HFBoards

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

Does Anybody Here Remember Vera Lynn? (CBA & Lockout Discussion) XXVIII ‎

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-15-2012, 12:35 PM
  #476
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HockeyCrazed101 View Post
I think both sides would be foolish to think that they couldn't possibly expect a backlash from fans. I'm sure they're hoping that's not the case but I think realistically both sides must have considered this possibility. With that said, I would think the league is aware of the risks and have determined that there are certain risks they're willing to take to get a higher share. The owners want 50% and they want linkage. If they lose or more for this and get it, their immediate loss in revenue should eventually rise again and that linkage ensures that if the players want to play a game of a chicken, then if the owners suffer revenue loss, the players will suffer for it as well. This must be a something that both sides have assessed and it seems clear that both sides are willing to take on the risk otherwise we'd have a CBA signed already and we'd be watching hockey.
While I agree with your post for the most part, this is exactly why I am player sympathetic but pro-owner.

I would be on the player's side (as I usually am) if they had agreed to 50/50 linked, but the owners were holding fast on contract rights. Hell, if they had proposed a linked number they were willing to actually negotiate off of, I would be ok with them saying 'take make whole and shove it'. The players could have suggested they get 60% linked and I would be on board.

The problem is that the owners seem to have made a reasoned assessment, Fehr has made his assessment but I can't bring myself to call it reasoned, but the PLAYERS themselves have been left out of this whole thing. Again, nothing that has unfolded helps the players in either the short or long term. This is just a tragedy of epic proportions for anyone who really cares about the players and wants to see them do well over being 'right' on an internet message board.


Last edited by mossey3535: 11-15-2012 at 12:40 PM.
mossey3535 is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:36 PM
  #477
Tinalera
Registered User
 
Tinalera's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Known Universe
Posts: 6,097
vCash: 500
Those 4 days of meetings, the end of it must have left some seriously sour tastes in both sides mouths. Kind of surreal that this time last week there were people speculating about "they'll have this done in a week" type of thing-as an example of the optimism, now it's very dark with no light right now it seems.

I'm suspecting next week if nothing happens between now and then that either half or all of Dec gets cancelled. I keep thinking if there's nothing done within the next month-at least some sort of significant progress, the season will be cancelled in Jan-I don't think they make it to Feb this time.

Tinalera is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:39 PM
  #478
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 6,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
While I agree with your post for the most part, this is exactly why I am player sympathetic but pro-owner.

I would be on the player's side (as I usually am) if they had agreed to 50/50 linked, but the owners were holding fast on contract rights. Hell, if they had proposed a linked number they were willing to actually negotiate off of, I would be ok with them saying 'take make whole and shove it'.

The problem is that the owners seem to have made a reasoned assessment, Fehr has made his assessment but I can't bring myself to call it reasoned, but the PLAYERS themselves have been left out of this whole thing. Again, nothing that has unfolded helps the players in either the short or long term. This is just a tragedy of epic proportions for anyone who really cares about the players and wants to see them do well over being 'right' on an internet message board.
Define "do well." They'll make huge chunks of money, be chauffeured around the country with first-class everything and have guaranteed contracts no matter what. If that's not "doing well," maybe the standards have been raised too high.

haveandare is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:41 PM
  #479
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by S E P H View Post
Can't forget about JM Liles and as a Avs fan I lost a lot of respect for him because of his comments.
I understand the players position of wanting to get the best deal possible for themselves. I'm not bitter or angry about them looking out for themselves. This is their livelihood. All I do is watch the games, I have no real stake in the matter and I'm not going to hold it against those that do (for either side) to look out for their best interests. However, the amount of posturing and spin doctoring that the players have taken up quite frankly is extremely nauseating. Pandering to me and every other fan isn't going to help you get a deal done faster. What purpose does it serve to behave in such a juvenile manner? While there are less than a handful of examples, there are players who have shown that you can share an opinion on the matter without sounding like an uneducated idiot.

Players are talking smack about the league saying that they should focus on negotiating instead of worrying about how Don is running the PA. What have the players been doing all this time? Have they not been talking smack about Bettman (and in many cases players are defending their owners and putting this all on Bettman as though he carries 100% of the voting that goes on among the owners)? Players say that the owners are just spreading lies about the PA not being united...how many stories have you read from players saying that the owners want to sign the PA's deal but it's just 8 owners that are preventing that from happening?

At least there are some players who have been doing the PA spiel and are mature about it (but not as eloquent as guys like Miller). If the PA wants their message to be heard, they've got all of the wrong guys doing the talking.

