I just frankly don't think you understand how the real world works.
Please elaborate instead of insulting me. I think you are taking labor disputes elsewhere and applying them to the NHL. If that's the case I would agree with many of your points as they might apply to labor disputes outside of this negotiation. The comparisons to other labor disputes in sports (or elsewhere) and this one are very hard ones to make.
Internal and external support for the PA is already established. I don't understand how his very poorly phrased (wrong by many) and frustrated comments serve any good other than some immediate gratification for himself. He's frustrated or he buys into a forced message, either one is understandable, but it doesn't make his comments any less foolish or ridiculous.
Just to be clear, I have no love for either party and I blame both equally.
He's just doing what his reps are telling to do. I'm guessing, but he probably would rather stay out of it. It's just that he has an obligation to his union. I do really think the lesser players want guys like him to speak up. The players seem united and ready to fight this to the end.
On your last point, of course the players aren't striking. They've voted repeatedly for the escalators (driving costs/pay up) and extended the CBA when the owners said they weren't going to keep it. I can't blame one side more than the other, both made this mess over the course of more than 4 decades of mistakes.
As to the previous points, I'm not disagreeing with what he should do as a leader, I'm strongly disagreeing with HOW he went about doing it. Keep it behind closed doors because there is nothing to gain on the owners with a public statement, and there probably never was. The fight is in a board room, not in public for labor dispute. PR might have mattered a bit in 94', they learned that it didn't matter then. This fight doesn't project to other labor disputes.
I don't see how PR impacts any part of this negotiation since the owners already entrenched (probably 2 or more years ago) on the assumption that they wouldn't engage in a PR battle against the players. It's a very tough argument to project this dispute to a different sport and it's nothing close to NFL dispute with the refs, this is unique. The fans don't need "awareness", they're used to this already unlike most labor disputes in other sports.
What tangible benefit does Toews gain for the PA by making an argumentive and erroneous (or at best a terribly worded) rant against owners? Even if there is a gain, it's far less of a gain compared to the loss it could cause. This isn't 94' and all the fans already picked sides, or no side, in this one. The players can keep this in-house. Most of the media has favored the players side anyway, and Bettman hasn't been bashing the players.
I compare these frustrated rants to players complaining about the refs or ice in the 2nd period in the middle of a shift. What good does it do given the circumstances? Plenty of time to do that the previous 2 years or after the negotiation is complete, and you don't risk screwing stuff up for your side or yourself.
The owners have been ready and waiting for this for a long time and the PA sat on their hands for years. They should appreciate the calculated position of the owners and Fehr should do a better job advising his side to think before they speak in public since all it can do at this point is undermine their position and possibly create infighting.
My last point about Toews and why he shouldn't mouth off inflammatory comments is that he's in a unique circumstance himself.
He's young and on a big contract and that's an enviable position for the majority of the PA too. The players are not all in the same boat. More and more players will be thinking a little harder about that the next couple weeks. He has far less to lose than most of his union, and he can land a nice contract elsewhere where most don't have that as an option. I'm not so sure it's leadership rather than a personal rant. If the veteran non-star players are happy Toews is running his mouth a bit, then I really fear the players buy in to all this stuff too much and that we won't see hockey for a couple more months.
This is horrible. It's all over the map and screams ignorance. What do you know about the the negotiations or the other players thoughts in the locker room? Nothing compared to Toews. OR maybe you should disclose your bona fides here if I'm wrong
It takes two sides to negotiate and get a deal done. So far, players are the only side willing to give up significant ground to get a deal done. Cant say the same for the owners.
It takes two sides to negotiate and get a deal done. So far, players are the only side willing to give up significant ground to get a deal done. Cant say the same for the owners.
Hmmm … they are? Not according to Daly. He recently stated that they haven’t moved since their stance on August 15th.
Here’s my take:
I believe Fehr is gambling that the owners will blink in November when the U.S. National TV contract is due to kick in. Failing that, the threat of the cancelation of the highly publicised Winter Classic could be critical and that game will be something the owners would like to preserve. As well, in the NHL’s mind, that game being played on schedule would significantly contribute to restoring the loyalty of the bitter fan base.
