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.

Adrian Dater-Gary Bettman deserves ALL of the blame

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-26-2012, 09:44 AM
  #26
redman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 112
vCash: 500
The NHL proposal was a complete and utter joke. For them to insist on immediate salary rollbacks reeks of arrogance on one hand, despair on the other hand, and on both feet there are a pair of boots with the words "DISTRUST" written in large red lettering.

Owners like the ******* in Minnesota who emptied out his coffers to sign Parise and Weber now have the temerity to ask those players to reduce the LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACTS voluntarily? Are you kidding me? Would any individual here arbitrarily reduce their own contract by 7-15% immediately after signing it less then 120 days prior? I don't think so. It's really quite arrogant as I said.

The despair is growing within the ownership community. They've already budged from 43% to 50%, with the same definition of Hockey Related Revenue as the old CBA. Fehr and the NHLPA offered the NHL a way out, but the despair emerged, probably from the small market owners, and the immediate rollbacks are still the sticking point. This tells me that there are a number of small teams that are really suffering economically at the moment, and the hard line they've taken means they need immediate cash infusions. This also makes sense with regards to the ridiculous retribution associated with old contracts - it's another attempt to alleviate the immediate burden that the small market teams face.

The distrust is growing. It's multi-faceted in nature. The players do not trusting the owners at all, and unless the owners get rid of the immediate rollbacks, there will be no CBA. I am 100% certain this is the lynchpin of the entire CBA. The big market owners do not trust the small market owners - the poison pill associated with retroactive contracts is clear here. In addition, the players and big market owners do not trust each other because of the lack of revenue sharing (this has been alleviated since the NHL will allow for 80% growth here) but until the CBA is finalized, this is another point of friction. The NHL and NHLPA distrust each other - the NHL has no idea how to deal with Fehr. Fehr has been very shrewd to this point - and the NHL caved in on the information front when they leaked the details of their contract offer because they were afraid that Fehr would be able to counter their narrative.

The CBA is nowhere near being settled after yesterday. Again, the center of gravity is the rollback of contracts. From the players perspective (they are 100% right), they are being asked to bail the owners out again because the owners and GMs are too stupid to run their businesses responsibly. In addition, the players feel betrayed because the last batch of free agents signed deals that would become 7-15% less valuable over an annual basis, and even more so as the length of contracts would be capped. The players are being asked to give up everything, the only concession the owners have made is to increase the size of the revenue sharing pot. Everything else is being lumped on the players backs - free agency rights, shorter contracts, immediate rollback of salaries...

I have to think Snider has a few tricks up his sleeve here. The increased revenue sharing and the retroactive contract mess have got to be driving him up the wall as they both damage his franchise and attack his personal worldviews. I have to think that he has only agreed to these in exchange for something...what that is, I have no idea. At this stage of the game, I wouldn't be surprised if he has forced Bettman and the other owners to guarantee a Stanley Cup for the Flyers in exchange for his sucking these eggs. Before I get claimed as a conspiracy theorist, the NHL has done this before with the Penguins...in order to keep Mario Lemieux out of the public eye whining about this and that.

I just don't see a great deal of progress on either front here. I think the NHL hiring the Republican Parties spinmeister, the Joseph Goebbels of the 21st Century, is also another huge affront to not only the players, but also to the fans. To me, it just makes the narrative eminating from the NHL that much more unbelivable...and every fan of the NHL should have huge suspicions associated with the NHL leadership.

One last thing. For all the morons stating that the owners accept all the risk...the players accept risk every time they lace up a pair of skates and get on the ice. Ask Clint Malarchuk, Pat LaFontaine, Eric Lindros, the score of heavyweights have overdosed on drugs to ease their physical pain, Jeff Beukeboom, Cam Neely, Keith Primeau, Paul Kariya and Adam Deadmarsh, to name just a few. Physical and mental anguish is part of the hockey culture it seems, and to think that the players do not accept any risk is about as foolish an argument to make as any I have seen in a long while.

redman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 09:46 AM
  #27
redman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 112
vCash: 500
Under the Bettman regime of incompetence, the NHL has experienced three lockouts. These three lockouts were orchestrated by the owners in order to weaken the NHLPA, force small market teams to relocate, institute and enforce a salary cap, restrict players contracts and free agency, and institute revenue sharing between the large market and small market teams.

