HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Montreal Canadiens
Notices

Ladies and gentleman we are going on a strike or lock-out

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
07-15-2012, 06:13 AM
  #201
habsfanatics
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PricePkPatch View Post
The PA would have nothing to say about it. It would be a matter of private interest between GMs and Owners, regarding the proper interpretation of the CBA and preventing its stretching/nonrespect of the reason behind a salary cap in the first place.

It's not called "Cap circumventing" for nothing.



The game had to grow, but because of an unreasoned and unplanned expansion plan, these teams ended up being the ridicule of the league. More often than not in the bottom of the rankings, always in deficit.

Yhea, they put these teams in place, and then every team did everything possible to get advantage out of them. No wonder fans never ended up coming in Atlanta or Phoenix. These kinds of irresponsible ventures are the Governors' faults, not the players. Why should they pay for bad business strategy?



I thought slavery was banned. Nobody owns anyone here.
Once again, there were no restrictions on contract lengths, owners can't get together after the fact and determine this. If Sidney Crosby wants 10 years, he's going to get 10 years, reality is a little different than where you come from. You've completely made this up.

It's called cap circumventing by arm chair gm's like yourself.

Ridicule of the league? According to who? Yes these teams struggled, in large part because they were never competitive. not many teams will retain their fans after constantly losing, not even the mighty Canadiens.

More teams = more jobs. The players benefit from the nashvilles/Pheonix/Atlanta's as well. You don't know if something won't work until you've tried it.

No one said anything about slavery, nice attempt there, but it won't work. The owners own the players in the sense that the players don't have many options, they are going to settle just like they did last time. THe owners have them by the balls.

habsfanatics is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 06:19 AM
  #202
Corky
Registered User
 
Corky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Montreal
Posts: 322
vCash: 500
I have no sympathy for the owners in this battle because they are the ones that have distributed silly contracts that are at the root of the problems we have now.

I have no sympathy for the players because they should work with the owners in making sure the business of hockey is sustainable while still getting a very decent share of league revenues.

Once again, the fans will pay the price.

OT but reading this thread, I get the weird feeling that the people supporting the players are the same ones that were supporting the students in the Quebec school strikes a few months ago. These are usually the people that think money grows on trees.

Corky is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 06:56 AM
  #203
Uwey
Registered User
 
Uwey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Lunenburg, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky View Post
I have no sympathy for the owners in this battle because they are the ones that have distributed silly contracts that are at the root of the problems we have now.

I have no sympathy for the players because they should work with the owners in making sure the business of hockey is sustainable while still getting a very decent share of league revenues.

Once again, the fans will pay the price.

OT but reading this thread, I get the weird feeling that the people supporting the players are the same ones that were supporting the students in the Quebec school strikes a few months ago. These are usually the people that think money grows on trees.

Or it's like the price of gasoline, although for several months now a barrel of crude has been no where near $100 per barrel, gas has only come down slightly from where it was at $120 a barrel & has the past couple of weeks actual begin to rise again at the pumps.


Their justification, just because they can!!!

Uwey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 07:08 AM
  #204
RushDP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsByTheBay View Post
I couldn't care less about whether Canadiens players care for me, I'm not a 17 year old girl looking for emotional validation like you are with ownership. I care about people making their fair share, whether it's in the auto industry, flipping burgers, or playing hockey.

I don't care at all for the owner's sob story. It's been established for well over a century in North America that people will pay to watch the top baseball/football/basketball/hockey players ply their craft. Owners are just a conduit, if the Molsons want to sell there will be groups aplenty to buy them out and get their share of Habs action. They'll get big profits doing so too, and that's fine. We're all capitalists here, but the labor theory of value melds pretty well with the free market in sports, because if the Molsons don't want to pay for players other teams can, will, and do, and make money doing it.

