisses me off though are the players that go over seas to play. If you're going to strike then stick with your brothers, don't leave them & do your job somewhere else while stealing someone elses.

Scottrockztheworld* is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 05:06 PM
  #866
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,047
vCash: 500
It's going to get ugly... It needs to get ugly... Both sides still feel the other is bluffing... Before September even rolled around, some players were saying December 1st is when they expect to play hockey (if some are saying it, more are thinking it)... Well, December 1st is Saturday... As days and weeks pass, past December 1st, we'll hear terrible things about the NHL and Bettman from the players... We might see Decertification rumblings (or, formal filings)... Another thing some players communicated as a "bluff" needed to get the NHL to move (if some are saying it, more are thinking it)... NHL call this "bluff" too... Call the season off immediately, at least, informally...

Doesn't matter how bleak it gets the first half of December, I still think a deal gets done for hockey January 1st (or, around there)... It needs to get bleak now... NHL needs to call all of the NHLPA's bluffs to get the players questioning Fehr...

Decertification? Cancelled season immediately... Players to Fehr, umm, is this what we really wanted? I thought the owners would give in with the threat!

I'm not an owner supporter... I'm not a player supporter either... But I think it would be absolutely foolish for the players to put pride ahead of making a good decision... Eventually, Leonidas Fehr needs to bow to the Xerxes Bettman... This isn't a battle worth sacrificing Sparta over, IMHO... The players "win" even if they "lose"... The only one who loses is Fehr, who's pride gets damaged through bowing... The players proved their point, IMO... The players stood up for themselves... The players pushed back, when being pushed... Held their ground, fighting off the Persian "god king" after round-and-round of battles... There's a time and place not to bow and die in the final, epic battle scene... This isn't it, IMO... You'd be hard pressed to find the majority of people (let alone, hockey fans) who would look up to the players for dying on their sword here... This isn't a battle worth dying over...

The owners, yes, they want all of the land (for whatever reason)... All of their significant demands met... Are they right? Are they wrong? In a battle between big Goliath and little Goliath, is it wrong for big Goliath to try and squish little Goliath? I don't think so... At least, it's to be expected... It's difficult to feel terrible for little Goliath here... To be flexing his guns and swinging his sword, time and again... Stay down, for Christ sake, IMHO... After all, little Goliath isn't David... Little Goliath could have lived to fight another day... against the Davids of the world... Hell, live to fight against Big Goliath another day... Hard to feel bad for Little Goliath... Hardly a target for my sympathy, if he commits suicide by deciding to fight to the end... He should have decided to live, IMO... He has a lot of good things to live for...

The fans are David... Now a fight between David against Big Goliath and Little Goliath is one I could really get into...

Go David go! Everybody loves an underdog... Such is life in the food chain...


Last edited by I in the Eye: 11-29-2012 at 05:26 PM.
I in the Eye is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 06:26 PM
  #867
billvanseattle
Registered User
 
billvanseattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: bellingham
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,944
vCash: 500
Heres hoping that the mediator steps up and says "You are both **** idiots. Here's a point midway between where you were, and I know neither side is happy". and then says "oh, by the way, I suggest both of you refuse to budge from this if you want to show cajones and let the other asswipe look like an idiot and lose a season!"

billvanseattle is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 06:29 PM
  #868
Barney Gumble
Registered User
 
Barney Gumble's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 18,655
vCash: 500
lol - now B*ttman has apparently proposed to Fehr a meeting without any NHL or NHLPA brass (only players & owners).

Here's the catch - the NHL would select which players to be in the meeting (I'm guessing guys like Hamrlik lol) & which owners would be in the meeting.

Barney Gumble is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 06:44 PM
  #869
hackey
Posts: 1,258,486
 
hackey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SoStopPostingSoMuch
Posts: 2,756
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reverend Mayhem View Post
I'd think that would spell the end of the season. I just don't see them coming to an agreement any time soon, something very significant that changes either the owners or the players stance would need to happen.
The 1994/95 lockout settled on January 11th 1995
They started playing on January 20
They played a 48 game season
New Jersey won the Cup on June 24

So don't fret yourself young little grasshopper
There's plenty of time

hackey is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 06:49 PM
  #870
Reverend Mayhem
1 for you, 19 for me
 
Reverend Mayhem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Port Coquitlam, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,024
vCash: 940
Send a message via Skype™ to Reverend Mayhem
Quote:
Originally Posted by hackey View Post
The 1994/95 lockout settled on January 11th 1995
They started playing on January 20
They played a 48 game season
New Jersey won the Cup on June 24

So don't fret yourself young little grasshopper
There's plenty of time
I know all this information already.

