HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Edmonton Oilers
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Lockout Thread #4: Tentative agreement!

View Poll Results: Will there be a short nhl season this year
Yes 49 43.36%
No 64 56.64%
Voters: 113. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-12-2012, 10:03 PM
  #51
Senor Catface
Registered User
 
Senor Catface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Country: Nepal
Posts: 6,278
vCash: 1937
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
So from a player perspective

Hiring the man responsible for the most player friendly CBA in sports = bad

Keeping a guy who opened sealed meeting transcripts and who has been fired twice in the past 3 years = better
Stop saying it like it was the only reason he got fired. If it was such a big deal to the players, it would constantly have come up as the reason for this dismal as it did with Saskin. Instead, it's all the other reasons that are brought forth by the NHLPA. They didn't hide the facts with Saskin, so why wouldn't they push the "privacy" point with Kelly.

Senor Catface is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 10:04 PM
  #52
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Billybaroo View Post
You do realize he was in the midst of examining the misapprpriation of funds by Lindros et al at the NHLPA, do you not? You also realize that the firing took place in the middle of the night, with little to no lead time for the players, if they even knew what was going on, to inform themselves.
Your not THAT naive , are you?
They fired him after Buzz Hargrove presented evidence that an NHL staffer came to him concerned about a request by Paul Kelly for sealed info

The sealed info was pertaining to an in-camera meeting earlier that year where an NHL advisory commitee (made up of NHL players Brad Boyes, Andrew Ference, Mike Komisarek and Matt Stajan) was reviewing HR issues surrounding Kelly's leadership. At that time there were several question pertaining to Kelly's leadership style.

Of course don't trust the NHLPA why not just look at the reason put forward by the US College administrators who fired him from his most recent position basically because they felt he was Kingdom making and over stepping his authority.

While admitedly knowing very little about Paul Kelly I can say with certainty the man the NHLPA hired to replace him was a significant upgrade for the players. Is it even possible to dispute that?

HotToddy is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 10:06 PM
  #53
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by President Van Buren View Post
Stop saying it like it was the only reason he got fired. If it was such a big deal to the players, it would constantly have come up as the reason for this dismal as it did with Saskin. Instead, it's all the other reasons that are brought forth by the NHLPA. They didn't hide the facts with Saskin, so why wouldn't they push the "privacy" point with Kelly.
What's your point?

The players had serious questions about his leadership going into his last board meeting.

By all accounts the Hargrove presentation on the issue regarding the transcript sealed it

HotToddy is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 10:23 PM
  #54
Billybaroo*
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
What's your point?

The players had serious questions about his leadership going into his last board meeting.

By all accounts the Hargrove presentation on the issue regarding the transcript sealed it
Yeah Hot Toddy, you got it. LHad nothing to do with his investigation of Lindros et al embezzeling from the NHLPA.
Yeah, your right, nothin at all..

Billybaroo* is offline  
Old
12-12-2012, 10:52 PM
  #55
Burnt Biscuits
Registered User
 
Burnt Biscuits's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,292
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AM View Post
If I were bettman, I would add $700 CDN to the pot.

One dollar for each player.
I think Bettman should bump up his offer with a nice big fat Christmas Turkey for every single player if they get this thing done before Christmas.

Burnt Biscuits is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 01:08 AM
  #56
402
#ualberta
 
402's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Egypt
Posts: 2,855
vCash: 500
We've heard alot about these three key issues the owners are insisting on Daly even said as you know that it is the hill they will die on. So here's my idea, the players agree to the three demands the owners have while the owners give even more make whole money maybe $350 million and agree to even more revenue sharing, that way everyone's happy

402 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 01:14 AM
  #57
McDNicks17
Moderator
McDavid Cometh
 
McDNicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 1115
Quote:
Originally Posted by 402 View Post
We've heard alot about these three key issues the owners are insisting on Daly even said as you know that it is the hill they will die on. So here's my idea, the players agree to the three demands the owners have while the owners give even more make whole money maybe $350 million and agree to even more revenue sharing, that way everyone's happy
I think that's the NHL's plan.

We need these three things. Agree to them and we'll negotiate. If not, we can wait.

McDNicks17 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 06:02 AM
  #58
RaabHart
Where's the Hart?
 
RaabHart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,835
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by dnicks17 View Post
I think that's the NHL's plan.

We need these three things. Agree to them and we'll negotiate. If not, we can wait.
Pisses me off that the Nhl isn't willing to move on the max contract length. If they went 6 and 8 or 7 and 9 I bet a deal gets done. If I was the players thats a hill I die on, I'd give back some of the make whole for the extra contract length.

RaabHart is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 06:40 AM
  #59
Tarus
#Craigsnotonit
 
Tarus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,810
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Pisses me off that the Nhl isn't willing to move on the max contract length. If they went 6 and 8 or 7 and 9 I bet a deal gets done. If I was the players thats a hill I die on, I'd give back some of the make whole for the extra contract length.
Even the GMs don't like it much, citing lack of flexibility when signing contracts.

