HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Fehr and Loathing in Lost Wages (CBA & Lockout Discussion) - Part XV

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-24-2012, 04:20 PM
  #51
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Geographical Oddity
Country: United States
Posts: 11,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Most NHL players can make a living wage elsewhere and have some money in the bank.
Maybe they recover the lost wages with a good deal, Maybe not.
Maybe not?!!!

Bring in Mike Modano again for his view (no, make that experience) on this...

Butch 19 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:20 PM
  #52
zx81
Registered User
 
zx81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,865
vCash: 500
57-57-50-50-50-50

That would be my proposal if I was the NHLPA.
That wouldn't be accepted but at least they would speak the "same language".

While I blame the owners for this mess, the players just can't win so they should at least limit the losses.

zx81 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:21 PM
  #53
Milhouse40
Registered User
 
Milhouse40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kegsey View Post
I think that was a poor example. Players are pushed to play physical by their coaches, owners do not have someone above telling them to sign more ridiculous contracts.
Really Owners giving contracts now?

You gave me exactly the answer i was hoping for!!!

GM gives ridiculous contract BECAUSE the Owners pushed them to be the best team in the league. To be the best, you got to hired the best and to hired the best, you got to give them the best offer POSSIBLE.

Owners do not gives contracts, that's the GM'S jobs.

Milhouse40 is online now  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:21 PM
  #54
RedWingsNow*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
Maybe not?!!!

Bring in Mike Modano again for his view (no, make that experience) on this...

Mike Modano lost.

What if these players win?

RedWingsNow* is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:22 PM
  #55
HawkeyLife07
Registered User
 
HawkeyLife07's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 121
vCash: 500
This is me whenever I start thinking about the lockout...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0hOf...endscreen&NR=1

HawkeyLife07 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:23 PM
  #56
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hullois View Post
"Someone else" being another owner. Bettman's strategy was a lockout from the very beginning, knowing that he should have declared it in June before the July 1st frenzy. But no, he let all the owners sign a bunch of ridiculous contracts and hes now trying to get money back in their pockets. It's wrong.
You realize that you can't declare a lockout until the CBA is up right? And you realize that the previous CBA was not up until September? And you realize that the NHL asked the NHLPA to maintain last year's cap for this off season to prevent exactly what happened this off season, but the NHLPA refused? And you realize that Bettman can not tell GMs to limit their offers to free agents? If you are going to post your opinions on the issues, then at least have a reasonable grasp of the issues themselves.

Chelios is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:23 PM
  #57
Deebo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,301
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
It's the principle, however, that the PA is sticking too.
So it's a factor in these negotiations.

And the players obviously knew they weren't just going to immediately give up 50/50./
Players never got the face value of the contract over the last CBA, The amount a player received was always subject to escrow and a true-up to HRR split that was stipulated in the CBA. They want to change the rules and take out linkage to earn what the face value of the deal is regardless of which way revenues go.

They are within their rights to try but the owners are also within their right to try and lower the players share of HRR.

Both sides want more money, that's really all there is to it, but to try and characterize the PA's stance moral or principled is wrong in my opinion.

Deebo is online now  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:24 PM
  #58
RedWingsNow*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by zx81 View Post
57-57-50-50-50-50

That would be my proposal if I was the NHLPA.
That wouldn't be accepted but at least they would speak the "same language".

While I blame the owners for this mess, the players just can't win so they should at least limit the losses.
I wouldn't go down that fast.

I'd go with 1.87 Billions, 1,87 Billion. 1.87 Billion. until we hit 50 percent. At that point, I take 50 percent. And not before.

Also, I would demand 33 percent of any expansion fees.
Also, UFA at 5 years or 26. RFA after entry level.

RedWingsNow* is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:24 PM
  #59
W75
Registered User
 
W75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 6,438
vCash: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
... and did Fehr actually say "the longer we wait, the better the owners' offer will get?" srsly?

That's just some great stuff right there...
Wow yeah. Funny as hell. Like no one ever tried to do that?
I'd laugh me ass off, but then realize how long this will last if he's really serious. Not so funny anymore.

