I"m not pro either side... if you'll note I just called the players idiots. I just find it absolutely retarded that people can actually be so one sided in this. It's ridiculous.
I try not to take sides but I have an opinion and the players are losing a lot of money right now, they are treat 5***** luxury, they make great money and all of their expenses are paid for.
I donīt believe a cap on contracts is right but maybe a variance in place to stop back diving contracts should be in place.
As for every other league are a 50-50 split, it really bothers me the players being upset about the NHL asking for that, also the pettiness by the players.
The owners came to the table to negotiate, while Fehr submitted 4 or 5 proposals that were crap.
I remember back in Semptember when the NHLPA was "excited" to submit their proposal and thought the NHL would be happy......it was a joke.
True, on the woman part. However if your food is lousy, and the beer is terrible, the beautiful women won't matter. Secondly, pro sports was for a very long time more about the long-term valuation growth rather than the year to year income. Once the corporations got involved and the number crunchers had to please shareholders, things changed.
Back to your point. Let's say you have a staff of bartenders who have a following. They demand higher shift pay, you agree but notice your profit is being cut. You cut the shift pay or bring in new bartenders at a cheaper shift pay, and then your customers who came in for those bartenders stop coming. Your profits go in the tank. Now what do you do? When you feel the employers are part of or are the product, you will need to find other ways to increase revenues or cut costs. Maybe change your vendors, cut labor costs of your non-essential employees. I find it hard to believe that EVERY employee is part of the product.
Using the example in the second paragraph, where would you reduce costs from an NHL franchise that does not relate to player salaries?
adater @adater
(1/2)On "bait and switch" charges:league says HRR language given to players on Dec. 27, and players acknowledged it with follow-up questions
That is not what happened and the tweet is pure NHL spin.
They wanted 2 buyouts. League agreed.
Bettmen was discussing the cap going to 60m and that certain GMs regretted giving out the contracts they had and were fine blowing up their teams to get under 60M. The NHLPA demanded to know which GMs were saying this. Bettmen wouldn't say.
This all came up during the cap discussion. It had nothing to do with compliance buyouts.
Marc Bergevin and Paul Holmgren. The PA should be smart enough to figure that out.
Its not blindness why people support the owners. How long did the PA refuse to negotiate? First it was because Fehr hadnt been on the job long enough, then it was they didnt want to do it during the season because it would distract the players, then it turned into ok well negotiate during the playoffs, then well continue to play this season under the old CBA while were negotiating. It was all games by the PA.
The league hasn't been negotiating as time ticked down (when the mediators were last there they refused to say anything other than "take it or leave it") so how would the NHLPA negotiating earlier have been productive? If the league won't negotiate as time draws to a close why the hell would they have negotiated with months to spare?
Quote:
Just like all the offers they submitted in the beginning.
And you think the league's first offer was reasonable?
Quote:
The league continuously moved towards the players
Pretty easy to do when your first offer is completely ridiculous.
Quote:
Look at all the dumbass tweets from the players as well.
Look at the dumbass comments from those on the owner's side. You seem pretty selective about what bothers you and do not seem to be looking at the actions of both sides here.
Haha nice, you probably haven't been following this closely if you don't remember Bettman's infamous December presser. And it's not even the only time the NHL threw a hissy fit after the PA refuses to unilaterally accept the NHL latest's "best offer that won't get better".
I have paid more than enough attention to this mess; so much attention that I understand what happened during the "hissy fit" you speak of. Fehr was attempting to win the PR battle by stating a deal was close, when he knew damn well it wasn't. Bettman was setting the record straight and protecting (what little was left) the NHL brand.
The PA never submitted an "offer" to the owners during the meeting in early December, they just picked over the offer made by the owners. Before the meeting the players and owners discussed what was important to the PA, but once the owners addressed (or attempted to address) those aspect of the CBA, the PA "moved the goalposts", and suddenly had other pressing issues.
When the PA wanted to bring Fehr in, the owners said it was a deal breaker because they knew where those talks would end up. Bringing Fehr in the mix was not in the spirit of the talks, as was agreed upon from the beginning.
The owners pulled their offer off the table because they didn't feel the PA was negotiating, just spouting individual, and ever-changing, entitlements they wanted addressed. Once everything cooled down, the owners made a subsequent EFFORT to negotiate, with a comprehensive offer to the PA.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest
Agreed. How people can't see that both sides have acted the same way is beyond me. This has become like a political discussion with every thing being black and white.
See above.
There is logic and there is emotion, in this situation the NHL has seemed logical (money in Vs. money out, return on investment, concessions to keep employees happy, etc) and the PA has been emotional (hire Fehr, won't get pushed around, all riled up about language in a CBA offer that their own attorneys/board "missed", #lockoutproblems, etc...).
Last edited by StevensCakeBakerBacker: 01-04-2013 at 12:14 PM.
I try not to take sides but I have an opinion and the players are losing a lot of money right now, they are treat 5***** luxury, they make great money and all of their expenses are paid for.
I donīt believe a cap on contracts is right but maybe a variance in place to stop back diving contracts should be in place.
