HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, and NHL revenues.

NHLPA Responds to Owners Withdrawing Latest Proposal

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-26-2012, 12:59 AM
  #51
AHockeyGameBrokeOut*
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post


Haven't heard any other news that league has taken proposal off the table.
They technically haven't withdrawn the 50/50 offer. They are withdrawing the current proposal because it says "82-game season".

The possibility of an 82-game season has evaporated. The 50/50 offer is probably still valid.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:01 AM
  #52
NewGuy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
However, there is no incentive to teams to do this any longer. One must assume that the only logical reason was to dump a big contract, thereby creating cap room. If the teams cannot create cap room, and have to pay the contract no matter where the player is sent, would they still do it? I think not.
There is at least one legacy AHL player in Wade Redden that would be affected by this, but I assume the Rangers would rather buy him out if this goes through because it now saves them cap space and real dollars.

In fact buy outs would likely be the preferred method of dealing with the situation. So it becomes whether the players would prefer to be bought or play for their full contract in the minors. I assume most would prefer the former because they could likely still play somewhere else for less salary.

Teams might still play around with it though and put these players on IR when they no longer live up to their cap hit and that would still count against the players' share.

NewGuy is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:04 AM
  #53
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,764
vCash: 50
I don't blame NHL for rejecting to talk about it. The Fehr's are being outclassed in terms of negotiating tactics.

The reality is, Fehr is using all his tricks "Let's play without a CBA" then will go on strike. Then there's the "hey, let's fix the make whole, and once you agree, we'll switch the rest" Look, I'm not saying NHL deal is fair or not but they are trying to make the NHL give first and work off what they give in with. We saw it with the NHLPA's reluctance to offer a deal and as such the NHL screwed them big time by offering straight up 50-50 and changing some fan's opinion on who's wrong.

The players are getting terrible advice. They are losing millions to preserve thousands. Unfortunately for them, they are also right in having this fight. They don't want to get pushed around and that's 100% legit, but it's costing them. It's up to the big guns in the NHLPA to salvage the season or this philosophy of making it tough for the owners to push them around will crash and burn pretty quickly.

Also, AFAIK the NHLPA never commented on players contract rights. They are making it sound as if the NHL just won't honour the deals but I haven't seen an official article saying that the NHLPA agreed on the contract rights. Do I agree with the change in contract rights? Some yes, others no. For instance, minimizing front loaded and max X years? I 100% agree although I would make it 7 years, not 5. The UFA at 28? I don't really care. The need to count people like redden on cap? Meh. I get why it's there and I get why NHLPA rejects but take it off the board entirely.

50-50 split immediately. Last 12.3% of players contract deffered over duration of CBA and it DOES count on the cap when it's paid. Front loaded and max contract size rules in place. Players get their contracts, owners get their cap and don't pay a cent more because deffered payments count on cap.

LyricalLyricist is online now  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:07 AM
  #54
Dalton
Registered User
 
Dalton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Ho Chi Minh City
Country: Vietnam
Posts: 2,096
vCash: 500
I don't think the owners have any interest in negotiating at all. I think they're going to keep presenting ultimatums and keep working on the public relations front.

If I were a player I'd present an offer at some point soon that rejects the salary cap. This is clearly being misused by the league as a tool to manipulate the players. The other unintended consequences of the cap are the restriction of free enterprise and the tarnishing of the reputations and relationship of the two parties and the league.

As it stands the cap floor presents as the minimum problem for the league and the labour relations issues. Get rid of the floor at least or get rid of the cap altogether.

Statements from the players that they see this as a shakedown by the league and the NHL's beligerent refusal to negotiate along with the NHLPA's contempt for the league's stance don't seem to support any notion of a resolution in the near future.

I wouldn't be surprised to see this go on for two seasons or at least into next season with the potential of other leagues becoming home to the league's stars and even the cup going up for grabs once again. This depends on the resolve of the parties of course.

The NHL's links to ownership and thus control of the major Canadian sports media just serves to encourage them to overplay their hand. The impression that the NHL handed the players their testicles in the last lockout just motivates them (the players) and is quite likely why Fehr became involved. Anyway I look at it, it looks long and dirty to me. Round three will just be worse when whatever they come up with ends.

