Nhlpa should just accept the NHLs offer if they really wanna play
Sorry, Fehr can't accept anything less than the baseball model.
I find it funny that with how far they got (basically everything was okay including money, the two biggest issues reported were length of the agreement and contract limits, both of which were very close), Fehr decided to negotiate off of NHL's offer, which was take it or leave it, instead of putting it up for a vote.
From the sound of things, the PA would have likely accepted the proposed NHL deal, but it seems he's not looking out for the players.
Sorry, Fehr can't accept anything less than the baseball model.
I find it funny that with how far they got (basically everything was okay including money, the two biggest issues reported were length of the agreement and contract limits, both of which were very close), Fehr decided to negotiate off of NHL's offer, which was take it or leave it, instead of putting it up for a vote.
From the sound of things, the PA would have likely accepted the proposed NHL deal, but it seems he's not looking out for the players.
Sorry, Fehr can't accept anything less than the baseball model.
I find it funny that with how far they got (basically everything was okay including money, the two biggest issues reported were length of the agreement and contract limits, both of which were very close), Fehr decided to negotiate off of NHL's offer, which was take it or leave it, instead of putting it up for a vote.
From the sound of things, the PA would have likely accepted the proposed NHL deal, but it seems he's not looking out for the players.
All of the major concessions in these "negotiations" have been made by the players. The owners haven't negotiated in good faith from the start. Nearly everything has been of the "take it or leave it" variety.
All of the major concessions in these "negotiations" have been made by the players. The owners haven't negotiated in good faith from the start. Nearly everything has been of the "take it or leave it" variety.
The whole thing is a freaking joke.
I don't think who is making the concessions matters.
The collective bargaining process in sports is outdated and always ends with the players losing, it's just the way it is.
The two sides got incredibly close to an agreement that worked for both sides that it looks like the players would have been willing to accept, but Fehr has his own agenda.
Quote:
adater From deep inside players side: "We were ready to play again. But Don came in (Wed.) and told us we could get more and to hold out"
I don't think who is making the concessions matters.
The collective bargaining process in sports is outdated and always ends with the players losing, it's just the way it is.
The two sides got incredibly close to an agreement that worked for both sides that it looks like the players would have been willing to accept, but Fehr has his own agenda.
How so? Isn't that how negotiations work? Sure, I know the players are going to lose. The players know they are going to lose. But the owners aren't negotiating. It's basically, come to us or it ain't happening.
And I don't really believe a word Dater tweets. Why is it that he has quotes that nobody else has, yet he won't say who the "source" is?
How so? Isn't that how negotiations work? Sure, I know the players are going to lose. The players know they are going to lose. But the owners aren't negotiating. It's basically, come to us or it ain't happening.
And I don't really believe a word Dater tweets. Why is it that he has quotes that nobody else has, yet he won't say who the "source" is?
Who knows, but when you look at the quote from the owner posted earlier, and all the rumors...the fact that they were real close and then it fell apart...I certainly can believe that it has Fehr's handwriting on it. What "concessions" were made by either side is purely speculation, although the league senses they have the upper hand and the leverage, and just like last time, they can hold out longer than the players, and they're not going to budge until that changes. Clearly Fehr thought differently.
How so? Isn't that how negotiations work? Sure, I know the players are going to lose. The players know they are going to lose. But the owners aren't negotiating. It's basically, come to us or it ain't happening.
What are the players doing then?
Same thing as you say the owners are doing except worse since they either propose de-linkage and continue to work off of it or work off of NHL proposals after they get something they like and find a new issue that is a sticking point, yet it was never mentioned previously ("moving the goal posts" as the media calls it).
Quote:
And I don't really believe a word Dater tweets. Why is it that he has quotes that nobody else has, yet he won't say who the "source" is?
Is it really that "out there" that you can't believe it?
It's obvious why he won't name the player, but it doesn't really require a name attached to it to carry weight.
Bob McKenzie said that players he talked to wanted the 10 year deal because of the security.
