HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New York Rangers
Notices

2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part IV (UPDATE: "The Union took a step backward")

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-18-2012, 04:13 PM
  #776
CM PUNK
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 3,270
vCash: 500
Chris Johnston ‏@reporterchris
Donald Fehr says union was told NHL only willing to tweak Tuesday's offer around the edges.

Expand Collapse Reply RetweetedRetweet
Delete
FavoritedFavorite

shocker

CM PUNK is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:15 PM
  #777
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,436
vCash: 500
We'll see what happens tomorrow when big chunk of games go bye-bye

Riche16 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:17 PM
  #778
Clowes Line
Cally's Chicken Parm
 
Clowes Line's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: New Yawk
Country: United States
Posts: 12,544
vCash: 500
**** the PA. It sounds weird, but I'm on Bettman's side now.

Clowes Line is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:18 PM
  #779
nevesis
#30
 
nevesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 8,423
vCash: 500
“@walsha: The most important thing everyone needs to know: Fehr to Bettman: "We'll go to 50/50 tomorrow if you honor contracts already signed."”

nevesis is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:18 PM
  #780
Lundsanity30
Registered User
 
Lundsanity30's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 10,087
vCash: 500
so the owners want 50/50 but are unwilling to honor the contracts they've already signed players too?

Lundsanity30 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:19 PM
  #781
silverfish
Mr. Glass
 
silverfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Standing on a Train
Country: United States
Posts: 14,440
vCash: 500
That makes no sense to me. How can you say, "Oh, we'll only take 50% of the HRR. But we want what we're owed which by definition is more than 50%"

Somebody needs to explain this one to me.

silverfish is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:20 PM
  #782
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,436
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevesis View Post
@walsha: The most important thing everyone needs to know: Fehr to Bettman: "We'll go to 50/50 tomorrow if you honor contracts already signed."
That wouldn't be 50/50 then. That would be 54/46 (minimum) for yr 1.

I think there's room to get close, and I agree that owners signed guys right up to the expiration and that's not fair.

This could go on for a while.

Riche16 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:21 PM
  #783
BlueShirts88
Section 208 Row 15
 
BlueShirts88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BlueShirts88
Quote:
Originally Posted by nevesis View Post
@walsha: The most important thing everyone needs to know: Fehr to Bettman: "We'll go to 50/50 tomorrow if you honor contracts already signed."
I thought the 50/50 NHL proposal did honor contracts already signed? Now I'm even more confused.

__________________
"Matteau! Matteau! Matteau!"~H. Rose
BlueShirts88 is online now  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:23 PM
  #784
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers88 View Post
I thought the 50/50 NHL proposal did honor contracts already signed? Now I'm even more confused.
It chops off a large percentage of the existing contracts via escrow , which the players view the same as a rollback. That's what they're pissed about.

Levitate is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:23 PM
  #785
nevesis
#30
 
nevesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 8,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers88 View Post
I thought the 50/50 NHL proposal did honor contracts already signed? Now I'm even more confused.
Me too man...

nevesis is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:23 PM
  #786
ltrangerfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 930
vCash: 500
My initial thought.

Bettman is Bettman so what else is new?

Without blaming either party ... are the owners so profitable and so afraid of Donald that they would hand the PA an easy 'victory"?

Was the high profile Donald Fehr brought in to reach an agreement in October?

ltrangerfan is online now  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:24 PM
  #787
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,828
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Levitate View Post
It chops off a large percentage of the existing contracts via escrow , which the players view the same as a rollback. That's what they're pissed about.
Future players get screwed in this deal.

Tom Gulitti ‏@TGfireandice
I have no problem with idea of guaranteeing contracts as signed under old CBA, but doing it without escrow is tricky.

Tom Gulitti ‏@TGfireandice
Going forwards, you'd have players with new contracts paying larger escrow amounts to guarantee the split that's been agreed to.

Tom Gulitti ‏@TGfireandice
So, if you didn't sign your contract under the old deal, you're footing the escrow bill for the rest of membership.

__________________
http://hfboards.com/image.php?u=53946&type=sigpic&dateline=1320361610
NYRFAN218 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:30 PM
  #788
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRFAN218 View Post
Future players get screwed in this deal.

Tom Gulitti ‏@TGfireandice
I have no problem with idea of guaranteeing contracts as signed under old CBA, but doing it without escrow is tricky.

Tom Gulitti ‏@TGfireandice
Going forwards, you'd have players with new contracts paying larger escrow amounts to guarantee the split that's been agreed to.

Tom Gulitti ‏@TGfireandice
So, if you didn't sign your contract under the old deal, you're footing the escrow bill for the rest of membership.
Yup but they get screwed under the other deal too

Levitate is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:33 PM
  #789
HatTrick Swayze
Tomato Potato
 
HatTrick Swayze's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 9,250
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverfish View Post
That makes no sense to me. How can you say, "Oh, we'll only take 50% of the HRR. But we want what we're owed which by definition is more than 50%"

Somebody needs to explain this one to me.
You're right. The current contracts on the books being honored this year in full would not be a 50/50 split (unless revenue grew a ridiculous amount). The NHL proposed remedying this with their "delayed payback plan" or whatever it's called which rightly was called out for having flaws.

