HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

Lockout V: Take the Long Way Home

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-17-2012, 04:58 PM
  #126
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 10,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Not really. TSN indicated that it gives the board until Jan 2nd to vote. So the PA now has from now (well Thursday) to Jan 2nd to use it as a threat against the NHL, to try and get better terms. Then from my understanding they'll need the players approval again if they didn't carry through on their threat between Thursday and Jan 2nd.

The big thing is if the players agree to give the board that power, then its most likely that they (the board) would go through with it.

I suspect that it will pass. But man-o-man would it ever be funny if it didn't pass. The PA would be screwed, and the NHL would have even less reasons to lessen their demands.
I understand but given the date most have circled on the calendar for a handshake deal to "save" the season is Jan 3 it's semantics. It wouldn't make much sense to vote on such a thing and give the union until June to use it. Though that's mainly my cynical view that this is all just a ploy by the union and not a genuine desire to disband.

Oh it will pass. if it didn't it would be essentially be a loss of confidence vote and they'd cut the legs out from under the negotiating committee. That would leave them susceptible to get completely and utterly steamrolled in a way we haven't even imagined could happen. So really what the PA leadership has done is dare the membership to vote against it knowing that will lead to outright destruction of the union. So the vote will likely go in the leaderships direction so they can get busy (potentially) destroying the union in a different way!

Really, this will end on the last day possible? Why? It won't be because the league has some script that will make it so but rather because that is the script Fehr has. His belief is the best offer comes on the last possible day. All the league is likely doing is holding enough back right now so they have room to move on that last day. If they move earlier they have to give up more and likely go past what they are comfortable with.

The danger for Fehr of course is that the NHL did have a masterful week not too long ago that turned some moderate owners into hawks which may result in the NHL calling the Fehr bluff and cancelling the season.

note: it's in my opinion that no matter what further concessions the PA gets from the owners it won't make up for the money they've lost and the money they will continue to lose due to the damage to the game.

tantalum is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:04 PM
  #127
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,538
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Not doubting what you found out. But was it put into context as well? How many top end FA's were available, and how relative/competitive were Canadian teams at that time? Since the lockout, only Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver and Edmonton (briefly anyway) had competitive teams. Teams go through cycles of having success, and rebuilding/retooling. When Edmonton is blowing goats like they have the last few years, it doesn't surprise me in the least that a star player didn't sign there.

My point is there's so much that goes into a player making this decision that while we can point and go Canadian teams never get the top UFA's, it's not that simple. There's 30 teams in the league... and that UFA can only sign with one of them. They all have their own reasons for choosing the team they choose (competitiveness, money, location, team/GM/ownership environment, etc), and that saying that players only go to these locations is generalizing too much.
I realize there is a limit, but even with the cap Philly and NYR keep shuffling the deck to make room for the top of market. I also agree about the relative dearth of good players available. Goalies are a good case in point as in some years it seems that there is not one quality starter available (top ten to fifteen). I try to stay away from overgeneralizing but the big market Canadian teams are just not grabbing any top of market guys. Enough to be a trend for me especially when there are one offs like Nashville, Anaheim and now Minnesota that are stepping up.

BTW, I am firmly of the opinion that FA is probably the least effective way of approaching a cup. Just about the least important variable.

SJeasy is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:21 PM
  #128
madhi19
Just the tip!
 
madhi19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cold and Dark place!
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,388
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
Not really. TSN indicated that it gives the board until Jan 2nd to vote. So the PA now has from now (well Thursday) to Jan 2nd to use it as a threat against the NHL, to try and get better terms. Then from my understanding they'll need the players approval again if they didn't carry through on their threat between Thursday and Jan 2nd.

The big thing is if the players agree to give the board that power, then its most likely that they (the board) would go through with it.

