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.

Suter Calls Out Leipold re: Contract Roll Backs

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
10-27-2012, 04:08 PM
  #151
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,829
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
That's the critical point, imo. Call the players and owners hypocrites all you like, but guys like Leipold and Snider had insider information, and may have acted on it. To what extent the other GMs/owners knew exact details is unknown ( to me, at least ). IF that's what Suter is implying with the reassurances, he has a point.
If Leipold told Suter during the negotiations that the owners were going to keep the HRR % close to 57, then yes, Suter has a legitimate complaint. I can't imagine a world where Leipold would have told Suter that before he signed a contract and Suter's agent would have done a tremendous disservice to his client if he didn't tell Suter that the next CBA could lower his contract value for a few seasons. Why else would the agent/Suter demand the signing bonuses? You don't think the owner would have asked for that?

I think that Suter was just asked to put the NHLPA's party line back out into the press about the big bad owners negotiating in bad faith and how he just wants his contract honored. It's the same rhetoric from the NHLPA and doesn't help the negotiations. Both sides should have a gag order during negotiations.

If everyone in the free world thought the NHL would go for 50/50, how can the players all claim that they didn't see it coming? Bettman even talked about how he was going to close the contract loop holes with the next CBA. How else would he accomplish that without tighter contract restrictions? Is 5 years too little? Maybe, but that is why you negotiate.

Sydor25 is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 04:10 PM
  #152
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,829
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Quote:
Originally Posted by haseoke39 View Post
Owners have three options:

1. Act "responsibly" alone, meaning you never compete for the top FAs and likely lose your own high end talent (see: Buffalo Sabres letting every good player we had walk from 2007-08).

2. Act responsibly in agreement with other owners - OOPS! Collusion, go to jail.

3. Act responsibly be resetting the market structure in the CBA. Only legal and viable option they have.

So Leipold shouldn't have bothered getting in the FA sweepstakes, so that some other owner could, and Suter could ***** about that owner until that team won the cup in 2014? Great plan.
And Burke in Toronto. The only team not to make the playoffs post-lockout. Toronto has all the money in the world and wouldn't spend it because Burke didn't believe in the cap-busting contracts. How is he liked in Toronto because of that?

Sydor25 is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 04:13 PM
  #153
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydor25 View Post
If Leipold told Suter during the negotiations that the owners were going to keep the HRR % close to 57, then yes, Suter has a legitimate complaint. I can't imagine a world where Leipold would have told Suter that before he signed a contract and Suter's agent would have done a tremendous disservice to his client if he didn't tell Suter that the next CBA could lower his contract value for a few seasons. Why else would the agent/Suter demand the signing bonuses? You don't think the owner would have asked for that?

I think that Suter was just asked to put the NHLPA's party line back out into the press about the big bad owners negotiating in bad faith and how he just wants his contract honored. It's the same rhetoric from the NHLPA and doesn't help the negotiations. Both sides should have a gag order during negotiations.

If everyone in the free world thought the NHL would go for 50/50, how can the players all claim that they didn't see it coming? Bettman even talked about how he was going to close the contract loop holes with the next CBA. How else would he accomplish that without tighter contract restrictions? Is 5 years too little? Maybe, but that is why you negotiate.
Exactly. In fact, I'm offended, because the player's PR pitch is just meant to abuse the intelligence of the public. Try to get the layman to believe that nobody had any idea there were pay-cuts coming. Insinuate that this might even be illegal by calling it "not honoring contracts." Try to convince the public the record revenues = profits. Try to convince the public that 57 = 50 and you just want to play and on and on when all of it's demonstrably false, you're clearly in the wrong, overpaid relative to what you bring in for your franchises, and pathetically bad negotiators (you've already refused to even negotiate off of the best deal you're going to get. Even if the league went to 51%, it sure as hell wouldn't happen until you'd taken such a hit this season as to nullify it).

haseoke39 is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 04:13 PM
  #154
unifiedtheory
Registered User
 
unifiedtheory's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Burnaby, B.C.
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,860
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DuklaNation View Post
Someone tell Suter he signed a contract under the terms of the old CBA which just expired.
Someone tell Leipold that he is obligated to pay the contract according to the terms HE agreed on and HE signed.

The hard line owners (of which Jeremy Jacobs is the leader) are beginning to sicken me.

I would like to ask Craig Leipold this:

Company "A" agrees to a 5 year advertising contract with the Predators. After two years Company "A" looks at T.V. ratings and see's they are lower than they were anticipating. Meaning far less eyes are on their advertising than they paid for.

If Company "A" went to Leipold and said "we want some of our money back", what do you think Leipold would say? Would he commiserate with them? Would he give them money back? Hell no, he would groan on about a "contract" and call his fleet of lawyers.

