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, 02:18 PM
  #101
4evaBlue
Registered User
 
4evaBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,359
vCash: 500
So, Campoli is worried that teams not being able to use cap circumventing deals will result in the superstars will getting all the money, leaving the middle class for fight over the leftover cap space. What a shortsighted fool. When the 38 year old former stars are still on the cap at $7M, and the young stars getting signed for their $7M, where does that leave the middle class he's worried about so much?

4evaBlue is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:19 PM
  #102
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpaws View Post
Since when do union members negotiate individual salaries ?
So you believe the NHLPA should decertify and then negotiate individual deals rather than as a group?

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

Vaive and Ludzik on collapse, and Phaneuf.
ULF_55 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:20 PM
  #103
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4evaBlue View Post
So, Campoli is worried that teams not being able to use cap circumventing deals will result in the superstars will getting all the money, leaving the middle class for fight over the leftover cap space. What a shortsighted fool. When the 38 year old former stars are still on the cap at $7M, and the young stars getting signed for their $7M, where does that leave the middle class he's worried about so much?
Yes, 8 year deals would make much more sense than 12-15 year deals.


Last edited by ULF_55: 12-08-2012 at 02:50 PM.
ULF_55 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 02:48 PM
  #104
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpaws View Post
Now Don's going back 30 years . Way to put everyone to sleep .
He was addressing the CAW. Got to think this was planned before last week and mybe even before Spet. 15. The talk is not just about these negotiations.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 03:13 PM
  #105
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
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??
Although not an owner Burke is leading the charge and I doubt Leafs Ownership is going to disagree.

The players are thinking of security and the owners are thinking of 196 million dollars spent on two players.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 03:50 PM
  #106
hotpaws
Registered User
 
hotpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,534
vCash: 1323
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
So you believe the NHLPA should decertify and then negotiate individual deals rather than as a group?
They can do what they want but what does your post have to do with my comment in regards to the post i was responding to ?

hotpaws is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 04:05 PM
  #107
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpaws View Post
They can do what they want but what does your post have to do with my comment in regards to the post i was responding to ?
Quote:
Since when do union members negotiate individual salaries ?
You comment about union members negotiating individual salaries seems to indicate you don't believe a union member should be able to negotiate individual salaries so logically wouldn't that lead to people who do shouldn't be considered union?

Individual <> union

If Individual ∴ not collective.

Analysis decertify.

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 04:22 PM
  #108
hotpaws
Registered User
 
hotpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,534
vCash: 1323
Quote:
Originally Posted by KuleminFan41 View Post
When it comes to being in a union no they aren't different
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpaws View Post
Since when do union members negotiate individual salaries ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
So you believe the NHLPA should decertify and then negotiate individual deals rather than as a group?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
You comment about union members negotiating individual salaries seems to indicate you don't believe a union member should be able to negotiate individual salaries so logically wouldn't that lead to people who do shouldn't be considered union?

Individual <> union

If Individual ∴ not collective.

Analysis decertify.
My original response was in regards to K Fan 41 saying the NHLPA union was no different than the CAW .

hotpaws is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 04:24 PM
  #109
egd27
#freethebigpicture
 
egd27's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budsfan View Post
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!
You don't believe that if 5 or even 10 of the poorer teams folded up that prices in Toronto, do you?
You are not paying to prop other teams, you are paying MLSE, who, in turn, pays into a revenue sharing plan.
If there was no need for revenue sharing, i'm pretty sure MLSE wouldn't be passing the savings onto the fans.

egd27 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 04:38 PM
  #110
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by egd27 View Post
You don't believe that if 5 or even 10 of the poorer teams folded up that prices in Toronto, do you?
You are not paying to prop other teams, you are paying MLSE, who, in turn, pays into a revenue sharing plan.
If there was no need for revenue sharing, i'm pretty sure MLSE wouldn't be passing the savings onto the fans.
There sure wasn't a ticket price reduction of 24% during the last lockout. MLSE will suckup every cent we as fans are willing give them even a glimpse of.


Edit: I really don't mind revenue sharing if it wasn't so rediculous like the 30M Phoenix needs. Without a TV deal like the NFL it puts too much onus on individual teams who have money.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 05:37 PM
  #111
Budsfan
Registered User
 
Budsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by egd27 View Post
You don't believe that if 5 or even 10 of the poorer teams folded up that prices in Toronto, do you?
You are not paying to prop other teams, you are paying MLSE, who, in turn, pays into a revenue sharing plan.
If there was no need for revenue sharing, i'm pretty sure MLSE wouldn't be passing the savings onto the fans.
Well put it this way, it may hold prices where they are now, instead of escalating to a level, that will make it too expensive for average people to go and watch, if you have teams that are no longer on the dole and players that probably should be playing in the AHL, that reduces the number of Teams and Players lining up to collect.

yes it may go into the coffers of MLSE but how could they raise prices if everyone knows they aren't paying it out anymore, mind you the greed still exists, so nothing is a sure thing.

Having a Fan Rep at any negotiations would certainly make them think twice about it but in any case it is not going to happen, they don't want any outside interference whether it be Gov't mediators or anyone else, so it's a non starter, it's only hypothetical anyway.