W75 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:24 PM
  #60
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Geographical Oddity
Country: United States
Posts: 11,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Red herring.

The owners might show restraint while preparing for a new economic system isn't collusion.
People are pretending it is, after the fact, so they can justify the owners' stupid behavior.

IE- owners overspend then try to get it back with a lockout
There's very few stupid contracts out there right now, maybe 15 - 20. (pre-lockout II it was likely 150 or so)

The other 725 +/- appear to be just fine.

Butch 19 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:25 PM
  #61
RedWingsNow*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deebo View Post
Players never got the face value of the contract over the last CBA, The amount a player received was always subject to escrow and a true-up to HRR split that was stipulated in the CBA. They want to change the rules and take out linkage to earn what the face value of the deal is regardless of which way revenues go.

They are within their rights to try but the owners are also within their right to try and lower the players share of HRR.

Both sides want more money, that's really all there is to it, but to try and characterize the PA's stance moral or principled is wrong in my opinion.
I don't say that they are principled, in the moral sense of the world.

But everyone has their principles. The owners have their 50 percent principle.

The owners have their linkage principle.

RedWingsNow* is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:26 PM
  #62
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 29,421
vCash: 500
Can someone clarify something else:

I had been reading yesterday that apparently it is the NHLPA and not the NHL that signs off on the raising of the cap? As an example the latest push to $70 mil was approved through the NHLPA, not the NHL? So all these summer huge contracts... were set in motion by approval by the NHLPA to raise the cap knowing the CBA was about to be re-negotiated?


LickTheEnvelope is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:26 PM
  #63
Leaf_Crazy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,818
vCash: 500
Its going to be a fair deal (What the owners have offered)

or

Both sides are going to lose.

Leaf_Crazy is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:26 PM
  #64
Milhouse40
Registered User
 
Milhouse40's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 5,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hullois View Post
We do agree those contracts are ridiculous and have to stop, but to say that the owners are trying to stop them while the players are fighting to still be able to get them is simply not true.
Well, the NHL asked for a 5 years maximum terms.
NHL asked for a rules against the frontloading

That will prevent any kind of ridiculous contract.

NHLPA cried like babies about that and said it wasn't fair.....so......

Milhouse40 is online now  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:26 PM
  #65
RedWingsNow*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
There's very few stupid contracts out there right now, maybe 15 - 20. (pre-lockout II it was likely 150 or so)

The other 725 +/- appear to be just fine.
That is totally beside the point.

RedWingsNow* is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:27 PM
  #66
Tra La La
Registered User
 
Tra La La's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Buffalo, New York
Country: Ireland
Posts: 4,707
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brick City View Post
Might as well say this in the first page of this thread, the only realistic hope now is a moderate player coup against Fehr or action by the moderate owners on the NHL side. The hardliners aren't going to budge.
The moderate owners got Bettman to make last tuesdays offer. Now the Hawks will direct the NHL's bargaining. Moderation failed.

Tra La La is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:28 PM
  #67
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Geographical Oddity
Country: United States
Posts: 11,406
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Mike Modano lost.

What if these players win?
The NHL becomes a 12 team league again?

(and yes, I realize that would be a positive to you, but the super-ultra-vast-majority of hockey fans DO NOT want that)

Butch 19 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:28 PM
  #68
RedWingsNow*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by thebinne4pres View Post
Really Owners giving contracts now?

You gave me exactly the answer i was hoping for!!!

GM gives ridiculous contract BECAUSE the Owners pushed them to be the best team in the league. To be the best, you got to hired the best and to hired the best, you got to give them the best offer POSSIBLE.

Owners do not gives contracts, that's the GM'S jobs.
Maybe the owners should lock out the GMS!

RedWingsNow* is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:28 PM
  #69
Iggy77
Registered User
 
Iggy77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Ottawa, ON
Posts: 1,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
Red herring.