In the three month 1994-1995 lockout, the large market owners broke away from the NHL over the idea of revenue sharing. In addition, the NHL wanted the players to accept a salary cap. The NHLPA steadfastly refused a salary cap, and the players instead had to agree to a rookie wage scale, limited free agency, and initiation of a salary arbitration process. The NHLPA beleived correctly - and you will see this again - that a salary cap tied to revenue had absolutely nothing to do with the players and everything to do with the fact that the GMs and owners were solely responsible for offering outrageous contracts to marginal talent in the first place. In addition, three small market teams were relocated to marginal markets: Winnipeg moved to Phoenix, a truly disastrous decision for all involved, Hartford moved to Carolina and Quebec moved to Colorado. In what can only be considered suspicious, Carolina and Colorado both won Stanley Cups within a decade. The end result - very similar to the end of World War I for the history buffs here - was that the labor peace was acheived without either side feeling as though they were really defeated...and this led directly to World War II, or the 2004-2005 lockout.

The 2004-2005 lockout was an utter debacle from all sides. The lack of strategic decisions eminating from the 1994-1995 lockout came home to roost in this lockout. Firstly, ESPN refused to renew the NHL contract after this lockout, a major blow to the league that it really hasn't recovered from as Versus has always had a limited viewership and NBC has not placed nearly as much emphasis on the sport as ESPN once did. The NHL also wanted to roll back salaries by 24% when the NHLPA was offering a one time 5% roll back of salaries. Again, the bad contracts - Bobby Holik being the worst - that the owners and GMs offered were being blamed on the players accepting them...the logic just does not work here. Revenue sharing was instituted as the largest 10 organizations had to support the smallest 10 organizations, and a salary cap was finally imposed on the players as well. The opaque nature of franchise ownership also came into play as Bettman claimed that the league had lost $273M in the season prior to the lockout, and Forbes - a pro-business magazine if there ever was one - wrote an article soon after claiming that the NHL had only lost $123M, a difference of about 50%. Teams were also allowed to buy out contracts at 66% of the value of the contract, and the player was not allowed to resign with that team. Bettman and the owners claimed that 75% of revenue went to players salaries, but this has never been effectively confirmed as being legitimate.

Two major strategic communication flaws from the NHL occured as a result of this lockout. Bettman claimed that tickets would become cheaper, a blantant lie that has only become worse over time. In addition, the NHL draft of 2005 was weighted towards teams that had been at the bottom of the league over the prior THREE seasons...why not two, four or eight...in effect, it allowed for the Penguins, a team in desperate financial struggles, to draft Sidney Crosby...which also allowed them to not only win a Stanley Cup, but more importantly for the league, it allowed the taxpayers of Pennsylvania to fund a new arena in the city which guaranteed stability.

So at the beginning of the 2005-2006 season, the NHL came back, but it had a weak national TV deal with Versus...a whopping two year deal worth $65M for the entire contract. Even with this new CBA, the NHL STILL HAD EIGHT TEAMS THAT WERE NOT PROFITABLE...in other words, the strategic decisions that were not addressed in the 1994-1995 CBA still were in effect even after the owners had asked for, and received almost everything that they had asked for in two successive CBAs. One little interesting factoid is that Bettman's salary has increased to almost $8 per year since the 2004-2005 lockout, when he was skulking by on a paltry salary of rouughly $3M per year.

