HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Time to Use Scabs

View Poll Results: If the deadlock continues to December would you agree to using scabs?
Yes 28 70.00%
No 12 30.00%
Voters: 40. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-17-2004, 11:52 PM
  #1
SwiftyHab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 559
vCash: 500
Time to Use Scabs

As far as Im concerned, the players association is way too powerful, and this crop of players is way too greedy, they dont care about the fans, they barely care about the game, and they definetly dont appreciate the money they get for the job that they do, when most people work much harder and get paid mch less.

So that being said, I would be in favor of the NHL introducing the system they want and invite people who want to play hockey for a good living and more importantly because they love the game.
Yes the product will be worse, but a worse product is better then no product in my opinion. Secondly, it will bring us back to the good old days when guys like the ROcket would have to leave work to stun the crowds. Real people playing for pride in front of other real people.

Lastly, I think if the owners do this, it will split the union, as some players, who just want to play will come back, and those who come here just for the money can go home.

I have no sympathy for the union, and I think this option must be considered now.

SwiftyHab is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 01:45 AM
  #2
Fish on The Sand
Untouchable
 
Fish on The Sand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Nanaimo
Country: Canada
Posts: 51,764
vCash: 500
yep, lockout is 2 days old, bring in the scabs

Fish on The Sand is online now  
Old
09-18-2004, 03:41 AM
  #3
tritone
Registered User
 
tritone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Laval
Posts: 4,976
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fish on The Sand
yep, lockout is 2 days old, bring in the scabs
I agree, I think the better option would be for the owners to just refuse any contracts exceding 1 million dollars regardless of how good a player is. Collution works for me.

Drop all the prices of everything surrounding hockey . And let all the millionaires become less wealthy players, owners, employees and lovers of the game.

tritone is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 04:15 AM
  #4
SwiftyHab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 559
vCash: 500
Imagine the pressure on the players union if the league went on and made money without them? Already players like Hull, and Yzerman are close to retirement, and younger players dont want to stunt their development, Im sure the union would crack.

* Truth be told its really an association, not a legitimate union. Unions negotiate salaries for their employees, here each individual player is left to do that on his own.

SwiftyHab is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 06:33 AM
  #5
rocketlives
Registered User
 
rocketlives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 793
vCash: 500
The scabs could be the Hamilton Bulldogs. Just have them play half their home games at the Bell Center, and with players like Higgins Kotsitsyn, Milroy, Locque, Komisarek, Archer, Danis etc... the fans may well be willing to wait a year or more without their regular Habs in order to settle this labor conflict once and for all.


rocketlives is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 07:23 AM
  #6
Solak
Registered User
 
Solak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Rochester, MN
Country: United States
Posts: 761
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Solak Send a message via Yahoo to Solak
Using scabs as a scare tactic to get the players to cave in would be a big mistake. I like the fact that us the fans are trying to think of ways to get the sides to give in because right now it doesn't look like either side is willing to budge. Although hockey is such a huge part of life for most of you in Canada it is not that way here in the U.S. and bringing in replacement players would probably backfire. The fanbase here has already been almost non existent over the last few years and without the emergence of a "superstar" player there hasn't been a rise in interest. The diehard fans here will come back to the NHL no matter what but most wouldn't. Perfect example is the strike in baseball years ago, baseball is more popular here and they still lost tons of fans afterwards, if it wasn't for the homerun race they may not have recovered at all. With there already not being a season this year its going to be hard enough to get the fans back here, in my opinion, replacement players would be the final straw.

Solak is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 08:10 AM
  #7
RE-HABS
Registered User
 
RE-HABS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: CANADA
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,885
vCash: 500
According to Bob McKenzie if the lockout last a whole seasson at the beginning of next year the league would have the power to use replacement players and could introduce a salary cap under those players because they are not a part of the CBA. Not only that he also stated that you would see players leave the union and cross over into the NHL with the replacement players but they too would be a part of the new CBA that the NHL would have in place because they would have left their union.