By the way, did tickets go down when the salary cap came in? Uh, no.
You keep saying the dumbest things. When the Molsons tried to sell their "sure fire investment for huge profits" as you describe it they couldn't find anybody in Quebec or Canada to do so. They had to sell to an American for roughly the cost of what the Bell Centre cost to build. They also retained part of the team and helped finance it along with the Caisse de Depot. Exactly where did "the owners" make money there?

You should stop pretending being a capitalist because you sound very much the opposite. In a really fair world that you seem to dream of the players like DiPietro and Gomez should give their money back to the owners. That would be fair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HabsByTheBay View Post
LOL, have you never heard of raising ticket prices?
Lamest comeback of the thread. You are defending millionaire players with guaranteed contracts by increasing already ridiculous ticket prices. Really intelligent proposition. And for those that talk about risk of injury...they're paid anyway even if they lose their career for the remainder of their contract. Stop crying for them, you will never be as well covered as the players are and most of us here risk something when we go to work.

RushDP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 07:23 AM
  #205
Uwey
Registered User
 
Uwey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Lunenburg, NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 551
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
18 of 30 teams in the NHL are losing money.

That is not brainwashing. That is reality.

Why are you so concerned with the players? Are they not making enough money? Is Prust making $2.5 million too little? Are Parise and Suter headed to bankruptcy?

This is not about "basic rights of citizens to compete in a free market economy". No, this is about NHL hockey and you are building strawmen to support your anti-business agenda.

Wrong thread, wrong place, wrong issue.
But the honest truth here is what Bettman has done in the past & what he is doing now is basically protecting the owners from themselves, not the PA.


The last PA would have worked fabulously, if the owners hadn't found loopholes in the CBA, to only screw themselves!!

No player or the PA writes the contract they sign, never did!!! The contract is written by the club & if the owner does not want to do write it, it won't happen.


The PA & the players are just trying to get as much as the owners will agree to during any negotiation. Once the first owner does something stupid, it opens Pandora's box & ole hell breaks loose again!!! No owner is has a gun held to his to sign any player.


Riddle me this, if you work for an employer that pays you $80 000 a yr & an employer down the street offers you $120,000 a yr, are you going to stay with your employer or move to where you can make 50% more??? & once that happens, your employer is going to raise the amount he is paying out in salaries as so not to lose more of his "best" employees.


Now if the revenues haven't rose the past decade, the salary cap wouldn't escalated as much as it has. Isn't it simple math.

Uwey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 09:31 AM
  #206
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky View Post
I have no sympathy for the owners in this battle because they are the ones that have distributed silly contracts that are at the root of the problems we have now.

I have no sympathy for the players because they should work with the owners in making sure the business of hockey is sustainable while still getting a very decent share of league revenues.

Once again, the fans will pay the price.

OT but reading this thread, I get the weird feeling that the people supporting the players are the same ones that were supporting the students in the Quebec school strikes a few months ago. These are usually the people that think money grows on trees.
The strike is ongoing. As in the NHL, the problem is one of wealth distribution.

Roulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 10:24 AM
  #207
HCH
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: The Wild West
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,552
vCash: 500
It is the solidarity of the owners that will be put to the test more than anything else. While the players would forego income during a strike/lockout, the owners will still be incurring expenses from leases to staffing costs to interest payments on loans they have taken out to purchase their franchises.

They will have to balance short term losses against the possibility of a long term gains achieved through a more palatable CBA. On the other hand, players careers tend to be short and foregoing one season would represent a big share of their career earnings.

HCH is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 10:45 AM
  #208
DDs not undersized
Former Partisan duCH
 
DDs not undersized's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Bangkok
Country: Thailand
Posts: 3,375
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky View Post
I have no sympathy for the owners in this battle because they are the ones that have distributed silly contracts that are at the root of the problems we have now.

I have no sympathy for the players because they should work with the owners in making sure the business of hockey is sustainable while still getting a very decent share of league revenues.

Once again, the fans will pay the price.

OT but reading this thread, I get the weird feeling that the people supporting the players are the same ones that were supporting the students in the Quebec school strikes a few months ago. These are usually the people that think money grows on trees.
I'm supporting the students, but not the players here. I fail to see the link between both conflicts.