Reverend Mayhem is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 06:55 PM
  #871
Hammer79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
It's going to get ugly... It needs to get ugly... Both sides still feel the other is bluffing... Before September even rolled around, some players were saying December 1st is when they expect to play hockey (if some are saying it, more are thinking it)... Well, December 1st is Saturday... As days and weeks pass, past December 1st, we'll hear terrible things about the NHL and Bettman from the players... We might see Decertification rumblings (or, formal filings)... Another thing some players communicated as a "bluff" needed to get the NHL to move (if some are saying it, more are thinking it)... NHL call this "bluff" too... Call the season off immediately, at least, informally...

Doesn't matter how bleak it gets the first half of December, I still think a deal gets done for hockey January 1st (or, around there)... It needs to get bleak now... NHL needs to call all of the NHLPA's bluffs to get the players questioning Fehr...

Decertification? Cancelled season immediately... Players to Fehr, umm, is this what we really wanted? I thought the owners would give in with the threat!

I'm not an owner supporter... I'm not a player supporter either... But I think it would be absolutely foolish for the players to put pride ahead of making a good decision... Eventually, Leonidas Fehr needs to bow to the Xerxes Bettman... This isn't a battle worth sacrificing Sparta over, IMHO... The players "win" even if they "lose"... The only one who loses is Fehr, who's pride gets damaged through bowing... The players proved their point, IMO... The players stood up for themselves... The players pushed back, when being pushed... Held their ground, fighting off the Persian "god king" after round-and-round of battles... There's a time and place not to bow and die in the final, epic battle scene... This isn't it, IMO... You'd be hard pressed to find the majority of people (let alone, hockey fans) who would look up to the players for dying on their sword here... This isn't a battle worth dying over...

The owners, yes, they want all of the land (for whatever reason)... All of their significant demands met... Are they right? Are they wrong? In a battle between big Goliath and little Goliath, is it wrong for big Goliath to try and squish little Goliath? I don't think so... At least, it's to be expected... It's difficult to feel terrible for little Goliath here... To be flexing his guns and swinging his sword, time and again... Stay down, for Christ sake, IMHO... After all, little Goliath isn't David... Little Goliath could have lived to fight another day... against the Davids of the world... Hell, live to fight against Big Goliath another day... Hard to feel bad for Little Goliath... Hardly a target for my sympathy, if he commits suicide by deciding to fight to the end... He should have decided to live, IMO... He has a lot of good things to live for...

The fans are David... Now a fight between David against Big Goliath and Little Goliath is one I could really get into...

Go David go! Everybody loves an underdog... Such is life in the food chain...
If they decertified, the lockout would be ended by the courts. They can't lockout a union that no longer exists. They would be forced to bring the players back and honor the contracts they signed. Anti-trust is a big deal. The owners could not collude to impose an artificial cap or to keep salaries down, or else they would open themselves up to anti-trust charges. With no CBA, there would be no draft, no RFA's just UFA's, no league minimum or maximum salaries, no pension. It could end up in the courts for years. It's a nuclear option with blowback for the players too. Rules can't be imposed unilaterally by the league without a bargaining unit to agree to the conditions.

To get to this point though, the union has to prove that they did everything in their power to negotiate an agreement, which is why they went along with mediation.

Hammer79 is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 06:56 PM
  #872
ddawg1950
Registered User
 
ddawg1950's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 9,171
vCash: 500
Part of me thinks the season is toast and that guys like Jacobsen and Fehr are too intransigent to get a deal done.

And part of me believes that the responsible adults involved would never allow this to happen.

ddawg1950 is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 07:19 PM
  #873
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer79 View Post
If they decertified, the lockout would be ended by the courts. They can't lockout a union that no longer exists. They would be forced to bring the players back and honor the contracts they signed. Anti-trust is a big deal. The owners could not collude to impose an artificial cap or to keep salaries down, or else they would open themselves up to anti-trust charges. With no CBA, there would be no draft, no RFA's just UFA's, no league minimum or maximum salaries, no pension. It could end up in the courts for years. It's a nuclear option with blowback for the players too. Rules can't be imposed unilaterally by the league without a bargaining unit to agree to the conditions.