I suspect that it will pass. But man-o-man would it ever be funny if it didn't pass. The PA would be screwed, and the NHL would have even less reasons to lessen their demands.
This weekend vote was all for show Fehr would never have put it to a vote publicly like that had he not done a private vote first. Well peoples wanted a real deadline and now we have one if they don't make a deal by Jan 2nd the season is done.

madhi19 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:29 PM
  #129
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,636
vCash: 500
I read all these posts taking sides, it's pretty pointless. LeBrun's latest article makes sense - "There is No Winning This Blame Game"

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/87...o-lockout-mess

Quote:
Looking back, the NHL made a terrible strategic mistake back in July with an original offer that asked for players to accept 43 percent of hockey-related revenue, down from the 57 percent it had in the previous deal. I cannot tell you how many level-headed NHL players -- not militants but rather moderates -- have told me repeatedly how that first offer from the NHL in July felt like a punch to the head and galvanized the player membership in a way in which NHLPA executive director Don Fehr likely could have never managed on his own.

That offer set the tone for the level of mistrust that has plagued what should have been a simpler negotiation, the players knowing deep down all along that they'd be accepting a 50-50 split of revenues.

On the other side of things, Fehr is also showing his true colors of late. The longtime baseball union leader seems hard to pin down. It just seems like whenever the league moves on what Fehr deemed a critical issue -- such as funding the "make-whole" provision and then upping it to $300 million -- the NHLPA boss finds new demands to throw the league's way, the latest being his desire to cap escrow as part of the transition rules.

All of which just feeds into the long-held criticism from NHL owners that Fehr can't close a deal.

Let's be clear here: The players have done most of the giving in this negotiation. There's no way you can argue otherwise. But as I've long maintained, that had to be the understood context of this negotiation from Day 1. After labor deals in the NFL and NBA last year in which players backed up financially, it was clear NHL players were going to be subject to the same end result. It's an industry standard you can't escape.

What is needed at this point is for one side to provide one more compromised offer, one that the moderate representatives could bring to their respective constituencies for a vote. Moderates on both sides have indicated to ESPN.com over the past few days that is how this thing finally ends.

Problem is, they disagree on how to come up with that proposal. The folks on the league/ownership side say it's up to the NHLPA to come up with the next proposal. The players we've talked to tell ESPN.com they believe it's up to the league to provide the next offer. Picture me now banging my head against the wall. Repeatedly.
These two sides are not paying attention to logic anymore.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:30 PM
  #130
_Del_
Registered User
 
_Del_'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: SkullcrusherMountain
Posts: 3,549
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
But all disclaimer of interest does is accelerate the negotiation process. It would take years to fight and win an antitrust suit.

Besides, how can all other means of negotiation be exhausted...when even an antitrust suit relies on the THREAT of uncertainty....to spur NEGOTIATION.
Right. And I'd suspect the NLRB will recognize this. I don't know if the players are really understanding what they're doing at this point. They're along for the ride and getting some questionable advice. This only works if the league is scared, and I don't see any sign that the league is afraid of the lawsuits. They might be confident in the outcome. I would be. Worse, they may excited to set a precedent for the next labor impasse when they'll trot this circus history out and kill any threat before it gets started.
If the players really wanted to go down this road, they're doing it the worst way possible. Just vote a straight decertification and walk away and file your suit and wait for two years to see the result. They might even get triple salary for those years in which they didn't play.
That they don't want to actually do that is obvious. They just want better terms in the collective bargaining. Doing it this way is not legal. And now the NLRB will likely decide that this is ridiculous, and they'll be back at the tables with one less arrow in the quiver and several months more of lost wages.

_Del_ is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:31 PM
  #131
Melrose Munch
Registered User
 
Melrose Munch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,457
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riptide View Post
The league is a lot different today than it was 20 years ago. Winnipeg and Quebec City moved for 2 reasons. Both teams needed new arena's, and neither team could find a buyer who would keep the team in either of those locations. In addition to both teams needing new arenas, the Canadian dollar was at an alltime low (.55-.60 cents on the dollar - IIRC). Kind of the same as the crap that Phoenix is experiencing (in terms of trying to find an owner willing to keep the team there). So much so that the only way someone will consider buying the team and committing to Phoenix is if the city gives them a very healthy arena management deal.