By the way, we could very well argue that it's those supporting the government in the students strike who believe that money grows on trees, since they think students making $12 000 a year (average) can afford $4000 tuition fees and that a 82% increase is "reasonable".

DDs not undersized is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 12:01 PM
  #209
NHLFutureGuy3
Registered User
 
NHLFutureGuy3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 354
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valois View Post
More important, what's gonna happen if they Strile?

Oh for crying out loud, please change the title to strike. This is annoying the hell out of me!

NHLFutureGuy3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 12:37 PM
  #210
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 13,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haburger View Post
this thread is awesome.soo many on here that think they know how big business in the nhl works.this agreement will get done,not sure when, but it will.fans that complain and complain aint gonna change a thing.cause real fans will keep coming back.
Please define coming back. Years ago,after I moved to New York, I had a season subscription to Ranger games and also bought Canadien tickets on my visits to Montréal but as a retired person I have to drastically limit my attendance at live events. Quite a few fans, working or retired, are squeezed out. Many face this reality once they have families. Owners and players alike contribute to the inflation. Will NHL hockey devolve into a television sport with low arena attendances because players expect baseball salaries and owners cater to corporations and the wealthy?

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 12:45 PM
  #211
Teufelsdreck
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 13,760
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HCH View Post
It is the solidarity of the owners that will be put to the test more than anything else. While the players would forego income during a strike/lockout, the owners will still be incurring expenses from leases to staffing costs to interest payments on loans they have taken out to purchase their franchises.

They will have to balance short term losses against the possibility of a long term gains achieved through a more palatable CBA. On the other hand, players careers tend to be short and foregoing one season would represent a big share of their career earnings.
Some owners can afford to wait. Some take loans. Some are forced to sell or take in partners. Owning a hockey franchise isn't a bottomless cornucopia. The highest paid players are in the best position to wait it out. For example, Scott Gomez (ugh) is set for life on what he has already been paid.

Teufelsdreck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 02:29 PM
  #212
RushDP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Partisan du CH View Post
I'm supporting the students, but not the players here. I fail to see the link between both conflicts.

By the way, we could very well argue that it's those supporting the government in the students strike who believe that money grows on trees, since they think students making $12 000 a year (average) can afford $4000 tuition fees and that a 82% increase is "reasonable".
No actually you can't argue that point since it is more than reasonable especially when you factor in that the increase is spread over 7 years and is not actually 82% at all until then....if at all. Factor in the bursaries and loans that compensate for this increase and it is still ridiculously low for higher education.

However, the conflict between the owners and the players is completely irrelevant to the ongoing stupidity between the government (taxpayers) and students (social tax revenue sponges).

RushDP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 02:33 PM
  #213
RushDP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
The strike is ongoing. As in the NHL, the problem is one of wealth distribution.
Yes, the tax payers pay and the students take. That's a reason to strike if ever I saw one. Wealth is earned through hard work not distributed like rations or toilette paper in the former USSR.

Seriously, give your head a shake.

RushDP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 02:37 PM
  #214
No Style Points
Registered User
 
No Style Points's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Delaware
Country: United States
Posts: 713
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RushDP View Post
Wealth is earned through hard work not distributed like rations or toilette paper in the former USSR.

Seriously, give your head a shake.
Are you old?

No Style Points is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 02:38 PM
  #215
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 5,851
vCash: 500
A lot of people are incorrectly arguing that the fans will be the ones paying the price if there's a lockout.

That is simply not true.

It will be the fans svaing money if there's a lockout, and spending more time on other hobbies.

Owners and current players will be the ones losing money during the lockout.

DAChampion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 02:40 PM
  #216
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 5,851
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RushDP View Post
Wealth is earned through hard work not distributed like rations or toilette paper in the former USSR.
In the real world, wealth is largely "earned" though government bailouts and inheritances.

