HFBoards

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

J.R. unhappy with impasse

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-17-2004, 07:59 AM
  #1
swflyers8*
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Upper Darby, PA
Posts: 2,908
vCash: 500
Send a message via Yahoo to swflyers8*
J.R. unhappy with impasse

"I definitely feel that a lot of players are unhappy with the lack of communication [between the union and the league], with the lack of negotiations, with the lack of understanding.

"Let's try and find something that will work both ways. All the players are saying is we won't have a salary cap, all the owners are saying is we won't play without a salary cap, and that they won't go for revenue sharing.

It's very me, me, me, I, I, I, and we can't get anything done that way."


Daily News

swflyers8* is offline  
Old
11-17-2004, 10:47 AM
  #2
Rex88
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Country: United States
Posts: 1,112
vCash: 500
Me, me, me and I, I and I are in every JR quote.
Seriously, the sides will not even talk so the salary cap and other options are really moot at this time. I have not even heard if anything is scheduled - how can the players accept that??? If I was an NHLPA member, I would insist that they at least meet monthly even if they just stare at each other for an hour - who knows, maybe someone would blink.
JR is just upset with the entire situation and I feel for the NHL as a league because it is soooo screwed up at this point. I can honestly see a scab league going next year.

Rex88 is offline  
Old
11-17-2004, 10:54 AM
  #3
flyersrock1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Nova Scotia Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 609
vCash: 500
If they do not solve this thing and we lose the season we will see a replacement league.

flyersrock1 is offline  
Old
11-17-2004, 01:19 PM
  #4
GoneFullHextall
RIP Andy B.
 
GoneFullHextall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Somewhere in NH
Country: United States
Posts: 36,318
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersrock1
If they do not solve this thing and we lose the season we will see a replacement league.
yeah and the owners will still try to charge 90 bucks to see them too.

GoneFullHextall is offline  
Old
11-17-2004, 01:20 PM
  #5
Teezax
Registered User
 
Teezax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,450
vCash: 500
I don't think anyone is happy with the impasse apart from the owners who are losing less money by not playing.

Teezax is offline  
Old
11-17-2004, 01:23 PM
  #6
Dr Love
Registered User
 
Dr Love's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Location, Location!
Posts: 20,378
vCash: 500
I love what JR brings to the Flyers, but... who would have thought that something would have shut him up more than a wired jaw?

Dr Love is offline  
Old
11-17-2004, 03:12 PM
  #7
CNote
Get 'er done
 
CNote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Toronto, ON.
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,656
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyersrock1
If they do not solve this thing and we lose the season we will see a replacement league.
i'd go to a couple games, it's the team that i support.

CNote is offline  
Old
11-19-2004, 12:47 AM
  #8
FlyersFan10*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,349
vCash: 500
Thank god for JR. Out of all the hockey players who have spoken out, not one of them have had the passion for the game in their voice like JR has. Yeah, he may say things that might disturb people, but fact of the matter is that he tells it like it is. There's no ***** footing around with JR and he's pointed the finger at Bettman AND Goodenow. And he's right when he says the two of them should lock themselves in a room and not come out until an agreement is reached. It's as simple as that. You listen to Bettman and Goodenow and you'd think the process is something intricate and complicated. There's nothing complicated or intricate about coming together on an agreement. I do think though that maybe both Bettman and Goodenow might think talking is something that is intricate and complicated. I know this much. If the season is lost, I'll never watch another hockey game again. Two work stoppages in ten years is rediculous.

FlyersFan10* is offline  
Old
11-19-2004, 08:39 AM
  #9
justapantherfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Sunrise, Fl
Country: United States
Posts: 3,205
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan10
Thank god for JR. Out of all the hockey players who have spoken out, not one of them have had the passion for the game in their voice like JR has. Yeah, he may say things that might disturb people, but fact of the matter is that he tells it like it is. There's no ***** footing around with JR and he's pointed the finger at Bettman AND Goodenow. And he's right when he says the two of them should lock themselves in a room and not come out until an agreement is reached. It's as simple as that. You listen to Bettman and Goodenow and you'd think the process is something intricate and complicated. There's nothing complicated or intricate about coming together on an agreement. I do think though that maybe both Bettman and Goodenow might think talking is something that is intricate and complicated. I know this much. If the season is lost, I'll never watch another hockey game again. Two work stoppages in ten years is rediculous.