But it does have a lot of issues attached to it. Cap circumvention, escalating risk as you push out past 5 years, impact on franchise resale value, conflicts with the NHL's desire for an even playing field, etc etc.

Maybe some of those reporters out east could take some time off from constantly explaining how bad they feel for the fans in this lockout, and ask the NHL why it's such a huge issue for them.

Tarus is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 07:03 AM
  #60
Hoogaar23
Registered User
 
Hoogaar23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,506
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Pisses me off that the Nhl isn't willing to move on the max contract length. If they went 6 and 8 or 7 and 9 I bet a deal gets done. If I was the players thats a hill I die on, I'd give back some of the make whole for the extra contract length.
If I'm part of the ~80% of the PA that is never likely to see anything close to a 7 year deal at any point in my career, I'm not giving up even more money so the elite few can secure better deals for themselves.

But like I've said before - if they make the salary paid out in a year = cap hit, or eliminate the big year to year variances, the length of the deal is relatively inconsequential, as either of those 2 things (I think) would essentially kill the cap circumvention we've seen.

Hoogaar23 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 07:43 AM
  #61
McCupofOil
Bob The Builder
 
McCupofOil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: 5-14-6-1
Country: United States
Posts: 15,644
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
While admitedly knowing very little about Paul Kelly I can say with certainty the man the NHLPA hired to replace him was a significant upgrade for the players. Is it even possible to dispute that?
So hiring a guy who led them towards losing millions of dollars already this season for what we all know will likely be a worse deal than the earlier ones offered by the owners and thus losing out on more millions and contractual rights because he thinks that a better offer will come or wants to break the owners, go after the cap or whatever the **** is diabolical endgame is a significant upgrade and a good hire? Ya, ok.

Just watch.... If the players don't accept a deal soon, they will rue the day that they hired Fehr. Hell, there are already union members questioning Fehr's leadership along with countless retired players who i would say knows more about union leadership than you and I.

McCupofOil is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 01:08 PM
  #62
402
#ualberta
 
402's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Egypt
Posts: 2,855
vCash: 500
Pa met with mediator this am and will meet again in the afternoon still unclear with they will meet with the league

@DarrenDreger: Mediator will speak with PA this morning. If he concludes a deal is close he will recommend meeting. Flip-side...neg returns to square 1.

402 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 02:10 PM
  #63
Master Lok
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,068
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by 402 View Post
We've heard alot about these three key issues the owners are insisting on Daly even said as you know that it is the hill they will die on. So here's my idea, the players agree to the three demands the owners have while the owners give even more make whole money maybe $350 million and agree to even more revenue sharing, that way everyone's happy
I don't think that's going to happen. The owners only went up to $300 million on the make whole, when they decided that they wanted 10 years for the length of the CBA. Those two are linked. If the CBA was reduced to five years for example, then it makes no sense to throw $300 million for the make whole.

So $300 million Make whole is linked to 10 year CBA.

If the players agreed to that, and conceded on the compliance issues.

I have a feeling that the NHL might be willing to budge on the five year max term (with seven max for homebased players) to the point of a six year term.

Master Lok is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 03:55 PM
  #64
nabob
Nuuuuuuuuuuge!!
 
nabob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: HF boards
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Lok View Post
I don't think that's going to happen. The owners only went up to $300 million on the make whole, when they decided that they wanted 10 years for the length of the CBA. Those two are linked. If the CBA was reduced to five years for example, then it makes no sense to throw $300 million for the make whole.

So $300 million Make whole is linked to 10 year CBA.

If the players agreed to that, and conceded on the compliance issues.

I have a feeling that the NHL might be willing to budge on the five year max term (with seven max for homebased players) to the point of a six year term.
Correct. Bettman and Daly said many times that it is a package deal. A give and take if you will.

Fehr doesnt see it that way. He thinks everything should be based off the previous CBA. Regardless of the change in the economic environment in that last 7 years. So he wants to cherry pick every individual part of the CBA and negotiate it separately from everything else, when in reality it is all tied together as part of a giant equation.

nabob is online now  
Old
12-13-2012, 04:49 PM
  #65
Stoneman89
Registered User
 
Stoneman89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,515
vCash: 500
Only the 2nd year into his new position and Hot Toddy's hero has already lost the players millions of dollars, with more losses on the way. Good job. At least they all feel "united."

Stoneman89 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 05:27 PM
  #66
402
#ualberta
 
402's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Egypt
Posts: 2,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Lok View Post
I don't think that's going to happen. The owners only went up to $300 million on the make whole, when they decided that they wanted 10 years for the length of the CBA. Those two are linked. If the CBA was reduced to five years for example, then it makes no sense to throw $300 million for the make whole.

So $300 million Make whole is linked to 10 year CBA.

If the players agreed to that, and conceded on the compliance issues.

