HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

With Fehr end-around, owners hit new low—and waste lead

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-07-2012, 10:55 AM
  #126
therealkoho
Gary says it's A-OK
 
therealkoho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: the Prior
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,794
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Sure he can. He won't close a deal that let's the NHL bend the players over.




Which other version is there?
nor will the nhl sign a deal, that continually hurts the so called small market teams

1 coin 2 sides

therealkoho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:01 AM
  #127
santiclaws
Registered User
 
santiclaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,956
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by THW View Post
Fehr's history of striking before playoffs is what drove this lockout. That is his M.O. and it poisons the process. The owners knew that missing a part of a season would be easier to repair than playing a season and having the playoffs and its publicity and money lost.
You mean Fehr's history of striking once, over two decades ago, poisons the process more than the NHL locking out the players for the third consecutive time? Really? Was it Fehr that poisoned the last two CBA negotiations?

santiclaws is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:02 AM
  #128
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,262
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
And here I always thought that the point is for hockey to be entertaining the fans, and the League to be trying to expand the interest in hockey to a wider audience.
You have been dumped. This is about the money and always has been.

Melrose Munch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:02 AM
  #129
Mumbler*
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: And'over
Country: United States
Posts: 394
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
And here I always thought that the point is for hockey to be entertaining the fans, and the League to be trying to expand the interest in hockey to a wider audience.
The cap floor encourages mediocrity.

What it means is when teams are in a change over phase, for example, they are forced to pay players more than their worth. That then limits their ability to offer the larger contracts later to bring in big talent or make multiple moves to make the team better. Which leaves them loaded down with players that no other team wants because of their salary and cap hit making them almost non trade-able. If a team strikes out on bringing in the big talent currently they are forced into bad contracts with mediocre players. Hence the increasing amount of buyouts for a reduced cap hit.

That doesn't seem like entertaining hockey to me, rebuilding happens.

And if it's a case of the team being cheap and not wanting be competitive at all then let them fail. The other teams shouldn't have to float money their way to keep their team running.

imo.

Mumbler* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:02 AM
  #130
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
Bringing your rep into a meeting is a deal-killer.

That's like something out of the 1930s.

What a clownish, buffoonish operation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
So, in other words, Daly doesn't deny it.

Joke operation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stix and Stones View Post
The owners would obviously prefer to negotiate with the guys who could only flip burgers for a living if they weren't playing hockey.....

Not that I believe that of the players intelligence but many here have said that and then they cry about these guys not wanting to negotiate with billionaire businessmen.

I have another idea. Let's let the owners and players meet w/o the reps again, only on the ice, and whoever scores more goals after 30 minutes of play.... ah, let's make it easy on them. 10 min. They get to write the CBA. That seems like the equivalent match of skills to me. Heck, let's spot them Hamrlik. S Fehr and Daly can come along too.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:03 AM
  #131
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan808 View Post
When one hires Donald Fehr as ones union representative...

the same guy who INVENTED the "Strike during the playoffs" as a negotiating tactic.

... this arguement loses virtually ALL credibility.
First of all, I'm not sure I would consider 2 months before the playoffs as "strike during the playoffs".

Second of all, Bob Goodenow used the tactic of striking just before the playoffs before Fehr when the NHLPA went on strike on April 1, 1992.

However, I will concede that if you consider 2 months before the playoffs as "just before the playoffs" or as you stated, "during the playoffs", then Fehr did use the approach as acting director of the MLBPA in August, 1985 when the players struck for two days.

rojac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:04 AM
  #132
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Model62 View Post
It's not really a question about how much "the owners are expected to concede" before the players sign ('cause they haven't conceded anything (from the baseline of the expired CBA) and they aren't gonna; the ultimate outcome of this will be all gain for the League).

The question you're really asking is how much are the players willing to give up in earnings in defense of some percentage (in dollars and rights) of what they had before? I don't know how much pain the PA will tolerate. I think they have taken more than anyone expected they would, and that may be frustrating the owners.

