HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

NHL Lockout XXVI: 57 Hockey Channels (And Nothin' On)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-11-2012, 03:35 PM
  #576
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stuck in Socal View Post
Once again, the NHL has lost all its motives to strike a deal now. The union made the moderate owners run away, and now we are at the point where the league knows there won't be a season. Why else was Gary so angry last Thursday at the press conference. He knows it is over. The PA is just too asinine they have given up on the best deals they are going to get.
Or an alternative interpretation of last week's events.
The NHL brought in the so-called moderate owners after Bettman and Jacobs had played the bad cops. The good cop moderate owners with Bettman and the other owners backing were brought in to see if they could take one last crack at getting the union to crack or make more concessions. The well written statements supposedly written by the owners just before talks broke down were largely scripted and prepared in advance. Bettman got pissed at Fehr for his press conference stunt. The date that has always been in mind for the owners is a Jan 1st start date. The union hasn't cracked so it's time to get a deal done.

Full disclosure: this is all conjecture and your views may vary.

vanwest is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:36 PM
  #577
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeK View Post
I love how the desertification talk has virtually gone away. The players have probably been told by Fehr and their lawyers that they waited too long and most judges would laugh them out of court leaving them with absolutely nothing to stand on. The players better wake up. They have once again shown the sporting world the hockey players not the smartest athletes around.
Fehr doesn't believe in it. He is 100% union. Fehr never decertified or disclaimed interest when he ran the MLB players association.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:36 PM
  #578
bp13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 11,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdawg1234 View Post
I think they'd put it on the table if Fehr came back and accepted the terms, but something tells me Fehr doesnt plan on doing that and this will just erupt again.
The thing is, aren't they at the point where there'd be no more meetings unless one group or the other did planned to give a bit more?

Again, if I was the players, I'd come back and give in on the 8 year deal in exchange for 7 year max contracts, for example. Or taken further, give them 8 years and give them their 5/7 max contract setup, but make them raise the cap and/or the make whole dollars.

I think that's maybe the only benefit to this latest staregy by the PA. You've got the NHL on record with the subset of their seemingly endless list of demands that they won't cave on. So give in on those and then double dip on the others.

bp13 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:37 PM
  #579
RedMenace
Zero ***** Given
 
RedMenace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Under the Bridge
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029 View Post
Here you go:

CBA Exhibit 1 - Standard Players Contract
18. The Club and the Player severally and mutually promise and agree to be legally bound by the League Rules and by any Collective Bargaining Agreement that has been or may be entered into between the member clubs of the League and the NHLPA, and by all of the terms and provisions thereof, copies of which shall be open and available for inspection by the Club, its directors and officers, and the Player, at the main office of the League, the main office of the Club and the main office of the NHLPA. This SPC is entered into subject to the CBA between the NHL and the NHLPA and any provisions of this SPC inconsistent with such CBA are superseded by the provisions of the CBA.
How can anything supersede something that doesn't exist? If the previous CBA is null and void, how can some parts apply but others not?

Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryHabs View Post
First of all, even in the previous CBA (2005-2012) the contracts were not guaranteed 100% either. It is what is called escrow, meaning if the player salaries during the season exceeded 57% of total league revenue projections, the players would give back money the following year in escrow payments. If the player salaries were less than 57%, they would receive that money back (just like this past year)
Then why are NHL contracts referred to as "guaranteed?" The escrow fund and owners not having to pay out contracts signed under the previous CBA (yet still have the players rights retained) isn't the same thing...

Quote:
Secondly, the reason the NHL was willing to give $300M was to aleviate the escrow payments that would result going from 57% of revenues to 50%. After 2-3 years, the league revenues would grow enough to cover all existing contracts or at the very least reduce escrow payments to the current level.
That's still not a guarantee of any sort, and the owners saying "Yeah, we'll pay (x)% of what we told you we'd pay you previously because we're not happy with the contracts that were handed out (even though we approved them)..." is a ****** way to do business in my opinion.

Quote:
Last but not least, the player agents knew exactly that the new CBA would look totally different, so they took advantage of that to get massive signing bonuses and huge front loading contracts. Both parties were at fault this summer.
I'll agree with that bolded part, but the contracts signed prior to this summer/season that were front-loaded with heavy signing bonuses weren't forced upon any team. As has been argued here before, if you can't afford the promised amount of the contract, don't sign someone to it.

RedMenace is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:37 PM
  #580
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 5,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThePhoenixx View Post
Neither would the thirty arenas they would need.
Hamilton doesn't need an arena, Albany doesn't need an arena, the Phantoms don't need an arena, the Oil Kings don't need an arena, the Wolves don't need an arena, and XL Centre can host the Whalers. Original 6 ftw!

