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

Encouraging sign/re Goodenow proposal

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-02-2004, 07:29 PM
  #1
Theodoredust
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 25
vCash: 500
Encouraging sign/re Goodenow proposal

Would love to see something come from Goodenow' s willingness to talk

Theodoredust is offline  
Old
12-02-2004, 07:54 PM
  #2
x-bob
Registered User
 
x-bob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,982
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Theodoredust
Would love to see something come from Goodenow' s willingness to talk
If he brings up a decent proposal then it's really gonna brighten up his image. I don't think the players could win so why not get the best possible deal?

x-bob is offline  
Old
12-02-2004, 07:56 PM
  #3
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,576
vCash: 500
The NHL has already said that a healthy luxury tax might work, depending on what else came with it.

If by "what else" they mean a salary cap, then their comment is in bad faith.

Hopefully they figure something out that benefits the Canadiens too!

tinyzombies is offline  
Old
12-02-2004, 08:08 PM
  #4
Hab-a-maniac
Registered User
 
Hab-a-maniac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Toronto via Calgary!
Country: Canada
Posts: 11,199
vCash: 500
Ok, the players make this sacrifice to strengthen the league, but the owners do...? You see, revenue sharing might help. If only a little! But some owners (Wirtz, Illitch, MLE, Snider, Jacobs, Cablevision) are too greedy to donate to the little guys. Not one cent was shared last year while even baseball has 12% revenue sharing. So why hasn't anyone brought this up and why aren't the owners willing to trust each other also. This isn't about saving hockey for them, it's about saving their own @ss and their own investments because the owners don't seem to be one happy group that keeps each other competitive. Sorry, sometimes I can't stand the uneducated public blaming players. They see it as: too much money to go to games, owners claiming to lose big bucks, players not wanting a cap=greedy, evil players. That's not even looking at a quarter of the big picture here.

Hab-a-maniac is offline  
Old
12-02-2004, 08:11 PM
  #5
tinyzombies
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Calif via Montreal
Posts: 11,576
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hab-a-maniac
Ok, the players make this sacrifice to strengthen the league, but the owners do...? You see, revenue sharing might help. If only a little! But some owners (Wirtz, Illitch, MLE, Snider, Jacobs, Cablevision) are too greedy to donate to the little guys. Not one cent was shared last year while even baseball has 12% revenue sharing. So why hasn't anyone brought this up and why aren't the owners willing to trust each other also. This isn't about saving hockey for them, it's about saving their own @ss and their own investments because the owners don't seem to be one happy group that keeps each other competitive. Sorry, sometimes I can't stand the uneducated public blaming players. They see it as: too much money to go to games, owners claiming to lose big bucks, players not wanting a cap=greedy, evil players. That's not even looking at a quarter of the big picture here.
Wirtz and Jacobs are too cheap to spend on their own team, they wouldn't qualify for the luxury tax anyway. Snider, Illitch, et al. are not cheap either, that's the problem. That's why the small market teams, and even middle tier teams are suffering.

I don't think the players are conceding anything with a luxury tax. I don't think a luxury tax would work. It depends on what other components came with it, like the NHL said.

tinyzombies is offline  
Old
12-02-2004, 08:44 PM
  #6
goalchenyuk
Registered User
 
goalchenyuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: montreal
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 8,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hab-a-maniac
Ok, the players make this sacrifice to strengthen the league, but the owners do...? You see, revenue sharing might help. If only a little! But some owners (Wirtz, Illitch, MLE, Snider, Jacobs, Cablevision) are too greedy to donate to the little guys. Not one cent was shared last year while even baseball has 12% revenue sharing. So why hasn't anyone brought this up and why aren't the owners willing to trust each other also. This isn't about saving hockey for them, it's about saving their own @ss and their own investments because the owners don't seem to be one happy group that keeps each other competitive. Sorry, sometimes I can't stand the uneducated public blaming players. They see it as: too much money to go to games, owners claiming to lose big bucks, players not wanting a cap=greedy, evil players. That's not even looking at a quarter of the big picture here.
sorry but your ''Ok, the players make this sacrifice to strengthen the league'' is far to be serious. What sacrfice are you talking about ? the players don't have anything to pay from their own pocket with the luxious tax; they only suggest to the rich owners to share their money.

they also proposed to cut the salary of the rookies ; still no sacrifice for them , only for the future players

and they '' generously '' proposed a 5 % salary cut ; the average salary is something like what ? 300 % of what it was in the last convention , and they propose a 5 % return ? it still isn't a sacrifice...

goalchenyuk is offline  
Old
12-02-2004, 08:50 PM
  #7
montreal
Go Habs Go
 
montreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Sark
Posts: 23,581
vCash: 500
I'd be shocked if we saw NHL hockey this year. This seems like a PR move on the NHLPA's part. But this is the first bit of good news I've heard on the lockout since it started.

montreal is offline  
Old
12-03-2004, 03:58 PM
  #8
Brisson11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the rink
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,264
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Brisson11
I believe Goodenow is testing the waters and seeing if Bettman will budge. I truly think that Bettman will deny his proposal(which won't be a bad one), and by next season or mid way through next season the PA will give in and finally do as Bettman wants so that they can have jobs that pay well again.