Can't agree more. I may not like him (only cause he is not on my team) but you have to love his passion for the game and having the big ones to speak out.






www.simplaying.com

justapantherfan is offline  
Old
11-19-2004, 09:44 AM
  #10
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
it won't be THAT easy for the NHL to institute a replacement player league next year. part of that would be being capable of proving that through negotiations of good faith they reached an impasse. whether or not you believe the league is right, they HAVE NOT been negotiating in good faith with the players.

i'm supportive of what ownership is trying to accomplish, but what they've offered is basically the same thing worded differently and said, "take it or leave it." that isn't negotiating in good-faith by any stretch of the imagination. if they attempt to bring in replacement players the NHLPA will almost definitely attempt to stop it in court, and there is a good chance they would be succesfull.

i'm still hopeful for this year regardless. high stakes poker is being played at the moment, which is the natural course of things. there is simply too much money, 1.2 billion, at stake for the players for them not to play this season. if goodenow is too stubborn to at least attempt to work with the league on the concept of a cap(the league should be willing to discuss a tax of some sort as well) he is doing a great disservice to the people he represents, since that is cash they will never get a chance to earn again.

maybe he realizes that, maybe he doesn't, but 1.2 billion is a lot of money to simply not recieve while arguing with your employers.

Jester is offline  
Old
11-19-2004, 10:47 AM
  #11
fan mao rong
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: port royal , pa
Posts: 968
vCash: 500
People say that negotiating in good faith is moving off of your position, it is not. It is negotiating with an open mind. The National Labor Relations Act says that neither side is required to agree to a proposal or make any concession. People say Major League Baseball did not get impasse because implementation is not allowed. This is not right. Major League Baseball did not get impasse because they continued to negotiate off of their position.

fan mao rong is offline  
Old
11-19-2004, 11:12 AM
  #12
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by fan mao rong
People say that negotiating in good faith is moving off of your position, it is not. It is negotiating with an open mind. The National Labor Relations Act says that neither side is required to agree to a proposal or make any concession. People say Major League Baseball did not get impasse because implementation is not allowed. This is not right. Major League Baseball did not get impasse because they continued to negotiate off of their position.
the league hasn't "negotiated." they've just stated what they want/need. have they shown an "open-mind" concerning a luxury tax? the reason they don't want a luxury tax is because that takes money out of the owner's pockets, whereas a salary cap takes money out of the players pockets. if they are really interested in creating competitive balance a luxury tax is easy to construct that will accomplish.

it's as simple as this...

tax threshold, set it at whatever you want, 40 million seems reasonable. the 30 million dollar number is an idiotic offer by the league, and shows how badly the expansion policy of bettman has worked.

year 1: tax 10% for every dollar over 40 million.
year 2: tax 30% for every dollar over 40 million.
year 3: tax 50% for every dollar over 40 million.
year 4: tax 70% for every dollar over 40 million.
year 5: tax 100% for evey dollar over 40 million.

so... the flyers would have had an 80-odd million dollar squad last year, the wings/rangers would have been well over a 100 million. i don't think too many people are willing to go there, and if they are that is a lot of cash coming back to the rest of the league, WHICH THEY HAVE TO USE ON THEIR TEAM. if they start doing revenue sharing, and they don't force these guys to spend it on their teams, it is really accomplishing nothing.

hell, lets make this more punitive. tax roster salary if they are over the luxury tax. escalating based on how far over the limit they are. so if you have an 80 million dollar squad, it is the 80 million that has the tax applied, not the 40 million that is cross the threshold. i would be shocked if too many teams would be flaunting the tax at that point... and if they are, even more money into the pot.

the problem with baseball's tax is that it isn't nearly punitive enough, and the owners that receive cash from the other teams aren't forced to spend it on their team.

this system would get the league spending under control with a quickness. the reason for scaling it in is to let the big contracts clear before you really start railing on teams... allow time for the market to assimilate to the idea of the tax, and then start hitting teams hard.

make no mistake. the reason the owners aren't discussing a luxury tax has absolutely NOTHING to do with the fact that they don't think it will create "cost certainty." cost certainty really isn't at the heart of this thing, competitive balance is... this is a method that will create that, but it will do so by attacking the owners themselves, not the players.

