HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Toronto Maple Leafs
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Lockout continues Part V - Hockey cancelled till January 14th

View Poll Results: OWNERS OR PLAYERS, who do you support
owners 75 62.50%
players 45 37.50%
Voters: 120. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-08-2012, 11:15 AM
  #76
calcal798
Registered User
 
calcal798's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budsfan View Post
Here's why we're still close to a deal.
By Pierre LeBrun | ESPN.com

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...lose-to-a-deal
I've had a hard time disagreeing with Lebruns opinions lately. I've pretty much agreed with everything hes said about the situation.

After this latest fiasco of pure stupidity and selfishness from the players and owners alike to not work together to get a deal done. Im at the point were Im just disinterested in this whole useless and time wasting process that they are partaking in. They should honestly just not talk or say anything to the media and fans until they get this stupid thing signed. Enough with trying to get us to choose a side, we don't care about who gets how much money, or how long your CBA is, or your contracts. We just want to watch hockey again and cheer for our Leafs (even if they are ****).

Show us some respect for once you selfish selfish people.

/end rant.

calcal798 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:15 AM
  #77
sangreale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyromaniac3 View Post
NHLPA is just about the star players. They will need to accept lower salaries in order to be a part of a team that competes for the cup. That's is why they are so much against contract limits and year-to-year variance limits.
There are also a group of young players who hope to cash in on that tailwind. However, I agree that the majority (and their families) are sitting there with the reality that they have already lost a significant amount of their earnings and are about to toss away a pile more. It must be increasingly infuriating for them.

The NHLPA would have you believe otherwise but the truth wil lout down the road. They have backed themselves into a corner with Fehr. No way out with this guy but straight ahead. Tough negotiator to be sure but I am not sure in the long run the majority will benefit from his hiring.

Furthermore after the last session I feel there are fewer "dove" owners in the room. Or at least they will be too cowed to speak out.

More money for us to spend on music and drinks boys with hockey gone for this season.

sangreale is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:22 AM
  #78
Budsfan
Registered User
 
Budsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,117
vCash: 500
This lockout has happened because of greed and IMO both sides are to blame, the players for upward spiraling contracts and owners under Bettman's hand, by expanding a game into areas that couldn't care less about hockey.

All this means is more financial support, from profitable teams, or more specifically the fans of those teams, ponying up more money to support teams and players in those areas, to keep on playing in venues, where the players on the team exceed the audience.

In this article Bettman says he has to make a good deal, so they won't have more losing teams, "Good Grief"!, why not just dump those teams and distribute the better players to teams where they will be appreciated and the other players will have to play elsewhere but no, we are supposed to support this good ole boys club.

Shannon on lockout: NHL franchises in trouble

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-l...s_in_jeopardy/

Quote:
"Gary, are you concerned that franchises will be in peril if there is no hockey this season?"

The answer was just a simple, yet had much more meaning: "My bigger concern is if we make the wrong deal we'll have more franchises in jeopardy."

And that, in a nut shell, is why there was no agreement in New York City this week. It is a message that the NHL really has not trumpeted enough during this lock out. As wealthy as some teams are there are other in this league riddled with debt. And before you jump up and yell, that the teams are in the wrong locales, stop it! This isn't a public trust, it's a private club. A business where the owners decide where the teams play. If you don't like that, tough! It's a private business, with economic issues that need to be addressed. And the players and the owners both bear the responsibility of addressing those issues.
All the above of course, says nothing about the Fans, that pay the freight on this fiasco, they have built a house of cards and it is about to come crashing down but they will expect, we the fans, that have hockey in our blood, to pay more, where else will the money come from, it's all going to cost us more, after all the shouting.

It may be a private club but when is enough, enough, all this "Lockout" does is take more money out of Leaf fan's pockets and no side here is going to lose money, not MLSE, not NHLPA or the players and not the good ole boy millionaires, having their own hockey teams, in places where no one cares and if they really are losing money, why don't they cut their loses' and get out, do we really have to support teams, in areas where hockey is not appreciated.

Maybe the fan's should have a seat, at the negotiation table, to put things in perspective.

Budsfan is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:25 AM
  #79
sangreale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stats01 View Post
He said that they agreed on the money " i.e the make whole provision and that they were fairly close to a deal when in reality there are nowhere close to agreeing on a deal. He is a liar and a manipulator.
That is his job.

Bettman's too.

sangreale is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:30 AM
  #80
Leafsman
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4evaBlue View Post
The money was solved if the players were willing to accept the 5 year contract limit. If they aren't, the money is far from solved. The owners are very unlikely to budge on the contract length. It is the one thing the players will probably have to swallow whole if they want to play, and the sooner the players understand this, the sooner the season can start.
You think the owners want to lose a season over contract length?? Not only that but difference of a few years. How many owners do you think even want a cap on contract length??