Hypocrite.

We need MODERATE owner's to bring sanity to the negotiations. Just like the NFL had Bob Kraft (who I despise) come in and be the voice of reason the NHL needs the Mike Ilich's of the World to be a voice of reason. If Jacobs and his ilk continue to run the agenda we will see no movement and no CBA. They don't give a flying **** about "the good of the game", "the fans" or anything else. They want to break the union, squeeze every cent out of the union they can and WIN. They don't want to look like they lost or gave back anything.

Yes, the union has a place at the "idiot" table as well. The foot dragging they are doing is maddening. That said, the NHL and the Board got this process off to a horrible start with their initial offer, which was laughable. They went below low balling and "poisoned the well" on day 1 of the negotiations.

Gary Bettman has NO CLUE how to negotiate. His track record proves it. Lowball, threaten, lock players out, hope they break and claim victory. That is not "good faith".

unifiedtheory is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 04:18 PM
  #155
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unifiedtheory View Post
Someone tell Leipold that he is obligated to pay the contract according to the terms HE agreed on and HE signed.

If what you're implying by that is that he's required to give Suter the dollar amount that was reported in the media, you DEAD WRONG. The contract is subject to the CBA. Therefore, if the next CBA that gets signed says "all previous contracts are null and void" or "All players will now play for $100K/year" or anything so despicably heinous that you can't fathom it, it's 100% legal, entirely over the table, and fairly negotiated for by both sides.

haseoke39 is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 04:20 PM
  #156
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,829
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Quote:
Originally Posted by unifiedtheory View Post
Someone tell Leipold that he is obligated to pay the contract according to the terms HE agreed on and HE signed.

The hard line owners (of which Jeremy Jacobs is the leader) are beginning to sicken me.

I would like to ask Craig Leipold this:

Company "A" agrees to a 5 year advertising contract with the Predators. After two years Company "A" looks at T.V. ratings and see's they are lower than they were anticipating. Meaning far less eyes are on their advertising than they paid for.

If Company "A" went to Leipold and said "we want some of our money back", what do you think Leipold would say? Would he commiserate with them? Would he give them money back? Hell no, he would groan on about a "contract" and call his fleet of lawyers.

Hypocrite.
If that 5 year advertising contract was based on a percentage of ratings and that percentage was due for renegotiation in 2 months, then of course Leipold should try and negotiate that new percentage for as close as it was previously. He has no grounds to complain that the contract isn't being honored. He would be a terrible business man if he didn't envision that the overall percentage could be lowered, especially if the advertising company had worries that the ratings weren't where they had hoped and that the other advertising companies had just lowered their percentage the previous summer.

Leipold shouldn't go to that advertising company and demand that his contract needs to be re-written so that it is paid in full based on the previous percentage because "it's not fair".


Do people not see that the NHL is honoring the contracts as written and the NHLPA is the one trying to re-write the contracts in their favor?

Sydor25 is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 04:27 PM
  #157
haseoke39
Brainfart 4 Reinhart
 
haseoke39's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 4,857
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unifiedtheory View Post
Gary Bettman has NO CLUE how to negotiate. His track record proves it. Lowball, threaten, lock players out, hope they break and claim victory. That is not "good faith".
Gary Bettman sees no other league paying more than 50% to its players, offers 50% in time for the full season, and that's "bad faith"? Only if you believe that the league has hidden financial treasures that they just maliciously want to keep from the players, that enables them to actually spend more than any other league in NA on their players does that make any sense. You're talking out of fairy tale land.

But you what? The proof is in the pudding: if owners were really making that kind of money, they'd want to play hockey already. They'd be losing money by sitting out. What this lockout proves is that they're not making money. They just sent a clear, simple message to the players: "Dear PA, it's not financially worth it to us to run this league under any of the financial models you've proposed. Thanks anyways, owners." And they're sitting back now, half of them counting their blessings because at least as long as they don't play they don't have to welfare subsidize their profit-less teams. And the players had better wake up fast, because they were the only ones making real money under the old system, so they're the only ones losing money now. The folks who make nothing at this can afford to wait forever.

haseoke39 is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 04:28 PM
  #158
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiuh View Post
Lol at all the people going "**** off Suter", when has every right to be upset here. It doesn't matter if its for millions of dollars or just 1 dollar a contract is a contract. I don't see how anyone can be hating on Suter here just because he's still making money despite being screwed out of potentially millions of dollars.
Owners want to pay the players less. Players were always subject to escrow since 05. So while I disagree with using escrow to force a 13% hit (there's ways around that), I have no issues with escrow taking ~3% (which is what it did over the life of the last CBA).