So here we are in 2012 facing the same issues. The owners are still trying to force the players out of more money and shorter contracts when they alone are responsible for the crafting and structure of the very contracts they are "forcing" the players to sign. The league has increased revenues considerably since the 2004-2005 lockout, mainly through the huge increase of ticket prices as well as relocation fees and a new national TV contract that is worth over $2B over the length of the contract. According to the NHL's very own tax returns, the league lost $14.7M in 2011...I am assuming this does not include the individual franchise losses...but it is worth noting the massive increase of personal income with Bettman when the league is operating in the red. The average ticket price has increased 39% since 2004 by the way, and this doesn't include the additional expenses associated with rising merchandise costs, concessions, parking, and goofy pre and post season packages. So you the individual hockey fan are paying through the nose for your professional hockey experience...and that's not even with the indirect costs associated with construction and financing of new arenas and transportation systems that required susbstantial infusions of taxpayer capital.

At this point, only one thing will really allow for the owners to gain any leverage over me what so ever...they have to open up their books and allow for total transparancy of their accounting. The foundational, structural issues that have existed between the NHL and the NHLPA have never been fully rectified since the first lockout in 1994-1995. The same issues continue to rise to the surface again and again:

1. Players contracts are too long and cost too much money yet the owners continue to sign them.
2. The salary cap is required in order to protect the GMs and owners from themselves. They simply do not have the self-discipline or intelligence to manage themselves.
3. Expansion continues to be used as a source of revenue and as an appeasement tool towards the players...more jobs for more marginal talent...but the league has overextended itself..
4. Revenues have increased by 33% to 3.2B last year through higher ticket prices and a better national TV deal. Imagine if they could actually market themselves and produce merchandize that doesn't suck (the vast majority of Flyers gear, for example, is poorly designed and looks like ****).


This problem is not about the players making more money. It never has been. This problem is systemic in nature within the owners and administration of the NHL - if the NHL cannot police its owners and GMs from spending more money on players, even with a salary cap, a rookie wage structure and free agency restriction, then it must change its nature of its business.

And I think Don Fehr gets all of this in spades, and he's not going to budge one iota. Now, if the teams were to release their accounting for examination by some impartial, third party forensic accountants, then there is little Fehr could do to build an argument against that if the majority of the teams were actually losing money. But at this point, the owners have provided zero data to prove they are actually losing money today, despite record revenues and historically high ticket prices.

So this is now a Mexican standoff. The NHL isn't going to release their books for examination, and the NHLPA has zero reason to allow a third reconstruction of players salaries, the salary cap and free agency in the last 17 years. Simply stated, the players have had enough of bad business decisions by the owners. The fans should be enraged by the owners - especially if the owners are so reliant on ticket revenues for the growth of their business - because these clowns are either making money hand over fist (record revenues) or they are bumbling away a ton of money...it's a terrific mess and completely fascinating to see how the NHL is going to continue to try and spin this on the players...when the owners and GMs have gotten rollbacks in every CBA to benefit their businesses, and yet they are claiming failure to succeed yet again.

redman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 09:50 AM
  #28
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Not a single contract has benn legally binding as far as the amount is concernded since 2005. It's called linkage to revenue which leads to escrow payments from whichever side deserves it according the the calculation at the end of the year. The players knew this when they signed their contracts, they're subject to ANY changes the upcoming CBA proposes. So it's not like this is coming out of nowhere and is EXACTLY the reason, why theses players demanden a high signing bonus, which in itself is an admittance, that they KNEW they won't get 100% of their contracts.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 09:53 AM
  #29
Cynthesis
Registered User
 
Cynthesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Denver, CO
Country: United States
Posts: 830
vCash: 500
Yep that's the Denver Post for you. They have nothing but brain-dead emotional children writing for them. Check out this article from exactly one month ago.

Gary Bettman doesnt deserve all blame nhl lockout

Cynthesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 09:55 AM
  #30
Huis Clos*
Creamy Hamstrings
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ballarado
Country: United States
Posts: 6,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by redman View Post
Under the Bettman regime of incompetence, the NHL has experienced three lockouts.
Under Bettman the NHL has also experienced record growth and revenue as well as a record TV deal. You have more players in the NHL than ever before as well as more fans.

