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.
Wake up NHLPA this is all about economic realities. The players have had it all their way for over 20 years. The owners are tired of the hockey operation portion of their business losing money. The owners aren't running a charity for the players.
Why people think the owners need to make the players whole is beyond me. Every player and agent knew that the new CBA would impact their deal when they signed it.
The players are going to regret their short sighted view of this. The way for them to make more money is to grow revenues and the popularity of the game.
If I signed for 100 million over 13 years, then I want 100 over 13 years or lets just rip the contract up right now.
If the owners knew going in that they were not going to honor what they put pen to paper on, then lets do the right thing here and void the contract.
I would bet dollars to donuts that the teams that signed guys to deals over the summer would be MORE than willing to honor the terms of the deal that they signed to they very last penny.
Sure it does. Formal decertification is a bit longer process - we would be guaranteed no hockey this season if they did that. The DOI is the PA's attempt to use a short cut to hopefully save some of the season.
Why not have the first vote last until 30th January if NHLPA wanted to use the threat as leverage? It's a transparent ploy as it is without multiple votes where the players give their leaders authorization to decide they don't want to represent the players.
Not that any vote is needed at all. Fehr could use a disclaimer of interest at any time if he wanted to.
That's actually painfully wrong. They've lost around $750M in salaries to get $300M in concessions. The best offer they've seen, by far, was the October offer.
Painfully wrong is your opinion, one that is not shared by the vast majority of players.
The best offer saw them take a significant hit on
Entry Level contracts being reduced from 3 years to 2 years.
Contract lengths to just 5 years
Elimination of Arbitration
pushing the UFA age to 28 years old.
Vaariance of annual salary just 5% year over year.
Painfully wrong is your opinion, one that is not shared by the vast majority of players.
The best offer saw them take a significant hit on
Entry Level contracts being reduced from 3 years to 2 years.
Contract lengths to just 5 years
Elimination of Arbitration
pushing the UFA age to 28 years old.
Vaariance of annual salary just 5% year over year.
Sorry, but Money is not everything.
And those things could have been negotiated upon in October, had Fehr been interested in negotiating. By not even trying to negotiate to save an 82 game season we have no idea what the players could have gotten when it comes to contracting.
Sure it does. Formal decertification is a bit longer process - we would be guaranteed no hockey this season if they did that. The DOI is the PA's attempt to use a short cut to hopefully save some of the season.
You didn't get my point.
DOI is about Fehr no longer wanting to represent the players.
Yet it's the players who vote to give Fehr himself the right to say that he doesn't want to represent the players.
How credible does that sound to you? Fehr needs a permission from the players to tell the players he doesn't want to continue as PA head? Is a Fehr some brainless robot who needs operators to tell him what to think?
Fehr has the right to file DOI by himself, after all it's HIS choice, not the players.
It's incredibly hard for PA to successfully claim that Fehr really wants to quit and it's not a negotiating tactic.
How credible does that sound to you? Fehr needs a permission from the players to tell the players he doesn't want to continue as PA head? Is a Fehr some brainless robot who needs operators to tell him what to think?
It sounds perfectly credible, if one starts from the assumption the PA wants to seriously explore decertification.
If I signed for 100 million over 13 years, then I want 100 over 13 years or lets just rip the contract up right now.
Inaccurate. You signed for 100 million over 13 years subject to the terms of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and any future such Agreements. When the terms of the CBA change, your contract changes with it. Don't like it? Then don't sign it.
Inaccurate. You signed for 100 million over 13 years subject to the terms of the Collective Bargaining Agreement and any future such Agreements. When the terms of the CBA change, your contract changes with it. Don't like it? Then don't sign it.
Its incredible how often thats overlooked. The players know this is the case with any contract they sign. If they don't they should get a new agent or in Jack Johnson's case hire one.
Its incredible how often thats overlooked. The players know this is the case with any contract they sign. If they don't they should get a new agent or in Jack Johnson's case hire one.
It's not overlooked. It's why there is no hockey right now.
Painfully wrong is your opinion, one that is not shared by the vast majority of players.