McKenzie says this may be the only way a salary cap will be placed in the NHL, it has been done the same in both the NFL and NBA. No union has ever accepted a cap, it has been forced on them. And it has seemed to work very well for those 2 leagues and their rich players!

I'd do it next season if I'm an owner.

RE-HABS is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 09:00 AM
  #8
Démon Blond
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Québec
Posts: 918
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RE-HABS
According to Bob McKenzie if the lockout last a whole seasson at the beginning of next year the league would have the power to use replacement players and could introduce a salary cap under those players because they are not a part of the CBA. Not only that he also stated that you would see players leave the union and cross over into the NHL with the replacement players but they too would be a part of the new CBA that the NHL would have in place because they would have left their union.

McKenzie says this may be the only way a salary cap will be placed in the NHL, it has been done the same in both the NFL and NBA. No union has ever accepted a cap, it has been forced on them. And it has seemed to work very well for those 2 leagues and their rich players!

I'd do it next season if I'm an owner.
If it's the only way to control the inflationnist system that's in place right now, then by all means let them impose a salary cap that way... In fact, I would take the NFL's CBA, adapt it to the NHL's reality and impose that after a 1 year lock-out if I was a owner. The NFL players have a average salary about equal to the NHL ones but their system works very well as the union resigns it every year, as told by a NFL player here (in french, at the bottom of the article).

I'll survive without NHL hockey... there is a lot of minor leagues that can be followed this year.

Démon Blond is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 09:23 AM
  #9
Astaroth
Registered User
 
Astaroth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Montreal,Qc
Posts: 1,651
vCash: 500
Scabs is a bad idea, hockey isn't like the NFL where the talent pool is insane, spanning almost an extra three leagues (AFL,CFL,NFL Europe). If I remember correctly it somewhere in the late 80' that the NFL owners broke down the union with those scabs. However the NFL's situation is completly different from the NHL's. The talent pool of the NHL is very different, some say it's diluted even within the top league and the leagues that are closer in talent in Europe are pretty useless since most the players who play in europe, want to stay in euroe (no taxes, house, car paid, easy schedule, great lifestyle basically). In Canada it could mabye mabye work but that's only in Canada. In the USA, man it would be like a graveyard¨. People in Atlanta go to see Heatly and Ilya not the thrashers, star power is much important down south than for us therefore scabs isn't going to cut it.

Astaroth is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 10:14 AM
  #10
Moester
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Montreal
Posts: 947
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Moester Send a message via MSN to Moester
I'm a huge fan of hockey, even more than that I'm a total and utter Habs fan. I go through the summer looking through every site hoping to see something about my habs and hoping that something comes out and hoping that the team improves.

But the thing of it is, I don't think I'd be able to jump right back in doing cartwheels if the strike lasts that long. I mean Its kinda like your girlfriend dumping you and then wanting you back because she made a mistake. Well you know what, if this conflict drags on for very much longer I for one am going to play hard to get. Because I think this should be about us the fans...we're the money, we're the power and we're the ones taken for granted like we're gonna come back like obedient dogs. I'm not going to watch any of those 4 on 4 leagues or anything like that if NHL players want to play for less money and for the love of the game let them do it in the NHL. :mad:

Moester is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 10:30 AM
  #11
SwiftyHab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 559
vCash: 500
The argument was made that with scabs some of the US teams would lose their fan support and not be able to continue operations. Well while that maybe true, theres nothing to say that with this current CBA or without an agreement that they wont go into bankruptcy anyway. I say get players who cost less, who desire to play, and give it a shot. You already have everything else setup, see how the fans react, at this point, you have literally nothing to lose.