The reason fans cry for more Canadian teams is two fold. One because we're patriotic, and we see hockey (rightly or wrongly) as our game. And two is because it's hard to argue that a team in Hamilton/Southern Ontario/Toronto#2 or a team in Quebec City would not do infinitely better than Phoenix is doing - even if the US's economy improved, and Canada's tanked. That's not to say that there's not markets in the US (Seattle, Houston, etc) that would not do better than Phoenix.

I'm not advocating that we relocate a ton of teams (and this is where I'm probably in the minority). Heck I'm not really even advocating that we move anyone other than Phoenix. Mainly because I know it's not really feasible, or practicable, or really necessary. And I think that expansion is far more realistic and practicable.



Pronger was something else, but you can't really paint all Canadian cities with that brush. Vancouver signed Garrison (paid too much, imo, but they still signed him), and he was highly sought after. Edmonton just got Schultz - someone who every team in the league wanted - and Edmonton could NOT over pay him due to him being on an ELC, they also signed Souray a while back (highly sought after). Calgary hasn't done much recently (mind you their team's been on a decline for a few years now - sorry Flames fans). Montreal signed Cammilari and Gionta a couple years ago. Toronto signed a few UFAs.

Yes there's differences in living in some places in Canada, and in some places in the US (snow vs sandy beaches, etc). I don't think anyone doubts that. So while some teams may have issues attracting star players, that shouldn't be a reason why we slam them. Regardless of that, those teams will still be in much better shape financially than many of their US counter parts. Even if the dollar went back to .75 (which is where it was at in 04), those teams are still in better shape. Not a lot, but they're not losing millions yearly. Something to keep in mind, is that when 30%+ of the revenue is Canadian based, that when the dollar goes down (will happen at some point), the NHL's HRR will likely decrease... meaning that the cap/floor will drop as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SJeasy View Post
I have looked at the destinations of top FAs in the past. It is really a narrow list of teams that grab top of market FAs and I look at it over a very extended timespan. Most of the guys that have been named were not the top available at their position in that year which has been my criteria regarding the attractiveness of markets.

There was an article and poll some time ago about the players' opinions of cities as destinations. Edmonton and Buffalo were bottom of the list. I don't share the opinion but it is what it is. There have also been some teams that were previously rejected for what I would term very unfriendly relations with their respective front offices. It was obvious which teams those were.

Summarizing, NY and Philly topped the list as favorite destination. Chicago (recently), Boston, Colorado and Detroit were up there. Nashville and Anaheim had one off entries in the sweepstakes. Toronto and Montreal have frequently seen entries in the second tier of FAs, but never the first tier (best available at the postion, forward, dman, goalie).
This is what I'm talking about riptide. Last all star week is the Survey SJeasy is talking about. Frankly I am moving to NYC myself so I can understand. Why can't we get Canadians to come back to Canada once they get rich?


Last edited by Melrose Munch: 12-17-2012 at 05:38 PM.
Melrose Munch is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:35 PM
  #132
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,427
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
I read all these posts taking sides, it's pretty pointless. LeBrun's latest article makes sense - "There is No Winning This Blame Game"

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/87...o-lockout-mess



These two sides are not paying attention to logic anymore.
They started off treating each other and their respective positions with little or no respect, and we see again where that strategy has got them and the apparent adversarial attitude that still exists, even though the gap between them has significantly closed (though with significant issues still to be resolved).

