The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
NHLPA Given Authority to File Disclaimer of Interest
Oh yes, it's because they want to get rid of him. Not because 97% just backed his strategy despite that it has a high chance of a cancelled season.
If it had been sold as a method that has a high chance of a canceled season, it wouldn't have passed.
It's been sold as (safe) magic that worked for the NBA and NFL players. The players voted yes because they think NHL will be afraid and agree to Fehr's demands.
It's a vote to allow the executive committee to walk away from the players and eliminate Fehr as the PA head.
Hardly a ringing endorsement of his leadership.
I'm really baffled that some actually think this... he represents the players... if they had a problem with him they would voice it. Perhaps not to the media, but he doesn't own them.
If it had been sold as a method that has a high chance of a canceled season, it wouldn't have passed.
It's been sold as (safe) magic that worked for the NBA and NFL players. The players voted yes because they think NHL will be afraid and agree to Fehr's demands.
Maybe not. Maybe they believe they're better off having a trade association and going free market. I think they'd be right, just not sure if they're ready to face a brave, new world.
If it had been sold as a method that has a high chance of a canceled season, it wouldn't have passed.
That is exactly what the players were told, and they did pass it, overwhelmingly. This path has been an ongoing discussion in the PA for a considerable length of time.
Quote:
It's been sold as (safe) magic that worked for the NBA and NFL players.
I'm really baffled that some actually think this... he represents the players... if they had a problem with him they would voice it. Perhaps not to the media, but he doesn't own them.
706 - 22 says it all.
They are willing to allow the PA to file a DOI.
97% of the Union membership wants the Executive Committee to walk away from the players. I don't see how anyone could see it any other way.
The Fehr Factor has been cancelled, and Rogan's moved on to MMA.
That is exactly what the players were told, and they did pass it, overwhelmingly. This path has been an ongoing discussion in the PA for a considerable length of time.
That's simply not true.
You can find quotes today from Winnik (who is on the negotiating committee) that it's to get negotiations going. Kessel saying that since it worked for NBA and NFL he's hoping it would work here.
The players aren't looking at this as a nuclear option. No quote over several months seems to suggest this. They view it just as something that will get them leverage in the negotiations.
You can find quotes today from Winnik (who is on the negotiating committee) that it's to get negotiations going. Kessel saying that since it worked for NBA and NFL he's hoping it would work here.
The players aren't looking at this as a nuclear option. No quote over several months seems to suggest this. They view it just as something that will get them leverage in the negotiations.
Yes, there have been several quotes that suggest players are thinking of the DOI as a way to push for a quicker deal... but I wouldn't say "no quote seems to suggest" players looking at a completely different system:
"Guys are going to be pretty highly in favor of it," Horcoff told ESPN The Magazine. "I’ve been in conference calls with 200-300 players. We just feel at this point the union has done everything they can for us and we’re not getting anywhere. It’s time for us to go in a different direction." http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...claimer-coming
This is the players agreeing with Fehr's recommendation to pursue a DOI.
So he's telling the players he hasn't done a good job, and has given them the ability to give the Executive Comittee the option of allowing him to remove himself as an admission of defeat?
I misjudged him; he's a true Samurai, and his sword that he impales himself with should be enshrined.
So he's telling the players he hasn't done a good job, and has given them the ability to give the Executive Comittee the option of allowing him to remove himself as an admission of defeat?
I misjudged him; he's a true Samurai, and his sword that he impales himself with should be enshrined.
haha, what are you on right now?
FEHR requested a vote to allow the disclaimer so he could pursue the league in court. It's a STRATEGY. He's not getting fired. On the contrary, he just had 97% of the union membership back his play.
If anything, such a high level of support should indicate that he really has the latitude to continue as he sees fit.
So he's telling the players he hasn't done a good job, and has given them the ability to give the Executive Comittee the option of allowing him to remove himself as an admission of defeat?
I misjudged him; he's a true Samurai, and his sword that he impales himself with should be enshrined.
So dramatic, Timmy?
I believe this is a strategy in one of two directions the PA can choose-- take the last NHL offer, or worse, because they refuse to talk further, or go the DOI route. Those options have been put forth by the PA leadership and it seems the PA prefers that to caving. Fehr cannot force the NHL to propose a better deal. You know that so it seems odd that you're trying to make this out about Fehr.
Yes, there have been several quotes that suggest players are thinking of the DOI as a way to push for a quicker deal... but I wouldn't say "no quote seems to suggest" players looking at a completely different system:
"Guys are going to be pretty highly in favor of it," Horcoff told ESPN The Magazine. "I’ve been in conference calls with 200-300 players. We just feel at this point the union has done everything they can for us and we’re not getting anywhere. It’s time for us to go in a different direction." http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/i...claimer-coming
This was during the sudden silence from the players after the NHL suit, where decertification was claimed to be a negotiation ploy. Horcoff's message might be the most transparent in this whole affair.
FEHR requested a vote to allow the disclaimer so he could pursue the league in court. It's a STRATEGY. He's not getting fired. On the contrary, he just had 97% of the union membership back his play.
If anything, such a high level of support should indicate that he really has the latitude to continue as he sees fit.
This was during the sudden silence from the players after the NHL suit, where decertification was claimed to be a negotiation ploy. Horcoff's message might be the most transparent in this whole affair.
This sounds like they're giving up on collective bargaining to me:
"I’ve been in conference calls with 200-300 players. We just feel at this point the union has done everything they can for us and we’re not getting anywhere. It’s time for us to go in a different direction."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Timmy
The Courts may not dig that.
If I wasn't, you'd think my account was hacked.
It's usually sarcastic wit, not the drama so much.
I think people are putting too much value on what individuals say. It's not really relevant, and this is dynamic. Someone who didn't imagine decertification as an option in September may feel differently now.
Precedence is clear though. The lockout may be deemed legal, but that doesn't mean the players have to remain in a union, or that they're precluded from filing anti trust claims.
This sounds like they're giving up on collective bargaining to me:
"I’ve been in conference calls with 200-300 players. We just feel at this point the union has done everything they can for us and we’re not getting anywhere. It’s time for us to go in a different direction."
This sounds like they have realized that every player quoted indicating that players view decertification as a negotiation ploy doesn't help with a court case where players are accused of using the threat of decertification as a negotiation ploy.
3 questions:
If this goes to its full extent, is there anything the owners can do to maintain a Salary Cap?
If not, then how ultimately could this effect the League, IF again the players should choose to maintain the status of not having a union?
And also, if the owners can't have a Salary Cap when there's no players' union, is that then really one of the primary objectives with this move by the players, to directly destroy the Cap?
Last edited by MoreOrr: 12-21-2012 at 10:15 PM.
Reason: typo
This sounds like they have realized that every player quoted indicating that players view decertification as a negotiation ploy doesn't help with a court case where players are accused of using the threat of decertification as a negotiation ploy.
I honestly don't believe that, and find it mostly irrelevant.
3 questions:
If this goes to its full extent, is there anything the owners can do to maintain a Salary Cap?
The owners cannot collude to control prices. They can only set a cap in a collectively bargained environment.
Quote:
If not, then how ultimately could this effect the League, IF again the players should choose to maintain the status of not having a union?
If the players actually do decertify and stick to it, teams will have to negotiate individually--- no draft, no free agency restriction or ELCs... all of that disappears.
