HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > Columbus Blue Jackets
Notices

The Lockout Thread Part I

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-30-2012, 02:29 PM
  #851
BluejacketNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,815
vCash: 500
I'd of been on the players side if they didnt have Fehr on their side

BluejacketNut is offline  
Old
11-30-2012, 05:02 PM
  #852
EDM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,879
vCash: 500
I agree 100% with Skraut. The "big owners" in this league are the most vicious, greedy, power mad group of any professional sport. If they can get away with this, there will be demands for still more at the next negotiation and another lockout. They are arseholes. Not a big fan of the players. But anything that sticks to the Koch Brothers types of the world, I am for.

EDM is offline  
Old
11-30-2012, 05:29 PM
  #853
pete goegan
HFBoards Sponsor
 
pete goegan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 11,395
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EspenK View Post


I was thinking the same thing as I was reading their posts.

and a game misconduct to pete for being 3rd man in.
Yeah, I got in before I realized they were going to start swinging. It always the innocents that get caught in the middle. Oh, the horror!

Edit: at the risk of catching another one to the back of the head, I'm with Skraut, too!

pete goegan is offline  
Old
11-30-2012, 09:51 PM
  #854
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skraut View Post
Well, seeing as I picked a side, I hope to amuse you with my reasoning.

7 years ago the owners locked the players out until they got exactly what they wanted. It worked, eventually the players caved.
I understand your reasoning, however judging the average salary increase in the NHL since the lockout I would have to say that the players, ultimately, didn't give up much beyond the across the board pay cut (which most of which have recovered).

You can't claim being treated unfairly with a 3.5 million average salary.

blahblah is offline  
Old
11-30-2012, 10:32 PM
  #855
Nanabijou
Playoffs back at Nat
 
Nanabijou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skraut View Post
Lockouts suck.
Strikes suck.

But since we're doing this now, I want the right set of circumstances to happen to hopefully prevent it from happening in the future.
I agree with the above statements. Unfortunately, I don't think the cycle will be broken if the players show backbone this time. I think they showed pretty good backbone last time in sacrificing a year.

This cycle will only be broken with new leadership in both the commissioner's chair and the NHLPA, but especially the former. Ideally, there has to be a commish who understands both the owner's and the player's perspective and tries to look out for the interests of both sides.

One name that comes to my mind is Ken Dryden, but I don't know if he'd ever do it.

Nanabijou is online now  
Old
11-30-2012, 11:16 PM
  #856
Sore Loser
Since 2009
 
Sore Loser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Spokane, WA.
Country: United States
Posts: 5,907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnCornelius View Post
It is pretty clear who the problem is and it is Gary Bettman. This incompetent boob is now 0-for-3 in CBA negotiations. He's lost significant time 3 straight negotiations. And for what? His first CBA was a gigantic disaster while it was lauded as a win for the owners. His second CBA...was a gigantic disaster while it was lauded as a win for the owners. It isn't clear that Gary has a fundamental understanding of what he would actually need to do to make his league financially viable...after around 20 years in the commissioners chair. That makes it kind of difficult for anyone to have any faith that this third time that he's sacrificing a substatial amount of games he's actually going to get it right.

I think he's got a bigger issue if this season is lost--he may lose a portion of next year as well. With the Olympics in Russia, I think a lot of the Russian born players may be quite happy to stay home next season. And others may be happy to join them up through the Olympics. Because it turns out there is another consequence of global capitalism--the NHL has competition for players in overseas markets.

Bettman and the owners are too set on winning everything in one CBA. The smart move would be to propose a shorter CBA as an alternative and come back in 3 years and once again demand concessions of the players and get them then. The owners will eventually be in the same place they would with Bettman's proposal without the substantial loss of time.
I agree with these comments, completely. I think Gary Bettman is definitely manipulated by the owners to some extent, however I think the owners may be more willing to bend than the front being put on by Bettman and the league may show.

Perhaps this proposed players/owners only meeting will help in some way. I still don't see NHL hockey being played this year, though. If this doesn't spell the end for Gary Bettman (and the Fehr brothers, for that matter), then it'll be time for me to stop following NHL hockey any longer. I simply cannot see these guys at the head of this league or any of it's entities after this lockout. This has to be the final straw for us, as fans, to have to put up with this bull-headed nonsense.