Leafsman is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:31 AM
  #81
sangreale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,064
vCash: 500
Wait until greater revenue sharing when MLSE will be helping to pay Parise and Suter's contracts.

I am sure the Leafs would love MLB's CBA although they couldn't win before the cap either.

sangreale is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:32 AM
  #82
sangreale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 2,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafsman View Post
You think the owners want to lose a season over contract length?? Not only that but difference of a few years. How many owners do you think even want a cap on contract length??
Yes I do.

sangreale is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:34 AM
  #83
egd27
#freethebigpicture
 
egd27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by diceman934 View Post
That sounds reasonable....it would also work.

The NHL wants to control themselves with the 5 year term....they are saying they can not help themselves and want a clause that protects themselves from themselves.....the 5 year and 7 if it is your own effectively makes free agency mute.....the current team can offer more term....and hence more money and there is no way the players should except this.

They battled hard for UFA and now the NHL wants to eliminate it effectively.....the only way a player would leave is if they were going to be paid vastly more over 5 years. If that is the hill that the NHL is going to die on....die on it they will!
It's partially that, but I think it also protects them from possible accusations of collusion should they manage to control themselves and limit contracts to 5 year terms. If max contract length is negotiated in the CBA, there is no ability for collusion charges down the road.

egd27 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 11:51 AM
  #84
egd27
#freethebigpicture
 
egd27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,738
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budsfan View Post
All the above of course, says nothing about the Fans, that pay the freight on this fiasco, they have built a house of cards and it is about to come crashing down but they will expect, we the fans, that have hockey in our blood, to pay more, where else will the money come from, it's all going to cost us more, after all the shouting.

It's not going to cost more if you don't agree to pay it.

It may be a private club but when is enough, enough, all this "Lockout" does is take more money out of Leaf fan's pockets and no side here is going to lose money, not MLSE, not NHLPA or the players and not the good ole boy millionaires, having their own hockey teams, in places where no one cares and if they really are losing money, why don't they cut their loses' and get out, do we really have to support teams, in areas where hockey is not appreciated.

No we don't. We all have a choice how to spend our money.

Maybe the fan's should have a seat, at the negotiation table, to put things in perspective.
I simply don't understand why some fans seem to feel they should be involved in how the revenue is split up, rather than just determine how much revenue is available. If you don't like how things are being run, vote with your wallet. It's that simple.

egd27 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:01 PM
  #85
onebighockeyfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,491
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kessly Snipes View Post
Fehr stated that they do not want 10 years beacuse players who come in years from now will have no part of the CBA process, which is part of their right.

Do I think he is being honest, I doubt it, but thats what he sad.
That's a ******** argument from Fehr. The new players that come in have to deal with the CBA. If they don't like it they don;t have to play in the NHL. It's also up to the players to accept an offer that is future proof.

onebighockeyfan is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:06 PM
  #86
4evaBlue
Registered User
 
4evaBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leafsman View Post
You think the owners want to lose a season over contract length?? Not only that but difference of a few years. How many owners do you think even want a cap on contract length??
Quote:
Originally Posted by sangreale View Post
Yes I do.
I do, too. The real question is, are players willing to lose the season over it.

As for how many owners want to cap contract length? I bet those owners that are supporting non-profitable teams via revenue sharing, just so they can hand out contracts like Parise's and Suter's.

4evaBlue is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:20 PM
  #87
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pyromaniac3 View Post
NHLPA is just about the star players. They will need to accept lower salaries in order to be a part of a team that competes for the cup. That's is why they are so much against contract limits and year-to-year variance limits.
Who saved Pittsburgh?

__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bA3LN_8hjM8.

Vaive and Ludzik on collapse, and Phaneuf.
ULF_55 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:28 PM
  #88
4evaBlue
Registered User
 
4evaBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by diceman934 View Post
I do not think that the players will settle with the current 5 year or 7 if it is your own free agent.....they will settle if both numbers are the same and I say it is 6 years.....the year to year variance will also likely go to 10%.

Time will tell...
The idea behind 5&7 is for teams to help keep their players. That doesn't mean that another team who has the cap space cannot outbid the home team, though. I think this would actually benefit the players, as it could drive their value up. The home team offered me 7 years @ $5M, I'm not even considering leaving for less than 5 years @ $6M.

The year to year variance could potentially go up to 10%, as it would mean the ending salary would need to be at least half of the starting salary (53.14%) on a 7 year home-town deal, instead of the 73.5% that it would work out to with a 5% year to year variance. I believe this value to be slightly negotiable (if contract length limit is accepted), and as long as it doesn't allow for ridiculously lopsided contracts, it would be accepted.