I think the owners are being irresponsible in their stewardship of this great game. At the very least Bettman must go before the next renewel. He's become a negative brand for the sport and labour relations generally.

Dalton is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:09 AM
  #55
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewGuy View Post
There is at least one legacy AHL player in Wade Redden that would be affected by this, but I assume the Rangers would rather buy him out if this goes through because it now saves them cap space and real dollars.

In fact buy outs would likely be the preferred method of dealing with the situation. So it becomes whether the players would prefer to be bought or play for their full contract in the minors. I assume most would prefer the former because they could likely still play somewhere else for less salary.

Teams might still play around with it though and put these players on IR when they no longer live up to their cap hit and that would still count against the players' share.
I don't remember the term for Huet's contract. The Hawks would also be subject to that cap space if that's still intact. I seem to recall it was 5 yrs.

Fugu is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:11 AM
  #56
AHockeyGameBrokeOut*
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
I don't blame NHL for rejecting to talk about it. The Fehr's are being outclassed in terms of negotiating tactics.
They haven't rejected talking about it. They've asked for a new proposal/modified version of their proposal, and the NHLPA won't prep something realistic because they might accept it. Fehr is intentionally trying to present proposals that WON'T be accepted, to stall negotiations and test the waters. And the fans all have caught wind of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
The reality is, Fehr is using all his tricks "Let's play without a CBA" then will go on strike. Then there's the "hey, let's fix the make whole, and once you agree, we'll switch the rest" Look, I'm not saying NHL deal is fair or not but they are trying to make the NHL give first and work off what they give in with. We saw it with the NHLPA's reluctance to offer a deal and as such the NHL screwed them big time by offering straight up 50-50 and changing some fan's opinion on who's wrong.
The NHL actually helped them get serious. They just don't want to get it done.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
The players are getting terrible advice. They are losing millions to preserve thousands. Unfortunately for them, they are also right in having this fight. They don't want to get pushed around and that's 100% legit, but it's costing them. It's up to the big guns in the NHLPA to salvage the season or this philosophy of making it tough for the owners to push them around will crash and burn pretty quickly.
The Players cannot play dumb. They know what they're doing too. They chose this lockout. Derek Roy needs another expensive car.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
Also, AFAIK the NHLPA never commented on players contract rights. They are making it sound as if the NHL just won't honour the deals but I haven't seen an official article saying that the NHLPA agreed on the contract rights. Do I agree with the change in contract rights? Some yes, others no. For instance, minimizing front loaded and max X years? I 100% agree although I would make it 7 years, not 5. The UFA at 28? I don't really care. The need to count people like redden on cap? Meh. I get why it's there and I get why NHLPA rejects but take it off the board entirely.
NHLPA wants Player privileges, not Player rights.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricalLyricist View Post
50-50 split immediately. Last 12.3% of players contract deffered over duration of CBA and it DOES count on the cap when it's paid. Front loaded and max contract size rules in place. Players get their contracts, owners get their cap and don't pay a cent more because deffered payments count on cap.
The idea that the Players won't get paid is a scare tactic... it's not real. If they were cheated out of any money, the high courts would not hesitate to intervene. They're pandering.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:11 AM
  #57
Mantha Poodoo
Playoff Beard
 
Mantha Poodoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCrazed101 View Post
Well then we're in perfect agreement. Both sides are playing their hands as best they can and I've said numerous times that that's just the nature of the negotiations and it's all business that each side feels needs to happen in order to get the best deal possible moving forward. I think with your initial comment in the thread, I assumed you to be one of those posters who claim that one side is negotiating in good faith while the other isn't. I think those people have rose tinted glasses on. Neither side is negotiating in good faith, both sides are negotiating in their best interests and I don't blame either side one bit for it. I'm looking at things from a practical point of view and I realize that the PA willing to make sacrifice by missing games also gives them leverage but we don't really know what the end game is and I just think it would be really sad and unfortunate if the players wait too late to pull the trigger so that they can land the best deal and salvage some part of the season.