And both sides are at fault, but by no means do I think one negotiated unfairly. The owner knew the new CBA would/should have a lower player split. The player knew this as well (or at least he should have as he has a team of agents/advisors who DID know this).

The player wanted to cash in, and did so before finding out what exactly the new CBA that would govern his contract entailed. So if he takes a hit with the new CBA... that's his own damn fault.

__________________
"Its not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, its as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Riptide is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 04:34 PM
  #159
Sydor25
LA Kings
 
Sydor25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: North Texas
Country: United States
Posts: 21,829
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to Sydor25
Does the money the NHL taked to escrow "grow" during the year? Do they put that money into a money making account and then give the profits to the players or do they pocket that money? Or do they just withhold the money, like a taxes, and the NHL can invest the money however they like?

Sydor25 is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:05 PM
  #160
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by unifiedtheory View Post
Someone tell Leipold that he is obligated to pay the contract according to the terms HE agreed on and HE signed.
The contract that BOTH parties signed is subject to the CBA that BOTH parties sign.


Quote:
We need MODERATE owner's to bring sanity to the negotiations. .. the NHL needs the Mike Ilich's of the World to be a voice of reason. ... They want to break the union, squeeze every cent out of the union they can and WIN. They don't want to look like they lost or gave back anything.

Yes, the union has a place at the "idiot" table as well. The foot dragging they are doing is maddening. That said, the NHL and the Board got this process off to a horrible start with their initial offer, which was laughable. They went below low balling and "poisoned the well" on day 1 of the negotiations.

Gary Bettman has NO CLUE how to negotiate. His track record proves it. Lowball, threaten, lock players out, hope they break and claim victory. That is not "good faith".
Epic fail here. Illich may not be a 'hard liner', but he's not a moderate either. He doesn't like RS, and wants no part of it. The NHLs initial offer was their IDEAL CBA. Fehr didn't take offense at it, and neither should anyone else. The NHL stated by their IDEAL CBA that they wanted to negotiate on the following topics. And you have to have them all in place first, or you're going to get somewhere down the line and then ask for X, and the PA is going to laugh.

And Bettman had to lock the players out. Ever since Fehr had the MLB players strike before the world series, it's taught EVERY owner a lesson. If there's no CBA in place, they do not play. It's not a threat, it's just a fact of life, thanks to Fehr. And there's no reason why the NHL would play another year under this CBA (even if they signed a 1 yr deal so the PA couldn't strike), as then the players have no need to negotiate as they're getting paid.

MOD


Last edited by Fugu: 10-27-2012 at 09:22 PM. Reason: not needed
Riptide is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:05 PM
  #161
Riptide
Moderator
 
Riptide's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Yukon
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sydor25 View Post
Does the money the NHL taked to escrow "grow" during the year? Do they put that money into a money making account and then give the profits to the players or do they pocket that money? Or do they just withhold the money, like a taxes, and the NHL can invest the money however they like?
The money thats put into escrow is paid back with interest. I assume that's what you're getting at.

Riptide is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:13 PM
  #162
RoseTintedVisor
Frans Nielsen?!?!?
 
RoseTintedVisor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: bklyn
Country: United States
Posts: 4,285
vCash: 500
I love that people are bashing millionaires to defend billionaires.

RoseTintedVisor is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:17 PM
  #163
Ogopogo*
 
Ogopogo*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Edmonton
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,216
vCash: 500
The PA loves to say it's the owners' fault for signing the deals. What a crock of ****.

The players hire these parasite agents who start and force bidding wars for their clients. They know full well that, for teams to be able to compete they need some star players. So, let's exploit the rules and turn it into the maximum possible deal we can get within the rules. That is what parasite agents do - they extort owners who want to compete.

Tighter rules on contracts in the CBA is the answer. Any competitive person will do what they have to do to win. Suter and the rest of the PA are typically not that intelligent, they really have no idea what they are talking about. The CBA is the problem and needs to be fixed.

Ogopogo* is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:19 PM
  #164
Legionnaire11
Registered User
 
Legionnaire11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hendersonville
Country: United States
Posts: 2,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoseTintedVisor View Post
I love that people are bashing millionaires to defend billionaires.
So you're saying that the amount of money that someone has determines when/how they are right or wrong?

Legionnaire11 is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:22 PM
  #165
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,042
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire11 View Post
So you're saying that the amount of money that someone has determines when/how they are right or wrong?

Is he saying that?

Fugu is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:23 PM
  #166
Legionnaire11
Registered User
 
Legionnaire11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hendersonville
Country: United States
Posts: 2,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ogopogo View Post
The PA loves to say it's the owners' fault for signing the deals. What a crock of ****.