I understand how the players might view this as "unfair" but they are not owed the exact dollars of their contracts a day past when the old CBA expired. That's life in a CBA world. Just because they ended last year at 57% it doesn't entitle them to receive the same amount this year.

__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
HatTrick Swayze is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:38 PM
  #790
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,594
vCash: 500
Honor the existing contracts. The NHL teams such as Minnesota gave out two huge contracts knowing the NHL's strategy of not intending to honor them. Boston signed most of their players to extensions before the previous CBA expired thinking they wouldn't pay the full value of the contract. Which two owners were in the room with Bettman and Daly? Craig Leopold from the Wild and Jeremy Jacobs from Boston.

How does the NFL cap system have no escrow while the NHL and NBA have escrow?

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:39 PM
  #791
silverfish
Mr. Glass
 
silverfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Standing on a Train
Country: United States
Posts: 14,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HatTrick Swayze View Post
You're right. The current contracts on the books being honored this year in full would not be a 50/50 split (unless revenue grew a ridiculous amount). The NHL proposed remedying this with their "delayed payback plan" or whatever it's called which rightly was called out for having flaws.

I understand how the players might view this as "unfair" but they are not owed the exact dollars of their contracts a day past when the old CBA expired. That's life in a CBA world. Just because they ended last year at 57% it doesn't entitle them to receive the same amount this year.
Right there is the nutshell of all the problems in the negotiations. They earned the 57% under the last CBA which is expired, gone, non-existent.

Yes, NHLPA advocates, the owner's made their bed with that one, the players got screwed over and here it is broken again, blah blah blah. We get it NHLPA, you guys got screwed. But that CBA was broken, so now take the time to fix it. One of the major reasons it was broken is because you guys were entitled to 57% The owner's should have seen that potential growth coming on and hurting the league under that CBA if it did, but they didn't, and that's unfair.

The league cannot operate with 30 teams at a players share of 57% of HRR. You want 57% ? Then cut the league to 26 teams.

silverfish is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:42 PM
  #792
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kreiders Underwear View Post
**** the PA. It sounds weird, but I'm on Bettman's side now.
Why is asking to have a signed contract honered considered so bad?

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:45 PM
  #793
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,436
vCash: 500
The unfortunate truth.

And then watch 80+ jobs dissapear.

Which is it going to be? Take less $ for yourself but all your friends and co-workers get to keep their jobs, or have 80 or so of them lose their jobs and keep all your cash.

Sucks, but it is what it is.

Riche16 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:46 PM
  #794
BlueShirts88
Section 208 Row 15
 
BlueShirts88's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Long Island, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 10,333
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to BlueShirts88
I'm starting to think Bettman offered that 50/50 deal knowing the players would reject it, with the sole intention of winning the interest of the fans with the illusion he is "making an effort".

BlueShirts88 is online now  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:50 PM
  #795
True Blue
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 15,006
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riche16 View Post
That wouldn't be 50/50 then. That would be 54/46 (minimum) for yr 1.

I think there's room to get close, and I agree that owners signed guys right up to the expiration and that's not fair.
It would go to 50/50 as soon as as the contracts that were signed get expired. But I view a 50/50 revenue split as a literal split of revenue.

True Blue is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:50 PM
  #796
Jim Morrison
Registered User
 
Jim Morrison's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Country: Sweden
Posts: 3,335
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRangers88 View Post
I'm starting to think Bettman offered that 50/50 deal knowing the players would reject it, with the sole intention of winning the interest of the fans with the illusion he is "making an effort".
Oh come on... Anything to hate on Bettman, right? Even though he seems like the most reasonable one right now.

Jim Morrison is online now  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:52 PM
  #797
silverfish
Mr. Glass
 
silverfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Standing on a Train
Country: United States
Posts: 14,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by True Blue View Post
It would go to 50/50 as soon as as the contracts that were signed get expired. But I view a 50/50 revenue split as a literal split of revenue.
Well, it's a 5 year term CBA, and there are players signed for quite a bit longer than 5 years, so this still doesn't make sense to me

Not calling you out or anything, just generally confused.

silverfish is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:54 PM
  #798
Riche16
Pessimistic-Realist
 
Riche16's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: FL
Country: United States
Posts: 3,436
vCash: 500
Everyone realizes the next step is games get cancelled.

Once that starts again, the owners will want more than 50/50 to make up for lost revenue.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens when the players sign for less than 50/50and lose a yr. of salary.

Riche16 is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:55 PM
  #799
Levitate
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 20,439
vCash: 500
Most current contracts expire in the next two years. New contracts signed would have to fit under the 50-50 split. Thus is basically the step down approach

Levitate is offline  
Old
10-18-2012, 04:55 PM
  #800
silverfish
Mr. Glass
 
silverfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Standing on a Train
Country: United States
Posts: 14,440
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riche16 View Post
Everyone realizes the next step is games get cancelled.

Once that starts again, the owners will want more than 50/50 to make up for lost revenue.

It's going to be interesting to see what happens when the players sign for less than 50/50and lose a yr. of salary.
What about the reports that the players would start offering CBAs that don't include a salary cap?

Yikes...

silverfish 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 07:41 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.