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

CBA Negotiations

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
09-19-2012, 04:20 PM
  #576
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
Both sides said they wont begin to talk about concessions until the core economic issues are figured out
Except the owners are asking the players to make (basically) all the concessions on the core issues, right?

Jack de la Hoya is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 04:39 PM
  #577
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlieGirl View Post
I'm not going to pretend that I know everything about the players' offers, but I didn't think the players had an issue with cap linked to revenue, but with the definition of revenue (which the owners want to change in their favour by excluding portions of income from the total amount to be shared) and the percentage of revenue to be shared.

I don't disagree that there are teams bleeding money out there, and something must be done for those teams, whether that is through stronger profit sharing between the teams or relocation, the league can simply not carry on the way it has with some teams losing $10+ million per year.

However, some teams are also lying in the beds they've made for themselves, and are now crying about it. The owners of those teams do not have a leg to stand on when it comes to finances and expectations that the concessions must come from the players.

Ultimately, most owners will start to lose real money in a few weeks, and so will the players, but the biggest losers in the whole damn thing is the fans.
The players wondering about the HRR change was with the first NHL proposal and they got rid of the change in their latest proposal.

The NHLPA's proposal was basically them getting the same share they got this year moneywise(about 1.88b) and getting small increases each year and then the rest of the revenue raise going to the owners for revenue sharing.

You can probably see why the owners wouldn't agree to this. What happens when the revenue goes downwards and they have to pay more money to the players without getting that extra little bit of money for revenue sharing

Krishna is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 04:41 PM
  #578
Krishna
Registered User
 
Krishna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Philadelphia
Country: Canada
Posts: 82,154
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
Except the owners are asking the players to make (basically) all the concessions on the core issues, right?
The owners are trying to get the players to talk any way possible. They've said the split can be negotiated higher. The players are too busy dicking around making sappy videos for fans. Like GKJ, a PR war is frivolous

Krishna is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 04:44 PM
  #579
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krishna View Post
The owners are trying to get the players to talk any way possible. They've said the split can be negotiated higher. The players are too busy dicking around making sappy videos for fans. Like GKJ, a PR war is frivolous
That's a bit disingenuous, isn't it?

You just said--the worst you can say about the players is that they are asking for the same deal. The owners are eager to talk...about what the players can give them.

Again, would it be more productive if the NHLPA started by demanding 65 percent of HRR, then decided to generously come down to 59 percent?

The players will end up taking a smaller share. Somewhere between 49 and 52, right? That's pretty much what everyone expects.

But to get them to do that without giving them some of what they want in other areas seems a bit naive. I'm not willing to give the owners "credit" for trying to negotiate..when each of their proposals demands a great deal of the players without offering anything in return.

Jack de la Hoya is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 04:53 PM
  #580
Coffe
Registered User
 
Coffe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Stockholm
Country: Sweden
Posts: 1,411
vCash: 500
Statement from the NHL regarding cancellation of pre-season through September 30.

http://www.nhl.com/ice/news.htm?id=641879&cmpid=fb


When do they start to cancel regular season games? A week ahead, or will a decision be made early next week already?

Coffe is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 05:14 PM
  #581
BleedOrange
BuildThroughTheDraft
 
BleedOrange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oshawa Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
NHLPA and the players are the reason for this lockout .Owners pay them big bucks but the players are greedy and dont want to help out the owners and the league.Revenue should be 50/50 or more to the owners side they take all the risk .

BleedOrange is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 05:24 PM
  #582
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange View Post
NHLPA and the players are the reason for this lockout .Owners pay them big bucks but the players are greedy and dont want to help out the owners and the league.Revenue should be 50/50 or more to the owners side they take all the risk .
This isn't a usual business venture. There's relatively little risk, when the NHL will step in an bail out a failing venture. The players take a very different kind of risk...

Jack de la Hoya is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 05:30 PM
  #583
BleedOrange
BuildThroughTheDraft
 
BleedOrange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oshawa Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
This isn't a usual business venture. There's relatively little risk, when the NHL will step in an bail out a failing venture. The players take a very different kind of risk...
Very little risk.