Brisson11 is offline  
Old
12-03-2004, 06:20 PM
  #9
goalchenyuk
Registered User
 
goalchenyuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: montreal
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 8,389
vCash: 500
goodenow is scare about the replacement players, so now he don't have any choice to negotiating in good '' faith '' if he wants to be able to prove to the court that he was trying to find solution , next september

goalchenyuk is offline  
Old
12-03-2004, 06:33 PM
  #10
Kirk Muller
Registered User
 
Kirk Muller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Brrr -18, Gomez Cold
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,788
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0v
goodenow is scare about the replacement players, so now he don't have any choice to negotiating in good '' faith '' if he wants to be able to prove to the court that he was trying to find solution , next september
Not really because the NHL also must prove that they have bargained in good faith. And the fact is, the NLRB(?) is a very subjective board and no one knows how they will respond to NHLPA/NHL claims. Its basically a coin toss whether they would declare an impasse.

Kirk Muller is online now  
Old
12-03-2004, 11:36 PM
  #11
goalchenyuk
Registered User
 
goalchenyuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: montreal
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 8,389
vCash: 500
yes , but if it's go to the court , it could take a really long time to get a judgement.Am i wrong if i think that the ownwers can ask replacement players before going to the court ? because the time is a big factor for the players ...even more if they realise that there are replacement players that are taking their job

goalchenyuk is offline  
Old
12-04-2004, 12:16 AM
  #12
Vicious
Registered User
 
Vicious's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,692
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Vicious
Quote:
Originally Posted by montreal
I'd be shocked if we saw NHL hockey this year. This seems like a PR move on the NHLPA's part. But this is the first bit of good news I've heard on the lockout since it started.

Exactly how I see this thing. They realized the bigger part of the fans are behind the owners and that they needed to get some support. When NHL turns down this proposal and calls it ludicrous, some fans will switch sides and pressure the NHL to make the next proposal.

Vicious is offline  
Old
12-04-2004, 12:59 AM
  #13
wedge
Registered User
 
wedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: victoriaville
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,298
vCash: 500
at least if they start talking, they can save NEXT season

I just don't see how this season could be saved.

wedge is online now  
Old
12-04-2004, 02:21 AM
  #14
EaGLE1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Quebec City
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,442
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0v
goodenow is scare about the replacement players, so now he don't have any choice to negotiating in good '' faith '' if he wants to be able to prove to the court that he was trying to find solution , next september
exactly. He want to make Bettman look bad. This offer will never be accepted. There will be a year long lock-out for sure. Do you really think a guy like Goodenow will soften his positions??? Never.

EaGLE1 is offline  
Old
12-04-2004, 02:52 AM
  #15
saskhab
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 994
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vicious
Exactly how I see this thing. They realized the bigger part of the fans are behind the owners and that they needed to get some support. When NHL turns down this proposal and calls it ludicrous, some fans will switch sides and pressure the NHL to make the next proposal.
I don't think pressure from the fans has played any role in the lockout process so far. This isn't a political campaign, it's a labour dispute. They can't let other parties divert them from their main issues. They gain strength from presenting a united front before any challenges, including fans.

If the luxury tax is 75 cents on the dollar above $40 million, it'd be tough to ignore. The Red Wings last year would've paid tax on $37 million in payroll, generating $27.75 million for revenue sharing. For the 20 teams with $40 mill or less in payrolls, that's over a million dollars just from the Red Wings' overexpenditures.

And think, these are STARTING figures. The NHL could negotiate the tax floor down a few million, possibly to $36 or $37 million. And the tax could be heavier than $.75, possibly an even dollar. That's a lot of money to help the league.

Add to that a 10% rumoured rollback on salaries, and it's a huge commitment. It's tough to ignore.

saskhab is offline  
Old
12-04-2004, 04:43 AM
  #16
Hackett
HF Needs Feeny
 
Hackett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,832
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by raketheleaves
The NHL has already said that a healthy luxury tax might work, depending on what else came with it.

If by "what else" they mean a salary cap, then their comment is in bad faith.

Hopefully they figure something out that benefits the Canadiens too!
they actually said a luxury tax might work? that makes me a little more optimistic because I thought their stance was that its a salary cap or no hockey.