Ari91 is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:41 PM
  #480
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 11,500
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mouser View Post
Yes, Anaheim had the option to trade Schultz's rights up until sometime in late June. Not sure of the exact date, it depends on when Schultz filed that he was leaving school.
1: Hey we got this prospect we want to move for one of yours.

2: What's he make?

1: er, well, he's not under contract, won't return our phone calls and goes free agent on july 1.

2: you have his agent's name? We'll just call him then.


Trading Schultz wasn't an option.

billybudd is online now  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:42 PM
  #481
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
Define "do well." They'll make huge chunks of money, be chauffeured around the country with first-class everything and have guaranteed contracts no matter what. If that's not "doing well," maybe the standards have been raised too high.
Oh I agree - which is why Fehr is doing them a disservice. And it has NOTHING to do with them 'rolling over'. It has everything to do with economic reality.

But pro-PA guys on here would have them lose a whole year of earning and possibly their careers for...well, nothing.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:42 PM
  #482
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,130
vCash: 500
Quote:
The NHL wants to limit contracts to five years, make rules to prohibit back-diving contracts the league feels circumvent the salary cap, keep players ineligible for unrestricted free agency until they are 28 or have eight years of professional service time, cut entry-level deals to two years, and make salary arbitration after five years.
If I may express a few opinions related to the above, as a "hockey fan", I'd say that on a couple of points the League appears to be a bit excessive.

- Limiting contracts to 5 years, for one seems slightly excessive. I use the CBA itself as a comparison. Typically we're seeing a new CBA being negotiated every 7 years or so. I think the same idea should apply to player contracts. Player contracts could be as long as the typical length of time between CBA negotiations.

- As for prohibiting the "back-diving" contracts... That's an obvious Yes!

- Restricting free agency until players are 28 or have had 8 years of professional service is another point which I think the League is being excessive. Yes, I understand that it's to help teams keep their young talent and may help parity, but it's still rings of a kind of enslavement (though a paid one of course). Truly, I believe that players should have the right to choose how long they wish to commit to a team and have the flexibility to play elsewhere when a contract has expired, without being restricted to having to stay with their first team for as much as 8 years. Players are like fans in way, if a particular market isn't attractive to them for some reason, then why should they be unduly obligated to stay there or maintain an affliliation. I'd say that 5 years is plenty to complete the obligation to whichever team first offers a player professional service. If the franchise wants to keep that young player longer, then find others ways to make him happy to stay there.

- As for cutting entry-levels deals to 2 years, I really have no strong opinion on that.

- And as for salary arbitration after 5 years... Haha... I'd say again, If the League is willing to accept arbitration in these CBA negotiations, then fine. Hypocrisy isn't a good tool for negotiations.

MoreOrr is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:44 PM
  #483
Shrimper
Trick or ruddy treat
 
Shrimper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Essex
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 71,183
vCash: 500
I kind've hope they'd just cancel the season so that my hopes can't get up at any point despite the fact that, let's face it, there's not going to be a deal.

Shrimper is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:46 PM
  #484
pepty
Registered User
 
pepty's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 10,478
vCash: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stewie Griffin View Post
Key point is bolded for emphasis. This was the story Fehr was spinning since negotiations started, and was his starting tactic. I don't think he's moved off this tale of fear (Fehr) and is still using that to negotiate.

Fehr has an end game and I don't think he's shown his hand yet. There's a reason he's continually brought up the spectre of the last CBA but your guess is as good as mine as to what that end game is.
And sometimes you have to wonder if there is an end game at all of if he just gets lost in the war games and is in no rush for this to end and for him to exit the stage.

pepty is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:47 PM
  #485
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bp13 View Post
Thanks for sending this along.

I do still think though that players going overseas really seems like a non-factor to me, Mark Mowers' thoughts not withstanding. Seems like Negotiation 101 to use the players' activities as a means to exert pressure.
But agents and the KHL alike have said that most of these players will be paid next to nothing. Either they get a salary and cover their own costly insurance or the league covers their costly insurance and they get paid relative pennies to play. We can call it a tactic but I don't think it's much of a pressure point. Just as we know, the league knows that these players are playing in lesser conditions for much lesser pay. Aside from the few star Russian players in the league, who belives that this PA tactic will result in all of these North American players packing their bags and moving to Europe and Russia to play out the rest of their careers?