My comment about the 'players just want to play' highlights my annoyance with the players themselves. There is BS being thrown back and forth from both sides and I'm just disappointed that the players have taken an active role in participating in it. They've hired a more than competent director in Fehr and he's got all the tools needed to play the mind games with Bettman in the public. Listening to the players talk, it makes me wonder if they actually understand what's going on or if they're willing to perpetuate ******** to the fans they 'care' about in order to save face during these negotiations. I could read 100 PA player articles if they were all as articulated as Ryan Miller's but unfortunately there aren't enough Ryan Millers in the league to balance out the Toews type of players speaking out, lol.
Indeed. I'm not on anyone's "side" here. Ultimately, I favor a deal that not only gets NHL hockey back as soon as is feasible, but also serves as a long term solution to the NHL's economic issues. I don't care who makes the "winning offer" as long as it accomplishes those two goals.

That said, I do think the owners are doing a piss poor job on fixing economic issues. The proposals and effort I have seen from them have unfortunate implications.

A: Many of the owners are fools. Given the tremendous success of these individuals in business and life, I doubt this is the case, which even more unfortunately leads to the more likely possibility B: Many of the owners are unscrupulous weasels who are trying to take as much as they can off the top at the expense of the future. See last CBA where linkage gave "immediate" relief but actually ended up much, much worse for the league over the course of the CBA than any of the delinked offers would have. How many owners that profited (or at least suffered less) from that initial reduction have since jumped ship?

On the other hand, I'm not exactly looking forward to a loose amalgamation of guys who violently skate around on razor blades near other guys who are doing the exact same thing to be economic saviors either. Mind you, they may have much more economically skilled representation, and said individual(s) may even have some good ideas, but those folks are being paid first and foremost to get the best deal possible for their clients, not fix another business's problems.

Mantha Poodoo is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:14 AM
  #58
Freudian
Patty likes beef
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 28,681
vCash: 50
Daly has already clarified that the NHL hasn't demanded that the NHLPA accept everything in the proposal to negotiate. Schneider is, as NHLPA has been doing all through this conflict, misrepresenting things.

The league demands that the NHLPA accepts linkage and won't negotiate until that happens. Which is perfectly reasonable, given we have a salary cap league.

Freudian is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:16 AM
  #59
AHockeyGameBrokeOut*
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
I don't think the owners have any interest in negotiating at all. I think they're going to keep presenting ultimatums and keep working on the public relations front.
Well, it seems to be working, because the majority of people who know feel differently about that. It seems to me the Owners were more than fair - and now we're waiting for the NHLPA to offer a legitimate counter-proposal instead of a bloated holiday for the Players.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
If I were a player I'd present an offer at some point soon that rejects the salary cap. This is clearly being misused by the league as a tool to manipulate the players. The other unintended consequences of the cap are the restriction of free enterprise and the tarnishing of the reputations and relationship of the two parties and the league.
Yes, you're right, the Players on teams that are losing money, are being manipulated by the salary cap to get higher salaries than they'd get on winning teams. Textbook manipulation tactics there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
As it stands the cap floor presents as the minimum problem for the league and the labour relations issues. Get rid of the floor at least or get rid of the cap altogether.
And if you do that, you sack Columbus, Phoenix and a lot of other teams.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
Statements from the players that they see this as a shakedown by the league and the NHL's beligerent refusal to negotiate along with the NHLPA's contempt for the league's stance don't seem to support any notion of a resolution in the near future.
That's because someone else is telling them what to say (their agents).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
I wouldn't be surprised to see this go on for two seasons or at least into next season with the potential of other leagues becoming home to the league's stars and even the cup going up for grabs once again. This depends on the resolve of the parties of course.
Won't happen. No other league could jump in. Too much money involved. WHA tried and died. Won't happen again, ever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
The NHL's links to ownership and thus control of the major Canadian sports media just serves to encourage them to overplay their hand. The impression that the NHL handed the players their testicles in the last lockout just motivates them (the players) and is quite likely why Fehr became involved. Anyway I look at it, it looks long and dirty to me. Round three will just be worse when whatever they come up with ends.
You mean the Canadian sports media like TSN and Larry Brooks that are completely pro-NHLPA and anti-Owner?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dalton View Post
I think the owners are being irresponsible in their stewardship of this great game. At the very least Bettman must go before the next renewel. He's become a negative brand for the sport and labour relations generally.
Bettman only does what the owners tell him to...

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:16 AM
  #60
NewGuy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
I don't remember the term for Huet's contract. The Hawks would also be subject to that cap space if that's still intact. I seem to recall it was 5 yrs.
Huet's contract expired this year so Chicago would be off the hook.