To get to this point though, the union has to prove that they did everything in their power to negotiate an agreement, which is why they went along with mediation.
OK, but I think I remember Daly saying that if the NHLPA decertifies (or, was it files for decertification?) that the season would most likely have to be cancelled...

My point was, if the NHLPA is "bluffing" with "starting the process" of decertification (thinking that the NHL will be pressured to move), that I think the NHL calls the bluff, and returns by saying the season now needs to be cancelled...

Edit: here's a link:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...rview/1723447/

About the possibility that the NHLPA might decertify as a strategy:

Daly: "I wouldn't view an antitrust lawsuit in this case to be anything other than an unfortunate development because I think it's a time-consuming process that would likely lead to the end of the season."

I in the Eye is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 08:09 PM
  #874
Hammer79
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
OK, but I think I remember Daly saying that if the NHLPA decertifies (or, was it files for decertification?) that the season would most likely have to be cancelled...

My point was, if the NHLPA is "bluffing" with "starting the process" of decertification (thinking that the NHL will be pressured to move), that I think the NHL calls the bluff, and returns by saying the season now needs to be cancelled...

Edit: here's a link:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports...rview/1723447/

About the possibility that the NHLPA might decertify as a strategy:

Daly: "I wouldn't view an antitrust lawsuit in this case to be anything other than an unfortunate development because I think it's a time-consuming process that would likely lead to the end of the season."
They probably won't move to decertify unless it's clear this season is lost already, like mid-February, although decertification threats helped end the NBA lockout last year. If they thought they could get a court ruling in time to save this season, I think they would have done it already. It's about getting them playing for the 13-14 season.

Hammer79 is offline  
Old
11-29-2012, 11:22 PM
  #875
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,047
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammer79 View Post
They probably won't move to decertify unless it's clear this season is lost already, like mid-February, although decertification threats helped end the NBA lockout last year. If they thought they could get a court ruling in time to save this season, I think they would have done it already. It's about getting them playing for the 13-14 season.
OK, next year is a whole different ballgame for me... I agree that the NHLPA would do everything in their power to ensure that the players are playing next year (if this year gets cancelled)... There's no way, IMO, the players wouldn't play for two seasons in a row... After a lost season, I could see the majority of players just wanting to get back to playing in the NHL (with the opportunities and benefits that it brings)... If that means entering the unknown (through decertification), and taking the chances that come with the unknown, I think they'd be more inclined to risk it, after a lost season... After all, better than not playing at all...

This season, I don't see all (majority) of the players being on board to actually decertify... I don't know how decertification works... but, I assume, it would need a vote? Majority of votes win?

If before February (or, before no hope for a season this year), I can see the players voting positive to "start the decertification process"... as in, officially announce (to anyone who will listen), "the decertification process has started"... which could mean, anything, from they talked about it over a beer... to they looked online for research about it... To, they downloaded the appropriate forms online to fill out... That could be the start of the decertification process... I could see this happening as soon as tomorrow or this weekend...

If before February, I think the players would perhaps all (most) get behind the bluff of decertification... To "start the process" (which could mean anything, really) with the plan to get the owners to pause, blink, and negotiate more towards them... It's a card in hand still to be played... To seriously consider decertification or seriously get the ball rolling though, I agree, that it would (I would think) be post-February (or post-behind hope to playing this year, whatever month or day that is)... The NHLPA, IMHO, would need time to get the majority of players on board anyways (assuming it's a majority vote that determines if it gets seriously explored to put into motion)... The decertification process itself, IMO, could split the union and perhaps cause a coup... It's something that's pretty damn impactful to the business of NHL hockey, and how the players are compensated... My impression is that the majority of players just want to play hockey at the highest level (and get paid well for it... and reap the rewards that playing a professional sport brings)... I really don't think the majority would get behind changing the business side of it all that much (i.e. no union), where they have to concern themselves with the business side much more, or think about the business side of it all that much (I realize there are agents... but it's different being a lone ranger than being in a union)... The majority of players seem to have opinions (obviously) but for the most part they have left the business side up to the union and the negotiating committee... And now the union would be saying, it's best to have no union? Would confuse the hell out of Ben Eager... It would be interesting to see if the majority of players would want that fight, or if they just give in to the NHL at that point...


Last edited by I in the Eye: 11-29-2012 at 11:33 PM.
I in the Eye 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 08:02 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.