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:37 PM
  #581
Hanklite*
Bettman's Bro
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: TO
Country: Canada
Posts: 996
vCash: 500
I would love to say a deal comes this week but I just don't see it. Nothing will be settled either way til late December. Either a deal or cancelled season.

Hanklite* is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:38 PM
  #582
DaAnimal
Registered User
 
DaAnimal's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Pasadena
Country: United States
Posts: 1,376
vCash: 500
Just because the offer is off the table, it doesn't mean that it is gone forever. Pretty sure if the PA was serious and want to renegotiate, the league and owners would be more than happy to bring back the offer.

DaAnimal is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:39 PM
  #583
ColePens
Global Moderator
Your Savior
 
ColePens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 34,795
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ColePens
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdawg1234 View Post
I think they'd put it on the table if Fehr came back and accepted the terms, but something tells me Fehr doesnt plan on doing that and this will just erupt again.
But he won't. This tactic is to bring down the PA demands and then inevitably give it back to "make the deal". This is where I will back off my support for the owners, if it happens. I'm 100% behind the owners because they've played a lot less games than Fehr. They need to stay away from it here.

The right tactic would be to take it off the table and re-negotiate. That drives their bargaining chip so low. It's unfortunate, but Bettman warned them 3 times it was going to be taken off the table.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bp13 View Post
I'm going to respectfully disagree.

Despite the fact Bettman was shaking more than his usual shaking self last week when the took his proverbial ball and went home, I think these guys realize they're too close to let a season go. Moreover, taking their make whole offer off the table could obviously been conditional upon what they asked for in return for THAT package. In other words, I think make whole will be right back on the table so long as the players give up more.

I'm coming around to the owners in this, at least to the extent that the players need to make the next move. The owners have made clear what they must have, numerous times. I say the players give it, every little bit, then take their pound of flesh back elsewhere, either in the make whole, the cap total, %HRR, whatever.

I would love to see a vote by Thursday... but if we don't get it this week we are in trouble. Hope you are right.

ColePens is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:40 PM
  #584
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaAnimal View Post
Just because the offer is off the table, it doesn't mean that it is gone forever. Pretty sure if the PA was serious and want to renegotiate, the league and owners would be more than happy to bring back the offer.
It's largely semantics really. Once an offer is rejected then legally the offer doesn't stand.

vanwest is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:41 PM
  #585
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 5,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordieHoweHatTrick View Post
Yet, Iginla will continue getting paid what he does inthe NHL playing in front of 7,000 fans.
Winnipeg is dead because their arena only seats 15,000!


Last edited by DyerMaker66: 12-11-2012 at 03:55 PM.
DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:42 PM
  #586
Hanklite*
Bettman's Bro
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: TO
Country: Canada
Posts: 996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaAnimal View Post
Just because the offer is off the table, it doesn't mean that it is gone forever. Pretty sure if the PA was serious and want to renegotiate, the league and owners would be more than happy to bring back the offer.
I would be mightily surprised if the NHL offers $300M in make whole again.

Hanklite* is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:42 PM
  #587
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,289
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
How can anything supersede something that doesn't exist? If the previous CBA is null and void, how can some parts apply but others not?
Because they agreed to handle it that way.

It's just legalese saying all contracts are governed by each CBA subsequent to the one the contract was signed under.

It would be chaos to do it any other way.

Keep in mind, they can have exceptions if they are negotiated into the new CBA, but they're not automatic.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:42 PM
  #588
Moe Mantha
Registered User
 
Moe Mantha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Winnipeg, MB, CANADA
Country: Canada
Posts: 810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
TV Contracts, and presence, will come with talent: Rome wasn't built in a day.
They're going to need it, since most arenas are smaller.

Moe Mantha is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:42 PM
  #589
scott99
Registered User
 
scott99's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,083
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaAnimal View Post
Just because the offer is off the table, it doesn't mean that it is gone forever. Pretty sure if the PA was serious and want to renegotiate, the league and owners would be more than happy to bring back the offer.
I agree with this. I don't think ownership would be dumb enough to pull an offer, that they proposed, and let's face it, an offer the owners felt was a WIN for themselves, otherwise they wouldn't have offered it. The same offer, maybe with even a few sweeteners, will probably be the last offer the owners offer. The players will take it.

scott99 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:44 PM
  #590
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,572
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by middletoe View Post
Let's say you and I are negotiating and I have an internal deadline of Feb.1 that I don't tell you about. But you guess that my deadline is somewhere around that date. And one thing you know is that you won't see my best offer until that date.

Now it's early December and I make you an offer. Do you accept it knowing that I haven't reached my own personal pressure point?

Let's say you choose not to because you strongly believe there's something better to come. Does that mean you are wasting time or does it mean you are just reacting to a negotiating partner that you know to be willing to waste time?
The problem is that with each cancelled game the offer has to get that much better to make it worth while. We are at the point that no offer the NHL would realistically give could make up for the amount of money lost to get it. It makes absolutely no sense.