Sore Loser is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 02:35 PM
  #857
JACKETfan
Real Blue Jacketfan
 
JACKETfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Venice
Country: United States
Posts: 9,232
vCash: 500
It's wrong to lay this at Bettman's feet. He represents 30 ownership groups made up of wealthy, bright, businessmen. They are not lambs. They know the numbers. They are not running a charity. They may be wrong but they are not stupid.


Last edited by JACKETfan: 12-01-2012 at 02:41 PM.
JACKETfan is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 04:06 PM
  #858
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EDM View Post
I agree 100% with Skraut. The "big owners" in this league are the most vicious, greedy, power mad group of any professional sport. If they can get away with this, there will be demands for still more at the next negotiation and another lockout. They are arseholes. Not a big fan of the players. But anything that sticks to the Koch Brothers types of the world, I am for.
Can you give me examples of how they are like this?

RDriesenUD is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 04:31 PM
  #859
Timeless Winter
Oceans of Grey
 
Timeless Winter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 16,001
vCash: 50
Send a message via AIM to Timeless Winter
Both sides are greedy ********. The players are just as bad. They should have taken the 50/50 split, and I don't feel bad for them at all if they get a worse deal.

Timeless Winter is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 04:39 PM
  #860
Samkow
Global Moderator
Sidney Cosby
 
Samkow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Columbus
Country: Colombia
Posts: 13,414
vCash: 500
Send a message via Skype™ to Samkow
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
Can you give me examples of how they are like this?
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...3361--nhl.html

Quote:
Winnipeg Jets representation at a recent NHL Board of Governors meeting piped up to say it was opposed to engaging in a long, bloody lockout sure to stymie their franchise's momentum and hurt the game of hockey.

It wasn't Winnipeg owner Mark Chipman, but rather one of the alternate governors representing the Jets.

Bruins Principal Owner and Chairman of the Board of Governors Jeremy Jacobs answered by reprimanding the Winnipeg representative as one of the "new kids on the block" and informed him that he would know when he was allowed to speak in the NHL board room.

That's the kind of hawkish, dismissive, bully mentality that's driving the bus for the NHL lockout that's now cancelled games through the middle of December.

__________________
Truth should never get in the way of a good persecution complex.
Samkow is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 04:41 PM
  #861
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Samkow View Post
I know that. Still wondering how they are any worse than any other leagues owners. Don't the players get a higher % than any other major sports league? Besides, they are called OWNERS for a reason. They OWN the teams. If the players don't like it, they can go play somewhere else. No one is forcing them to play in the NHL. They play there because it is where they can make the most money and get the best of everything as a professional hockey player.

RDriesenUD is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 04:56 PM
  #862
Nanabijou
Playoffs back at Nat
 
Nanabijou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JACKETfan View Post
It's wrong to lay this at Bettman's feet. He represents 30 ownership groups made up of wealthy, bright, businessmen. They are not lambs. They know the numbers. They are not running a charity. They may be wrong but they are not stupid.
It's not all Bettman's fault. But now that we are in the third lockout, this clearly shows he is unable to broker a deal without significant bloodshed. The NHL commissioner should really have a broader mandate than just doing what the most hawkish owners desire. We need one who is able to better balance the owner's interests with that of the players and yes, even fans. Not an easy job but I think it can be done better.

Nanabijou is online now  
Old
12-01-2012, 06:02 PM
  #863
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanabijou View Post
It's not all Bettman's fault. But now that we are in the third lockout, this clearly shows he is unable to broker a deal without significant bloodshed. The NHL commissioner should really have a broader mandate than just doing what the most hawkish owners desire. We need one who is able to better balance the owner's interests with that of the players and yes, even fans. Not an easy job but I think it can be done better.
I guess they would have to change the job description

candyman82 is offline  
Old
12-01-2012, 07:33 PM
  #864
Nanabijou
Playoffs back at Nat
 
Nanabijou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by candyman82 View Post
I guess they would have to change the job description
Actually, I'm not sure they would. First and foremost, his job is to "serve as the Chief Executive Officer of the League and is charged with protecting the integrity of the game of professional hockey and preserving public confidence in the League."