I have a feeling that the NHL might be willing to budge on the five year max term (with seven max for homebased players) to the point of a six year term.
Yeah i understand what your saying, but as of now the nhl hasn't been willing to move on any of the three issues the league says accept these first then we'll talk, meanwhile the pa refueses the accept these demands. I'm just trying to think of how they can solve this thing, hopefully one of the sides comes up with a great idea soon because the clock is really ticking

Talks with mediator are done and mediation has unsurprisingly failed again.
It seems to me the situation has turned into a staring contest who blinks first does the league budge on one of the issues or does the pa just accept the nhl's nonnegotiable offer

402 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 05:45 PM
  #67
molsonmuscle360
Registered User
 
molsonmuscle360's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Ft. McMurray Ab
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,968
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 402 View Post
Yeah i understand what your saying, but as of now the nhl hasn't been willing to move on any of the three issues the league says accept these first then we'll talk, meanwhile the pa refueses the accept these demands. I'm just trying to think of how they can solve this thing, hopefully one of the sides comes up with a great idea soon because the clock is really ticking

Talks with mediator are done and mediation has unsurprisingly failed again.
It seems to me the situation has turned into a staring contest who blinks first does the league budge on one of the issues or does the pa just accept the nhl's nonnegotiable offer
I have a feeling once the PA made Chipman and the owners from Toronto and Pittsburgh annoyed last week, that really solidified the owners. Now I'm pretty sure that they are just going to keep the offer as it is currently, and probably not budge off it.

I think they are starting to see the split in the players. Look at how quiet some players who have been some of the most active on twitter and with fans before hand have been in the last month or so. Ryan Jones for instance used to tweet like 20 times a day, now it's a rarity. I think guys like him just want to get back to work

molsonmuscle360 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 06:22 PM
  #68
AM
Registered User
 
AM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 5,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raab View Post
Pisses me off that the Nhl isn't willing to move on the max contract length. If they went 6 and 8 or 7 and 9 I bet a deal gets done. If I was the players thats a hill I die on, I'd give back some of the make whole for the extra contract length.
If I were the NHL I would offer them 10 year contract lengths... but not guaranteed.

Continuation based on performance, no problemo.

AM is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 06:44 PM
  #69
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,608
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stoneman89 View Post
Only the 2nd year into his new position and Hot Toddy's hero has already lost the players millions of dollars, with more losses on the way. Good job. At least they all feel "united."
Millions like the 300 million the players have clawed back on the make whole from one of the owners numerous "final, final, we really mean it, going going gone, this is it, final" offers?

And Fehr isn't my hero, I'm hoping the players get as little as possible in these negotiations as this works better from a fan perspective.

I'm not pro-Fehr as much as I'm anti- silly little opinionated narratives that have not basis in reason

HotToddy is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 07:01 PM
  #70
Stoneman89
Registered User
 
Stoneman89's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 7,515
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
Millions like the 300 million the players have clawed back on the make whole from one of the owners numerous "final, final, we really mean it, going going gone, this is it, final" offers?

And Fehr isn't my hero, I'm hoping the players get as little as possible in these negotiations as this works better from a fan perspective.

I'm not pro-Fehr as much as I'm anti- silly little opinionated narratives that have not basis in reason

The players have lost a total of 619,000,000 in salaries so far. And counting every day. They better keep clawing.

Stoneman89 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 10:10 PM
  #71
HotToddy
Registered User
 
HotToddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,608
vCash: 500
Pretty good Grantland piece of Fehr and the lockout

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...hr-nhl-lockout

HotToddy is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 10:47 PM
  #72
Billybaroo*
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 737
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
Pretty good Grantland piece of Fehr and the lockout

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...hr-nhl-lockout
All its missing is the pom poms

Billybaroo* is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 02:10 AM
  #73
McDNicks17
Moderator
McDavid Cometh
 
McDNicks17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,680
vCash: 1115
Quote:
Originally Posted by HotToddy View Post
Pretty good Grantland piece of Fehr and the lockout

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/...hr-nhl-lockout
Do writers like to throw their credibility out the window by writing an incredibly biased article like that?

That was a challenge to get through. Just an abomination.

McDNicks17 is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 02:32 AM
  #74
402
#ualberta
 
402's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Edmonton
Country: Egypt
Posts: 2,855
vCash: 500
Here's a good article
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...medium=twitter

Supposedly an anonymous member of the nhl BoG proposed the three issues currently splitting the sides simply be divided so the sides meet in the middle. It also mentions how many analyst believe there is still so much money to be made if a deal is done, Here's a piece of the article

Quote:
Originally Posted by theglobeandmail
According to the report, the NHL governor proposed a nine-year collective agreement (with an opt-out after seven years for either side), a six-year limit on player contracts (with an option for eight-year deals for players who have been with a franchise for five years) and a “simple buyout option,” where the buyouts money would count against the salary cap.

ESPN also spoke with two players who felt such an offer would be worth a vote of the NHL Players’ Association.
(this is a for real good article not just a biased fehr cheerleader article )

402 is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 02:35 AM
  #75
I am the Liquor
Fire Mact
 
I am the Liquor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Sunnyvale
Country: Canada
Posts: 35,553
vCash: 1271
Another day, zero dollars.

I am the Liquor 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 11:43 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.