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

Who's side are you on if you were forced to pick sides? The owners? ... or the NHLPA?

View Poll Results: Who's side are you on if you were forced to pick sides? The owners? ... or the NHLPA?
The owners 144 48.65%
The NHLPA 152 51.35%
Voters: 296. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-16-2012, 04:30 PM
  #501
habitue*
 
habitue*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,142
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
Should be interesting. Kinda annoyed Fehr said its a "start".
Don't worry. Typîcal negotiation jargon. Fehr doesn't want to loose the face, too. Players will decide.

habitue* is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:09 PM
  #502
Taupy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,878
vCash: 500
It's easy for me to stay on the owners side when I see a retweet from Pacioretty saying: ''So basically the NHL just shifted from making bad offers that were easy to reject to a bad offer that's going to be really hard to reject.''

It piss me off reading that after having had some hope for like 2 hours.

Taupy is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:10 PM
  #503
Marc the Habs Fan
Moderator
Cakes!
 
Marc the Habs Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Longueuil
Country: Canada
Posts: 55,611
vCash: 567
LeBrun on RDS just said that in year 1 of this offer, teams can go up to 70 M in cap hits even if the ''cap'' is set at lower.

So there's our answer.

Marc the Habs Fan is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:16 PM
  #504
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Taupy View Post
It's easy for me to stay on the owners side when I see a retweet from Pacioretty saying: ''So basically the NHL just shifted from making bad offers that were easy to reject to a bad offer that's going to be really hard to reject.''

It piss me off reading that after having had some hope for like 2 hours.
Pacioretty almost died on the ice. He's been practicing his whole life to be a hockey player.

It's understandable that he wants to be well-paid and he has no responsibility to accept bad deals.

DAChampion is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:31 PM
  #505
Taupy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,878
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Pacioretty almost died on the ice. He's been practicing his whole life to be a hockey player.

It's understandable that he wants to be well-paid and he has no responsibility to accept bad deals.
It's not like he's playing for peanuts... and he just re-signed long term with one of the team with the worst taxes in the league. Wouldn't he have been better off with another team?

But I get your point.

Taupy is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:42 PM
  #506
Protest the Hero
Registered User
 
Protest the Hero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,383
vCash: 500
****ing players, they better accept this (with concessions on some things of course) or it'll make my decision much easier.

Protest the Hero is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 05:57 PM
  #507
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Pacioretty almost died on the ice. He's been practicing his whole life to be a hockey player.

It's understandable that he wants to be well-paid and he has no responsibility to accept bad deals.
Pacioretty IS well paid, and this is a good deal. As a matter of fact, he would be very well paid even if the players took the 43% share. He should have a responsibility to accept a fair deal like what is being offered.

Drydenwasthebest is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 06:01 PM
  #508
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
A low revenue share with no rollbacks means that future UFAs will be severely underpaid.

I would definitely reject that as a player. Any cut in the players share *must* come with rollbacks.
Recent history suggests that free agents will never be underpaid. 2.5 million for Prust. The players will always get paid, especially the elite ones (Parise and Suter). I also love how half of the revenues is suddenly a "low" share. Imagine what 43% of the revenue shares must feel like.

Drydenwasthebest is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 06:35 PM
  #509
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Recent history suggests that free agents will never be underpaid. 2.5 million for Prust. The players will always get paid, especially the elite ones (Parise and Suter). I also love how half of the revenues is suddenly a "low" share. Imagine what 43% of the revenue shares must feel like.
Yes, we're all aware of your position that wealth should be transferred from overpaid millionaire players to ... billionaire owners, on the basis that you feel that players are overpaid.

DAChampion is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 07:00 PM
  #510
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,542
vCash: 500
I think part of the reason a lot of people support the owners is that we, the fans, know how much the players make, but we typically don't know how much the owners make. As such, less educated individuals may conclude that the players are overpaid, because they actually see the numbers in the case of the players.

The same people who say "Prust makes 2.5 million, he should stop whining", will never write "Geoff Molson makes ~55 million a year*, he should stop whining", because the number is not as public. Their envy is only directed at the riches they know about.

*Forbes lists the operating income of the Canadiens at 48 million dollars as of November 2011, as the cap went up at the end of last year, and there are definitely hidden income sources, we can be sure the true total is much higher.
http://www.forbes.com/teams/montreal-canadiens/

DAChampion is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 07:15 PM
  #511
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,542
vCash: 500
What if Bain Capital had bought the NHL?

http://deadspin.com/5939623/where-wo...=recirculation

DAChampion is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 07:16 PM
  #512
impudent_lowlife
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Country: Japan
Posts: 803
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I think part of the reason a lot of people support the owners is that we, the fans, know how much the players make, but we typically don't know how much the owners make. As such, less educated individuals may conclude that the players are overpaid, because they actually see the numbers in the case of the players.