Unfortunately Fehr’s assessment is likely wrong in this high stakes poker game. Like Goodenow before him, he underestimates the resolve of the owners who are bound to stick with the tried and true methods of 2004. The owners may give a little to preserve either of those dates but it won’t be anywhere near where the players want to be. At that point the onus will be on Fehr and the players to relent or lose the season, imo.
Hmmm … they are? Not according to Daly. He recently stated that they haven’t moved since their stance on August 15th.
Here’s my take:
I believe Fehr is gambling that the owners will blink in November when the U.S. National TV contract is due to kick in. Failing that, the threat of the cancelation of the highly publicised Winter Classic could be critical and that game will be something the owners would like to preserve. As well, in the NHL’s mind, that game being played on schedule would significantly contribute to restoring the loyalty of the bitter fan base.
Unfortunately Fehr’s assessment is likely wrong in this high stakes poker game. Like Goodenow before him, he underestimates the resolve of the owners who are bound to stick with the tried and true methods of 2004. The owners may give a little to preserve either of those dates but it won’t be anywhere near where the players want to be. At that point the onus will be on Fehr and the players to relent or lose the season, imo.
Its very easy for the owners to make multiple counterproposals because they started with a very insulting first offer. On the other hand, the only item the players have been very rigid on is no salary cuts in the existing contracts handed out. IMO that is a very reasonable stand to take.
Here is my take:
NHL wants to have a NFL like league wide parity without NFL like revenue sharing or the tv deal.
Given the state NHL is in, meaningful revenue sharing between the haves(Toronto, Montreal, Boston, Rangers, Philly, Detroit, Chicago, Vancouver) and the have-nots(Columbus, Phoenix, Florida, Tampa Bay, Anaheim etc) is the most viable long term solution. Anything else like taking a chunk out of players salaries to help out the struggling franchises (like the NHL intends to this time around again) is going to be a temporary bandaid and we are going to be in the same situation by the time next CBA rolls around.
It should not be about who has the stronger hand in these negotiations, but about doing whats viable and right for the sport in the long run.
Agreed, that's why the rich teams need to be allowed to spend as much as they want but pay a luxury tax to do so. Baseball's system.
That really isn't agreeing at all
Not gonna happen, though, ever. Owners lost a whole season for a hard cap. Even if they know it's the wrong way to run the league, their egos will never allow the league to go back to a point where there isn't one.
Well, he talked about meaningful revenue sharing. What else can that mean, just have the top teams write a check to the broke teams as a handout? There has to be some incentive and that comes from allowing them to play outside the rules of the cap and go for championships.
Well, he talked about meaningful revenue sharing. What else can that mean, just have the top teams write a check to the broke teams as a handout? There has to be some incentive and that comes from allowing them to play outside the rules of the cap and go for championships.
Why does there have to be?
It's a business. Their incentive is that they own the teams in money making markets and get to profit up the ass.
It's a business. Their incentive is that they own the teams in money making markets and get to profit up the ass.
I'd have to see the numbers to know that those rich teams are so rich that everything else can be the same, they can write checks to the broke teams and still have insane profits.
Hawks as an example. Let's say they make 50M profit a year. Fine, they can contribute 10% of that (5M) to bail out the broke teams.
However, if they only make, say 5M a year, I think it would be unfair for them to send anything "meaningful" to the broke teams. But in this scenario, if they are allowed to spend over the cap, contributing all of their profits plus a large sum of their own money, more will be available to share. I think the MLB is a progressive tax depending how far you go, but let's just pick a number, 25%. Let's say the threshold is what the cap limit was, 64M. You spend to 79M. That's a 3.75M contribution.
I'd have to see the numbers to know that those rich teams are so rich that everything else can be the same, they can write checks to the broke teams and still have insane profits.
Hawks as an example. Let's say they make 50M profit a year. Fine, they can contribute 10% of that (5M) to bail out the broke teams.