NewGuy is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:20 AM
  #61
Mantha Poodoo
Playoff Beard
 
Mantha Poodoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut View Post
They haven't rejected talking about it. They've asked for a new proposal/modified version of their proposal, and the NHLPA won't prep something realistic because they might accept it. Fehr is intentionally trying to present proposals that WON'T be accepted, to stall negotiations and test the waters. And the fans all have caught wind of it.
Meanwhile, the owners are doing the same thing. This is what we call "good negotiating." Fehr and Bettman both have records showing them to be among the leaders in their respective businesses and it would do every spectator well to remember that.

Unfortunately, it's not being done in a very timely fashion, but I suppose both sides see a lot of negotiating value in stalling at the present time.

Mantha Poodoo is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:22 AM
  #62
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wheeled Winger View Post
Indeed. I'm not on anyone's "side" here. Ultimately, I favor a deal that not only gets NHL hockey back as soon as is feasible, but also serves as a long term solution to the NHL's economic issues. I don't care who makes the "winning offer" as long as it accomplishes those two goals.

That said, I do think the owners are doing a piss poor job on fixing economic issues. The proposals and effort I have seen from them have unfortunate implications.

A: Many of the owners are fools. Given the tremendous success of these individuals in business and life, I doubt this is the case, which even more unfortunately leads to the more likely possibility B: Many of the owners are unscrupulous weasels who are trying to take as much as they can off the top at the expense of the future. See last CBA where linkage gave "immediate" relief but actually ended up much, much worse for the league over the course of the CBA than any of the delinked offers would have. How many owners that profited (or at least suffered less) from that initial reduction have since jumped ship?

On the other hand, I'm not exactly looking forward to a loose amalgamation of guys who violently skate around on razor blades near other guys who are doing the exact same thing to be economic saviors either. Mind you, they may have much more economically skilled representation, and said individual(s) may even have some good ideas, but those folks are being paid first and foremost to get the best deal possible for their clients, not fix another business's problems.

Anaheim - 2005
Buffalo - 2011
Dallas - 2011
Edmonton - 2008
Florida - 2009
Minnesota - 2008
Montreal - 2010
Nashville - 2007
Phoenix - 2009...and pending
St. Louis - 2006 and 2012
Tampa - 2007 and 2010
Toronto - 2012
Vancouver - 2005
Winnipeg - 2011

Los Angeles - For Sale


So about half the league.

New Jersey (2004... close, but current probleems with arena debt)
San Jose - 2004

Fugu is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:22 AM
  #63
AHockeyGameBrokeOut*
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wheeled Winger View Post
Meanwhile, the owners are doing the same thing. This is what we call "good negotiating." Fehr and Bettman both have records showing them to be among the leaders in their respective businesses and it would do every spectator well to remember that.

Unfortunately, it's not being done in a very timely fashion, but I suppose both sides see a lot of negotiating value in stalling at the present time.
No, they're not. The Owners have made a total of 9 proposals. The NHLPA has made 4. If you want brevity and fairness, the NHLPA owes another 5 proposals to catch up, at the very least.

The Players have shafted this entire negotiation process, on purpose. On paper, it's a lockout, but the reality is this is a Fehr-lead strike.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:24 AM
  #64
LyricalLyricist
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Montreal
Country: Canada
Posts: 20,764
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wheeled Winger View Post
Meanwhile, the owners are doing the same thing. This is what we call "good negotiating." Fehr and Bettman both have records showing them to be among the leaders in their respective businesses and it would do every spectator well to remember that.

Unfortunately, it's not being done in a very timely fashion, but I suppose both sides see a lot of negotiating value in stalling at the present time.
NHLPA stalled for a year. What a waste. What's done is done but wow. They used an option on old CBA and they even stalled an extra year after and now suddenly they feel they got a shakedown. Fehr tried to push the league into a corner and it didn't work. However, neither is truly bargaining in good faith. They are all trying to get the best deal but the NHLPA's attempts to block the lockout mid negotiation in canada and stalling tactics are rubbing me off the wrong way.

LyricalLyricist is online now  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:25 AM
  #65
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NewGuy View Post
Huet's contract expired this year so Chicago would be off the hook.

For a new guy, you've been here a while.