The League's reaction to yesterday's developments (the PA countering a "take-it-or-leave-it" offer) suggests to me that it's important that whatever offer is ultimately accepted has to be a League offer, and not a PA offer.
This is not a case of trying to take money out of the players' pockets; it's a case of trying to limit how much money is put into the players's pockets, to the extent that fewer owners will have lower economic losses. That's raw economic reality here. And it's an economic reality which ultimately serves the players as well, because the more economically healthy teams there are, the better the potential of maintaining a 30-team League in order to employ the number of players that the NHL currently employs.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:05 AM
  #133
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,700
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I have another idea. Let's let the owners and players meet w/o the reps again, only on the ice, and whoever scores more goals after 30 minutes of play.... ah, let's make it easy on them. 10 min. They get to write the CBA. That seems like the equivalent match of skills to me. Heck, let's spot them Hamrlik. S Fehr and Daly can come along too.
How's this for an idea: all the Owners and Players take an IQ test. Which ever group has a higher average gets to write the CBA.

CpatainCanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:06 AM
  #134
oilexport
Registered User
 
oilexport's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 844
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by santiclaws View Post
You mean Fehr's history of striking once, over two decades ago, poisons the process more than the NHL locking out the players for the third consecutive time? Really? Was it Fehr that poisoned the last two CBA negotiations?
this from Wikipedia

-With the NHL locking out the players at midnight on September 15, 2012, Fehr became the only Executive Director to be directly involved in work stoppages in two sports. Six of the eight contract negotiations he has been involved in have resulted in work stoppages, including five consecutive negotiations between the MLBPA and Major League Baseball.

This from me

I hope the NHL owners bury this guy once and for all, better yet, you players should do it first for the good of everybody.

oilexport is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:10 AM
  #135
THW
Registered User
 
THW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 582
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by santiclaws View Post
You mean Fehr's history of striking once, over two decades ago, poisons the process more than the NHL locking out the players for the third consecutive time? Really? Was it Fehr that poisoned the last two CBA negotiations?
When you are in negotiations for in excess of a billion dollar deal, history is very much in play. Add to that Fehr's lack of action before the lockout and the blame is as much on him as the owners...more so because his job is to prevent a lockout as much as it is to secure the best contract possible for the players.

THW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:11 AM
  #136
rojac
HFBoards Sponsor
 
rojac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Waterloo, ON
Posts: 6,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by santiclaws View Post
You mean Fehr's history of striking once, over two decades ago, poisons the process more than the NHL locking out the players for the third consecutive time? Really? Was it Fehr that poisoned the last two CBA negotiations?
18 years ago is not over 2 decades ago. He also struck in 1985 as acting director of the MLBPA. He was also working for Marvin Miller in the MLBPA for the 1981 MLB strike -- not to mention he basically learned his craft at the knee of Miller who also led the MLB strike in 1972.

rojac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:13 AM
  #137
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
You have been dumped. This is about the money and always has been.
A lot of stupid NHL billionaires around then. Because there are a lot of NHL markets where it wouldn't take any kind of brain to realize that they aren't money-making markets for the NHL (at least not at any time in the short-term, perhaps some day down the road in the long-term), but still the owners stepped up and got involved in the NHL to have franchises in those cities. Perhaps I, like many of those same owners, am a bit naive, but I do still think that there are major league sports franchises often simply for the reason that there is a passion for the sport. Now of course there is a serious economic element, and no owner can seriously take on a franchise and continually lose tons for money. But if a system can be put in place that keeps losses at a minimum, then the atmosphere of NHL hockey can be given a wider audience.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:14 AM
  #138
RedMenace
Zero ***** Given
 
RedMenace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Under the Bridge
Posts: 4,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
At what point in this Lockout/non-Season should an offer be a "take it or leave it" offer or else the Season is a no-go?

As Bettman stated yesterday, they didn't want any part of the Season to be lost, but yet here things stand with two months down the drain.

A few people here have been saying that the owners's latest offer was like an ultimatum, though in different words, that the owners shouldn't present it that way, that it's not reasonable as part of the negotiation process... I ask all of you: How much more of the Season do you want to be lost? When should the owners ultimately expect the players to take their proposals seriously, and thus finally get down to playing hockey?
Just as a reminder, who locked out whom again?

