I'm not sure if you actually believe that the Maple Leafs, who make 100 million/year in profits, want the season cancelled.
I doubt you actually believe it. Personally I take it as a given that the owners are doing a very effective job of showing a unified public face, that they have strong internal disagreements -- inevitable due to their different situations -- but that they're choosing to be united publicly.
This latest show of "disgust", particularly from Bettman, is obviously theatrics. "We've never seen Bettman look so livid" ... please. It's just theatrics to gain the public's confidence in a psychological media war. If he was actually livid, he would never let it show.
***********************
The owners most recent offer involves them taking four or five times as much as they're putting in. There's nothing "good faith" about it. Taking a dollar and giving 20 cents is not what most would call "give and take". Good faith might mean a dollar in concessions from the owners for every dollar in concessions from the players ... or even half that.
And yes, I know what guaranteed contracts mean, as do the players who were already aware of escrow when they signed those contracts.
I suspect you said the same at the last lockout, and the lockout before that, and that you'll say the same at the next lockout.
I think Toronto want to BADLY play. More so than most teams. When a guy like Fehr makes the the Leafs say "**** it" that's when you know you're in trouble. That's the point I was making. A team that makes that much money can't even come to an agreement, than you know 29 other teams are even further from a deal. By all accounts, everything was going well until the Players spoke to Fehr and the Tuesday meetings and went off the rails from there.
Then yesterday, Bettman wasn't even in the room. He had absolutely nothing to do with the breakdown. The ow era went to him after the meeting and while Fehr was saying the deal was all but done to tell Bettman that they weren't interested in the nhlpa counter. Don't see how any of this is Betmans fault and not Fehrs.
As for 94' that was a very different situation. A systemic change was going to be much more difficult. This CBA should have been a cakewalk.
Record salaries for players. 8% annual growth for the league. 17 of 30 teams profitable. 26 of 30 teams with increasing franchise valuations. 140 million dollars in total operating income.
But then, the owners wanted to take, take, take, and not give.
I was horrified when I saw the 43% offer. They should have just renewed the CBA as it was with some small tweaks.
Quote:
I think Toronto want to BADLY play. More so than most teams. When a guy like Fehr makes the the Leafs say "**** it" that's when you know you're in trouble. That's the point I was making. A team that makes that much money can't even come to an agreement, than you know 29 other teams are even further from a deal. By all accounts, everything was going well until the Players spoke to Fehr and the Tuesday meetings and went off the rails from there.
Do you actually think they're saying **** it over 100 million dollars ?!?!?!
I don't.
These theatrics are clearly a negotiating tactic. They're trying to break the union by setting up an emotional roller coaster.
Record salaries for players. 8% annual growth for the league. 17 of 30 teams profitable. 26 of 30 teams with increasing franchise valuations. 140 million dollars in total operating income.
But then, the owners wanted to take, take, take, and not give.
I was horrified when I saw the 43% offer. They should have just renewed the CBA as it was with some small tweaks.
Do you actually think they're saying **** it over 100 million dollars ?!?!?!
I don't.
These theatrics are clearly a negotiating tactic. They're trying to break the union by setting up an emotional roller coaster.
I think they're saying **** in to Fehr.
If the players think they will "beat" the owners, then the season will not be played. I get it as a negotiating tactic to get as much as you can but when it goes to far and you risk losing sponsors money, fans, tickets and tv revenue as well as a huge chunk of your salary, you have to start to question are you getting more in return for what you've lost? The owners know how to count and don't think they're not subtracting as games get lost. The offer won't get much better. That, I'm sure of. Players need to come to grips with that and not let Fehr hijack a game he cares nothing for, at least not more than his ego.
I was led to believe by Gorges and Cole that they are concerned about the "future" of the game. I wonder if the wax was out of their ears when Bettman explained that a 10 year CBA would secure them, the fans and the league. I wonder if the wax was out of their ears when Bettman tried to explain that the training facilities have improved, medical and training staffs have improved, hotels have improved, traveling in general has improved.