The same people who say "Prust makes 2.5 million, he should stop whining", will never write "Geoff Molson makes ~55 million a year*, he should stop whining", because the number is not as public. Their envy is only directed at the riches they know about.

*Forbes lists the operating income of the Canadiens at 48 million dollars as of November 2011, as the cap went up at the end of last year, and there are definitely hidden income sources, we can be sure the true total is much higher.
http://www.forbes.com/teams/montreal-canadiens/
As of 2011, the NHL had 10 billionaire owners: Among them: Jacobs (net worth: $1.9 billion); Phil Anschutz ($7 billion); Stanley Kroenke ($3.2 billion); Mike Ilitch ($2 billion); Ed Snider ($2.5 billion) and Philip Falcone ($2.2 billion).

impudent_lowlife is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 07:21 PM
  #513
Raider917
Registered User
 
Raider917's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,612
vCash: 500
i am not sure if this article is accurate but if what he says is true. i am for the owners.

http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...out-faq-part-i


Other than splitting the pie, what issues are the players and owners fighting over?

There are a host of other issues on the table, all of which are secondary, at best, to the share of revenue that will flow from owners to players. Here’s a quick list:

The owners want:

Five-year maximum on player contracts
Ten seasons in the NHL before a player can become an unrestricted free agent (currently they need seven seasons or to be 27 years old)
Elimination of salary arbitration
Five-year term for rookie contracts
The players want:

No changes to required lengths or limits on contracts
A limit on “non-player spending” by the teams, which would in essence serve as a salary cap for coaches, general managers, and other front office executives
Increased revenue sharing among the teams



this seems wrong to me. i can see them asking for a mininum salary but to care what others who work for the organization make is greedy.

Raider917 is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 07:28 PM
  #514
Viggo Mortensen
Registered User
 
Viggo Mortensen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Gondor
Country: Seychelles
Posts: 936
vCash: 500
I've always been on the owners' side, why?

Yes they are worth far more than the players, but in the end, if there is no owners, these players won't be able to get paid because there is no other equivalent hockey league in the world in terms of salaries and conditions.

Thats why I was laughing at some arguments by players on twitter saying to the fans: ''if your boss told you that he wants to cut your salary by x%, would you accept it?''

In this case, the common people like you and me have more than 1 option (well for the majority of us), so you can tell your boss ''go **** yourself, i'll find another job where they treat me salary-wise for what Im worth''. But in the players' case....well they can't.

Viggo Mortensen is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 07:58 PM
  #515
SouthernHab
Not a Fanboy
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by impudent_lowlife View Post
As of 2011, the NHL had 10 billionaire owners: Among them: Jacobs (net worth: $1.9 billion); Phil Anschutz ($7 billion); Stanley Kroenke ($3.2 billion); Mike Ilitch ($2 billion); Ed Snider ($2.5 billion) and Philip Falcone ($2.2 billion).
Do a Google search and read how Mike Ilitch became a billionaire. Next, search and read how Philip Falcone went to college with the help of financial aid.

The hatred for people who made smart business decisions despite growing up as normal people is really lame and smacks of pure jealousy.

SouthernHab is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 08:00 PM
  #516
SouthernHab
Not a Fanboy
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
I think part of the reason a lot of people support the owners is that we, the fans, know how much the players make, but we typically don't know how much the owners make. As such, less educated individuals may conclude that the players are overpaid, because they actually see the numbers in the case of the players.

Wrong again.

Only narrow minded people are envious of the success of the players and the owners or anyone else who have become "wealthy".

SouthernHab is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 08:05 PM
  #517
Ryan O'Byrne
Registered User
 
Ryan O'Byrne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 908
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Which means there can't be a drop in the cap, and thus the shift from 57% has to be gradual rather than instantaneous.
well the way they would do the 50/50 now is by holding the players money in the escrow account and as the cap rises it would then be released back to the players . So really its like the players having a savings account they cant touch until all the conditions are met ,and that seems not that bad to me.
it would mean free agents get less in the next few years ,but its not like their also losing money from a roll back . So the Owners are honoring their contracts this way

Ryan O'Byrne is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 08:19 PM
  #518
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by impudent_lowlife View Post
As of 2011, the NHL had 10 billionaire owners: Among them: Jacobs (net worth: $1.9 billion); Phil Anschutz ($7 billion); Stanley Kroenke ($3.2 billion); Mike Ilitch ($2 billion); Ed Snider ($2.5 billion) and Philip Falcone ($2.2 billion).
Billionaires are very good at hiding their wealth, you should consider the list of world's richest people to be an lower bound at all times, as many sources of wealth have been excluded / not included as has been demonstrated in various places.

DAChampion is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 08:23 PM
  #519
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SouthernHab View Post
Wrong again.