However, if they only make, say 5M a year, I think it would be unfair for them to send anything "meaningful" to the broke teams. But in this scenario, if they are allowed to spend over the cap, contributing all of their profits plus a large sum of their own money, more will be available to share. I think the MLB is a progressive tax depending how far you go, but let's just pick a number, 25%. Let's say the threshold is what the cap limit was, 64M. You spend to 79M. That's a 3.75M contribution.
And there lies the big issue, we'll never know how much teams make because the way HRR is calculated is a ****in joke.
Yeah, you're absolutely right. Any suggestions we have are purely theoretical. I can't imagine how difficult these negotiations are for the players because even they probably don't know the truth about how much money the owners are making and where it is coming from.
This is horrible. It's all over the map and screams ignorance.
I'll concede and apologize that it read poorly. I was trying to address numerous points instead of quoting each one. I'll take an extra second and I'll try keep my points focused a little better in the future.
What exactly screams ignorance anyway?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarmerSavardSecord
What do you know about the the negotiations or the other players thoughts in the locker room? Nothing compared to Toews.
My opinions on other players' thoughts are based on numerous statements, quotes, books, and 1st and 2nd hand conversations from players and people working within the NHL over the last few decades. We've seen many of the same things from the players in 94' we did in 2004' and will see many of those things again this time around, especially in retirement and the offseasons. I don't think I know the players or the locker room better than Toews, but I don't think Toews spent much time thinking about the lockerroom when he made his frustrated statements.
I wouldn't trust Toews' understanding of the negotiations any better than most fans who have followed the game closely the last few decades based on what he's said to this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LarmerSavardSecord
I hate SHUT-UP-AND-PLAY people.
My issues with Toews remarks have nothing to do with where I stand in the negotiations. Plenty of players have been able to support their union while addressing the media without sounding foolish. Toews hasn't been one of them. I just hope JR isn't giving him pointers.
I don't support any player, franchise employee, or owner saying anything stupid about the negotiations. Fehr and Bettman are the only two that need to be doing that.
I've lost all motivation to post in the Hawks thread. Its really a shame because there's so much to discuss but i dont see the point in investing my time talking about this stuff if there's a HIGH chance there wont be a season.
I dont care about which side is right, which side is being overly difficult..anything like that. I just want to watch NHL hockey. For the life of me, i can't understand why the Owners and NHLPA can't start these discussions 8 months ago. Why do they have to wait until freaking June to hammer this stuff out?
So frustrating. If the NFL and NBA can have their Owners and PA's come to an agreement, with all the ego thats involved every game in those two sports, how the **** can the NHL not have this done already? Every day they drag this on i hate both sides more and more.
The NBA just last year was out until what...Christmas or the New Year? Give it time...when the players start missing paycheck after paycheck, somethings will change. I would be shocked if they aren't back playing by January at the latest.
The NBA just last year was out until what...Christmas or the New Year? Give it time...when the players start missing paycheck after paycheck, somethings will change. I would be shocked if they aren't back playing by January at the latest.
Normally I'd agree, but this is the NHL we're talking about.
They are actually going to discuss HRR on Tuesday from what I've read. I really think if they hammer out a definition of HRR the rest of this negotiation will fly by (within a couple weeks). I hope so at least. I'm not expecting a definition of HRR before the weekend.
I've lost all motivation to post in the Hawks thread. Its really a shame because there's so much to discuss but i dont see the point in investing my time talking about this stuff if there's a HIGH chance there wont be a season.
I dont care about which side is right, which side is being overly difficult..anything like that. I just want to watch NHL hockey. For the life of me, i can't understand why the Owners and NHLPA can't start these discussions 8 months ago. Why do they have to wait until freaking June to hammer this stuff out?
So frustrating. If the NFL and NBA can have their Owners and PA's come to an agreement, with all the ego thats involved every game in those two sports, how the **** can the NHL not have this done already? Every day they drag this on i hate both sides more and more.
Bettman said going into the summer that they were willing to start talking a year ago, but the NHLPA wasn't. Some crap about wanting/needing the players to be informed and unified, yadda yadda, and they couldn't do that during the season. But, of course, they can remain informed and unified while playing overseas, collecting a paycheck. Bettman and the owners are really getting all the heat, but the NHLPA deserves a large portion of the blame.