The owners might show restraint while preparing for a new economic system isn't collusion.
People are pretending it is, after the fact, so they can justify the owners' stupid behavior.

IE- owners overspend then try to get it back with a lockout
Maybe they overspent and are trying to get some of it back but wanting owners to work together to artificially lower contract offers to players is collusion and Fehr took the MLB owners to court over it. No way will the NHL risk that.

Even if owners are somehow legally thrifty, players would get 57% regardless so it doesn't matter what contracts are handed out, we'd be in this mess regardless.

Iggy77 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:29 PM
  #70
meedle
Registered User
 
meedle's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 4,852
vCash: 3775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hullois View Post
We do agree those contracts are ridiculous and have to stop, but to say that the owners are trying to stop them while the players are fighting to still be able to get them is simply not true.
Didn't the NHLPA reject all facets of the last NHL offer which includes the 5 year cap on contracts and how much they can go up on a yearly basis?

Well yes. I agree 5 yr is pretty strict and maybe 7 or 8 is better. But none the less. the NHL is trying to fix it while the NHLPA is trying to keep the status quo

meedle is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:29 PM
  #71
RedWingsNow*
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ann Arbor
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,340
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
The NHL becomes a 12 team league again?

(and yes, I realize that would be a positive to you, but the super-ultra-vast-majority of hockey fans DO NOT want that)
When you want to have a real conversation with me, let me know.

RedWingsNow* is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:29 PM
  #72
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: ϶(o)ϵ
Posts: 35,986
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by czwalga View Post
Is it really just hard to understand? They just got the numbers wrong. Linkage IS good, as it does give cost certainty. With 50/50 under the last CBA, a LOT more teams would be in the black or significantly further in the black.

The problem is linkage was based on all the teams combined income, the outlier's on the high end and low end is what really screwed the system.
Isn't that what I'm saying?

50% share and the level of RS won't help the bottom tier. The floor is still too high. Instead of dealing with revenue disparity, the solution that resulted forced higher costs on the teams least able to afford it while lowering it for the rich teams (who have pocketed greater profits). You don't solve revenue disparity by making it more expensive for the weak.

Cost certainty in the case of the expired CBA was that it was certainly going to cost the weakest teams a lot more [than they could afford].

Fugu is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:29 PM
  #73
Bologna 1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 8,638
vCash: 500
Fehr is ****ing ********. in all honesty, this lockout is NOTHING like the one in 04-05. completely different issues at hand. his logic of wait it out and the deal will get better wont work this time me thinks. nor should it work, **** him. i wish some crazed fan somehow walked by him someplace and spit right in his face.

Bologna 1 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:30 PM
  #74
zx81
Registered User
 
zx81's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
I wouldn't go down that fast.

I'd go with 1.87 Billions, 1,87 Billion. 1.87 Billion. until we hit 50 percent. At that point, I take 50 percent. And not before.
But again you wouldn't speak the same language.
The NHLPA can't make a delinked proposal.

zx81 is offline  
Old
10-24-2012, 04:31 PM
  #75
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 4,170
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Bob View Post
I wouldn't go down that fast.

I'd go with 1.87 Billions, 1,87 Billion. 1.87 Billion. until we hit 50 percent. At that point, I take 50 percent. And not before.

Also, I would demand 33 percent of any expansion fees.
Also, UFA at 5 years or 26. RFA after entry level.
Then I guess the NHL would not be meeting with you either. Even if you want to make the case that in the offseason an unlinked deal is a reasonable solution, the fact is that now it is not. We can argue about how much damage has been done thus far due to the lockout, but you cannot tell me that there hasn't been at least some damage. That is why a delinked proposal, guaranteeing the players a certain $ amount, is completely unreasonable now (even if it could be argued that it wasn't before). That is why the league is refusing to meet with the PA. They keep submitting proposals with a set $ amount guaranteed to them, and that is just not going to fly since we won't know what the financial damage is from the lockout. There is no way the league will even entertain the idea of a proposal that is not linked to revenues now that the lockout has begun.

Chelios 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 07:53 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.