Jester is offline  
Old
11-19-2004, 03:17 PM
  #13
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,435
vCash: 500
Despite all the knocks to his noggin', I'm glad to see that JR is one of the few players out there who seems to understand that if the season is called off, the players will be bidding farewell to literally millions of dollars (in his case $7.5 million) he will NEVER have a chance to recover.

CarlRacki is offline  
Old
11-20-2004, 10:40 AM
  #14
fan mao rong
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: port royal , pa
Posts: 968
vCash: 500
The lock-out as defined in the NLRA is an ownership tool to force changes in the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Perfectly legal. I never heard anyone say it was just about competitive balance. It is also about, I have heard Bettman say, enabling all 30 teams to be financially viable and compete in their present location. As I said above , no party to CBA negotiations has to make any concessions. What you say, Mr. Jester, about the league not being open minded about a luxury tax would equally apply to the Player's Association regarding a hard salary cap. The American Justice System must at the very least make an effort to appear even handed to both sides. Equal Justice for all and all that. The proposal you make is ineffectual at best. Even the 5 year wait would produce what? The revenues produced by this tax would be inconsequential as compared to a teams payroll, and there is no reason to believe it would inhibit teams from spending if their revenue warrants it. Other teams , in order to keep their players would have to match their spending to keep drawing sufficient fan support. It would require the next CBA to run at least 5 years, and then what? This site has become a stronghold for disinformation. I believe the League will be able to implement in time, if not, they can continue to hold out further prolonging the current situation.


Last edited by fan mao rong: 11-20-2004 at 10:45 AM.
fan mao rong is offline  
Old
11-20-2004, 12:17 PM
  #15
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
the reason that neither side is negotiating the other's proposals is specifically so that they can maintain their respective arguments for the future issue of replacement players. espn.com had an article on this i saw, yesterday i believe, concerning this. if the players were willing to "negotiate" over the salary cap, that would strengthen the NHL's position to argue that an "impassed" had been reached as opposed to the fact that they are simply attempting force a salary cap into the CBA, which they are... i don't think there is any question of that.

competitive balance is absolutely at the heart of this, bettman has used it in his arguments about this CBA many many times. that is why the NHLPA keeps spitting out the number of teams that have reached the Conf. Finals the last few years... to combat bettman's claim that competitive balance is hurting.

if this lockout continues into next year, which doesn't seem to be too much of a stretch. they should seek to reach a very long-term deal so that they can concentrate on building a fan base and not killing it with future labor issues. so while i stretched it to five years, specifically to allow current contracts that were signed under the current market, which i think we can all agree is not really operating anything like one with restrictions on it financially. the idea being that before it started to getting at a high tax, contracts like roenick, jagr, etc... would be gone from the books. thus not killing teams like the flyers right away when they've done nothing wrong. it would allow the league to honor the contracts, grandfather them in if you will, while still moving relatively quickly to a different financial landscape.

the idea would work to create competitive balance, brian burke thinks a system just like that would work... and he's been in the business for some time, so think he has a clue.

how would it work to create competitive balance? say the redwings decide to keep their 80 million dollar payroll. well, they'd be giving 40 million dollars back to the league that would go directly to a pot that would go to the have-nots which they would be then forced to use on their teams. so that would allow the lessers to bring themselves up closer to the threshold of the "richer" teams. however, the idea is more for the "have's" to come back closer to the "have-nots." either way it is going to level the financial field significantly.