RedMenace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:17 AM
  #139
Do Make Say Think
Soul & Onward
 
Do Make Say Think's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 15,236
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by santiclaws View Post
What I think a lot of people are missing is that from the players' perspective, this negotiation was always about the next 2-3 CBA's, not just this one. They are trying to reverse the trend of the owners using the lockout as "Plan A" in order to make the players capitulate to the owners' demands every time.
If that's how they feel then they are even misguided than I thought. IF there's anything the previous CBA has shown us, it's the the revenue disparity between clubs due to economics and regional differences makes it very difficult to plan far ahead.

Of course many posters and, very likely, players feel that the owners will simply keep taking from the players should they cave once more. It's beyond ridiculous to think so: the only reasons the owners need to take from the players is because the system was heavily favoured in the player's favour in terms of HRR and that the lack of regulations on the contractual level further exacerbated the financial situations of clubs. There is no reason to think the owners simply want to screw over their employees on a continual basis other than trying to galvanize the players into digging in.

Do Make Say Think is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:17 AM
  #140
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbler View Post
The cap floor encourages mediocrity.
I seriously believe that the only "mediocrity" your referring to is the one that relates to the degree of fan interest that exists and the amount of money that a particular franchise can afford to pay to the players as a result of that fan interest.

Forget the smaller markets, have teams only where there is a huge demand and where the franchises can afford to pay every player on the team millions.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:18 AM
  #141
pbgoalie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 394
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by syc View Post
Ya it's all Fehrs fault.

Just nix the season already. That should be enough to crush the 5 or 6 flaky American teams that are the cause for this whole mess.

Come on Twitch stick to your guns, don't fold to the union. Listen to your owners that charge $40 a ticket and then complain they lose money every year. Those are the fans and owners that will get you that billion dollar espn deal!
Ummm. Like Tananbaum, that flaky Maple Leaf guy?

He sounded completed unreasonable
There is plenty a blame to go around, but geez

pbgoalie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:18 AM
  #142
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
Yep == as opposed to Bettman, now on his third lockout, third or fourth "best offer" in this negotiation, and creator from whole cloth of an utterly unnecessary, last-minute "hill to die on."

Bettman also is the proud holder of the world record for most games lost by a league.

His latest ploy of "let's see if the players will close a deal without Fehr," and then hissy fit, was the very height of amateur clown.
The PR machine was in fine form yesterday.

Shock and disappointment. Shared sacrifice. A deal is imminent. Two weeks. 30 franchises with an opportunity to be healthy. Cheaper tickets for fans. A partnership with players.

What's the point of picking a hill to die on when you have more hills than a cat has lives.


Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
How's this for an idea: all the Owners and Players take an IQ test. Which ever group has a higher average gets to write the CBA.
I'm not as convinced this measures what you think this measures, but the owners already had a chance to work the skills that they've cultivated and which clearly put them at an advantage. Negotiating business deals is what they do all the time. We also know what players do for a living.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:19 AM
  #143
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,536
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
Just as a reminder, who locked out whom again?
And just a reminder about which side refused to come to the negotiating table until the Season was about to start; and also about the history of a guy named Fehr and his negotiation tactics, especially if the Season had played out and we were approaching Playoff time.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:19 AM
  #144
aj8000
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 683
vCash: 3000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I have another idea. Let's let the owners and players meet w/o the reps again, only on the ice, and whoever scores more goals after 30 minutes of play.... ah, let's make it easy on them. 10 min. They get to write the CBA. That seems like the equivalent match of skills to me. Heck, let's spot them Hamrlik. S Fehr and Daly can come along too.
Except that the owners would remove their net from the game.

aj8000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:23 AM
  #145
RedMenace
Zero ***** Given
 
RedMenace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Under the Bridge
Posts: 4,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
And just a reminder about which side refused to come to the negotiating table until the Season was about to start; and also about the history of a guy named Fehr and his negotiation tactics, especially if the Season had played out and we were approaching Playoff time.
Refused? Seriously, do you have any proof to back up that claim?