Continue cherry picking though.

Huis Clos* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 09:56 AM
  #31
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,926
vCash: 500
It is really amazing how people can support the owners who knowingly signed players to ridiculous contracts knowing they were going to ask for some of it back almost immediately. That is just plain wrong and for anyone to say what does it matter as they still have a lot of money is missing the point. And how is it the NHLPA who is not negotiating when the owners really have only come to the table with one legit offer? Is it really not negotiating when someone asks to talk but the other person will only talk if they are going to agree to almost everything first? These take it or leave it offers of negotiation by the NHL are bogus.

shakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 09:57 AM
  #32
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cynthesis View Post
Yep that's the Denver Post for you. They have nothing but brain-dead emotional children writing for them. Check out this article from exactly one month ago.

Gary Bettman doesnt deserve all blame nhl lockout
That's brilliant, I bet these guys sit right next to each other at work.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 09:57 AM
  #33
Huis Clos*
Creamy Hamstrings
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Ballarado
Country: United States
Posts: 6,020
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
That's brilliant, I bet these guys sit right next to each other at work.
Frei is his editor.

Huis Clos* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 09:58 AM
  #34
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes View Post
It is really amazing how people can support the owners who knowingly signed players to ridiculous contracts knowing they were going to ask for some of it back almost immediately. That is just plain wrong and for anyone to say what does it matter as they still have a lot of money is missing the point. And how is it the NHLPA who is not negotiating when the owners really have only come to the table with one legit offer? Is it really not negotiating when someone asks to talk but the other person will only talk if they are going to agree to almost everything first? These take it or leave it offers of negotiation by the NHL are bogus.
Read post # 28

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:04 AM
  #35
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
Read post # 28
Fine, Linkage! But those contracts had "linkage" based on a certain percentage. Once the owners come out and decide to change the %, then that fractures the basis of the whole "linkage" agreement.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:13 AM
  #36
ThisYearsModel
Registered User
 
ThisYearsModel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Country: United States
Posts: 6,889
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
That's your take. I think he's a very good commish. And the owners want to play under a CBA they propose, the NHLPA doesn't want to negotiate, I don't think they (the owners) blame Bettman for that.
Good Commish? The guy who sold the owners on expansion to markets where the NHL does not belong? The guy who won their favor by bringing in the massive expansion fees? The markets that are now drowning the league causing this acrimonious CBA negotiation, and the owners of these teams demanding handouts from players, fans and the richer clubs? This guy has screwed the pooch and negatively affected hockey BEFORE the labor issues every 5-6 years. This is a man that willingly shut down the league for an entire season the last time and seems poised to do so again.

ThisYearsModel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:13 AM
  #37
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,926
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
Read post # 28
So now they get even less. Plus, it still doesn't answer all the BS from the NHL's ridiculous take it or leave it proposals.

This following is not directed at the quoted poster but in general.

I can understand how people could be on side with the owners at the last lockout as it was pretty good propoganda to swallow about league health, keeping franchises etc but in this case it seems like its about the owners wanting more money and trying to break the players union again. I can't identify with either of them with regards to the money they are making but I can certainly identify with the players more in general. Why is it people want the players to lose this battle? Is it projection of some failed attempt at what they were successful at? I'm not trying to insult anyone, i just can't figure out why anyone would side with the owners this time.

shakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:14 AM
  #38
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Fine, Linkage! But those contracts had "linkage" based on a certain percentage. Once the owners come out and decide to change the %, then that fractures the basis of the whole "linkage" agreement.
Yes, but it's clearly stated that any contract is subject to changes under a new CBA. This shouldn't even be an issue, everybody knew it.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:17 AM
  #39
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ThisYearsModel View Post
Good Commish? The guy who sold the owners on expansion to markets where the NHL does not belong? The guy who won their favor by bringing in the massive expansion fees? The markets that are now drowning the league causing this acrimonious CBA negotiation, and the owners of these teams demanding handouts from players, fans and the richer clubs? This guy has screwed the pooch and negatively affected hockey BEFORE the labor issues every 5-6 years. This is a man that willingly shut down the league for an entire season the last time and seems poised to do so again.
The guy that created the league with the greatest paritiy and this with guaranteed contracts. They that grew the game like nobady could imagine. Yes, he's a great commish and the players should be grateful, they have the best working conditions and now cry when their share needs to be adjusted close to the other cap leagues.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:18 AM
  #40
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes View Post
So now they get even less. Plus, it still doesn't answer all the BS from the NHL's ridiculous take it or leave it proposals.

This following is not directed at the quoted poster but in general.

I can understand how people could be on side with the owners at the last lockout as it was pretty good propoganda to swallow about league health, keeping franchises etc but in this case it seems like its about the owners wanting more money and trying to break the players union again. I can't identify with either of them with regards to the money they are making but I can certainly identify with the players more in general. Why is it people want the players to lose this battle? Is it projection of some failed attempt at what they were successful at? I'm not trying to insult anyone, i just can't figure out why anyone would side with the owners this time.
What's up with this "they get even less" stuff? The players earn way more than ever before, IN REAL DOLLARS, not in revenue % and that's what matters in the end.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:23 AM
  #41
redman
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 112
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hek View Post
Under Bettman the NHL has also experienced record growth and revenue as well as a record TV deal. You have more players in the NHL than ever before as well as more fans.

Continue cherry picking though.
the record TV deal came from Ed Snider, not Bettman!

redman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:23 AM
  #42
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
Yes, but it's clearly stated that any contract is subject to changes under a new CBA. This shouldn't even be an issue, everybody knew it.
Again, fine. But that still doesn't mean that the players have to agree to all of those changes, especially when every change effects them in a negative way.

There's not a whole lot of point of negotiating any contract that goes beyond the date of the CBA if there is no obligation to hold to that contract after a new CBA. Such an arrangement totally undermines the concept of "long-term" contracts, hell even short-term contracts if they were agreed on at any time near to the end of the old CBA.

If the owners won't hold up or aren't obligated to hold up their end of previously negotiated contracts, then players should be allowed freedom to negotiate new contracts even with other teams.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:27 AM
  #43
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
Again, fine. But that still doesn't mean that the players have to agree to all of those changes, especially when every change effects them in a negative way.
There's not a whole lot of point of negotiating any contract that goes beyond the date of the CBA if there is no obligation to hold to that contract after a new CBA. Such an arrangement totally undermines the concept of "long-term" contracts, hell even short-term contracts if they were agreed on at any time near to the end of the old CBA.

If the owners won't hold up or aren't obligated to hold up their end of previously negotiated contracts, then players should be allowed freedom to negotiate new contracts even with other teams.
To the bolded. I agree, the should not have to accept EVERTHING, but for the love of god, then start to negotiate these points, pouting will get you nowhere.

And to the rest. I disagree, why should they be able to renegotiate? If they want to make sure they're only subject to the existing CBA, then it's their choice to only sign a contract for its duration. If the end of the CBA means contracts can be voided from each side, then yes, longterm contracts make no sense.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:31 AM
  #44
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 5,680
vCash: 500
I bet Gary is flattered that so many people think he's responsible for everything that happens in the NHL. Except growing revenues hand over fist. Not that one.

haseoke39 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:37 AM
  #45
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 17,721
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
To the bolded. I agree, the should not have to accept EVERTHING, but for the love of god, then start to negotiate these points, pouting will get you nowhere.