Fugu is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:26 AM
  #66
Mantha Poodoo
Playoff Beard
 
Mantha Poodoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Bettman only does what the owners tell him to...
One of the worst and most inaccurate quotes on here (the same when such is said for Fehr/the players). If you think about it, it's actually an almost insulting representation of his job and the legal expertise required.

Bettman represents the owners, their positions, and their goals. In many cases this in fact means that he's telling them what they need to do to meet those goals, and telling them what he is going to do to achieve those goals for them. He's paid to negotiate and make decisions both for and on behalf of the owners.

Mantha Poodoo is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:26 AM
  #67
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut View Post
No, they're not. The Owners have made a total of 9 proposals. The NHLPA has made 4. If you want brevity and fairness, the NHLPA owes another 5 proposals to catch up, at the very least.

The Players have shafted this entire negotiation process, on purpose. On paper, it's a lockout, but the reality is this is a Fehr-lead strike.

Good grief. This is like something Luntz would design.

None of your Jedi mind tricks here.

Fugu is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:30 AM
  #68
Mantha Poodoo
Playoff Beard
 
Mantha Poodoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut View Post
No, they're not. The Owners have made a total of 9 proposals. The NHLPA has made 4. If you want brevity and fairness, the NHLPA owes another 5 proposals to catch up, at the very least.
It's not a hockey game where the team that makes the most proposals wins. Bowling is probably a better analogy: the best results in the fewest shots possible.

Quote:
The Players have shafted this entire negotiation process, on purpose. On paper, it's a lockout, but the reality is this is a Fehr-lead strike.
If Fehr has managed to make a lockout seem more like a strike in union leverage that's likely a testament to his skills as a union negotiator (I don't see things that way--yet--but I have no doubt of Fehr's skills).

Mantha Poodoo is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:30 AM
  #69
AHockeyGameBrokeOut*
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Good grief. This is like something Luntz would design.

None of your Jedi mind tricks here.
Am I wrong? Do you think that I'm alone in feeling this way?

Consider the title of this thread: "NHLPA Responds To Owners Withdrawing Latest Proposal".

What this thread should say is "Full Text Of Latest NHLPA Proposal".

We should be reading something from the NHLPA right now - instead, they're making videos about a proposal from the opposing camp that they didn't accept... if you're not going to accept the proposal, it's moot if they withdraw it...

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:32 AM
  #70
Mantha Poodoo
Playoff Beard
 
Mantha Poodoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Good grief. This is like something Luntz would design.

None of your Jedi mind tricks here.
"...Mind tricks do not-a work on me! Only money..."

Wow, that applies a little too well to the whole situation.

Mantha Poodoo is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:32 AM
  #71
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,446
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wheeled Winger View Post
Indeed. I'm not on anyone's "side" here. Ultimately, I favor a deal that not only gets NHL hockey back as soon as is feasible, but also serves as a long term solution to the NHL's economic issues. I don't care who makes the "winning offer" as long as it accomplishes those two goals.

That said, I do think the owners are doing a piss poor job on fixing economic issues. The proposals and effort I have seen from them have unfortunate implications.

A: Many of the owners are fools. Given the tremendous success of these individuals in business and life, I doubt this is the case, which even more unfortunately leads to the more likely possibility B: Many of the owners are unscrupulous weasels who are trying to take as much as they can off the top at the expense of the future. See last CBA where linkage gave "immediate" relief but actually ended up much, much worse for the league over the course of the CBA than any of the delinked offers would have. How many owners that profited (or at least suffered less) from that initial reduction have since jumped ship?

On the other hand, I'm not exactly looking forward to a loose amalgamation of guys who violently skate around on razor blades near other guys who are doing the exact same thing to be economic saviors either. Mind you, they may have much more economically skilled representation, and said individual(s) may even have some good ideas, but those folks are being paid first and foremost to get the best deal possible for their clients, not fix another business's problems.
I don't pretend to know what's good and what's not in terms of the economics of the business. That is one area I have openly admitted ignorance to and to be honest, if I invested more time learning about it, I may have a stronger opinion on the economics presented in all of the proposals. For now, I feel that I've firmly planted my feet in reality and while I may not appreciate the good, bad and ugly of the NHL's current system, I don't need to understand it to know that the league seemingly values the current system too much to let it go just yet. We can only respond to the events as they unfold and speculate at best what the end games may be for both sides.

