HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

NHL Lockout Discusion XXXIII: It's the same old song. **MOD WARNING POST 274

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-20-2012, 11:08 PM
  #651
kihei
Registered User
 
kihei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,894
vCash: 4614
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy View Post
I will get you 3X earnings in damages from an illegal lockout, I will get rid of the cap, and I wll give all of you free agency with no artificial constraints on your earning power...
That is a very intriguing theory. Would you then say the end game is misjudged by Fehr or that it is going more or less according to plan?

kihei is online now  
Old
12-20-2012, 11:08 PM
  #652
meedle
Registered User
 
meedle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 3,762
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CBJBrassard16 View Post
So the world didn't end... Did the lockout?
Check back next year.

meedle is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 11:09 PM
  #653
Orca Smash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,129
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy View Post
I will get you 3X earnings in damages from an illegal lockout, I will get rid of the cap, and I wll give all of you free agency with no artificial constraints on your earning power...
You should probably add there is no guarantee the courts will rule in your favor. Stars gain to make much more, aging and lesser players might not have a roster spot anymore, several struggling clubs will likely dissolve and not be able to compete, meaning some of you wont have a job here anymore, also by the time this gets settled you might have to play in russia for awhile.


Its not all roses or any guarantee of that. If the players investigate the entire picture. Especially non star players.

Orca Smash is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 11:12 PM
  #654
ltrangerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 930
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by meedle View Post
Yes, because its not "vast". Majority sure, But its not like its 25 owners out of 30 are making money.
For months I have read that many question if the NHL owners make money or not?

The thinking is plain wrong.

What owner would purchase a team knowing they could earn a few million dollars yr on average operating the franchise?

The more important is whether the owners are receiving a decent return on their investment? Businessmen aren't in the charity business. Many seem to think that if a club isn't losing money the owners should be happy and all is well in the world.

ltrangerfan is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 11:14 PM
  #655
Barrie22
Shark fan in hiding
 
Barrie22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,131
vCash: 302
Quote:
Originally Posted by Orca Smash View Post
You should probably add there is no guarantee the courts will rule in your favor. Stars gain to make much more, aging and lesser players might not have a roster spot anymore, several struggling clubs will likely dissolve and not be able to compete, meaning some of you wont have a job here anymore, also by the time this gets settled you might have to play in russia for awhile.


Its not all roses or any guarantee of that. If the players investigate the entire picture. Especially non star players.
And don't forget the oh so lovely perks like no pension, no insurance (meaning you break your hand you pay out of your own pockets), no minimum salary so if a team really wanted to they could pay you next to nothing for the year, no guaranteed contracts.

Barrie22 is online now  
Old
12-20-2012, 11:14 PM
  #656
Puckstopper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 91
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Mirtle View Post
No because the make whole declines and eventually disappears. When it does, they would be at 50-50, provided there's no permanent escrow cap or some other unforeseeable addition to what's on table now.
Unfortunately as of now the PA wants a cap that doesn't go below $67 million and a cap on escrow. So are they really at 50-50?

Puckstopper is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 11:21 PM
  #657
petrobruin
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: London Ont.
Posts: 647
vCash: 500
Don't you think

Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
The full financials of every team. It's pretty cut and dry. They don't have access to everything.
If the NHLPA/Fehrzie had a problem with the financials they were given , it might come up in the bargaining of the new CBA , or do you think That the Players are dumb high school drop outs who hired some dumb Shmuck who doesnt understand the financials given to him.

Do you really think you might be on to something here or does it support your argument.

My Dad always said dont let the truth get in the way of a good story.

petrobruin is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 11:36 PM
  #658
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 22,921
vCash: 13357
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Actually, he was right.

By your logic, the NHLPA should take whatever the NHL puts in front of them before a game is lost --- until salaries average KHL levels.
You perpetuate this claim as though it were inevitable. How about we close off this lockout and go the nuclear route should your scenario actually happen. All the PA accomplishing at this junction is an obscene amount of lost earnings for little gain.

Bourne Endeavor is online now  
Old
12-20-2012, 11:51 PM
  #659
ltrangerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 930
vCash: 500
I keep reading that the players could win 3 times their wages in court, etc.

I'm not a lawyer nor an odds maker but ... is this a 50-50 proposition or a long shot How many players are willing to give up 2 seasons more to find out if the courts rule in their favor @ the level they desire?

But enough... let's say the players win everything they hope for. How
many franchises / jobs would be left in the NHL? Owners constantly think about improving profitability. Cutting costs are the way back to prosperity. Salaries are the owners biggest cost and with no minimum caps (no CBA/union) most teams (led by angry owners) might pay substantially lower team salaries? In the long run what do the players truly gain in court other than the threat?

ltrangerfan is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 11:52 PM
  #660
Groucho
Tier 1 Fan
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Displaced
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,617
vCash: 500
What's the point of holding out for 2+ season to make 3x your current contract, when you could just keep playing and make XX over your current contract ...