The proposed contract limit (NHL proposed five years for free agents, seven years for your own player and the PA proposed eight) doesn't even matter to the majority of the union.
The NHL offered the amount of money that the PA named as the deal breaker months ago and dropped other contracting rights requests that actually mattered to the common player like arbitration rights and free agency age, yet they still find a problem with it.
It's not that ridiculous to think that the majority of the union was ready to get back at it because they got what they wanted.
I understand how important it is to have a strong league and 30 healthy teams. I must admit that I was shocked at how things have played out over the last 48 hours. The sessions on Tuesday felt cooperative with an air of goodwill. I was optimistic and conveyed my optimism to the Board of Governors at our Wednesday meeting. However, when we reconvened with the players on Wednesday afternoon, it was like someone had thrown a switch. The atmosphere had completely changed. Nevertheless, the owners tried to push forward and made a number of concessions and proposals, which were not well-received. I question whether the union is interested in making an agreement.
I am very disappointed and disillusioned. Had I not experienced this process myself, I might not have believed it. Like all hockey fans, I am hopeful this situation can be resolved as soon as possible. I miss our game."
That's got Fehr's fingerprints all over it. I might dismiss this as owner's rhetoric except for the stunt he pulled at the press conference today where they "just happened" to get a voicemail from the owners in the middle of the presser. If Fehr though they were so close why did the PA request mediation again earlier in the day? It's just a silly useless PR stunt. I'm done arguing for the players at all. Guys like Ryan Miller have to look at this guy after what happened today and realize that he's a buffoon. He's embarrassing the players.
The owners know they can get over on the players if they work on them hard enough. They know that they can't do the same to Fehr. Of course they'll have been disappointed that he got involved again.
I don't even care any more. I'm sick of talking about lawyers, and negotiating stances, who is greedy, who is not, etc, etc. I just want to watch hockey.
And I don't think I'm going to go back to watching the NHL's brand of it for a long time. If it ever comes back.
I get this terrible feeling that those who have will continue to get. The rich owners can afford to pay the players a bit more and will not lose sleep over losing a few franchises--a couple might relocate and another 2-4 without real concessions will never be able to be competitive and will die a financial death where they are. The Leafs etc. will just raise ticket prices..The players with the big contracts will safeguard those and the lesser players figure they are gone in 3 or 4 years so grab what they can and too bad about 100 players not getting jobs 4 years from now. Fehr and Bettman and those hiring them care dick about the league viability compared to saving face and appearing to win--and grabbing as much as they can for themselves--
I don't see why the NHLPA would honestly care about term limits. There's only a small contingent of players who sign 6+ year contracts in free agency or 8+ year extensions internally and certainly nowhere near enough to crow about the proposed 5/7 limits; and what exactly is wrong with a 10-year max CBA, as I'm sure none of them want to deal with another labor dispute in their playing days...
This news just makes me want to pour a drink... sigh, go Amerks.
It would also help if context is given to the comments about Don Fehr
Quote:
@TSNRyanRishaug
Daly reaction to Hainsey saying owners told players that adding D. Fehr back in room could be a deal breaker.. “it was a reaction to the…
Quote:
@TSNRyanRishaug
…to players unilaterally terminating the players/owners-only dynamic, and telling us (2 or 3 times) that their decision was non-negotiable..
Quote:
@TSNRyanRishaug
..totally within their rights to do, but response of our owners was “if that’s the case, don’t expect us to stay involved.”
IMO this is simply the hardliners in the NHLPA reclaiming control of the players side of the equation. Once they saw the progress being made with some moderate elements on the player and owners sides involved. They stepped in and I have little doubt they are the ones "worried" about the owners doing an end around the NHLPA's leadership so Don Fehr had to be brought back in. What they were panicked about is coming to an agreement now instead of continuing to drag things out. It doesn't fit their blueprint. They know what buttons to push on the owners to get the reactions they want so they can say to the members, 'see I told you they are unreasonable'.