The Leafs are still my passion and I wouldn't stop watching them even if it is from home and just because I could get a better price to watch baseball doesn't mean I would just stop watching the Leafs and become a big Jays fan.

Budsfan is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 05:53 PM
  #112
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budsfan View Post
Well put it this way, it may hold prices where they are now, instead of escalating to a level, that will make it too expensive for average people to go and watch, if you have teams that are no longer on the dole and players that probably should be playing in the AHL, that reduces the number of Teams and Players lining up to collect.

yes it may go into the coffers of MLSE but how could they raise prices if everyone knows they aren't paying it out anymore, mind you the greed still exists, so nothing is a sure thing.

Having a Fan Rep at any negotiations would certainly make them think twice about it but in any case it is not going to happen, they don't want any outside interference whether it be Gov't mediators or anyone else, so it's a non starter, it's only hypothetical anyway.

The Leafs are still my passion and I wouldn't stop watching them even if it is from home and just because I could get a better price to watch baseball doesn't mean I would just stop watching the Leafs and become a big Jays fan.
Coyotes and other franchises sell family packs to watch the Leafs (4 tickets, food and drinks) for $100.

Does MLSE do that?

Same product, same league. Why?

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 06:26 PM
  #113
Budsfan
Registered User
 
Budsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
Coyotes and other franchises sell family packs to watch the Leafs (4 tickets, food and drinks) for $100.

Does MLSE do that?

Same product, same league. Why?
Well this is the point, we are subsidising teams, so they can sell tickets to their fans, at reduced prices and they couldn't care less about hockey however when all this is said and done, those same teams will be looking for bigger handouts and we get to pay for it because they are probably more in debt and will have lost half of their already low fan base but they will still stick around and for why?

Some people think we shouldn't involve ourselves in the process and just sit back and let it happen but frankly I'm irked with this bantering back and forth by millionaire Players and Owners with absolutely no concern for the meat and potatoes fans that pay the freight but having a fan sit in on the proceedings would be a miracle and I'm not suggesting they would even consider it but the more people that write about it and do a little complaining about it, it may come within ear shot of some of the people on the sides involved and they may take note of it.....well maybe but I doubt it, money and greed is front and center, as per usual.

Budsfan is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 06:48 PM
  #114
charliolemieux
rsTmf
 
charliolemieux's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,569
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budsfan View Post
Well put it this way, it may hold prices where they are now, instead of escalating to a level, that will make it too expensive for average people to go and watch, if you have teams that are no longer on the dole and players that probably should be playing in the AHL, that reduces the number of Teams and Players lining up to collect.

yes it may go into the coffers of MLSE but how could they raise prices if everyone knows they aren't paying it out anymore, mind you the greed still exists, so nothing is a sure thing.

Having a Fan Rep at any negotiations would certainly make them think twice about it but in any case it is not going to happen, they don't want any outside interference whether it be Gov't mediators or anyone else, so it's a non starter, it's only hypothetical anyway.

The Leafs are still my passion and I wouldn't stop watching them even if it is from home and just because I could get a better price to watch baseball doesn't mean I would just stop watching the Leafs and become a big Jays fan.
What do you mean Escalating prices so they're too expensive for the average guy to go and watch?

They already are.

charliolemieux is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 07:07 PM
  #115
Budsfan
Registered User
 
Budsfan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,136
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliolemieux View Post
What do you mean Escalating prices so they're too expensive for the average guy to go and watch?

They already are.
Your absolutely right on that and Frankly be prepared to pay more, when this is all over, both sides will be crying poor and to get a deal done, they may just raise ticket prices but only on the teams that have fans that love their hockey like Toronto and New York and a few others and split up the proceeds, you know everybody wins except, oh ya us.

Budsfan is offline  
Old
12-08-2012, 08:30 PM
  #116
thewave
Registered User
 
thewave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 8,817
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Budsfan View Post
Your absolutely right on that and Frankly be prepared to pay more, when this is all over, both sides will be crying poor and to get a deal done, they may just raise ticket prices but only on the teams that have fans that love their hockey like Toronto and New York and a few others and split up the proceeds, you know everybody wins except, oh ya us.
You got that right

thewave is offline  
Old
12-09-2012, 12:33 AM
  #117
The Blue Devil
Registered User
 
The Blue Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,531
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.
He's a clown and one of the main reason's that the NHL now looks like a joke!

The Blue Devil is offline  
Old
12-09-2012, 06:52 AM
  #118
The Naz
With God given hands
 
The Naz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,388
vCash: 500
I think it would be best for the NHL to leave the last deal on the table. Sort of as a teaser. When my union was locked out, US Steel made it abundantly clear that when we were willing to accept their deal, we could come back the next day. They handed a copy of their last proposal to every man and woman leaving the gates on the last day in NOV 2010. It made for a lot of unrest amongst the union right from the get-go.

Leaving the last deal (which is close to fair, IMO) on the table will generate in-fighting. I know that from experience. Especially considering the last couple lingering issues only effect a select few.