DAChampion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 04:41 PM
  #217
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RushDP View Post
Yes, the tax payers pay and the students take. That's a reason to strike if ever I saw one. Wealth is earned through hard work not distributed like rations or toilette paper in the former USSR.

Seriously, give your head a shake.
So, do you already live in Alberta, or are you still working on your move?

Roulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 05:19 PM
  #218
RushDP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by OneTimer11 View Post
Are you old?
Old enough to know that is a lame post. If you have nothing to add why post?

Are you 8?

RushDP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 05:30 PM
  #219
RushDP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
So, do you already live in Alberta, or are you still working on your move?
Live in Montreal and I have no plans to move. Why would I? Last I checked the vast majority of the population think as I do...except for some bleeding hearts that categorize anybody with a different opinion as western cowboys. It must be truly amazing to be as enlightened as you are.

Again, if you have something to add to this dialogue please do but refrain from asking stupid questions. It only serves to reinforce my point.

RushDP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 05:47 PM
  #220
RushDP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
In the real world, wealth is largely "earned" though government bailouts and inheritances.
Really? Microsoft, Apple and Facebook were sponsored by governments? Much more locally, Molson needed help to grow into the brewery they became?

Come on...there are posters advocating that players should get wealthy with nothing at risk. If the economy turns even worse than it is and nobody attends the games the owners take the hit but some posters think the revenue is entirely generated by the players and the losses should be borne by the owners.

Here's the truth: the Great One retired and hockey survived. The Magnificent One retired and hockey survived. Hockey consists of the TEAMS and their fans not the players who are here one day and gone the next. Lidstrom retired this summer...the stands will be empty in Detroit next season for sure. That's the logic being presented here.

Players and their quality are important to the growth of the game but if they can't partner themselves in a fair agreement with the owners they will lose. They are the last of the four sports in terms of popularity and have to work together to advance their sport.

The most popular sport in NA is the NFL where the players have nothing guaranteed, can be cut at any time and have TV revenues that eclipse NHL TV rights. How can anybody make the case that NHL players deserve more than NFL players?

RushDP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 05:53 PM
  #221
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,041
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RushDP View Post
Live in Montreal and I have no plans to move. Why would I? Last I checked the vast majority of the population think as I do...except for some bleeding hearts that categorize anybody with a different opinion as western cowboys. It must be truly amazing to be as enlightened as you are.

Again, if you have something to add to this dialogue please do but refrain from asking stupid questions. It only serves to reinforce my point.
Hey, I have no problem with "western cowboys" - Carey Price is great! Just that this province has a proud tradition of affordable education. It's too bad that some people on this forum would rather Montreal and Quebec be more like, well, Alberta.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RushDP View Post
The most popular sport in NA is the NFL where the players have nothing guaranteed, can be cut at any time and have TV revenues that eclipse NHL TV rights. How can anybody make the case that NHL players deserve more than NFL players?
If you look at the history of NFL players' lives post-career... yeah, they could be treated a whole lot better, considering the amount of money owners made off their sacrifices/risk. If you're making a case against player compensation, the NFL probably isn't the best place to look for analogies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RushDP View Post
Come on...there are posters advocating that players should get wealthy with nothing at risk. If the economy turns even worse than it is and nobody attends the games the owners take the hit but some posters think the revenue is entirely generated by the players and the losses should be borne by the owners.
I haven't seen any poster make the argument for repealing the cost certainty the owners have already won. That ship has sailed, a cap tied to revenue is here to stay. I'm not sure you understand what is actually being debated, or the current CBA...


Last edited by Roulin: 07-15-2012 at 06:05 PM.
Roulin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 06:16 PM
  #222
Talks to Goalposts
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RushDP View Post
Yes, the tax payers pay and the students take. That's a reason to strike if ever I saw one. Wealth is earned through hard work not distributed like rations or toilette paper in the former USSR.