Secondly, there is a huge talent pool of hockey players not in the NHL, not enough to fill 30 rosters, but truthfully there never really was. Getting scabs from different leagues will dilute the talent even further for the first few years, then with successful drafting and a broken union, the talent would eventually come back at a more reasonable price

SwiftyHab is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 10:34 AM
  #12
x-bob
Registered User
 
x-bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,999
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RE-HABS
According to Bob McKenzie if the lockout last a whole seasson at the beginning of next year the league would have the power to use replacement players and could introduce a salary cap under those players because they are not a part of the CBA. Not only that he also stated that you would see players leave the union and cross over into the NHL with the replacement players but they too would be a part of the new CBA that the NHL would have in place because they would have left their union.

McKenzie says this may be the only way a salary cap will be placed in the NHL, it has been done the same in both the NFL and NBA. No union has ever accepted a cap, it has been forced on them. And it has seemed to work very well for those 2 leagues and their rich players!

I'd do it next season if I'm an owner.
If this is true then there is no reason for the owners to cave.

x-bob is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 11:04 AM
  #13
Crusher20
Registered User
 
Crusher20's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Montreal
Country: Ecuador
Posts: 4,645
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Crusher20 Send a message via Yahoo to Crusher20
Quote:
Originally Posted by Astaroth
Scabs is a bad idea, hockey isn't like the NFL where the talent pool is insane, spanning almost an extra three leagues (AFL,CFL,NFL Europe). If I remember correctly it somewhere in the late 80' that the NFL owners broke down the union with those scabs. However the NFL's situation is completly different from the NHL's. The talent pool of the NHL is very different, some say it's diluted even within the top league and the leagues that are closer in talent in Europe are pretty useless since most the players who play in europe, want to stay in euroe (no taxes, house, car paid, easy schedule, great lifestyle basically). In Canada it could mabye mabye work but that's only in Canada. In the USA, man it would be like a graveyard¨. People in Atlanta go to see Heatly and Ilya not the thrashers, star power is much important down south than for us therefore scabs isn't going to cut it.
of course but after 1 year, if the nhl and nhlpa are still far from an aggreement to do you really think not having hockey at all for 2 years will be good for the hockey the states? i dont think so. Better have in your team players like Simon Gamache than.. no one.. then at least the players would say: hey.... i dont have much money getting in my account.. damn.. i should go work elsewhere.. in Russia.. In Germany... or in Swiss.. and trust me lots of players would come back, it might be the hard way but what else can you do, continue to act like babies when they already should **** with their huge salaries compare to anyone.. or even compare to Football wich is making incredible revenues I suppose.

anyway, getting pissed about NHLPA.. still what is wrong about having the owners making the big bucks.. arent they the OWNERS? i mean it isnt like the players would be getting a 8 bucks an hour like a lot of people do... anyway...

I guess its only my opinion as a frustrated fan. :mad:

Crusher20 is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 11:16 AM
  #14
SwiftyHab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 559
vCash: 500
Players will not get sympathy from fans who pay their salaries while making 1/1000 of what they make. Theyve already lost the public opinion battle. Give me a team full of Gamaches and il be happy

SwiftyHab is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 11:58 AM
  #15
chicpea*
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 8,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwiftyHab
It's time to use scabs...
The new, nice chicpea holds tongue.

chicpea* is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 01:18 PM
  #16
jonny5
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Alberta
Posts: 346
vCash: 500
Hey, I think SwiftyHab has some good points concerning the use of alternate players. Also if the league would drop in the number of teams, than naturally the league would become more competetive, as not so many players would be required to fill the rosters. Hell, look at the class of the league when there was only the "Original Six". So what if the league is smaller. And as for the USA? Well, I am sure that many of the existing teams in the northern USA would still be able the garner a good fan base. A drop in salaries would follow right down to the people who really care about the game, the people who keep hockey alive every day, " We the Fan ". Where would the NHL be without it's fans?
Jerseys, tickets,and all other merchandise would be easier accessable to the ordinary fan. How many of you Habs fans can buy seasons tickets? How many can even take in 10 games a year? Not many!!! Simply because you can"t afford it. Here we have guys playing hockey, a sport we all love to play, and they get paid to play at an average of approx $1.8 million dollarsUS per year, with all expenses included. Thats more money than all us Habs fans will make in our lifetime. It"s kind of scary to me. And they have the nerve to say they need that kind of money to sustain their lifestyles. Well, I don't make money like that and I am just happy with my lifestyle. I am not just coming down on hockey players, but all professional atheletes in general. WAY TOO MUCH IN SALARY!!! And it's us, the loyal fan who pays in the end. SAD, SAD, SO VERY SAD!!!