The Habs' players (those who can't shut up) have been an embarrassment. They have top notch facilities and seemingly don't understand how.
My point is that pretty much everytime there's a contract coming up in the NHL it results in a work stoppage. And I think it would've happened no matter who was representing the players.
I don't think I came to Fehr's defense at all. I had very little to say about him actually.
OK, so then back in 2004 the players should have accepted the owners' offer of a fixed 42.5 million/year... oh wait, no. That would have been a disaster for the players.
Back in September, the players should have accepted the owners offer of a fixed 43% of HRR, oh wait no. That would have been a disaster for the players.
Or maybe they should have accepted the owners' offer of 50/50 with no make-whole... oh wait no.
Fact is it is not in the players' interest to just instantly cave to what the owners want on the basis that "the more powerful always win". If they do that they'll be down to 20% of HRR within 15 years.
Those who have no pride end up as slaves real quick.
Those who have no courage end up as slaves real quick.
I am pretty certain Fehr said it yesterday or a media type said that's the PA's reasoning when asked why they won't do 10 years. Yesterday is just a big blur at this point.
I am pretty certain Fehr said it yesterday or a media type said that's the PA's reasoning when asked why they won't do 10 years. Yesterday is just a big blur at this point.
Yeah I read a player saying it doesn't impact current players as most won't be in league in 10 years and that future players should have a say on their next agreement. Failed to mention that it would prevent situations like this for a while and that it's the trend in the other leagues.
"Record salaries" for a few players, which only a few teams can actually afford. If the NHL tried to model itself after MLB it would be a disaster. The NHL doesn't have the revenue to even attempt that.
Actually the star players have benefited the least from the previous CBA. I believe the top salaries only went up about 1.2% per annum compared to a 7.8% average.
Saying there were "record salaries" means almost zero. Duo to natural growth there is going to be more money availible every year. In pretty much every professional sport you see new records set most off-seasons. Its just the economics of growth.
By fighting against contract terms the NHLPA isn't fighting for the guys that can get 6+ year contracts. They are fighting for the salaries of the middle class. If contracts are capped at 5 years then teams will be back to competing on salary for big free agents instead of this CBA's invention of competing on term. The next Parises, Suters and Richards of the league will start getting 10-12 million on the cap instead of ~7 for 5 year deals which will result in the 2nd, 3rd line guys getting squeezed.
As is the case in a lot of economic matters, you have to consider second order effects not just immediate consequences.
By fighting against contract terms the NHLPA isn't fighting for the guys that can get 6+ year contracts. They are fighting for the salaries of the middle class. If contracts are capped at 5 years then teams will be back to competing on salary for big free agents instead of this CBA's invention of competing on term. The next Parises, Suters and Richards of the league will start getting 10-12 million on the cap instead of ~7 for 5 year deals which will result in the 2nd, 3rd line guys getting squeezed.
If the PA is so concerned about the middle class...Why not propose to reduce the maximum salary from 20% of the cap to...15%? 12%? Or will that anger the collection of stars that is part of the hardliners group too much?
Yeah I read a player saying it doesn't impact current players as most won't be in league in 10 years and that future players should have a say on their next agreement. Failed to mention that it would prevent situations like this for a while and that it's the trend in the other leagues.
It's also ridiculous because the guys that are 17-18 today will be affected the same way by a CBA signed for 5years than the ones who are 13 would if it's a deal for 10years.
If the PA is so concerned about the middle class...Why not propose to reduce the maximum salary from 20% of the cap to...15%? 12%? Or will that anger the collection of stars that is part of the hardliners group too much?
Who knows, obviously there are ways to deal with the situation. But its very clear that this is something the players have thought about since its coming up from their camp. The point is that the PA isn't fighting contract term limits just to benefit the upper class of players who can get 6 year deals.
By fighting against contract terms the NHLPA isn't fighting for the guys that can get 6+ year contracts. They are fighting for the salaries of the middle class. If contracts are capped at 5 years then teams will be back to competing on salary for big free agents instead of this CBA's invention of competing on term. The next Parises, Suters and Richards of the league will start getting 10-12 million on the cap instead of ~7 for 5 year deals which will result in the 2nd, 3rd line guys getting squeezed.