BleedOrange is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 05:34 PM
  #584
BleedOrange
BuildThroughTheDraft
 
BleedOrange's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Oshawa Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,084
vCash: 500
Revenue from hockey most of it should go to the owners and the league why should the players get big money for playing and revenue
to.

BleedOrange is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 05:38 PM
  #585
dbr2
Lockout Beard
 
dbr2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,340
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to dbr2
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange View Post
NHLPA and the players are the reason for this lockout .Owners pay them big bucks but the players are greedy and dont want to help out the owners and the league.Revenue should be 50/50 or more to the owners side they take all the risk .
I disagree, if the owners want more money they should stop signing players to these multimillion dollar contracts. In a perfect world 50/50 would be ideal but in the NHL doubtful. Can't really blame the players for taking big money as the owners throw it on the table.


Last edited by dbr2: 09-19-2012 at 05:44 PM.
dbr2 is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 05:43 PM
  #586
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by dbr2 View Post
I disagree, if the owners want more money they should stop signing players to these multimillion dollar contracts. In a perfect world 50/50 would be ideal but in the NHL doubtful.
"Let's sign these players to multi million dollar contracts and then we want them to make less money so we can make more and have no salary cap lowering of any kind."

Just... this whole situation...

SolidSnakeUS is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 05:45 PM
  #587
dbr2
Lockout Beard
 
dbr2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,340
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to dbr2
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
"Let's sign these players to multi million dollar contracts and then we want them to make less money so we can make more and have no salary cap lowering of any kind."

Just... this whole situation...
Yes, it's quite comical.

dbr2 is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 05:46 PM
  #588
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,984
vCash: 500
Sorry, what I meant by salary cap as in lower their pay overall, not necessarily the cap?

SolidSnakeUS is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 06:02 PM
  #589
CharlieGirl
Get well soon Kimmo
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,978
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange View Post
Revenue from hockey most of it should go to the owners and the league why should the players get big money for playing and revenue
to.
Who makes the money?

CharlieGirl is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 06:15 PM
  #590
CharlieGirl
Get well soon Kimmo
 
CharlieGirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Kitchener, ON
Country: Canada
Posts: 29,978
vCash: 500
http://m.theglobeandmail.com/sports/...service=mobile

Quote:
Now that Gary Bettman and the NHL owners marked their irrelevant deadline by locking out the players on Saturday, all eyes turn to the next step.

Well, the league already took the next step with that ridiculous statement it issued following the lockout but more on that in a minute.

The really big next step, one that actually produces progress, is going to take some time. After all, the great deadline of Sept. 15 declared by the NHL commissioner only marked the expiry of the collective agreement, not the start of the season or even the start of training camps. No one in this mess will be inclined to get serious about labour negotiations until pay cheques and gate receipts are missed, which is almost four weeks away.

There is no reason for NHL Players' Association executive director Donald Fehr and the players to do anything right now. They know they have the moral high ground and are, for a change, winning the public relations battle. And the league is doing nothing except shooting itself in both feet right now with Sunday's statement as Exhibit A.

First of all, the NHL seems to be the only business in the world that thinks the expiry of a labour agreement means business must cease. This is the fourth time since 1992 the league ceased operations due to a labour dispute and it is the third time the owners locked out the players, all three of them coming on Gary Bettman's watch.

Where every other business carries on operations while a new labour agreement is being negotiated, with both labour and management rightly regarding a strike or lockout as the absolute last resort, Bettman and his chief labour strategist, outside counsel Bob Batterman, rush to lock the doors. As Ansar Khan of MichiganLive.com noted, the NHL has now lost 1,698 regular-season games due to labour disputes since 1992. That is more than Major League Baseball (938), the NBA (504) and the NFL (0) combined.