This is just another stall tactic by that group. They want to push this is far as possible. They want to get back at the owners and push the season to the brink. They feel thats when they will have leverage and more control over the process.
What are the players doing then?
Same thing as you say the owners are doing except worse since they either propose de-linkage and continue to work off of it or work off of NHL proposals after they get something they like and find a new issue that is a sticking point, yet it was never mentioned previously ("moving the goal posts" as the media calls it).
Oh you mean like the owners all of the sudden deciding yesterday that they wanted a 10 year CBA with the "opt out" option for themselves after 8 years...as opposed to the 5 year deal that had been discussed previous (and both sides essentially agreed on).
I'm tired and don't feel like doing to research to list all the things the players have conceded on but if you believe the owners have given more than they've taken, then I guess there's really no point in discussing this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfb392
Bob McKenzie said that players he talked to wanted the 10 year deal because of the security.
The proposed contract limit (NHL proposed five years for free agents, seven years for your own player and the PA proposed eight) doesn't even matter to the majority of the union. The NHL offered the amount of money that the PA named as the deal breaker months ago and dropped other contracting rights requests that actually mattered to the common player like arbitration rights and free agency age, yet they still find a problem with it.
It's not that ridiculous to think that the majority of the union was ready to get back at it because they got what they wanted.
Forgive me if I don't thank the owners for deciding to just take less. This isn't "giving back" or "giving in" as you like to phrase it. It's simply keeping things the way they were (or on topic of the money issue, taking less money than they had demanded off the bat, but still much more than previously) and focus their hardlining on other topics. It's not "giving" the players anything.
EDIT: And as far as that quote, not it's not that out there. It probably is true, there probably is some level of cracking within the NHLPA. I can't imagine that guys like Matt Ellis, Pat Kaleta, or Cody McCormick (just to name a few Sabres) are terribly thrilled with the current situation. Guys like Crosby, Richards, and Miller (the "face" guys) can afford it, 4th liners or tweeners may not be able to afford to lose a year of their career like this.
Oh you mean like the owners all of the sudden deciding yesterday that they wanted a 10 year CBA with the "opt out" option for themselves after 8 years...as opposed to the 5 year deal that had been discussed previous (and both sides essentially agreed on).
I'm tired and don't feel like doing to research to list all the things the players have conceded on but if you believe the owners have given more than they've taken, then I guess there's really no point in discussing this.
Forgive me if I don't thank the owners for deciding to just take less. This isn't "giving back" or "giving in" as you like to phrase it. It's simply keeping things the way they were (or on topic of the money issue, taking less money than they had demanded off the bat, but still much more than previously) and focus their hardlining on other topics. It's not "giving" the players anything.
EDIT: And as far as that quote, not it's not that out there. It probably is true, there probably is some level of cracking within the NHLPA. I can't imagine that guys like Matt Ellis, Pat Kaleta, or Cody McCormick (just to name a few Sabres) are terribly thrilled with the current situation. Guys like Crosby, Richards, and Miller (the "face" guys) can afford it, 4th liners or tweeners may not be able to afford to lose a year of their career like this.
The players benefit from the things the owners dropped. Why on earth would the owners give the players even more things to inflate their salaries. Arbitration means players have ways to artificially inflate their salaries. In some cases massively. Its an incredibly pro player system.
I'm amazed anyone thinks the players are being "screwed" in any way shape or form. Had they accepted the owners system they would still be making a ton of money, and unlike their play, its guaranteed. They would have only one meaningful restriction to their contracts and that would be the 5 years limit (7 for re-signing your own RFAs/UFAs). Something that impacts a very small percentage of players.
Folks we're not talking about poor coal miners fighting for health care and a living wage against the evil mine owner. We are talking about players that even at the bottom of the pay scale are millionaires. Matt Ellis has 1.9mil in career earnings. I don't begrudge him a penny of it. But lets not pretend these players are being put upon and are fighting the good fight as a union. I don't know too many union workers in the real world that can take several months off and not get paid so they can have a pissing match with their employer.