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:38 PM
  #133
santiclaws
Registered User
 
santiclaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 1,987
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by _Del_ View Post
I don't see any sign that the league is afraid of the lawsuits. They might be confident in the outcome. I would be.
What kind of sign that they're scared would you expect to see, exactly? They probably aren't terrified because chances are very good that a court will never get an opportunity to make a decision. But they have no reason to be confident about the outcome if it did come down to a court decision. Neither does the NHLPA. No one has any idea what would happen, except that if it went that far, the results would be disastrous for both sides.

santiclaws is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:38 PM
  #134
Mork
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,601
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Mork
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
.. . . Essentially what you're saying is that there's no room to negotiate now...which is tantamount to saying that a deal is impossible to reach anyhow . . .
I'm just repeating what I've heard. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I understood that last week the federal mediator spent much time with the union exploring options, and very little time with the league because the league's last offer was "take it or leave it".

Maybe I misunderstood, but to me that means not negotiable.

How do you negotiate a non-negotiable offer?

I was pretty busy with other things last week. Am I misunderstanding what happened?

Mork is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:43 PM
  #135
Do Make Say Think
Soul & Onward
 
Do Make Say Think's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 19,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
I read all these posts taking sides, it's pretty pointless. LeBrun's latest article makes sense - "There is No Winning This Blame Game"

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/87...o-lockout-mess



These two sides are not paying attention to logic anymore.
I still don't see how the league made a mistake with their opening offer... It seems like a standard offer that was meant to be negotiated off of rather than the league hoping the players would simply take it. The players decided to take the offer personaly and that's on them.

I agree that the blame game doesn't help anyone, but as in any dispute people wioll find one party they agree more with. To me it's quite clear the players are the most responsible for the lockout and I will convey that opinion when asked or when someone says something silly like "why is the league not doing anything about revenue sharing".

I despise misinformation above all, and the poster boys for misinformation are definitely the players. You can say a lot of things about the owners but Bettman and Daly have been upfront about everything they can be upfront about whereas Fehr went on live TV and lied to everyone (I still can't believe he did that) about the state of talks.

Do Make Say Think is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:46 PM
  #136
Lacaar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 1,518
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melrose Munch View Post
This is what I'm talking about riptide. Last all star week is the Survey SJeasy is talking about. Frankly I am moving to NYC myself so I can understand. Why can't we get Canadians to come back to Canada once they get rich?
They just listed every succesful american team. Not the fancy sunshine cities. Players just go where they think they'll get paid, win and have success. The city itself in most cases has little to nothing to do with it besides what you believe.

Lacaar is online now  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:51 PM
  #137
Mork
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,601
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Mork
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
. . . Dealing with the players on a decertified basis would be an astronomical step backwards for the League; extremely few teams would benefit from it in the short term. And we know that the owners have stood together in bringing the League to where it is today, none of them are going to want to destroy all of that.
I agree. This is what I've been thinking for a while. In fact, I don't think the NHL can effectively operate without the existence of a players' union and, of course, a CBA.

This is why its astounded me that the NHL should treat the union with such animosity and disrespect from the outset. Rather than treating trhe union as a valued and necessary business partner, it seems from where I sit that they've done their best to antagonize the union; even to the point of appearing to attempt to divide the membership from its leadership.

I'm also somewhat amused to see pro-management HFB posters suddenly come to realize just how important the existence of a union is to the NHL. The union helps the players a lot, but it probably helps the owners even more.

I wouldn't be advising the union to decertify, but if that's a path they eventually follow (however remote that possibility might be), I'm sure interested to see how it turns out.

Mork is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:52 PM
  #138
ToursLepantoVienna
Registered User
 
ToursLepantoVienna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Country:
Posts: 2,094
vCash: 500
Per LeBrun ...

"Looking back, the NHL made a terrible strategic mistake back in July with an original offer that asked for players to accept 43 percent of hockey-related revenue, down from the 57 percent it had in the previous deal. I cannot tell you how many level-headed NHL players -- not militants but rather moderates -- have told me repeatedly how that first offer from the NHL in July felt like a punch to the head and galvanized the player membership in a way in which NHLPA executive director Don Fehr likely could have never managed on his own.

That offer set the tone for the level of mistrust that has plagued what should have been a simpler negotiation, the players knowing deep down all along that they'd be accepting a 50-50 split of revenues."