Without the back sliding deals, stars will just ask for league max, whether it's 5 years or 8. This will be like the NBA now. But instead of 15 players splitting the pie, it will be ~22.

The Naz is offline  
Old
12-09-2012, 09:43 AM
  #119
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 60,050
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.
A 50/50% split of HRR and $300 mil in make whole of existing contracts OFFERED by the NHL, as acceptable to the NHLPA.

Therefore essentially they've agreed on the money aspect based on those items.

The remaining items that separate the two sides like length of CBA, player contracting rights like contract length and variance from year to year, are not money issues.

__________________
Signature: There is no greater demonstration of Fan patience then to suggest to "Play the Kids " and be willing to accept the consequences of those actions..
Mess is offline  
Old
12-09-2012, 09:55 AM
  #120
4evaBlue
Registered User
 
4evaBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
A 50/50% split of HRR and $300 mil in make whole of existing contracts OFFERED by the NHL, as acceptable to the NHLPA.

Therefore essentially they've agreed on the money aspect based on those items.

The remaining items that separate the two sides like length of CBA, player contracting rights like contract length and variance from year to year, are not money issues.
Logic problem:

(A^B^C^D)->E
// A, B, C, and D implies E

Is the following true?
A->E
// A by itself implies E

4evaBlue is offline  
Old
12-09-2012, 09:59 AM
  #121
The Blue Devil
Registered User
 
The Blue Devil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,531
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 ?
Edmonton should be disqualified for having3 #1 picks in the last 5 years already.

The Blue Devil is offline  
Old
12-09-2012, 11:03 AM
  #122
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Blue Devil View Post
Edmonton should be disqualified for having3 #1 picks in the last 5 years already.
We should look at the NHL as a business and they are trying to address poor locations with the lock-out.

The expectations should be that the lock-out lottery will be to aide those franchises that need propping up, and that isn't the Leafs, Canadiens, or other financially strong teams.

My expectation is that teams like the Blues, Coyotes, Islanders, Panthers will be gifted the best picks from the lock-out lottery.

Leafs fans will return, they place no demands on a winning team to fill the cash box, so there is absolutely no reason to gift them a top 5 pick.

Leafs fans have built their reputation of being easily satisfied with decades of filling their arena. Bettman takes that for granted and will continue to focus on the welfare clubs.

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
12-09-2012, 11:11 AM
  #123
ULF_55
Global Moderator
 
ULF_55's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Mountain Standard Ti
Posts: 55,785
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mess View Post
A 50/50% split of HRR and $300 mil in make whole of existing contracts OFFERED by the NHL, as acceptable to the NHLPA.

Therefore essentially they've agreed on the money aspect based on those items.

The remaining items that separate the two sides like length of CBA, player contracting rights like contract length and variance from year to year, are not money issues.
Funny how many posters here wanted the NHLPA to sign the first deal put on the table.

Again, the results of the agreement will not help the fans at all. Ticket prices will not be reduced, people in Phoenix don't buy $25 tickets today, selling $12 tickets might get more people there, but it doesn't improve the financials of the league.

I still think they should allow players to go UFA status if the teams don't want to make whole. If the team doesn't want to pay don't force them, allow the players to decide if they will play under a 12% reduction or if they'd like to tear up the contracts and move on. All new contracts would have to fit in the 50/50 system, so going forward teams wouldn't have to make whole.

ULF_55 is offline  
Old
12-09-2012, 11:40 AM
  #124
4evaBlue
Registered User
 
4evaBlue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,359
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
Funny how many posters here wanted the NHLPA to sign the first deal put on the table.

Again, the results of the agreement will not help the fans at all. Ticket prices will not be reduced, people in Phoenix don't buy $25 tickets today, selling $12 tickets might get more people there, but it doesn't improve the financials of the league.

I still think they should allow players to go UFA status if the teams don't want to make whole. If the team doesn't want to pay don't force them, allow the players to decide if they will play under a 12% reduction or if they'd like to tear up the contracts and move on. All new contracts would have to fit in the 50/50 system, so going forward teams wouldn't have to make whole.
I don't believe the players who oppose the 5 year term limit, and the year-to-year variance will accept such a term. They believe that they're entitled to the retirement contracts they have "earned".

4evaBlue is offline  
Old
12-09-2012, 11:51 AM
  #125
RtooDtu
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 605
vCash: 500
After my locked post i have come to realize that this lockout is very much Bettman's fault.

He should have started negotiations at 50/50 and he should not have negotiated against himself. This has caused the NHLPA to think of Bettman as weak and why they are not giving in. He has played this lockout totally wrong and Fehr is just taking whatever they give him and is always looking for more because the NHL is continuing to give him more.

If the NHLPA does not accept this latest offer we will lose the season. Not because of Fehr but because Bettman will have to change his tactics. If they reject this current offer the NHL will be playing hardball. Any and all offers will be removed, the make-hole will be gone and both sides will be starting at scratch.

I am fully behind the NHL and I feel what they are asking for will improve the NHL as a whole and it will be better for hockey. Bettman totally played this wrong and we lost a season because of it.

RtooDtu 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 09:49 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.