And to the rest. I disagree, why should they be able to renegotiate? If they want to make sure they're only subject to the existing CBA, then it's their choice to only sign a contract for its duration. If the end of the CBA means contracts can be voided from each side, then yes, longterm contracts make no sense.
They already have said that they'd accept 50/50 moving forward (down from 57/43), and they said that they were open to the discussing the "Make Whole", which is at least another issue and a point to negotiate from. And the owners' response: 'Accept our latest offer or we're not talking more.'

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:39 AM
  #46
MtlPenFan
Registered User
 
MtlPenFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 10,982
vCash: 500
Adrian who?

MtlPenFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:41 AM
  #47
Milliardo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Zürich
Country: Switzerland
Posts: 1,596
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
They already have said that they'd accept 50/50 moving forward (down from 57/43), and they said that they were open to the discussing the "Make Whole", which is at least another issue and a point to negotiate from. And the owners' response: 'Accept our latest offer or we're not talking more.'
Then why don't they make a proposal with 50/50? All I've seen is 50/50 in 5 years.

And the owner say that because they have the leverage. I'm digging out the Bill Guerin quote again:

"We could have waited two years and they would have waited us out -- I would have given an extra 2 percent back to play that year," Guerin said. "When you are in the heat of battle, and you are fired up, you don't think what they are doing is right. But it's not about what is right or wrong -- it's their league. It's theirs. I feel, personally, I didn't like guys giving up a year of their career, for what? A few less bucks? Guys are making more money now than they ever have."

The bolded says all you need to know.

Milliardo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:41 AM
  #48
pepty
Registered User
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,057
vCash: 492
Quote:
Originally Posted by redman View Post
The NHL proposal was a complete and utter joke. For them to insist on immediate salary rollbacks reeks of arrogance on one hand, despair on the other hand, and on both feet there are a pair of boots with the words "DISTRUST" written in large red lettering.
T
The distrust is growing. It's multi-faceted in nature.
T
ng while.
I agree that distrust is growing. In fact distrust of Donald Fehr and the spin doctoring at the NHLPA is the reason that the NHL put their proposal on the internet for the players to see and why they permitted the GM's, for a short period, to respond to the calls from the players regarding that proposal.

Many of the owners have completely lost trust in the NHLPA as an honest bargaining partner, believing that the Fehr brothers and those around them have another agenda which is not about finding an agreement, and no matter what is offered it will be spun as an insult etc etc .It's all PR all the time for the PA.

It seems a lot of players are getting tired of being pawns in the Fehr's game and are losing faith that the Fehrs can or will reach any agreement but have their own agenda.

pepty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:42 AM
  #49
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 17,288
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milliardo View Post
What's up with this "they get even less" stuff? The players earn way more than ever before, IN REAL DOLLARS, not in revenue % and that's what matters in the end.
I am sorry but a lockout hurts the league, alot. All research and any expert will attest to that.

You should not look at it as a gift that hockey has been played at all since Bettman took over. He took over a league with a ton of growth potential that was very hot after NYR won in 94' and so forth (ok, maybe not on its way to take over the NBA as often was stated, but undoubtedly on its way up), and since then it has more or less been a constant struggle.

Give or take this a couple of weeks, or what do I know, a month or two, but loose the entire season again and you are in for a horrible suprise in the US when things finally opens up. It won't be pretty. Alot of people would stay at home.

Ola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
10-26-2012, 10:47 AM
  #50
RangerBoy
1994 FOREVER
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 31,574
vCash: 500
The NHL has lost over 2,000 games because of Gary Bettman and his lockouts. The man is the lockout king. His legacy as NHL czar will be tied to labor work stoppages. Lockouts. It doesn't seem to really bother the NHL brass. From: @NYDNRangers
Sent: Oct 26, 2012 11:39a

Bill Daly told us a couple weeks ago this isn't about winners & losers. He's correct. When #NHL fritters away its own seasons, no one wins

sent via TweetDeck
On Twitter: http://twitter.com/NYDNRangers/statu...54671545696256

RangerBoy is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:15 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.