I would say that he's not preserving public confidence in the League.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not on the players side either. I want Bettman AND Fehr gone and I want a deal centered around 50/50 done.

My original point is that I don't think having the players draw a hard line will prevent this lockout cycle from happening over and over again. Changing the principle players involved might, and Bettman is the number one constant for all 3 lockouts.

Nanabijou is online now  
Old
12-01-2012, 07:46 PM
  #865
leesmith
"We're NEVER Done!"
 
leesmith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 15,262
vCash: 500
I dont want a 5 year deal. I want a TEN year deal. No way we should be forced to go through this again so soon.

leesmith is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 02:36 AM
  #866
InjuredChoker
Registered User
 
InjuredChoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: LTIR or golf course
Posts: 16,903
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by leesmith View Post
I dont want a 5 year deal. I want a TEN year deal. No way we should be forced to go through this again so soon.
Agreed, but owners want a 5 year deal, I think. Too risky to go with 10 year deal; just look at the last CBA. They want more concessions in 5 years.

InjuredChoker is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 06:59 AM
  #867
Nanabijou
Playoffs back at Nat
 
Nanabijou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kemisti View Post
Agreed, but owners want a 5 year deal, I think. Too risky to go with 10 year deal; just look at the last CBA. They want more concessions in 5 years.
To be fair, the owners initially proposed a longer deal (6 years) than the players wanted. 5 years will be the likely compromise.

Nanabijou is online now  
Old
12-02-2012, 02:07 PM
  #868
candyman82
Registered User
 
candyman82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Fredericksburg, VA
Posts: 2,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nanabijou View Post
To be fair, the owners initially proposed a longer deal (6 years) than the players wanted. 5 years will be the likely compromise.
No way on earth that happens. That would have the CBA expire going into the NHL's 100th anniversary. I can't imagine that the NHL would put themselves in such a poor negotiating position.

candyman82 is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 04:38 PM
  #869
Skraut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Enter city here
Posts: 10,344
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by blahblah View Post
I understand your reasoning, however judging the average salary increase in the NHL since the lockout I would have to say that the players, ultimately, didn't give up much beyond the across the board pay cut (which most of which have recovered).

You can't claim being treated unfairly with a 3.5 million average salary.
Since you claim it wouldn't be giving up much, I'm sure you wouldn't mind me putting a limit on your earning potential.

Skraut is offline  
Old
12-02-2012, 06:10 PM
  #870
IBleedUnionBlue
Registered User
 
IBleedUnionBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,118
vCash: 124
Players Owners meeting looks to be confirmed. Owners in attendance will include Jacobs and Murray. Dolan was reportedly interested, but no surprise he was shut out given his rift with Bettman.

I wouldn't hold out any hope that this meeting accomplishes anything. In fact, I expect another 2 weeks of games to be cancelled this Friday Dec 7th.

IBleedUnionBlue is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 12:23 AM
  #871
RDriesenUD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 7,854
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skraut View Post
Since you claim it wouldn't be giving up much, I'm sure you wouldn't mind me putting a limit on your earning potential.
???? I think most jobs have a limit on earning potential. Plus, this is one business. There are other hockey leagues in the world. The players don't have to play in the NHL. They can go play wherever they want.

RDriesenUD is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 02:10 AM
  #872
Hugg
Registered User
 
Hugg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Columbus
Country: United States
Posts: 1,770
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RDriesenUD View Post
I know that. Still wondering how they are any worse than any other leagues owners. Don't the players get a higher % than any other major sports league? Besides, they are called OWNERS for a reason. They OWN the teams. If the players don't like it, they can go play somewhere else. No one is forcing them to play in the NHL. They play there because it is where they can make the most money and get the best of everything as a professional hockey player.
MLB players got 52% in 2008, I can't find anything more recent and there's been no major CBA changes to indicate that it's much different.

In 2008, this was the lowest of the 4 major sports. If it's still the same, it's going to be the highest when this lockout ends. NBA is essentially a 50/50 split. NFL is between 47-49 depending on factors.