Only narrow minded people are envious of the success of the players and the owners or anyone else who have become "wealthy".
There are a huge number of posts in this thread whining that players are overpaid.

You yourself were arguing on pages 4-7 (post #108) that you want money to be transferred from player salaries to owner profits, you thought that this wealth transfer would reduce ticket prices, until several people refuted your post.

DAChampion is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 08:31 PM
  #520
Habsterix*
@Habsterix
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,475
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edmontreal View Post
The funny thing is that Bettman is usually among the most despised men in hockey during the season, but is currently drawing new fans by locking out the players...
Uh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozymandias View Post
From a fan's standpoint, Bettman is a ****, totally agree with you. But on the financial side, no matter if some teams are taking down profits, this league has tripled its revenues in the 20 years Bettman has been there, taking it from 990 million, to the present 3,3 billion.

The owners like him, for a good reason, and most fans dislike him for some good reasons.
That's like saying that the Devils won the Stanley Cup because they had Chris Terreri on the team.


Habsterix* is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 08:43 PM
  #521
SouthernHab
Not a Fanboy
 
SouthernHab's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 11,199
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
There are a huge number of posts in this thread whining that players are overpaid.

You yourself were arguing on pages 4-7 (post #108) that you want money to be transferred from player salaries to owner profits, you thought that this wealth transfer would reduce ticket prices, until several people refuted your post.


As much as you want to raise the same strawman up again, it is still not what that post was about.

SouthernHab is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 08:44 PM
  #522
Habs
Registered User
 
Habs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,464
vCash: 500
Gainey

Habs is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 08:58 PM
  #523
Drydenwasthebest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion View Post
Yes, we're all aware of your position that wealth should be transferred from overpaid millionaire players to ... billionaire owners, on the basis that you feel that players are overpaid.
Actually, it is on the basis of having a fair partnership and a healthy NHL. It is always nice to have you try and demean my position by pointing out how the poor players need more than the wealthy owners, but that is simply a ploy on your part to generate sympathy for your position. I simply feel that the people who take all of the financial risk involved in running an NHL team should get at least half of the revenue because they pay ALL OF THE COSTS! Every single cost. An educated academic should have understood my position better by now. Neither the players nor the owners are "poor", but that should not preclude an equal distribution of the revenues. I hope you can understand my position more clearly. I am still waiting for some links or other evidence to support your 98-99% argument about your poor players' risks and failure rates.

Drydenwasthebest is offline  
Old
10-16-2012, 09:07 PM
  #524
DAChampion
Registered User
 
DAChampion's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Canberra, Australia
Country: Australia
Posts: 7,542
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Actually, it is on the basis of having a fair partnership and a healthy NHL. It is always nice to have you try and demean my position by pointing out how the poor players need more than the wealthy owners, but that is simply a ploy on your part to generate sympathy for your position. I simply feel that the people who take all of the financial risk involved in running an NHL team should get at least half of the revenue because they pay ALL OF THE COSTS! Every single cost. An educated academic should have understood my position better by now. Neither the players nor the owners are "poor", but that should not preclude an equal distribution of the revenues. I hope you can understand my position more clearly. I am still waiting for some links or other evidence to support your 98-99% argument about your poor players' risks and failure rates.
As has been explained to you,

The owners do not "pay all the costs", the fans do. Total player salaries are approximately 3 billion dollars, do you actually think this comes from the owners? No, it doesn't come from the owners. The owners are not pouring money into the system, they are taking money out of the system, Molson for example takes in a profit of over 50 million per year.

Your dream, that wealth should be transferred from players to owners, would be legitimate in my view if the NHL were either or both of well-run and unprofitable, for example in 2005 when the NHL was a money-losing operation and a lockout was legitimate. However, the reality is that it is poorly run and extremely profitable. Quit feeling sorry for the owners, they don't need your pity.

By the way, 50% for 29 owners and 50% for 600 players is not "equal". I really hope you don't teach mathematics.

DAChampion is online now  
Old
10-16-2012, 09:13 PM
  #525
Roulin
Registered User
 
Roulin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 4,242
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drydenwasthebest View Post
Pacioretty IS well paid, and this is a good deal. As a matter of fact, he would be very well paid even if the players took the 43% share. He should have a responsibility to accept a fair deal like what is being offered.
As far as I know, we're still missing major details. How do the owners propose to get to that 50% mark? Will players currently under contract have to give back money? Until that is answered, I don't think we can call the proposal "a fair deal" in the context of these negotiations.

edit: ...and now I'm reading that the proposal has a different definition of HRR. I really do hope it's a workable deal (I have thought for a long time that the NBA CBA is going to be the end result of all of this, so the quicker we get to point the better), but we don't have that information yet.


Last edited by Roulin: 10-16-2012 at 09:33 PM.
Roulin 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 04:00 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.