The mid-point of 57 and 43 is, drum-roll, please, ... 50!

If the players really knew "they'd be accepting a 50-50 split of revenues", how was the league's original offer "a punch to the head"?

ToursLepantoVienna is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:57 PM
  #139
Smokey McCanucks
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,159
vCash: 500
I'm wondering if any of y'all are in the same situation I am concerning tickets for games that have been cancelled. I have several hundred dollars payed out to a ticket broker. The games have already been cancelled, they would've already happened if the season had gone ahead. But the team won't give the broker their money until either the season is cancelled in full, or the games are re-scheduled. Consequently, the broker won't refund my money until one of those things happen. Thing is, I bought those tickets planning to go to those games on those particular days. Rescheduled games may not work with my schedule or finances. I want my money back for the holiday season but now cannot get it. Meanwhile all I can do is wait for them to cancel the season for real, I am stuck in limbo here. As a customer I feel completely screwed over. Anyone else in this predicament? Any solutions, beyond calling the broker up and cursing at them?

Smokey McCanucks is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 05:58 PM
  #140
Mork
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,601
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Mork
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToursLepantoVienna View Post
The mid-point of 57 and 43 is, drum-roll, please, ... 50!

If the players really knew "they'd be accepting a 50-50 split of revenues", how was the league's original offer "a punch to the head"?
Could it possibly have to do with the absence of any offsetting concessions given by the owners in exchange?

I'm sure there are many reasons the players might feel this way, and they're more than capable of speaking for themselves.

Mork is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:03 PM
  #141
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,427
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Guy View Post
I still don't see how the league made a mistake with their opening offer... It seems like a standard offer that was meant to be negotiated off of rather than the league hoping the players would simply take it. The players decided to take the offer personaly and that's on them.
I think it was a definite mistake to start off so extreme, even if their own calculations told them that those were the best numbers for them to fix the problem. They still have to take into consideration what is reasonable to expect from the players. And now look what they've done (the owners)... they've made so many continual concessions, and wasted so much time in the process, that the PA now believes that they'll keep bending more and more if Fehr keeps applying the pressure. It would've been better to come out with something closer to their ultimate offer to begin with. They knew damn well who they're dealing with in Fehr, and that he wasn't going to let the PA bow to anything sooner rather than later.

Respect your opposition and their position, that's the first step, IMO, towards getting to a resolution sooner rather than later, and it doesn't create an adversarial atmosphere.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:13 PM
  #142
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 12,710
vCash: 500
I think most knew, the original offer was to just show the PA that 57-43 was seriously unfair, which is what the league gave them for the past 7 yrs.....everyone knew where they were really going, which was 50-50 all along....

If some are really serious about, what a punch to the head, then they are just being disingenuous...and maybe a little dramatic...

BLONG7 is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:24 PM
  #143
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,466
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mork View Post
I'm just repeating what I've heard. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I understood that last week the federal mediator spent much time with the union exploring options, and very little time with the league because the league's last offer was "take it or leave it".

Maybe I misunderstood, but to me that means not negotiable.

How do you negotiate a non-negotiable offer?

I was pretty busy with other things last week. Am I misunderstanding what happened?
Well we don't know if it's negotiable or not do we? Your mediation example just highlights what the current posture of each side is. It's like saying the players wouldn't move just because they present three offers with guaranteed raises - that's what it seemed like at the time but now we're in a different situation.

If the owners are truly on a take-it-or-leave-it offer, and that is it, how is an antitrust suit going to make them move off of that in a timely fashion?

The more likely scenario is that both sides have room to move. Therefore there is a way to negotiate NOW, and that room to negotiate exists NOW, even without DOI. The players might as well proceed with the ability to have DOI in their pocket, but it doesn't change the fact that NEGOTIATION is the end result of a DOI, not a long drawn out battle in court.

mossey3535 is online now  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:28 PM
  #144
WinterEmpire
Unregistered User
 
WinterEmpire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,804
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLONG7 View Post
I think most knew, the original offer was to just show the PA that 57-43 was seriously unfair, which is what the league gave them for the past 7 yrs.....everyone knew where they were really going, which was 50-50 all along....