And you want to blame players for hiring someone with a track record of not backing down?

You're also making an assumption that a strike was inevitable simply by hiring Fehr; unless you've got some sort of psychic powers, that's a pretty risky assertion to make.

RedMenace is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:25 AM
  #146
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,998
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mumbler View Post
So they were not for sale in May but were for sale in September? He was asked in May right?
If you dig into the history a bit, it comes up that they were available earlier. I think it's documented in the thread which confirmed AEG is up for sale.


Quote:
Originally Posted by aj8000 View Post
I see it a different way. If the players wanted to stop the player/owner discussion, then why would the owners stay to negotiate with Fehr? It makes complete sense that the owners would revert back to the original format as well.

Fugu, I am surprised that you are so pro player in this discussion. You always seemed to have a balanced approach to discussions.
Actually, I'm anti-NHL/Gary Proskauer Rose, not pro player. I don't like the way the league is run, and if you follow my posts on the topic of the cap range system, you'll know why I believe it's wrong economically for the league.

I already offered that the players may have simply reached a point where they knew their limit. Pushing them to continue on the terms the owners found comfortable was, at best, unfair, and at worst, an attempt to exploit-- imho.

Quote:
Originally Posted by therealkoho View Post
nor will the nhl sign a deal, that continually hurts the so called small market teams

1 coin 2 sides
The NHL's system has hurt the small market teams, inclusive of having let UFA age drop to 27 from 31. The NHL already signed that deal in 2005. Why are you so certain this fixes a systemic problem?

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:28 AM
  #147
Do Make Say Think
Soul & Onward
 
Do Make Say Think's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 15,236
vCash: 256
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
Refused? Seriously, do you have any proof to back up that claim?

And you want to blame players for hiring someone with a track record of not backing down?

You're also making an assumption that a strike was inevitable simply by hiring Fehr; unless you've got some sort of psychic powers, that's a pretty risky assertion to make.
The NHL claims they were ready to start talking as early as November last year but that the PA said no to talks during the season (and lo and behold, once the season ended they claimed they were ready to play and talk!); I don't see why they would lie about that.

Do Make Say Think is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:28 AM
  #148
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,158
vCash: 500
Somehow, it's Donald Fehr's fault that the ownership doesn't want to negotiate with the guy the union hired to negotiate. It's asinine.

I don't care what his history is. It doesn't matter. You negotiate with the guy on the other side.

Tawnos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:29 AM
  #149
Model62
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 891
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
This is not a case of trying to take money out of the players' pockets; it's a case of trying to limit how much money is put into the players's pockets, to the extent that fewer owners will have lower economic losses. That's raw economic reality here. And it's an economic reality which ultimately serves the players as well, because the more economically healthy teams there are, the better the potential of maintaining a 30-team League in order to employ the number of players that the NHL currently employs.
Feh. Record revenues, year after year. It's distribution of those revenues among the clubs that's wonky (more Rev. Sharing eases that, but can't solve it. Growth in American media is maybe the answer). But regardless -- the PA has agreed to the 50/50 split. They've agreed in principle to term lengths on contracts. They've agreed on percentage step-downs. They get the "raw economic reality". They have demonstrated it with all the giveaways.

The League is after more and I think it's that bit I mention at the end of my previous comment; this CBA and the ones that follow are to be negotiated on ownership's terms, not the PA's.

Model62 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-07-2012, 11:29 AM
  #150
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,773
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
What's the point of picking a hill to die on when you have more hills than a cat has lives.
Eloquently said. And that goes for both sides, too.

For the NHL, reducing the Players' % of HRR was the end-goal. Until an agreement in principle on that was made. Now it's term limits, masqueraded around as this noble idea of preventing cap circumvention, even though variance limits and a cap reconciliation program take care of that issue just fine.

For the NHLPA, it was Make Whole. Once the NHL budged on Make Whole, it was "Actually, contract issues are the most important thing to us". Once the NHL walked away from certain contract demands, it was "Actually, the pension plan is the biggest thing."

It's all a game. Are we even at the 11th hour yet? The actions from both sides would suggest no.

Crease is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:35 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.