Last edited by jonny5: 09-18-2004 at 01:22 PM.
jonny5 is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 01:38 PM
  #17
Blind Gardien
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 20,552
vCash: 500
I think there's a certain "period of mourning" or other nod to the pretense of civilised negotiation that still needs to be satisfied before the threat of scabs is actually uttered officially.

But, supposing such a suitable period passes, I'm all for the scab process.

Say, if things are still totally at an impasse come March, then bring the scab hammer to the table. If that still fails to inspire the NHLPA to bow meekly before their overlords, then the NHL should just go full tilt, get their own CBA established in time for the June draft, and have a scab draft sometime in the summer, with a scab training camp for the 2005-06 season.

It wouldn't be dramatically less entertaining than the NHL. You'd lose a bit of the power game, get some of those nifty Lebeau types back to compensate though, and after a little while most of the former NHLers would slink back with their tails between their legs.

But that's all officially hush-hush for now. There are still miles to go on "real negotiation" first. Both sides have lots of room for concessions at this stage, and hopefully one or two cooler heads in the pantheon will see to it that the hammer never has to fall.

Blind Gardien is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 03:34 PM
  #18
SwiftyHab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 559
vCash: 500
I agree, the owners should at least start the pressure by hinting at this option. Watch how fast the union will start to have some infighting

SwiftyHab is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 03:49 PM
  #19
habitual_hab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: bc
Posts: 217
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SwiftyHab
I agree, the owners should at least start the pressure by hinting at this option. Watch how fast the union will start to have some infighting
If I'm in the NHLPA and the owners even mention the word "scab" I'd suggest to my association that the players, after a vote so decrees it, look to moving to the WHA en masse.

habitual_hab is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 05:56 PM
  #20
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chicpea
The new, nice chicpea holds tongue.
chicpea, I know that obviously nothing can be done at the present time. I think I know where you stand on basic owner/labor relations, at least historically. My question is, if the owners feel that their interests are best served by sitting back, waiting to see if the NHLPA at least opens the door to the system they want, then declaring an impasse if this doesn't happen, are you opposed to this as a strategy ? Basically sacrificing a season to bust the union.

mcphee is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 06:39 PM
  #21
habitual_hab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: bc
Posts: 217
vCash: 500
Anyone who wishes to use scabs to break the NHLPA has no grip on the reality of the situation and the history between players and owners. One good source of info is Net Worth by Alison Griffiths and David Cruise:

Net Worth is a taut and powerful tale of a struggle for fairness against popular opinion and daunting power.

The theme is quickly and effectively set by introducing Detroit general manager Jack Adams, a crude bully who shames or intimidates his players into working for the least he can get away with, the better to line his own pockets. Adams sells most of his stars on the dubious lucky-to-be-here line, even malleable and self-effacing Gordie Howe, manipulated yet again into undervaluing himself. The lone rebel is Lindsay, who's grown suspicious of the team owners' cries of poverty. Lindsay emerges victorious but is then harshly punished, stripped of his captain's "C," his image poisoned by Adams' strategically planted lies.