If some are really serious about, what a punch to the head, then they are just being disingenuous...and maybe a little dramatic...
PA didn't get 57% the last 7 years. It was only at 57% in the final year iirc.

WinterEmpire is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:33 PM
  #145
Do Make Say Think
Soul & Onward
 
Do Make Say Think's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 19,918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
I think it was a definite mistake to start off so extreme, even if their own calculations told them that those were the best numbers for them to fix the problem. They still have to take into consideration what is reasonable to expect from the players. And now look what they've done (the owners)... they've made so many continual concessions, and wasted so much time in the process, that the PA now believes that they'll keep bending more and more if Fehr keeps applying the pressure. It would've been better to come out with something closer to their ultimate offer to begin with. They knew damn well who they're dealing with in Fehr, and that he wasn't going to let the PA bow to anything sooner rather than later.

Respect your opposition and their position, that's the first step, IMO, towards getting to a resolution sooner rather than later, and it doesn't create an adversarial atmosphere.
What is reasonnable to expect is that the PA leadership tell the players that the first offer "is no meant to be taken at face value, they are numbers they intend to move from to get the middle".
Instead the players reacted liked children "it's an insult" "they want to take us back to the dark ages" and so on... Choosing to focus on the offer rather than what the offer was supposed and designed to lead to.

I don't blame the players for getting offended, I was offended when I saw it but after spending some time talking about with people that know more about labour negotiations it became clear that it was not something to get angry about. The real failure is of leadership: it's more than likely that Fehr used the offer to rile up the players since he specializes in adverserial talks and stall tactics.

Do Make Say Think is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:38 PM
  #146
simplefan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 444
vCash: 500
There will be a season

What if all those lawsuit were all part of the PR strategy? Think about it. It was speculated that around Dec. 20 that they should have a deal to have a season sometimes around Christmas.

So players have to vote until Dec. 20. Right?

The NHL wants to hit the NHLPA but it looks like the NHL wants to destroy itself.
I firmly believe that the NHL wants simply to scare the PA with rumors of contracts being voided. But if they are really crazy (contracts voided/disclamer of interest),the lockout will be lifted and it will be MASSIVE Free agency.

Maybe the NHL and NHLPA want to deflect any pressure after doing that impressive skit on Thursday Dec 6. Then going into serious legal procedures starting on Friday Dec 21, to really press on each other but also to kill every optimism so that on Friday Dec 21, we'll all be surprised.
I believe they are negociating, but it will be so hard to believe so because of the lawsuits.

So let's hope that on Friday we have a deal.

simplefan is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:45 PM
  #147
Conflicted Habs fan
Registered User
 
Conflicted Habs fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Montreal
Country: Martinique
Posts: 576
vCash: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by simplefan View Post
There will be a season
No there won't

Conflicted Habs fan is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:47 PM
  #148
sipowicz
The Original
 
sipowicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,519
vCash: 200
Too late already and now who cares, actually stay locked out for the 2013-2014 season as well!

sipowicz is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:49 PM
  #149
simplefan
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 444
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conflicted Habs fan View Post
No there won't
I know it's crazy but actually many owners have leaned towards 9 year CBA deal and I don't think players dont want to get close to 5 years max contract. It's only for 10% of the NHL.

Actually, if the league just moved to 6, we would have a deal.

simplefan is offline  
Old
12-17-2012, 06:56 PM
  #150
Mayor Bee
\/me_____you\/
 
Mayor Bee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 15,082
vCash: 500
In my opinion...

This will never see the inside of a courtroom. The NHL will cede ground on something where there's ground to give (actual term of max contract length), and then the NHL is able to paint it as an overall victory while the PA paints it as a victory by not having terms imposed upon them.

If this does go to court, it would officially prove that Fehr is insane.

Mayor Bee 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 01:14 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.