MLB also has, by far, the strongest union and the best working relationship between the players/owners.

Hugg is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 11:07 AM
  #873
BluejacketNut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 4,815
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugg View Post
MLB players got 52% in 2008, I can't find anything more recent and there's been no major CBA changes to indicate that it's much different.

In 2008, this was the lowest of the 4 major sports. If it's still the same, it's going to be the highest when this lockout ends. NBA is essentially a 50/50 split. NFL is between 47-49 depending on factors.

MLB also has, by far, the strongest union and the best working relationship between the players/owners.
That's cause Fehr is no longer there

BluejacketNut is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 02:01 PM
  #874
blahblah
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 16,346
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skraut View Post
Since you claim it wouldn't be giving up much, I'm sure you wouldn't mind me putting a limit on your earning potential.
There already is unless I change occupations. It's actually questionable how much more I can make with an occupation change. I would probably have to look at my own start up with the intent to sell it. Having said that if my company came up and said "individual salaries are capped at 10 or 12 million". I think you would mostly get a crap load of laughing. Remember before this CBA talk they could get signing bonus's as well. I am not sure what kind of restrictions they are trying to place on that, but with its abuse they are probably going to try and do something with that as well.

Within the company I work for we have pay grades. For my job there is a max pay grade for which I have max salary and max bonus's unless I move over to management (change my pay grade). My benefits are tied to pay grade as well, with a couple of minor exceptions based on years of service. There is also a realistic max for my skill set in the industry as a whole. My salary has already dramatically limited which companies I can even look at if I wish to move on. I would have to look more into jobs that involve more travel in order to increase my salary. Even then there are only a small amount of jobs that would dramatically increase my salary, but they would generally hurt my quality of life.

So yes, there is a salary cap. At least in the company I work for. The benefits of moving to another company are more quality of life than salary and benefit related. That tends to happen when you've been in an industry for 23 years.

Let's no play around with silliness here. We are talking about income that places them in the most wealthy on a global scale. The limits are intended more for competitive balance than anything else. They are not there to oppress the workers. If there wasn't a cap the Rangers would be paying 20 million+ for a Crosby. That would be good for him, not necessarily good for the sport.

What I don't like is the ever increasing restrictions they are trying to impose on player mobility.

blahblah is offline  
Old
12-03-2012, 08:23 PM
  #875
jktsfan*
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Thornville, Ohio
Country: United States
Posts: 1,018
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skraut View Post
Well, seeing as I picked a side, I hope to amuse you with my reasoning.

7 years ago the owners locked the players out until they got exactly what they wanted. It worked, eventually the players caved.

The owners then took that lesson into this year, tossed a lowball offer at the players, then locked them out when they didn't take it. The owners haven't given up anything in this, and why should they. They know no matter what comes out of this, they're getting a better deal than the last CBA. All they have to do is nothing, and they could potentially get an even better deal. They go back to that lowball and claim to actually have made concessions when you compare the current offer to it. When in fact they've gained considerably even if they walk right now with the players proposal.

If the players break again, the circle of lockouts will continue every time a CBA expires. In 7 years will 50/50 be enough? Just lock the players out, wait for their house of cards to fall, and poof, you're at 60/40. Meanwhile the fans have missed another season because the owners know they'll eventually come back.

That's why I'm cheering for the players to find their backbones. I want 7 years from now the deal to be done in July because the owners know they can't just push the players around. I want the players to know they can't push owners around. I want balance so that neither side uses a lockout or a strike to get what they want. I want both sides to respect each other. I want there to be some negotiations, some give and take on both sides, and uninterrupted hockey for the first time in decades.

Lockouts suck.
Strikes suck.

But since we're doing this now, I want the right set of circumstances to happen to hopefully prevent it from happening in the future.
I'm thinking your political beliefs are bleeding over into your side-picking regarding the lockout.

And to be clear, I haven't picked a side. At this point, I'm hopeful that no agreement is EVER reached and that the NHL owners AND players suffer equally. . . . for eternity.


Last edited by jktsfan*: 12-03-2012 at 08:28 PM. Reason: Wanted to do more than just bash Skraut's political beliefs.
jktsfan* 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 11:54 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.