Ari91 is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:49 PM
  #486
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,672
vCash: 500
If there is enough player pressure, I think Don will have to get a deal done. He doesn't want to get marched out like he did to Kelly.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:54 PM
  #487
FanSince2014
What'd He Say?
 
FanSince2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 3,065
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
...I believe Don is the real problem.

The really sad thing is that I'm saying this because I don't think the players have the balls to actually make their voice heard.
I agree with you, but they put themselves in this position.

They do it to themselves every time.

They always hire the wrong guy and when they did hire they right guy, they didn't even give him a chance and fired him.

Unbelieveable how self-desctructive NHL players are.

They should negotiate themselves the best mental health money can buy then go in for intensive, two times a day, five days a week therapy.
Maybe after a couple years, the therapists would make a small dent.

FanSince2014 is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:55 PM
  #488
SuperUnknown
Registered User
 
SuperUnknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,525
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJDevs26 View Post
Substantial offers = offering the players downgrades in EVERY SINGLE area from the last CBA? That's not negotiation, that's attempted extortion. Neither side has done anything remotely close to negotiating at this point, 50-50 hardly qualifies as a concession considering it's still a net HRR gain of < 10% from 43-57.
Extortion is the other way around. Money is flowing from owners to players, so owners can't extort players.

SuperUnknown is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:58 PM
  #489
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,439
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by FanSince2012 View Post
I agree with you, but they put themselves in this position.

They do it to themselves every time.

They always hire the wrong guy and when they did hire they right guy, they didn't even give him a chance and fired him.

Unbelieveable how self-desctructive NHL players are.

They should negotiate themselves the best mental health money can buy then go in for intensive, two times a day, five days a week therapy.
Maybe after a couple years, the therapists would make a small dent.
I agree, but it isn't really the players as a whole - it is always some small group or more usually a bunch of washed-up ex-players who make these decisions.

Their problem is that they don't care about their own union until it's too late. It's like hiring a financial manager and then not noticing for years he is stealing money from you hand over fist - which also happens to a lot of pro athletes, not just hockey players.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:58 PM
  #490
haveandare
Registered User
 
haveandare's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 6,362
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mossey3535 View Post
Oh I agree - which is why Fehr is doing them a disservice. And it has NOTHING to do with them 'rolling over'. It has everything to do with economic reality.

But pro-PA guys on here would have them lose a whole year of earning and possibly their careers for...well, nothing.
Agreed. The bold is really well put IMO. Fehr is walking a very dangerous line for those he represents. I'm still somewhat optimistic that a deal will be made when the deadline for the season approaches. I don't think he's crazy enough to keep pushing it beyond that but who really knows?

haveandare is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 12:58 PM
  #491
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laszlo Panaflex View Post
I agree things should change in the next CBA. There probably should be a limit on contracts or at the very least a rule so teams can't circumvent the cap. For example, if a player makes 5 million one year you shouldn't be allowed to pay him 1 million the next. I think I saw somewhere a 5% rule regarding contracts, which seemed pretty fair to me.

My point is that teams who have signed these crazy deals should not complain. If 25 teams have not, they can complain all they like, but i think if you sign a guy to a contract you should honour it. There should not be any kind of rollback or taking away part of a player's salary because that means you did not negotiate in good faith.
How many teams who have signed these deals do we hear complaining? You mean the Wild owner, correct? The optics look bad but he is on the negotiating board. He shows up to the meetings not as a representative of himself but as a representative of all of the owners. Similarly when the players show up to these meetings, they represent the collective union, not just themselves. Regardless of which owners and players are driving the bus in these negotiations, you can't remove the context of the situation and treat what's said by the owners at the table as an individual opinion when the owners are representing one collective thought to show their unity as owners in this negotiation process. Similarily, the players are doing the same. If Rick Nash showed up to these meetings, it would look bad for him to be there talking about how owners need to honour the contracts they signed when he is guilty of not only dishonouring the contract he signed with Columbus by not only demanding a trade, but handcuffing his owner as to which teams he can negotiate with in order to get something in return for him.

Ari91 is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 01:07 PM
  #492
W75
Wegistewed Usew
 
W75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 3,937
vCash: 626
Quote:
Originally Posted by haveandare View Post
Agreed. The bold is really well put IMO. Fehr is walking a very dangerous line for those he represents. I'm still somewhat optimistic that a deal will be made when the deadline for the season approaches. I don't think he's crazy enough to keep pushing it beyond that but who really knows?
Yes he is. Only that, some say he's so clever, some say he's that crazy. But I think one thing we can all agree.. he's fully capable of doing it.