Players are clearly a disposable commodity, serfs on skates with no security and an inequitable payback for the money they earn for the owners.


link

habitual_hab is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 06:58 PM
  #22
mcphee
Registered User
 
mcphee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 19,105
vCash: 500
Habitual Hab, if an impasse is declared after whatever time frame is deemed acceptable, then scabs aren't really scabs, are they ? Players would be invited to camp and whoever wanted to could attend. I imagine enough players would show up to render the union defunct. If this is the owner's endgame, what remedey would the player's have ?

mcphee is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 07:30 PM
  #23
habitual_hab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: bc
Posts: 217
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcphee
Habitual Hab, if an impasse is declared after whatever time frame is deemed acceptable, then scabs aren't really scabs, are they ? Players would be invited to camp and whoever wanted to could attend. I imagine enough players would show up to render the union defunct. If this is the owner's endgame, what remedey would the player's have ?
I don't know the legalities involved in the owners' ability to state that there's an impasse, end any and all recognition of the NHLPA and begin a new season.

If the owners' intent is to break the NHLPA, then all the power to them. But two can play hardball - and I'm sure the NHLPA is aware of the options, both legal and otherwise, open to them.

If solidarity in the NHLPA is as strong as I think it is then the scenario where the players look to moving to the WHA en masse is not far-fetched.

Historically the owners have treated players like chattel and it's only in the last 20-odd years that a more equitable system is in place. Notice how the public backs the owners by a huge majority - even though the owners, who cry poverty just like back in Ted Lindsay's day, will not allow an independent audit of their books.

habitual_hab is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 07:39 PM
  #24
JV
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: na
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by habitual_hab
Anyone who wishes to use scabs to break the NHLPA has no grip on the reality of the situation and the history between players and owners. One good source of info is Net Worth by Alison Griffiths and David Cruise:


link
That's ancient history. It's fascinating, but ancient. The worm turned a long time ago, and the balance of power is firmly and decisively with the players. Busting the union now would not result in the kind of abuses of the Adams era. But it may bring about a much-needed swing of the pendulum back toward the center. The players have done better than they deserved given the tenuous financial state of so many franchises. Of course, the owners have only themselves to blame for their own weakness, but the NHLPA certainly took advantage of the opportunities that weakness presented.

Collectively-bargained for benefits are "rights" only under the existing agreement. Once the agreement expires, it's a brand new day in most respects. Times have changed. Optimism about southward expansion and big TV revenues has been replaced by sobre reality. It's time to roll-back some of the "gains" the NHLPA has made. If that means the union has to be busted up, so be it. And it bears remembering that the only way it becomes "necessary" is if the NHLPA refuses to recognize that the world has changed.

JV is offline  
Old
09-18-2004, 08:00 PM
  #25
habitual_hab
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: bc
Posts: 217
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JV
That's ancient history. It's fascinating, but ancient. The worm turned a long time ago, and the balance of power is firmly and decisively with the players. Busting the union now would not result in the kind of abuses of the Adams era. But it may bring about a much-needed swing of the pendulum back toward the center. The players have done better than they deserved given the tenuous financial state of so many franchises. Of course, the owners have only themselves to blame for their own weakness, but the NHLPA certainly took advantage of the opportunities that weakness presented.

Collectively-bargained for benefits are "rights" only under the existing agreement. Once the agreement expires, it's a brand new day in most respects. Times have changed. Optimism about southward expansion and big TV revenues has been replaced by sobre reality. It's time to roll-back some of the "gains" the NHLPA has made. If that means the union has to be busted up, so be it. And it bears remembering that the only way it becomes "necessary" is if the NHLPA refuses to recognize that the world has changed.
"the tenuous financial state of so many franchises" has yet to be proven by an independent audit. The NHLPA has seen one set of books (and is bound by a privacy agreement not to disclose the contents) and has made a proposal they feel to be equitable.

I order for the "world change" to be recognized, it must first be proven that the world has changed. The owners claim poverty? The owners must prove it and so far they haven't. And giving financier Arthur Levitt a set of books so he can write a report that says the NHL lost $273 million last season doesn't cut it.

habitual_hab 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 03:11 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.