Last edited by Homeland Security: 09-19-2012 at 06:56 PM. Reason: Edited content.
CharlieGirl is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 06:33 PM
  #591
Daishi
Registered User
 
Daishi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Finland
Posts: 1,219
vCash: 500
That entire article is nothing but propaganda trying to make it look like the players are somehow in the right here. They get a bigger slice of the revenues than in any of the other NA pro sports. The only thing I will ever agree with the players on this subject is that salary rollbacks are unacceptable. Retroactively changing the salary or term of a signed contract is simply wrong. Regarding everything else though, the players are out of touch with the real world.

Daishi is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 07:00 PM
  #592
Flyerfan808
Registered User
 
Flyerfan808's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Honolulu, HI
Country: United States
Posts: 2,002
vCash: 500
I'm confused.

Everyone can pretty much agree the 57% of HRR for players is too much. So, How does one bring the number closer to 50/50 and NOT rollback salaries?

Flyerfan808 is offline  
Old
09-19-2012, 07:04 PM
  #593
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerfan808 View Post
I'm confused.

Everyone can pretty much agree the 57% of HRR for players is too much. So, How does one bring the number closer to 50/50 and NOT rollback salaries?
Well, for one, by phasing it in.

Jack de la Hoya is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 07:08 PM
  #594
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,984
vCash: 500
Also I don't see why players won't do the rollback (I know they want what they they were promised, but as it showed with those players showing up at Voorhees, they just want to play), especially if we know they want to play.

SolidSnakeUS is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 07:09 PM
  #595
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
Also I don't see why players won't do the rollback (I know they want what they they were promised, but as it showed with those players showing up at Voorhees, they just want to play), especially if we know they want to play.
Ultimately, they probably will.

But there's a difference between a 24 percent rollback and a 5-10 percent rollback.

Jack de la Hoya is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 07:12 PM
  #596
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
Ultimately, they probably will.

But there's a difference between a 24 percent rollback and a 5-10 percent rollback.
At 50-50, its just a 7% rollback isn't it? If the cap is rolled back by 7% as well, it would be about last year-ish (65.379M). And I know the Flyers could easily work with 65M for a cap.

Sorry, I thought wrong about something. Even if they didn't roll back salaries, at 65M, the Flyers could still easily work with what they have (Pronger out all year and Mez out most of it, and I think Lilja is on LTIR right now as well, not sure though).

SolidSnakeUS is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 07:16 PM
  #597
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
At 50-50, its just a 7% rollback isn't it? If the cap is rolled back by 7% as well, it would be about last year-ish (65.379M). And I know the Flyers could easily work with 65M for a cap.
A seven-point drop in share means roughly a 12.5 percent rollback, assuming all other things stay the same.

Jack de la Hoya is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 07:17 PM
  #598
SolidSnakeUS
Registered User
 
SolidSnakeUS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Pipersville, PA
Country: United States
Posts: 30,984
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeh82 View Post
A seven-point drop in share means roughly a 12.5 percent rollback, assuming all other things stay the same.
Why is a 12.5% rollback in a 7% drop from the players? Just weird ****ing math... that's all.

SolidSnakeUS is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 07:32 PM
  #599
Jack de la Hoya
Registered User
 
Jack de la Hoya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 14,049
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolidSnakeUS View Post
Why is a 12.5% rollback in a 7% drop from the players? Just weird ****ing math... that's all.
Their old share was 57 percent of HRR, right?

The contracts were based on 100 percent of that old share.

Their new share would be 50 percent.

57 to 50 is (approximately) a 12 percent reduction.

Therefore, to accomodate all existing salaries under the new cap, you'd have to roll them back by 12 percent.

Jack de la Hoya is online now  
Old
09-19-2012, 07:38 PM
  #600
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,400
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BleedOrange View Post
NHLPA and the players are the reason for this lockout .Owners pay them big bucks but the players are greedy and dont want to help out the owners and the league.Revenue should be 50/50 or more to the owners side they take all the risk .
Why should a fortune 500 company pay their engineers 100k+? After all, the company takes all the risk. Those greedy engineers should be making less. They don't want to help their company out by taking less money.

Hockey players are paid what their skills demand. Period. Don't like it? Blame yourself, fan enough to post on HFBoards and likely dump large amounts of money into their pockets.

BringBackStevens 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 11:24 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.