4evaBlue is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:28 PM
  #89
4evaBlue
Registered User
 
4evaBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
Who saved Pittsburgh?
What is "a rigged lottery"?

4evaBlue is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:32 PM
  #90
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,125
vCash: 500
I'm not missing this season with a focus on juniors and AHL, really missing another lottery type season is the only thing I am missing. Rooting for us to finish in the typical 25-30 spot so we can land Mackinnon, Jones, Monahan, Pulock is not exciting pre christmas, post new year, yeah ok.

Interactif is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:35 PM
  #91
calcal798
Registered User
 
calcal798's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,643
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
Who saved Pittsburgh?
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4evaBlue View Post
What is "a rigged lottery"?
If were not in the top 5 this year if we have no hockey, I will be one of many pissed off Leaf fans.

calcal798 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:42 PM
  #92
Budsfan
Registered User
 
Budsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,117
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by egd27 View Post
I simply don't understand why some fans seem to feel they should be involved in how the revenue is split up, rather than just determine how much revenue is available. If you don't like how things are being run, vote with your wallet. It's that simple.
Well as a Leaf fan, there is no other team, some may watch other sports with an eye to what is cheapest but I bleed Blue and White and people in those other venues that don't appreciate hockey can go watch whatever sport they want and pay for their passion but not just go to watch hockey because I help pay for them to do so.

I seldom get down to the ACC now because of the cost involved and at one time I used to go to the Gardens almost every week to watch the Leafs but that was when you could afford to go and watch them, if prices accelerate to a point where it becomes impossible to see a game at the ACC, I will be only able to catch a game on the TV and that may become a paying proposition soon and that I also will have an issue with.

Should I get riled and want to get involved in the Talks Darn right!

Budsfan is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 12:44 PM
  #93
Interactif
Registered User
 
Interactif's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North York
Country: Canada
Posts: 27,125
vCash: 500
If there isn't a season, they should weight the last 5 seasons and points teams have compiled, then have a lotto ball situation of weighted balls, with the Leafs being as bad as we have been the past 5 years, only Edmonton would have a significantly more balls to draw from. To me this is the fairest method of determining the draft order.

Leafs should get a top 4 pick. One of Monahan, Jones, Mackinnon, and ?

Interactif is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:30 PM
  #94
KuleminFan41
Registered User
 
KuleminFan41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: Portugal
Posts: 4,630
vCash: 500
Donald Fehr is talking about the lockout on Sportsnet

KuleminFan41 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:35 PM
  #95
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Interactif View Post
If there isn't a season, they should weight the last 5 seasons and points teams have compiled, then have a lotto ball situation of weighted balls, with the Leafs being as bad as we have been the past 5 years, only Edmonton would have a significantly more balls to draw from. To me this is the fairest method of determining the draft order.

Leafs should get a top 4 pick. One of Monahan, Jones, Mackinnon, and ?
No that would be a random, lottery situation.

They should add up all the points from the last lock-out and grant picks based on those totals.

Team with the least points between lock-outs should get the best picks.

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:36 PM
  #96
hotpaws
Registered User
 
hotpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,522
vCash: 1071
****ing tard is babbling like an idiot .

Yea Don your millionairs are no different than the avg guy .

hotpaws is online now  
Old
12-08-2012, 01:40 PM
  #97
hotpaws
Registered User
 
hotpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,522
vCash: 1071
Now Don's going back 30 years . Way to put everyone to sleep .

hotpaws is online now  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:00 PM
  #98
KuleminFan41
Registered User
 
KuleminFan41's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Country: Portugal
Posts: 4,630
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpaws View Post
****ing tard is babbling like an idiot .

Yea Don your millionairs are no different than the avg guy .
When it comes to being in a union no they aren't different

Maybe if you heard what he was actually saying and not what you wanted him to say maybe you wouldn't be so angry

KuleminFan41 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:07 PM
  #99
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,746
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KuleminFan41 View Post
When it comes to being in a union no they aren't different

Maybe if you heard what he was actually saying and not what you wanted him to say maybe you wouldn't be so angry
I enjoyed his talk.

Even the other night he was in control of himself and didn't look like he was going to blow a gasket.

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:09 PM
  #100
hotpaws
Registered User
 
hotpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,522
vCash: 1071
Quote:
Originally Posted by KuleminFan41 View Post
When it comes to being in a union no they aren't different

Maybe if you heard what he was actually saying and not what you wanted him to say maybe you wouldn't be so angry
Since when do union members negotiate individual salaries ?

hotpaws is online now  
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 01:12 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.