ideally we could get the entire league into an area where their payroll was seperated by at most like 10 million dollars, which is a lot i admit, but it isn't the idiotic amounts that exist right now. and while the rangers pretty much prove that money doesn't fix all problems, it will make the job for smart GM's much easier. add to this the fact that presumably struggling teams will be able to draft cheaper and better talent, to bring their talent level up quicker, tampa bay for example. i'm a strong believer in the idea that winning breeds fans, philly proves this to a large extent. if those teams have a real chance to be successfull, and then do succeed, they should be able to build a market... if they can't, then the team shouldn't be there in the first place.

just my thoughts. but to dismiss a luxury tax out of hand is somewhat idiotic in my opinion. if implemented correctly and if it is punishing enough, it will act almost exactly like a salary cap. the only reason the owners don't want to discuss it, as i noted, is because it takes the money from THEM not from the players... that and if they try and negotiate a luxury tax, it will complicate their argument to attempt and institute a replacement player league.

Jester is offline  
Old
11-21-2004, 02:27 AM
  #16
FlyersFan10*
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Ottawa, Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,349
vCash: 500
I don't think we'll ever see a replacement player league come from the NHL. There is no way that teams like Philadelphia, Toronto, New York, Detroit, Montreal or even Boston would allow this to happen. When you consider that there are some old school hockey people running the shows in these towns, heads would roll in these cities if anything like that ever happened. I just couldn't picture Bobby Clarke or Bob Gainey fielding a team featuring players as talented as Lonny Bohonos or Corey Hirsch. That's not a dig at either of those players, it's more a statement of both GMs trying to make chicken salad out of chicken feces. It's something that just won't happen. I think what you'll eventually see is some sort of break away league consisting of the haves. The have nots will end up becoming some kind of farm team league.

FlyersFan10* is offline  
Old
11-21-2004, 04:26 AM
  #17
hfboardsuser
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 12,280
vCash: 500
The day J.R. stops complaining about the NHL will coincidentally be the day he dies. And I'm pretty sure he's got a secret combination in his will to open a safe holding decades of videotaped complaints he's prepared over the years for future generations.

hfboardsuser is offline  
Old
11-21-2004, 11:28 AM
  #18
Jester
Registered User
 
Jester's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: St. Andrews
Country: Scotland
Posts: 34,075
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan10
I don't think we'll ever see a replacement player league come from the NHL. There is no way that teams like Philadelphia, Toronto, New York, Detroit, Montreal or even Boston would allow this to happen. When you consider that there are some old school hockey people running the shows in these towns, heads would roll in these cities if anything like that ever happened. I just couldn't picture Bobby Clarke or Bob Gainey fielding a team featuring players as talented as Lonny Bohonos or Corey Hirsch. That's not a dig at either of those players, it's more a statement of both GMs trying to make chicken salad out of chicken feces. It's something that just won't happen. I think what you'll eventually see is some sort of break away league consisting of the haves. The have nots will end up becoming some kind of farm team league.
if the league is doing it... those teams will do it. these guys are businessmen first and foremost. you can't just sit on the sidelines and say no, not gonna play. not to mention, the owners make that call, not the GM's.

Jester is offline  
Old
11-22-2004, 08:10 AM
  #19
flyersrock1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Nova Scotia Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 609
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyersFan10
I don't think we'll ever see a replacement player league come from the NHL. There is no way that teams like Philadelphia, Toronto, New York, Detroit, Montreal or even Boston would allow this to happen. When you consider that there are some old school hockey people running the shows in these towns, heads would roll in these cities if anything like that ever happened. I just couldn't picture Bobby Clarke or Bob Gainey fielding a team featuring players as talented as Lonny Bohonos or Corey Hirsch. That's not a dig at either of those players, it's more a statement of both GMs trying to make chicken salad out of chicken feces. It's something that just won't happen. I think what you'll eventually see is some sort of break away league consisting of the haves. The have nots will end up becoming some kind of farm team league.
If the NHL opens up the 2005-06 season with replacement players Clarke will have a team. No question about it. The owners are in it together and any GM that will not work with replacement players (like Sparky Anderson in 94) will be gone.

flyersrock1 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 12:00 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.