The players hire these parasite agents who start and force bidding wars for their clients. They know full well that, for teams to be able to compete they need some star players. So, let's exploit the rules and turn it into the maximum possible deal we can get within the rules. That is what parasite agents do - they extort owners who want to compete.

Tighter rules on contracts in the CBA is the answer. Any competitive person will do what they have to do to win. Suter and the rest of the PA are typically not that intelligent, they really have no idea what they are talking about. The CBA is the problem and needs to be fixed.
I've been wondering what it would be like if the free agent process was conducted like a silent auction. Don't allow agents to play these teams against each other. Interested teams simply submit their best offer (whatever they think is fair that they are willing to pay to a player) and then the agent can sort through them and choose the best one (term, salary, location) with his client.

I think we'd see A LOT fewer "bad" contracts and gross overpayments.

Legionnaire11 is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:24 PM
  #167
ThirdManIn
Mod Supervisor
 
ThirdManIn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 42,194
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire11 View Post
hasn't he also run other non-hockey ventures into the ground?

If not for marrying into the Johnson fortune, Liepold would have never gotten into the NHL in the first place.
I haven't had much desire to look into his other business ventures, but it would not surprise me in the least. Leipold strikes me as the kind of guy who likes to spend money on things that he really wants, but has next to no clue what to do after buying those things. I guess it's hard to screw up hockey in Minnesota, though.

ThirdManIn is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:24 PM
  #168
Legionnaire11
Registered User
 
Legionnaire11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hendersonville
Country: United States
Posts: 2,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Is he saying that?
after re-reading, now I don't know

Legionnaire11 is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:25 PM
  #169
ThirdManIn
Mod Supervisor
 
ThirdManIn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Posts: 42,194
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Is he saying that?
Personally, I'm not sure what is being said there. Then again, I'm bashing both sides so I guess maybe I'm just out of touch

ThirdManIn is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:27 PM
  #170
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 28,042
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Legionnaire11 View Post
after re-reading, now I don't know

If I may, I think people bash one set of rich guys for kvetching about money, ignoring that it's all about money and the other guys are even richer and also kvetching by virtue of a lockout.


It's an odd social phenomenon. By being fans, we support all these guys and hand over the money that they end up fighting over-- and there are billions at stake here. The next step is to decide that someone or the other deserves more/less or a fixed percent. At least in my experience, life doesn't work that way.... but here we are.

Fugu is online now  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:29 PM
  #171
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
( _)>⌐■-■ (⌐■_■)
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,300
vCash: 5158
Quote:
Originally Posted by unifiedtheory View Post
Someone tell Leipold that he is obligated to pay the contract according to the terms HE agreed on and HE signed.
Except he is not. The CBA is a contract, which expired last month. Therefore, until a new one is agreed upon, Leipold is only obligated to pay bonuses. Suter is well aware the CBA could deviate, thus reducing his salary. In fact, they would have to be deaf, dumb and blind to have anticipated this was precisely what the owners intended to do, as it was widely speculated from as early as last year.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 05:34 PM
  #172
Seedling
Fan level 7?
 
Seedling's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,375
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
I don't know why Suter and Parise are whining. They knew this was coming and that is why they negotiated for a giant signing bonus. How can they complain about the owners not negotiating in good faith when you cash in $10M without possibly having to play a single game?
Precisely. There is a reason they demanded so much in signing bonuses. Don't pretentious that they didn't know that this was gonna happen.

These two knew exactly what could happen and shaped their deals in this way just in case. Smart on their part. Just please be quiet though (these two). They made out like bandits and are now complaining? That takes a pretty astonishingly shameful ego.

Seedling is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 06:01 PM
  #173
Kloparren
Hth
 
Kloparren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,445
vCash: 500
Rather than disagreeing or agreeing with him, I think it's a major breakthrough because this is the first time I can remember that a player has criticized his own owner.

For the sake of entertainment, I hope others say the same but less diplomatically.

Kloparren is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 06:19 PM
  #174
Legionnaire11
Registered User
 
Legionnaire11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hendersonville
Country: United States
Posts: 2,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuietCompany View Post
Rather than disagreeing or agreeing with him, I think it's a major breakthrough because this is the first time I can remember that a player has criticized his own owner.

For the sake of entertainment, I hope others say the same but less diplomatically.
are you good with the owners also criticizing their players for not living up to contracts?

Legionnaire11 is offline  
Old
10-27-2012, 06:27 PM
  #175
the_fan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 5,460
vCash: 500
I hope this goes a very long time, both sides lose tons and tons of money, Bettman and Fehr lose their jobs and become bums, players lose their hockey careers and forced to look for other jobs. Huh, good luck with that because most of the NHL players are dumb, they'd be lucky if they get jobs at McDonald's drive through

the_fan 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 03:48 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.