That's an interesting point. That next class is Getzlaf and Perry, I would say absolutely, if contracts are limited to their 28-32 year old seasons, if I'm a GM I consider offering 10+mil/yr each and gutting the middle of the lineup.
I am pretty certain Fehr said it yesterday or a media type said that's the PA's reasoning when asked why they won't do 10 years. Yesterday is just a big blur at this point.
Fehr was hired by the players because he's a very, very tough negotiator...he's a shark
I'm not picking sides in this, and even then, if I had too I would lean more towards the owners...but Donal Fehr is doing EXACTLY what he was hired to do...get the best deal possible for the players
Did he bite off more than he can chew? Maybe...time will tell.
NHLPA is just letting Fehr ruin the season. I have said it before, I will say it again:this is all about Fehr and his ego. Screw the players. Cancel the season and find a way to bring in replacement players to start a new season.
The owners went up by almost 100 million, intelligently want a 5 year limit on contracts knowing that SOME of the owners are stupid enough to try and manipulate any loopholes they can to fix their team without considering the negative impact on the game as a whole, and also added a 10 year term of security for the players, owners and fans. What happens? It is not good enough for the players. Wait, the offer was not voted upon by the union, but just voted down by the representatives? Yes, tell me how Fehr is trying to make things better for all of those average players with 6+ year long contracts... Fehr's "reputation" and the elite players' pockets are all that is being looked out for, at this point.
Thank goodness I am getting into Basketball more and more. I have not missed hockey as much as I thought I would, and am having almost as much fun in the basketball pools I joined as I have in the hockey pools.
It is time for the players to try and convince their union reps that the union should be representing all of the layers, not mainly the Crosby's. That was a great deal that just got scuppered.
Cancel the season and find a way to bring in replacement players to start a new season.
As repeated time and again before, this is not a realistic or plausible solution. Cloning the players using DNA found on used jockstraps is likely more realistic.
NHLPA is just letting Fehr ruin the season. I have said it before, I will say it again:this is all about Fehr and his ego. Screw the players. Cancel the season and find a way to bring in replacement players to start a new season.
The owners went up by almost 100 million, intelligently want a 5 year limit on contracts knowing that SOME of the owners are stupid enough to try and manipulate any loopholes they can to fix their team without considering the negative impact on the game as a whole, and also added a 10 year term of security for the players, owners and fans. What happens? It is not good enough for the players. Wait, the offer was not voted upon by the union, but just voted down by the representatives? Yes, tell me how Fehr is trying to make things better for all of those average players with 6+ year long contracts... Fehr's "reputation" and the elite players' pockets are all that is being looked out for, at this point.
Thank goodness I am getting into Basketball more and more. I have not missed hockey as much as I thought I would, and am having almost as much fun in the basketball pools I joined as I have in the hockey pools.
It is time for the players to try and convince their union reps that the union should be representing all of the layers, not mainly the Crosby's. That was a great deal that just got scuppered.
I'm not sure how you can say that given you don't have even half of the entire proposal's details. We're not privy to the specific details of the proposal.
I have my opinions about the players...but they didn't hire Fehr to save the season, they hired him to get them the best deal possible.
That's an interesting point. That next class is Getzlaf and Perry, I would say absolutely, if contracts are limited to their 28-32 year old seasons, if I'm a GM I consider offering 10+mil/yr each and gutting the middle of the lineup.
I'm actually in favour of the 5 year limit, I think it will lead to a more rational market on player salaries and reduce the scope for the cap shenanigans of teams like the Flyers, Rangers, Red Wings and Blackhawks and prevent other teams from following them into deals they know are insanely risky in the long-term like Nashville with Weber.
If the league forces all the big market teams to act like Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal have during this CBA (using finacial muscle at points but not blatently gaming the system), I'd be all right with that.
But I understand why the players are fighting against it.
