HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

NHLPA starts another 'disclaimer' vote

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-04-2013, 11:12 AM
  #151
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 15,976
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
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.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 11:14 AM
  #152
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
Doesn't make any sense.
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.

  Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 11:19 AM
  #153
Freudian
Patty likes beef
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 28,531
vCash: 50
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.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 11:23 AM
  #154
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 15,976
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
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.

Sorry, but Money is not everything.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 11:28 AM
  #155
Freudian
Patty likes beef
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 28,531
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
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.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 11:29 AM
  #156
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
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.

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 11:32 AM
  #157
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
Sorry, but Money is not everything.
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.

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 11:41 AM
  #158
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
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.

  Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 12:06 PM
  #159
optimus2861
Registered User
 
optimus2861's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bedford NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,582
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
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.

optimus2861 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 12:08 PM
  #160
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by optimus2861 View Post
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.

joshjull is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 12:38 PM
  #161
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 15,976
vCash: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
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.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 12:42 PM
  #162
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Its incredible how often thats overlooked. The players know this is the case with any contract they sign.
Nobody overlooked this.

In fact it's a major reason there's no hockey being played right now.

  Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 01:11 PM
  #163
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
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.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 01:39 PM
  #164
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 10,095
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
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.

tantalum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 02:22 PM
  #165
Crumblin Erb Brooks
Registered User
 
Crumblin Erb Brooks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Grenyarnia
Country: United States
Posts: 2,961
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper View Post
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.

Crumblin Erb Brooks is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 02:31 PM
  #166
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumblin Erb Brooks View Post
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.

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 03:07 PM
  #167
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
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.

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 03:13 PM
  #168
Stickmata
Registered User
 
Stickmata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 1,489
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
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.

Stickmata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 03:19 PM
  #169
Halibut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,009
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stickmata View Post
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.

Halibut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 03:43 PM
  #170
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,507
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halibut View Post
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.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 03:49 PM
  #171
moosehead81
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Great White North
Country: Canada
Posts: 836
vCash: 500
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.

moosehead81 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 03:57 PM
  #172
FishMonger
Registered User
 
FishMonger's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 376
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halibut View Post
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!

What a clever man.

FishMonger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 04:00 PM
  #173
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
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.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 04:02 PM
  #174
RedWingsNow*
SaskatoonDeathSquad
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,356
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moosehead81 View Post
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.

RedWingsNow* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
01-04-2013, 04:04 PM
  #175
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by moosehead81 View Post
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.

Pepper is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 02:26 AM.

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.