W75 is online now  
Old
11-15-2012, 01:07 PM
  #493
Captain Saku
Registered User
 
Captain Saku's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 10,946
vCash: 500
Gotta admit that last round of negociations made be optimistic, but now I wouldn't be surprised if the season is canceled. In 2004 I was already expecting the season to be canceled, so I wasn't that disappointed, but surely not this year, there is absolutely no reason to have the season canceled when you had almost 6 months to conclude a deal within the same frame of the old CBA. Totally unacceptable.

Captain Saku is online now  
Old
11-15-2012, 01:08 PM
  #494
Crows*
 
Crows*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Vancouver
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,307
vCash: 500
Ray Ferraro made those comments on his daily team 1040 show in Vancouver this morning.

Sorry no link or tweet. I heard it live though

Crows* is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 01:09 PM
  #495
Freudian
No Guenin, No cry
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 30,966
vCash: 0
Talking about the Parise-Suter contracts seems like a red herring to me. The top UFAs usually get huge contracts. They did in the 90s. They did in the last CBA and they will in the next CBA.

Asking the owners to show constraints last summer when there is a bidding war for these players is unrealistic. Ken Holland showed restraint and look what that got him.

Yes, the optics of signing players to big contracts and then asking for players wages to be reduced isn't the best. But would anything be fundamentally different if the owners colluded to only offer them $6M/year and then ask for wage reductions in the next CBA? I suspect not.

Freudian is online now  
Old
11-15-2012, 01:11 PM
  #496
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 12,053
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by billybudd View Post
1: Hey we got this prospect we want to move for one of yours.

2: What's he make?

1: er, well, he's not under contract, won't return our phone calls and goes free agent on july 1.

2: you have his agent's name? We'll just call him then.


Trading Schultz wasn't an option.
It was an option, just not a terribly practical one.

Anyway, I wasn't trying to defend the merits of trading Schultz or not. Just answering the question whether Anaheim had the right to trade him.

mouser is online now  
Old
11-15-2012, 01:12 PM
  #497
Stuck in Socal
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 792
vCash: 500
I have been saying already they won't meet until after Thanksgiving.

I was a firm believer that a deal would get done. Now, unless the union decertifies like the NBA you can forget it.

I think there is a 1 percent chance at a season at this point. The NHL is done trying to create some movement forward and Don is telling the players wait till this summer ill kill the cap.

I'm pretty ashamed of this entire process but I love NHL hockey otherwise I wouldn't be posting here.
It is really sad how we have to kill th sport for a season to get a new CBA.

Stuck in Socal is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 01:15 PM
  #498
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crows View Post
Ray Ferraro made those comments on his daily team 1040 show in Vancouver this morning.

Sorry no link or tweet. I heard it live though
You talking about him saying the under current of players are pissed that there are no games yet? or was that something else.

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 01:16 PM
  #499
wondeROY
Registered User
 
wondeROY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Missoula, Montana
Country: United States
Posts: 770
vCash: 500
Can someone explain to me the process and role of Fehr? Is his word the end all for the players? Meaning if the players like the terms they are being offered by Bettman/NHL, but Fehr does not like them, does his word over ride all of the PA?

Or can the players and/or PA vote yes to play even though Fehr does not agree to the terms.

I'm just trying to wrap my head around the idea of one idiot ruining an entire season for several hundred players who would probably rather be making some money as opposed to none.

wondeROY is offline  
Old
11-15-2012, 01:17 PM
  #500
Ragamuffin Gunner
Lost in The Flood
 
Ragamuffin Gunner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 16,357
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laszlo Panaflex View Post
Nobody put a gun to the head of any GM and told them to hand out some of the ridiculous contracts we've seen in the past 7 years. If you want to sign a guy for 10 plus years and drive a dump truck full of money to the guys house, fine, but don't complain about contracts being out of hand. If you sign a guy you live with the contract. I'm the first to admit that some of the contracts in the NHL are absolutely ridiculous, but if the team decides to sign him to that deal they have no right to complain in my opinion. If you're Zach Parise or Ryan Suter, do you turn down 13 years and close to 200 million dollars? Of course not. The Wild made their bed, they can lie in it.
You don't get the point of the contract restrictions.

They're there not to protect the owners from the players but to protect owners from other owners.

Only a few teams can afford to hand out these huge cap circumvention deals, which hurts the parity of the league and forced other GMs to hand out bigger deals to just stay competitive.

Ragamuffin Gunner 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 10:03 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.