The best offer saw them take a significant hit on
Entry Level contracts being reduced from 3 years to 2 years.
Contract lengths to just 5 years
Elimination of Arbitration
pushing the UFA age to 28 years old.
Vaariance of annual salary just 5% year over year.
Sorry, but Money is not everything.
(a) these were all negotiable, and (b) these are just things that shift money around between players. For every player they disadvantage, they advantage another.
It's not overlooked. It's why there is no hockey right now.
Somewhat sure, but the issue isn't that it's overlooked, the issue is that the players who signed these deals knowing this then whine about it when the rules are applied. So in that case, don't sign and don't blame owners for exercising their rights in a CBA negotiation.
The same can be said of the teams. They may not be happy if new rules come in where they might be punished for those existing back diving, retirement contracts but don't whine about it (except behind closed doors when determining what the strategy and desires for a new CBA are). But the teams aren't whining about it publicly every chance they get. They'll deal with it. Players need to deal with it as well.
Sure it is, for the NHL. Had Fehr agreed to 50-50 in september he would have gotten just about all other issues in PA's favor.
Pretty sure the owners still were offering in the 40s in September and what makes you think they wouldve been willing to give up other issues had the PA offered 50/50? Its 2013, we are at 50/50, and we are still squabbling over pension, variance, etc.
Pretty sure the owners still were offering in the 40s in September and what makes you think they wouldve been willing to give up other issues had the PA offered 50/50? Its 2013, we are at 50/50, and we are still squabbling over pension, variance, etc.
You're right, I should've said "prior to any games cancelled", i.e mid-october.
Owners care about the money. Other than the 50/50 (and the pension issue), all the other issues are about how the players divide the money they get. ELCs, contract length, variance, free agency etc. don't directly affect the money players are getting in total.
If I signed for 100 million over 13 years, then I want 100 over 13 years or lets just rip the contract up right now.
But that's not what you signed for if you signed an NHL contract. You signed a contract that the actual payments due under which are dependent upon both the level of HRR and the terms of the CBA in place in each year. None of the contracts the players signed guaranteed them all of the dollars that get thrown around in the media. And the players either knew this going in or they should sue their agents for not doing their job explaining the nature of the contracts they were signing and advising them about the economics of the league and the likelihood of a massively reduced CBA once the current CBA expired.
And those things could have been negotiated upon in October, had Fehr been interested in negotiating. By not even trying to negotiate to save an 82 game season we have no idea what the players could have gotten when it comes to contracting.
Exactly. This is the primary reason why I put the blame solely on Don Fehr when we start assessing blame. The players have lost way more in lost salary than they have gained by fighting this long. They could have started negotiating earlier and hammered out a deal that gave them more than what they're going to get now, net of what they're losing during the lockout. The only way what they've done makes any sense is if they never wanted a deal and the real goal all along was to disclaim in order to gain what they believe will be a lot of leverage and the ability to open up things like the salary cap, etc., which is such a risky proposition.
The players are cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Fehr is doing a masterful job of getting the players to respond emotionally to every perceived slight by the owners, in order to consolidate his power and continue to push his agenda.
I really hope Bettman cancels the season this weekend and the NHLPA disclaims, so we can get this thing moving toward some sort of resolution and Fehr can turn it over the litigators and go home.
Exactly. This is the primary reason why I put the blame solely on Don Fehr when we start assessing blame. The players have lost way more in lost salary than they have gained by fighting this long. They could have started negotiating earlier and hammered out a deal that gave them more than what they're going to get now, net of what they're losing during the lockout. The only way what they've done makes any sense is if they never wanted a deal and the real goal all along was to disclaim in order to gain what they believe will be a lot of leverage and the ability to open up things like the salary cap, etc., which is such a risky proposition.
The players are cutting off their noses to spite their faces. Fehr is doing a masterful job of getting the players to respond emotionally to every perceived slight by the owners, in order to consolidate his power and continue to push his agenda.
I really hope Bettman cancels the season this weekend and the NHLPA disclaims, so we can get this thing moving toward some sort of resolution and Fehr can turn it over the litigators and go home.