Chelios is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:46 PM
  #591
RedMenace
Zero ***** Given
 
RedMenace's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Under the Bridge
Posts: 4,269
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029 View Post
It's just legalese saying all contracts are governed by each CBA subsequent to the one the contract was signed under.

It would be chaos to do it any other way.

Keep in mind, they can have exceptions if they are negotiated into the new CBA, but they're not automatic.
Okay, those are small, bite-sized words I can understand.

That still seems like a really, REALLY ****** way to have a contract structured. If it were me, I don't think I'd take the risk of having a contract that extended past the life of whatever current CBA there was.

Then again, I'm just a mindless "PA jockrider," so I suppose that's par for the course.

RedMenace is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:47 PM
  #592
schabadoo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,192
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaAnimal View Post
Pretty sure if the PA was serious and want to renegotiate
That's what happened last week, and the owners took the deal off the table.

That's the exact opposite of what you're saying.

schabadoo is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:48 PM
  #593
Deebo
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
How can anything supersede something that doesn't exist? If the previous CBA is null and void, how can some parts apply but others not?
I'd wager that that the SPC states that if the active CBA between the NHL and NHLPA contradicts anything in the contract, what is in the CBA stands.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
Then why are NHL contracts referred to as "guaranteed?" The escrow fund and owners not having to pay out contracts signed under the previous CBA (yet still have the players rights retained) isn't the same thing...
You can't cut players without buying them out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
That's still not a guarantee of any sort, and the owners saying "Yeah, we'll pay (x)% of what we told you we'd pay you previously because we're not happy with the contracts that were handed out (even though we approved them)..." is a ****** way to do business in my opinion.
The PA agreed to the above stipulation in the CBA, they knew about it or at least their agents should have told them, complaining about it now is part of theatrics that have been going on during the negotiations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedMenace View Post
I'll agree with that bolded part, but the contracts signed prior to this summer/season that were front-loaded with heavy signing bonuses weren't forced upon any team. As has been argued here before, if you can't afford the promised amount of the contract, don't sign someone to it.
The signing bonuses were paid out.

If the PA didn't want SPCs that could have been changed by future CBA negotiations, they shouldn't have agreed to that during the last round of CBA negotiations.

Deebo is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:48 PM
  #594
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 5,437
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moe Mantha View Post
They're going to need it, since most arenas are smaller.
How many NHL teams own their own arena?

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:49 PM
  #595
HavlatMach9
Registered User
 
HavlatMach9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,208
vCash: 500
If Donald Fehr was younger, I wouldn't have been surprised if the players tried to keep him for the next CBA after current one was negotiated.

HavlatMach9 is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:49 PM
  #596
Deebo
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,309
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanklite View Post
I would love to say a deal comes this week but I just don't see it. Nothing will be settled either way til late December. Either a deal or cancelled season.
What is this based on?

Deebo is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:49 PM
  #597
StevensCakeBakerBacker
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Country:
Posts: 1,294
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
It's largely semantics really. Once an offer is rejected then legally the offer doesn't stand.
An offer can be rejected and still stand, but the original offer is terminated once a counter offer is made. The owners, for good measure, took the offer off the table before acceptance was delivered... That should have cleared up the situation for the players, but it apparently hasn't.

StevensCakeBakerBacker is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:53 PM
  #598
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,348
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by StevensCakeBakerBacker View Post
An offer can be rejected and still stand, but the original offer is terminated once a counter offer is made. The owners, for good measure, took the offer off the table before acceptance was conveyed... That should have cleared up the situation for the players, but it apparently hasn't.
No, outright rejection of an offer ends the offer. Once an offer is rejected you cannot then go back and accept it.
Wiki:

"2) Rejection: Once an offer is rejected by the offeree it can no longer be accepted. Rejection can take the form of an outright refusal or a counter-offer - that is, a purported acceptance but on different terms. "

In this case the NHL has said it is taking everything off the table. It doesn't really mean anything as legally the NHLPA could also strat over again. This isjust posturing by Bettman.

vanwest is online now  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:53 PM
  #599
Hanklite*
Bettman's Bro
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: TO
Country: Canada
Posts: 996
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deebo View Post
What is this based on?
My gut...

The players definitely still feel a better deal is coming and wont agree to the three key points until that date...

They either agree or the season is toast.

Hanklite* is offline  
Old
12-11-2012, 03:55 PM
  #600
FanSince2014
What'd He Say?
 
FanSince2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 3,066
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HavlatMach9 View Post
If Donald Fehr was younger, I wouldn't have been surprised if the players tried to keep him for the next CBA after current one was negotiated.
D. Fehr's mini-me, his brother, will still be around.

FanSince2014 is offline  
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 08:00 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.