Hackett is offline  
Old
12-04-2004, 11:42 AM
  #17
Blind Gardien
Global Moderator
nexus of the crisis
 
Blind Gardien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Four Winds Bar
Country: France
Posts: 19,768
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by saskhab
I don't think pressure from the fans has played any role in the lockout process so far. This isn't a political campaign, it's a labour dispute. They can't let other parties divert them from their main issues. They gain strength from presenting a united front before any challenges, including fans.
It is being run like a political campaign, however, unfortunately. While direct fan pressure plays no real role, the "advanced polling" on fan perceptions is still an important consideration, given that all the money they're fighting about ultimately comes from the pockets of the fans.
Quote:
And think, these are STARTING figures. The NHL could negotiate the tax floor down a few million, possibly to $36 or $37 million. And the tax could be heavier than $.75, possibly an even dollar. That's a lot of money to help the league.
Personally, I think a stiff luxury tax like that along with restrictions on qualifying offers and arbitration would be an okay program to start with, then if things still aren't working they can look for a cap in 2010. But... if the NHL rhetoric about requiring a salary cap is true, then this goes nowhere. (It's impossible for me to guess from all the conflicting commentary whether they are really that adamant about getting a cap or not, or whether that's just a negotiating ploy).
Quote:
Add to that a 10% rumoured rollback on salaries, and it's a huge commitment. It's tough to ignore.
Honestly, I think the whole idea of a one-time rollback is just a huge PR red herring. It means nothing. I can't imagine the owners caring at all about that, when player salaries are automatically incrementing by 10% every year anyway. The rollback is a mechanism for Bob Goodenough to be able to say in his press clips that "we made an offer which will save the league hundreds of millions of dollars", but really, the rollback fixes nothing and has no lasting impact.

But hey, at least they're talking again, however briefly.

Blind Gardien is offline  
Old
12-04-2004, 12:54 PM
  #18
saskhab
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Saskatoon
Posts: 994
vCash: 500
The rollback is a bit silly, but it does help teams that would be over a soft cap/luxury tax mark in their first season. Detroit's payroll would drop about $7 mill automatically. It gives team a bit of a break to re-adjust to the new outlook.

I'm optimistic if the proposal is close to what's been rumored. If it isn't, we're in a stalemate for a long time.

What I meant by fan pressure not playing a role is that each side can't let that dictate their moves. They need to shelter themselves as much as possible in order to get a good deal done for their side.

And I agree that I don't think a jump from the previous CBA right to a hard cap is possible. Wait til the next CBA, but get a luxury tax with teeth in the meantime.

saskhab is offline  
Old
12-04-2004, 01:09 PM
  #19
Brisson11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the rink
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,264
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Brisson11
I'm interested in knowing how Bettman feels about a Cap even if Goodenow gives the NHL a very decent proposal. After all, from what I've heard he promised a few people here and there ie. some owners... that the NHL WILL have a salary cap in place after the expired CBA to finally get the Profits they want. I'm glad I'm not the one in his place.

Brisson11 is offline  
Old
12-04-2004, 06:06 PM
  #20
goalchenyuk
Registered User
 
goalchenyuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: montreal
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 8,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brisson11
I'm interested in knowing how Bettman feels about a Cap even if Goodenow gives the NHL a very decent proposal. After all, from what I've heard he promised a few people here and there ie. some owners... that the NHL WILL have a salary cap in place after the expired CBA to finally get the Profits they want. I'm glad I'm not the one in his place.
glad youre not the one in his place ?

received millions by the NHL since 10 years ...and he didn't do the job ;not a drama if they fire him sice he already has money for more than 10 lifes...

goalchenyuk is offline  
Old
12-05-2004, 04:26 AM
  #21
Anthony P
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 621
vCash: 500
One of their proposals is the 75 cents on the dollar luxury tax over 40m.... does anyone know where I could find the info on how many teams have salaries over 40m??? it would be interesting to see if that would actually lead to a large pot to share....

Anthony P is offline  
Old
12-05-2004, 01:13 PM
  #22
ngc_5128
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Fredericton, NB
Posts: 602
vCash: 500
what would be the point of giving 20 odd teams a million dollars from a luxury tax? it gets them a mucker or a grinder...that barely even covers travel expenses for a year. A luxury tax is a waste of time, unless you are talking 2 or 3 dollars for every dollar over the limit.

I think the only thing that would make the league soften it's stance on a cap would be to get rid of garunteed contracts...but I think the players (well, the top paid ones anyway, and they are the only ones that matter in this type of bargaining agreement) would take a cap before that happens anyway.

ngc_5128 is offline  
Old
12-05-2004, 07:41 PM
  #23
Brisson11
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: On the rink
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,264
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Brisson11
Quote:
Originally Posted by mark0v
glad youre not the one in his place ?

received millions by the NHL since 10 years ...and he didn't do the job ;not a drama if they fire him sice he already has money for more than 10 lifes...
But he looks like my dogs rear end and he constantly blinks like he has some kind of disease, what kind of life is that?

Brisson11 is offline  
Old
12-05-2004, 09:09 PM
  #24
goalchenyuk
Registered User
 
goalchenyuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: montreal
Country: Vatican City State
Posts: 8,389
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brisson11
But he looks like my dogs rear end and he constantly blinks like he has some kind of disease, what kind of life is that?
:lol

finally , i think your'e right

i've always think that the guy is looking a lot as '' the pink panther insp clouseau ''and that he always look as he has some make-up on his face...burk !

goalchenyuk 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 08:37 PM.

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.