They would never be able to agree on who got what percentage of that $100.
Well done.
They should take what they can get from me at this point. Because I'll tell you one thing, take my cable bill out of the equation and I sure as hell won't be investing 100$ in anything NHL related for a long, long time.
Bruce Garrioch @SunGarrioch
"I can't wait to see what his teammates do when guys go after him." Philly's Scott Hartnell on @TEAM1200Ottawa on Roman Hamrlik. #NHL #NHLPA
I don't really understand why people are amazed and aghast that most of the players are backing Don Fehr and bringing up terms like "kool-aid" and "brainwashing".
The NHLPA went out and hired Fehr to represent them because of all the massive amounts of ******** that went on with the NHLPA during and following the last lockout. They wanted a strong leader with experience in labor negotiations, so they got one. There's no "brainwashing" or crap like that, this is what the players wanted to get. Fehr isn't some evil mastermind bent on destroying the NHL to appease his ego, he's doing the job he was hired to do.
Ultimately, some people are getting way too emotionally invested in this and I feel like the players and Fehr are the easiest targets because everyone has deduced that the NHL has the upper hand overall, and "if those damn players would just cave in and accept that they don't have as much leverage as the owners then we could get back to watching hockey!"
Even in regular unions the rank and file do not take kindly to dissenters when it comes to labor negotiations.
Hamrlik had ever right to say what he did but 1) to not be involved in the process 2) to not express those thoughts to the command structure put in place to represent you is just childish.
Had he been involved in the union as a rep or even just going to the meeting he might have had some point. But to shoot his mouth off to the public / press does nothing but add ammo to the owners.
If the union was ignoring him I could see why he would go public but all he did was give the owners an angle to try to exploit just like they did the last time.
Fehr tried to pass on the job. The PA begged him to take it. Yet Fehr is conning them and has no interest in settling.
Unfortunately the breaking of the ranks delays the process. Both sides will settle when they know movement is over.
Fehr also doesn't have to live with the outcome of this, or have it affect his repuation in any way. He can hold out forever and not give a crap. No responisibility to the league, the fans or the game.
Just the players. Get them as much $ as possible, end of story.
Fehr tried to pass on the job. The PA begged him to take it. Yet Fehr is conning them and has no interest in settling.
Unfortunately the breaking of the ranks delays the process. Both sides will settle when they know movement is over.
Im not in the camp that Fehr is "conning" the players, but he needs to be very careful now that hes helped entrech his constituency firmly into an ongoing 3 month lockout. Players have lost nearly half the paychecks they would've earned in 2012-2013. At what point does fighting for an extra few dollars down the road become less important than the dough they're losing now?
If they're really so close, as Fehr insisted, and contract term lengths are the last hurdle, how does the 90% of players that will never have a 6+ year contract feel about fighting for that issue when they're losing paychecks now?
fehr involved in one lost hockey season is less impressive than gary bettman's record. bettman negotiates like william fridge perry perry rushed the goal-line.
Last edited by egelband: 12-11-2012 at 12:31 PM.
Reason: didn't intend to quote
fehr involved in one lost hockey season is less impressive than gary bettman's record. bettman negotiates like william fridge perry perry rushed the goal-line.
Fehr's record of work stoppages isn't exactly stellar, either.
Im not in the camp that Fehr is "conning" the players, but he needs to be very careful now that hes helped entrech his constituency firmly into an ongoing 3 month lockout. Players have lost nearly half the paychecks they would've earned in 2012-2013. At what point does fighting for an extra few dollars down the road become less important than the dough they're losing now?
If they're really so close, as Fehr insisted, and contract term lengths are the last hurdle, how does the 90% of players that will never have a 6+ year contract feel about fighting for that issue when they're losing paychecks now?
Don't know how it makes sense. That is their decision. But (and this doesn't apply to you) people need to realize this is the UNION'S decision, not Fehr's unilateral decision to ruin hockey.
We had it out throughout but we both can agree that the two sides took too long to sit down, were too stubborn, too everything. But the main issues are addressed in principle. They both need to compromise on the terms.
Don't know how it makes sense. That is their decision. But (and this doesn't apply to you) people need to realize this is the UNION'S decision, not Fehr's unilateral decision to ruin hockey.
We had it out throughout but we both can agree that the two sides took too long to sit down, were too stubborn, too everything. But the main issues are addressed in principle. They both need to compromise on the terms.
im not 100% sure how it works but i think the players arent polled till theyve really reached an agreement that Fehr is comfortable with.
I think it goes something like.
Fehr--->Board--->Players
so once its good with Fehr, it goes to the board for a vote, and then it goes to the players.
im not sure who's on the board, but if most of them are players with long term contracts and make big money, then youd think that they dont have the rest of the unions best interests in heart. as mentioned, the current squabble are really over things that only effect the top most players.
settlement announced 02:42 thursday morning (can't announce resolution during the day). Press conference (no jackets, no ties, everyone looks tired and sweating as if they battled in a heavyweight fight (great for effect)
Schedule starts New Year's Eve.
Do they really want to miss more games and play for the Jan 15 start?
im not 100% sure how it works but i think the players arent polled till theyve really reached an agreement that Fehr is comfortable with.
I think it goes something like.
Fehr--->Board--->Players
so once its good with Fehr, it goes to the board for a vote, and then it goes to the players.
im not sure who's on the board, but if most of them are players with long term contracts and make big money, then youd think that they dont have the rest of the unions best interests in heart. as mentioned, the current squabble are really over things that only effect the top most players.
Pretty sure if the players aren't happy with how Fehr is doing things they could tell him and pressure him to change his tactics, and if he doesn't, then get rid of him. He doesn't exactly have power over them the same way Bettman and his group does over the rest of the owners.
Also, I assume the guys who have been in negotiations the most are members of the "board" you speak of, and lots of them are bottom six guys
im not 100% sure how it works but i think the players arent polled till theyve really reached an agreement that Fehr is comfortable with.
I think it goes something like.
Fehr--->Board--->Players
so once its good with Fehr, it goes to the board for a vote, and then it goes to the players.
im not sure who's on the board, but if most of them are players with long term contracts and make big money, then youd think that they dont have the rest of the unions best interests in heart. as mentioned, the current squabble are really over things that only effect the top most players.
It's not Fehr's decision per se. The negotiating committee of players will reach some kind of consensus that they can take it back to the players with some reasonable chance of its passing.