Groucho is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:12 AM
  #661
Puckstopper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 91
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelios View Post
15% of the NHLPA, those that would actually be affected by these changes, have a legitimate reason not to want these restrictions. 85% don't. My point is, and has always been, that the entire PA should not be resisting restrictions that only affect a very small % of its constituents.
I think the main talking point through the PA now is that the contract limits will "squeeze" everyone else but star players, in terms of money and length they will be able to get. They likened it to the NBA where there are a few guys with maxed out deals and the rest of the team gets significantly less. I don't agree it'll happen in the NHL because the NBA is a star-driven sport and that approach won't work in hockey.

David Backes also said something to the effect of, "if Crosby can only get a 5 year deal, what's the best I can get? 3?" Kind of a silly conclusion but I think these are the types of arguments they're using to galvanize the players.

Puckstopper is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:12 AM
  #662
Some Other Flame
Registered User
 
Some Other Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 791
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bourne Endeavor View Post
You perpetuate this claim as though it were inevitable. How about we close off this lockout and go the nuclear route should your scenario actually happen. All the PA accomplishing at this junction is an obscene amount of lost earnings for little gain.
There's more to this lockout than money, from a PA perspective.

Stopping or preventing a cycle of constant give backs and CBA negotiation losses is probably pretty important for the PA.

They've already conceded a significant amount of money over time, so it should be obvious that money isn't the only concern here.

Some Other Flame is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:26 AM
  #663
James Mirtle
Registered User
 
James Mirtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 218
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puckstopper View Post
Unfortunately as of now the PA wants a cap that doesn't go below $67 million and a cap on escrow. So are they really at 50-50?
Here's the thing that many, many of the fans I talk to miss: What the cap is set at is irrelevant with the players' share directly linked to revenues.

You could have a $100-million cap and the players would only get 50 per cent as long as there isn't a cap on escrow. That's what linkage is.

I don't believe the league will ever agree to that cap on escrow, even as a temporary measure, so these arguments that the deal won't get to 50-50 really don't make sense.

What the percentage will be is a moving target based on how many games they play, what the make whole is, etc. etc. At the moment, it appears the deal will go something like 56-54-51-51-50-50-50-50 in terms of a players' share, but forecasting exactly what it'll be is impossible.

Needless to say, this idea that the players would get 57% over the term of the deal simply doesn't have merit.

James Mirtle is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 12:39 AM
  #664
DuklaNation
Registered User
 
DuklaNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltrangerfan View Post
I keep reading that the players could win 3 times their wages in court, etc.

I'm not a lawyer nor an odds maker but ... is this a 50-50 proposition or a long shot How many players are willing to give up 2 seasons more to find out if the courts rule in their favor @ the level they desire?

But enough... let's say the players win everything they hope for. How
many franchises / jobs would be left in the NHL? Owners constantly think about improving profitability. Cutting costs are the way back to prosperity. Salaries are the owners biggest cost and with no minimum caps (no CBA/union) most teams (led by angry owners) might pay substantially lower team salaries? In the long run what do the players truly gain in court other than the threat?
They were referencing a legal statement from another league (NBA or NFL, cant recall). That 200% over and above their salaries is an estimate of damages. It is NOT a guarantee they would get that nor is it a guarantee that they would win. So, it is a big risk. More like a bluff. This isnt a winning strategy. Receiving 3 x your lost wages due to antitrust issues has a lot of holes in it. Some teams wouldnt be able to pay it given their financial issues. This claim is a bluff. Not sure how the bottom 20% of the PA is even willing to go with this tactic.

DuklaNation is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:07 AM
  #665
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuklaNation View Post
They were referencing a legal statement from another league (NBA or NFL, cant recall). That 200% over and above their salaries is an estimate of damages. It is NOT a guarantee they would get that nor is it a guarantee that they would win. So, it is a big risk. More like a bluff. This isnt a winning strategy. Receiving 3 x your lost wages due to antitrust issues has a lot of holes in it. Some teams wouldnt be able to pay it given their financial issues. This claim is a bluff. Not sure how the bottom 20% of the PA is even willing to go with this tactic.
I find this reference interesting seeing as how if the NHLPA successfully sues it will be precedent setting within N American sports. Care to show your reference?

CommonMeans* is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:08 AM
  #666
OrangeCrush10
Registered User
 
OrangeCrush10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Lancaster, Pa
Country: United States
Posts: 46
vCash: 500
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...=63XfqP_E1AI#!
Funny lock out song.

OrangeCrush10 is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:22 AM
  #667
Puckstopper
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 91
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Mirtle View Post
Here's the thing that many, many of the fans I talk to miss: What the cap is set at is irrelevant with the players' share directly linked to revenues.

You could have a $100-million cap and the players would only get 50 per cent as long as there isn't a cap on escrow. That's what linkage is.

I don't believe the league will ever agree to that cap on escrow, even as a temporary measure, so these arguments that the deal won't get to 50-50 really don't make sense.
I think most understand this. The problem is there are still people within the PA that say they have agreed to 50/50 but they haven't. As long as the minimum cap and escrow cap are still there, it's not true.

Puckstopper is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:26 AM
  #668
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 31,113
vCash: 500
At what point do the players ask themselves, "what are you fighting for?" And is it really worth the losses? I'm astonished that they aren't pushing the man they hired to get a deal done. Who cares about who is right or wrong or who has to make the first call at this point, lets see some damn urgency if any of you truly do care about the health of the sport and the league.