It takes two to tango and the league wasnt negotiating in September or October, they were and still are for the most part giving out take it or leave it offers and announcing which hills they are willing to die on. You cant claim the players should have just taken the owners offer in October and then say they should have negotiated on points that werent up for negotiation.
As for cancelling the season and disclaiming interest, that doesnt get rid of Fehr just changes his title. He then just becomes a lawyer representating the trade association or whatever the players reform themselves as, or even as head counsel for their anti-trust law suit.
It takes two to tango and the league wasnt negotiating in September or October, they were and still are for the most part giving out take it or leave it offers and announcing which hills they are willing to die on. You cant claim the players should have just taken the owners offer in October and then say they should have negotiated on points that werent up for negotiation.
As for cancelling the season and disclaiming interest, that doesnt get rid of Fehr just changes his title. He then just becomes a lawyer representating the trade association or whatever the players reform themselves as, or even as head counsel for their anti-trust law suit.
This is just silliness. The league made 4 consecutive offers in September and October without any counterproposal by the PA. The PA refused, even, to negotiate the core economic issues over a 30 day period during that time. The league may say "this is our only offer today, take it or leave it," but the league has done plenty of moving between meetings. You don't judge a party's willingness to negotiate based on just what they do within any one single meeting.
Given the recent "news" on Sportsnet via Larry Brooks (who I know you all love to hate) that Gary Bettman blurted out to the players' reps that some GMs' want to dismantle their teams cause of their bad contracts, I'm not surprised the disclaimer option has reared its ugly head again. Way to go Gary- keep up the good work.
It takes two to tango and the league wasnt negotiating in September or October, they were and still are for the most part giving out take it or leave it offers and announcing which hills they are willing to die on. You cant claim the players should have just taken the owners offer in October and then say they should have negotiated on points that werent up for negotiation.
As for cancelling the season and disclaiming interest, that doesnt get rid of Fehr just changes his title. He then just becomes a lawyer representating the trade association or whatever the players reform themselves as, or even as head counsel for their anti-trust law suit.
We found his master plan! Since he claims to not be taking a salary during the lockout, he wants the DOI so he can charge millions in attorney fees!
Its incredible how often thats overlooked. The players know this is the case with any contract they sign. If they don't they should get a new agent or in Jack Johnson's case hire one.
LOL
It's incredible how much this is played up on HFBOARDS>
It's only been in the last 7 years that the NHL owners started the dishonorable practice of rolling back salaries, and they only can do that because they beat the players to a pulp in the last CBA.
And that's why the NHLPA hates Bettman and hired Fehr.
Given the recent "news" on Sportsnet via Larry Brooks (who I know you all love to hate) that Gary Bettman blurted out to the players' reps that some GMs' want to dismantle their teams cause of their bad contracts, I'm not surprised the disclaimer option has reared its ugly head again. Way to go Gary- keep up the good work.
I suspect Fehr wants the NHL to cancel so he can fight to repeal the cap.
And I suspect bettman wants the NHL to file a disclaimer and is offering up the NHL as a guinea pig for Proskauer Rose.
Given the recent "news" on Sportsnet via Larry Brooks (who I know you all love to hate) that Gary Bettman blurted out to the players' reps that some GMs' want to dismantle their teams cause of their bad contracts, I'm not surprised the disclaimer option has reared its ugly head again. Way to go Gary- keep up the good work.
Honestly people, do you believe everything the biggest pro-PA shill writes?
Most people here agree (myself included) that Bettman is a lot of negative things (cruel, evil, strong-willed, unflappable, emotionless, overly-lawyerish etc) but I ask you this, do you think Bettman is stupid? I don't like Fehr at all but one thing I know he's not stupid.
So ask yourself this; would Bettman EVER say something like that to players? Would the lawyer Bettman say something that stupid that would be certainly used against him in any court case?
First of all, Bettman saying that would compromise everything in a possible court case because that would squarely fly against the face of NHL claiming they are negotiating in good faith.
Secondly, why on earth would Bettman say that in the first place? What good would that do? Why should he give ammo to players?
Absolutely zero chance of Bettman saying that. Zero.
Someone should finally call out Brooks for all the BS.