As for every other league are a 50-50 split, it really bothers me the players being upset about the NHL asking for that, also the pettiness by the players.
The owners came to the table to negotiate, while Fehr submitted 4 or 5 proposals that were crap.
I remember back in Semptember when the NHLPA was "excited" to submit their proposal and thought the NHL would be happy......it was a joke.
I think the players actually thought the owners would be happy, they were brain washed by Fehr. Fehr knew full well that the PA's proposal wouldn't fly, but wasted months of time with it anyways.
Anyone else watching Hockeycentral at noon on Sportsnet? What were John Shannon and Doug Maclean talking about concerning a 20 minute battle between both sides about a towel problem? I missed a part of it and didn't catch it all.
Towels being an argument point is believable. The players demanded a minimum thread count for hotel sheets as well...this is what some of this crap comes down to
True, on the woman part. However if your food is lousy, and the beer is terrible, the beautiful women won't matter. Secondly, pro sports was for a very long time more about the long-term valuation growth rather than the year to year income. Once the corporations got involved and the number crunchers had to please shareholders, things changed.
Back to your point. Let's say you have a staff of bartenders who have a following. They demand higher shift pay, you agree but notice your profit is being cut. You cut the shift pay or bring in new bartenders at a cheaper shift pay, and then your customers who came in for those bartenders stop coming. Your profits go in the tank. Now what do you do? When you feel the employers are part of or are the product, you will need to find other ways to increase revenues or cut costs. Maybe change your vendors, cut labor costs of your non-essential employees. I find it hard to believe that EVERY employee is part of the product.
Every employee IS part of the product. From the dishwasher to the Manger
Every employee IS part of the product From the Mascot, Nacho Stand attendent to Every hockey player and GM.
Every variable, every employee is always a part of the product.
The league hasn't been negotiating as time ticked down (when the mediators were last there they refused to say anything other than "take it or leave it") so how would the NHLPA negotiating earlier have been productive? If the league won't negotiate as time draws to a close why the hell would they have negotiated with months to spare?
And you think the league's first offer was reasonable?
Pretty easy to do when your first offer is completely ridiculous.
Look at the dumbass comments from those on the owner's side. You seem pretty selective about what bothers you and do not seem to be looking at the actions of both sides here.
I'm pretty sure the NHL's initial offer falls in line with what the NFL and NBA offered in their initial offerings.
Marc Bergevin and Paul Holmgren. The PA should be smart enough to figure that out.
I get the reference to Gomez and Kaberle and Bourque, but just for reality's sake, Bergevin wouldn't be included in the regretting part unless you think the contract for Price, Prust, Armstrong, Bouillon are insane. Prust may not be the best but it's certainly not Gomez like....
Towels being an argument point is believable. The players demanded a minimum thread count for hotel sheets as well...this is what some of this crap comes down to
Tom Gulitti @TGfireandice
Players ask for compliance buyouts. NHL agrees to 2. PA apparently upset now GMs would use buyouts to shed contracts they regret.Makes sense
Its not blindness why people support the owners. How long did the PA refuse to negotiate? First it was because Fehr hadnt been on the job long enough, then it was they didnt want to do it during the season because it would distract the players, then it turned into ok well negotiate during the playoffs, then well continue to play this season under the old CBA while were negotiating. It was all games by the PA. Just like all the offers they submitted in the beginning. When you continuously submit offers that contain items that you have been told are non starters do you honestly expect the other side to sit at the table? Funny how when the PA stopped submitting those offers how the real negotiations started isnt it?
I started off in this whole thing blaming both sides and still do to a point. But the players and the PAs actions are what have led me to support the owners more during these last few months. The league continuously moved towards the players only to have the players change the goal posts multiple times. Look at all the dumbass tweets from the players as well. For all of them just wanting to play their actions certainly dont speak that.
I blame the players up until about October. Since that time I'd say that they both are about equally responsible for this mess. This could have been easily resolved back then if both sides were interested in getting the games back on the ice. The owners have been just as bad since October of moving the goalposts. Bettman's tirade a few weeks ago and his idiotic speech about everything being off the table was what did it for me. He's shown by his latest HRR penalties nonsense that he's every bit as bad as Fehr.
adater @adater
(1/2)On "bait and switch" charges:league says HRR language given to players on Dec. 27, and players acknowledged it with follow-up questions
Tom Gulitti @TGfireandice
Players ask for compliance buyouts. NHL agrees to 2. PA apparently upset now GMs would use buyouts to shed contracts they regret.Makes sense
funny thing is that most of the players involved in these latest sets of negotiations would have this used against them, and some of them dont even have a job right now.
Did you miss the blow up in december where Bettman said "everything is off the table including Make Whole as a concept" after the PA submitted a counter because the owners only wanted a "yes or no" answer? Or did you miss this whole weeks worth of negotiations where the owners came back and not only brought everything back but improved on the last offer as well?
If you have missed all that I can't help you. You can find a link through google.
Does anyone understand this part and could clarify it?
sounds to me that the NHL is saying that they are so confident that they arent hiding money that the NHLPA can hire people to look for hidden HRR and if they find a variance greater than 2%, they will end the current CBA