Unlike many people who think the league's offers will get worse, I don't see that happening...at least not yet. I do think both sides are testing each other's resolve and I also think that the league played their hand too soon. They said they gave their best offer, pulled it off table and then gave another best offer better than the previous. The league has given the players the resolve to believe that they can get a better deal than the current one and it doesn't really matter if that's true or not, the players now have the incentive to wait it out longer and the league will have to suffer more losses in revenue until they do give the players a better offer or the players decide they've lost enough and need to get back to work.

Ari91 is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:33 AM
  #72
AHockeyGameBrokeOut*
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wheeled Winger View Post
It's not a hockey game where the team that makes the most proposals wins. Bowling is probably a better analogy: the best results in the fewest shots possible.
Okay, so 6 open frames, 1 spare and 2 gutter balls from the NHL, and 4 consecutive gutter balls from the NHLPA.... that didn't make the score any better, sorry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Wheeled Winger View Post
If Fehr has managed to make a lockout seem more like a strike in union leverage that's likely a testament to his skills as a union negotiator (I don't see things that way--yet--but I have no doubt of Fehr's skills).
What skills would those be?

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:35 AM
  #73
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Okay, maybe you think that but one of the members of the negotiating committee just said otherwise.

I have said all along that the league wants those other items, but many in the media keep saying it's only about the share. I think they're wrong.
I'm not certain why the PA would have a problem with most of the other provisions, though, apparently they do. Anything one guy currently gains via cap-circumventing retirement deals costs is lost by the other 599 via escrow. The only people who make out on that deal are rich owners (who get a competitive advantage) and guys with those deals (the amount they circumvent the cap hit GREATLY outweighs the global increase in escrow dollars). Any player who doesn't have one, essentially, gets a higher-than-necessary tax increase on his own deal. Peter robs Paul to pay himself.

That's a "stick it to the owners who did this" provision that doesn't take a dime out of the PA memberships' pockets writ large. Maybe they lose $8000 a piece because Redden's contract can't be stashed, but, other than that, the only effect that has on them is to reduce escrow.

Absent those retirement deals, there aren't really any reasons for 15 year contracts. They wouldn't be asked for or given out, except by Charles Wang to guys who know they're made of glass. So that's another thing I don't quite understand why it would be so unacceptable.

And the 2 year entry level deal is exactly the type of thing (like reducing the penalty for rfa signings) that backfires in the league's face. It's not going to restore the "second contract," like they think it will. It's just going to give big paydays to players who teams know even less about.

The only thing it makes sense to consider "unacceptible" is the 1 year increase on free agency. But they didn't take issue with that. They took issue with all of it.

billybudd is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:36 AM
  #74
Mantha Poodoo
Playoff Beard
 
Mantha Poodoo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,887
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut View Post
Am I wrong?
Yes.

Quote:
Do you think that I'm alone in feeling this way?
No. And it's understandable given the complexities of the situation.

Quote:
Consider the title of this thread: "NHLPA Responds To Owners Withdrawing Latest Proposal".
That's pretty much an accurate description of the video.

Quote:
What this thread should say is "Full Text Of Latest NHLPA Proposal".
If Luntz was in charge of naming BoH threads he might agree.

Quote:
We should be reading something from the NHLPA right now - instead, they're making videos about a proposal from the opposing camp that they didn't accept... if you're not going to accept the proposal, it's moot if they withdraw it...
That would perhaps be the stance of a fan wanting to see a quick resolution to the lockout regardless of how it affects the parties involved but is not a very reasonable stance for a union trying to work for the best deal for its members.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut View Post
Okay, so 6 open frames, 1 spare and 2 gutter balls from the NHL, and 4 consecutive gutter balls from the NHLPA.... that didn't make the score any better, sorry.
Again, from the perspective of a fan wanting hockey, not business owners/a union aiming for a favorable CBA.

Quote:
What skills would those be?
Representing labor unions in contract negotiations. There's a reason the guy makes a killing at it and I don't.

Mantha Poodoo is offline  
Old
10-26-2012, 01:39 AM
  #75
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,661
vCash: 8000
These Fehr brothers are going to cast a black eye forever on the NHLPA. They clearly have no interest in the game.

MikeK 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 08:21 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.