Whatever happened to rolling up your sleeves and being determined to get something done? Neither side is budging, neither side is interested in negotiating, and until someone decides to take the initiative in saving this league, then I'm afraid that we are going to suffer from yet another lost season due to men in suits and ties. These guys aren't deal makers, they're egomaniacs who are trying to save face from public scrutiny. Neither Bettman nor Fehr want to appear desperate in these negotiations nor do they want to end up caving in to the others' demands.

I don't know at what point the owners and players reach a boiling point and decide to get something done without their representatives. They made that attempt, it seemed to work after the first 24 hours, over time, Fehr got more involved and talks broke down. It is no coincidence that what progress was made came to a screeching halt when Fehr entered the fracas.

Ziggy Stardust is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:31 AM
  #669
Bleedred
Pete still coach?
 
Bleedred's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seminole Florida
Country: United States
Posts: 33,284
vCash: 500
http://blogs.northjersey.com/blogs/f...work_stoppage/
Just dug this up. Nearly two years to the day. Fehr said he did not anticipate a work stoppage. And here we today.

Bleedred is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:38 AM
  #670
CN_paladin
Registered User
 
CN_paladin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westeros
Posts: 2,657
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleedred View Post
http://blogs.northjersey.com/blogs/f...work_stoppage/
Just dug this up. Nearly two years to the day. Fehr said he did not anticipate a work stoppage. And here we today.
Players always said they just wanted to play with no CBA!

CN_paladin is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:41 AM
  #671
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
At what point do the players ask themselves, "what are you fighting for?" And is it really worth the losses? I'm astonished that they aren't pushing the man they hired to get a deal done. Who cares about who is right or wrong or who has to make the first call at this point, lets see some damn urgency if any of you truly do care about the health of the sport and the league.

Whatever happened to rolling up your sleeves and being determined to get something done? Neither side is budging, neither side is interested in negotiating, and until someone decides to take the initiative in saving this league, then I'm afraid that we are going to suffer from yet another lost season due to men in suits and ties. These guys aren't deal makers, they're egomaniacs who are trying to save face from public scrutiny. Neither Bettman nor Fehr want to appear desperate in these negotiations nor do they want to end up caving in to the others' demands.

I don't know at what point the owners and players reach a boiling point and decide to get something done without their representatives. They made that attempt, it seemed to work after the first 24 hours, over time, Fehr got more involved and talks broke down. It is no coincidence that what progress was made came to a screeching halt when Fehr entered the fracas.
I agree with the overall essence of this post, but will ask you this. Who is the commissioner and who is not? Who is representing the players and carrying out their will, and who is supposedly carrying out the will of the league and owners.

Berrtman, in my mind, has a track record of making poor choices for our league. It's time he goes. I won't lie, I have always disliked him. I believe most before this lockout felt the same way. I root for the NHLPA because I think the backlash will result in Bettman's termination.

Lets be honest; Fehr doesn't need this negotiation for his legacy. Why does Bettman need it? So he can take over for the NBA?

People need to consider things other than what is fed to them via media IMO.

CommonMeans* is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:43 AM
  #672
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CN_paladin View Post
Players always said they just wanted to play with no CBA!
The well known star players would be better off without one - hence contract limits being a sticking point.

CommonMeans* is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:51 AM
  #673
The Flin Flon Bomber
Registered User
 
The Flin Flon Bomber's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CommonMeans View Post
Lets be honest; Fehr doesn't need this negotiation for his legacy. Why does Bettman need it? So he can take over for the NBA?
You know the story about the scorpion and the frog? Its just in their nature to fight.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog

The Flin Flon Bomber is offline  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:55 AM
  #674
Krnuckfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,163
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CommonMeans View Post
I agree with the overall essence of this post, but will ask you this. Who is the commissioner and who is not? Who is representing the players and carrying out their will, and who is supposedly carrying out the will of the league and owners.

Berrtman, in my mind, has a track record of making poor choices for our league. It's time he goes. I won't lie, I have always disliked him. I believe most before this lockout felt the same way. I root for the NHLPA because I think the backlash will result in Bettman's termination.

Lets be honest; Fehr doesn't need this negotiation for his legacy. Why does Bettman need it? So he can take over for the NBA?

People need to consider things other than what is fed to them via media IMO.
Sorry, but your dream of Bettman getting fired will not be coming true I can guarantee you that. Bettman isnt there to make the average fan happy, his job is to put money in the owners pockets and he's done a good job of growing the league from when he first took over.

Krnuckfan is online now  
Old
12-21-2012, 01:56 AM
  #675
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flin Flon Bomber View Post
You know the story about the scorpion and the frog? Its just in their nature to fight.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog
Fehr has a history of successfully negotiating for those he represents. Can Bettman say the same? If he could, we wouldn't be where we are. The last CBA was a disaster, even after Bettman won his PR war.

Problem for him is this time he's dealing with a real lawyer. Not a snake oil salesman in a hollow suit.

CommonMeans* 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 09:10 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.