Seriously, give your head a shake.
Wealth is earned in our modern free market capitalist system by what you can negotiate from a market price. When the market for players in the NHL was the most free its been in the modern era players got an estimated 78% of the revenues. If there is a free market price for hockey players that was closer to the real it rather than what they receive in a managed system negotiated between a cartel and a union in a monopoly/monosopy relationship. Much of the NHL's labour practices are only legal in North America under special rules for sports teams and only excusable because the players are well compensated.

Sports leagues aren't normal capitalism. Anyone arguing that the owners deserve things based off of how things work in other capitalist markets is making a false equivalence. If the NHL was like the supposed "real world" people are refering too there would be no draft, no restricted free agency and whenever your contract was up you could sign for whatever you could get wherever you could get it.

So the "Real World" argument holds no water in this situation. Sports aren't like the real world and haven't been for a long time. The closest parallel to sports is other entertainment industries and the players earn money like other entertainment figures. In fact, everything players have wanted in recent times is to make compensation in hockey more like the supposed real world of a marketplace rather than the tightly managed system the league favours.

Now a managed system is better for the league in general and gets the players more in the long run due to the increased viability of the league increasing revenue. But that's why the players vs owners should be interpreted as they are rather than pointing to flawed analogies from other business.


Last edited by Talks to Goalposts: 07-15-2012 at 06:33 PM.
Talks to Goalposts is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 06:29 PM
  #223
not quite yoda
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Qatar
Posts: 3,495
vCash: 500
roy-carbonneau-lemieux.jpg

http://http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cy8...au-lemieux.jpg

it's always been all about the money

not quite yoda is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 06:35 PM
  #224
RushDP
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roulin View Post
Hey, I have no problem with "western cowboys" - Carey Price is great! Just that this province has a proud tradition of affordable education. It's too bad that some people on this forum would rather Montreal and Quebec be more like, well, Alberta.



If you look at the history of NFL players' lives post-career... yeah, they could be treated a whole lot better, considering the amount of money owners made off their sacrifices/risk. If you're making a case against player compensation, the NFL probably isn't the best place to look for analogies.



I haven't seen any poster make the argument for repealing the cost certainty the owners have already won. That ship has sailed, a cap tied to revenue is here to stay. I'm not sure you understand what is actually being debated, or the current CBA...
Hey, a proud tradition of affordable education based on tuition fees not having been increased in 30 years does not equate to them never moving in the future. if anything they should be brought into line over the next 7 years and then indexed with inflation as is everything else in the real world. This illusion that because you had it good so long means it is perpetual is ridiculous.

When you use the players in the NFL as an example and the risk/sacrifice you had better realize that they made alot of money and that they would do it all over again if the same conditions were available. So please stop crying about how abused they are when they would willingly do it all over again in a heart beat.

I understand the CBA a lot better than you do seemingly. I know that this is a FIRST offer and not a final offer by the NHL. I know how negotiating works since I do it every day. What you don't understand is that the player, with nothing to risk, does not deserve more than 50% of ticket sales because if they are SO very important they should generate full houses all on their own. Including in Florida. If they are the only reason hockey exists explain why there are not full houses everywhere? Nash is not a star? He can't fill the arena.

The players should get their 50% and sell their own brand which is themselves. That's how they can make money. They excel: they sell more advertising.

Schumacher was paid 20M by Ferrari and netted over 100M for the season via sponsorships. This is how it should be. Crosby should sign with Reebok and Di Pietro should sign with...nobody. Performance based revenue is what players should have while the owners continue to promote a brand and grow their business.

RushDP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
07-15-2012, 06:40 PM
  #225
Cyclones Rock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,240
vCash: 500
Donald Fehr will eat the NHL for lunch.

The guy never loses. This contract won't be the first time either.

I see an approximate 55% players share and no meaningful changes in free agency, contract length or anything else.

Hopefully the owners aren't silly enough to think that they'll get anything better. They won't. The players have won every negotiation and they'll win again. The owners may as well cave early on, because in the end they always cave. Lockouts have accomplished nothing in the past and another will be more of the same.

Cyclones Rock 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 07:20 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.