HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2012 CBA Discussion Part IV (Lockout talk here)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-27-2012, 10:05 AM
  #701
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackNgold 84 View Post
Once again I think you're going a bit overboard here. Everyone who is pro owner around here is saying that bettman and the owners are doing this to better the game. All they're doing is screwing over the fans. Also 2 lockouts in the last 8 years? ya seems to me the owners give a **** about us fans. And no.. i don't feel the same about the players either. Both sides are at fault. Don't know why you choose to put a scarlet letter one over the other.
Why not, if as you say both sides are at fault? Aren't they the ones taking home bags of cash from the game? Everyone talks about how teams like Toronto, New York and Edmonton make good money and therefore the players should get more... do you know where that money comes from? It comes from them charging outlandish prices at the gate, from the fans.

And players want more money.

Neither side is blameless for any of the lockouts, nor is either side completely to blame. Pretending otherwise is foolish and bias. It's easy and a cop out to blame a guy like Bettman or Fehr but neither are the driving forces behind the lockout. Players and owners are, and those are the two deserving of all the angst imo for yet another lockout debacle.

As for why I support the owners... I see it as common sense, and not really supporting the owners but the NHL. I'm also selfish, I could care less about owners or players, I want the best NHL experience. All teams need to make money for the NHL to be competitive and for it to be as enjoyable as possible for myself. I like parity. I don't like it when my team can't or won't pay the outlandish contracts others will and is therefore handicapped. I sympathize with other fanbases who have to deal with things like internal cap limits that prevent them from building cmpetitive teams and by extension, making money and garnering fan support. NHL players whining because they might not get guaranteed raises each year when they already make millions over the course of their careers doesn't evoke my sympathy.


Last edited by Kaoz*: 11-27-2012 at 10:16 AM.
Kaoz* is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:14 AM
  #702
Artemis
Took the red pill
 
Artemis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mount Olympus
Country: United States
Posts: 19,067
vCash: 500
I have no doubt whatsoever if the owners could pay the players half what they make now that they would pass the savings along to the fans.

I also believe a fat man lives at the North Pole and gives every child in the world a present on Christmas.

Artemis is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:17 AM
  #703
Therick67
Registered User
 
Therick67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: South of Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 4,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
I have no doubt whatsoever if the owners could pay the players half what they make now that they would pass the savings along to the fans.

I also believe a fat man lives at the North Pole and gives every child in the world a present on Christmas.
I could see JJ dressed as Santa giving out refunds and slashing prices on hot dogs and beers

Therick67 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:18 AM
  #704
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
I have no doubt whatsoever if the owners could pay the players half what they make now that they would pass the savings along to the fans.

I also believe a fat man lives at the North Pole and gives every child in the world a present on Christmas.
Likely not, owners are greedy ******** too and now that they know people will pay it they'll keep on price gouging.

Make no mistake though, if the owners need to pay the players more and take a loss themselves, it won't be just the owners pocket books that suffer.

Kaoz* is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:23 AM
  #705
Therick67
Registered User
 
Therick67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: South of Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 4,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Likely not, owners are greedy ******** too and now that they know people will pay it they'll keep on price gouging.

Make no mistake though, if the owners need to pay the players more and take a loss themselves, it won't be just the owners pocket books that suffer.
The sad part is this sport was finally looking like it was making some progress and then this happens.

I can tell you one thing, my pocket book wont suffer because if they miss this season I won't go back. I'll watch them on the tube, but I won't be buying any tickets or merchandise.

Therick67 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:25 AM
  #706
mikelvl
Registered User
 
mikelvl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
That article doesn't seem biased in the least. Bettman is the devil, it's all his fault, rah rah. Trying to screw those poor unfortunate players who should get their 57%, why should owners get more then 43% of the revenue from their franchises. Who can live off 10 million a year these days? Who cares if teams can't make money, we're talking about putting these players 3rd and 4th houses on the line here. Did he mention how much Bettman makes?
Bottom line, there is a deal out there to be done that would be amenable to both sides if the league took a more moderate approach. There is NO reason for another entire season to be cancelled. The players want to play. Some owners don't want them to. It's outrageous that Jacobs is doing this to his own team while they are in their Stanley Cup window. Proves he cares only about his own pockets, not his fanbase.

mikelvl is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:49 AM
  #707
KnightofBoston
MVP
 
KnightofBoston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Easthampton, Ma
Country: United States
Posts: 13,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikelvl View Post
Bottom line, there is a deal out there to be done that would be amenable to both sides if the league took a more moderate approach. There is NO reason for another entire season to be cancelled. The players want to play. Some owners don't want them to. It's outrageous that Jacobs is doing this to his own team while they are in their Stanley Cup window. Proves he cares only about his own pockets, not his fanbase.
While I don't hold JJ in high regard, I don't really buy that argument. Seems to me like he's doing what the majority of owners want to see happen

KnightofBoston is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:51 AM
  #708
Therick67
Registered User
 
Therick67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: South of Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 4,790
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightofBoston View Post
While I don't hold JJ in high regard, I don't really buy that argument. Seems to me like he's doing what the majority of owners want to see happen
He looks to be the lead clown. I don't think for one second JJ is concerned with anyone but himself.

Therick67 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:54 AM
  #709
KnightofBoston
MVP
 
KnightofBoston's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Easthampton, Ma
Country: United States
Posts: 13,181
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Therick67 View Post
He looks to be the lead clown. I don't think for one second JJ is concerned with anyone but himself.
I personally don't buy it, and I'm not a fan of JJ

KnightofBoston is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 10:54 AM
  #710
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikelvl View Post
Bottom line, there is a deal out there to be done that would be amenable to both sides if the league took a more moderate approach. There is NO reason for another entire season to be cancelled. The players want to play. Some owners don't want them to. It's outrageous that Jacobs is doing this to his own team while they are in their Stanley Cup window. Proves he cares only about his own pockets, not his fanbase.
Likewise, there is a deal out there to be done if the players looked to their counterparts in both the NBA and NFL and realized 50% of revenues from the sport isn't out of the question, a deal that would go a long way in making the league stronger.

Players want to play but, and this is a big but, not unless they are guaranteed even more cash year to year then they have been getting which is already millions and millions of dollars. That's a very important amendment to your statement you seem to have missed. Owners want their teams to play and are willing to increase revenue sharing to do it, but want player expenses curbed so smaller market teams can thrive as well and the sport can grow (and they aren't noble in this pursuit, they want the sport to grow because obviously that will make them even more money).

Kaoz* is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 11:24 AM
  #711
mikelvl
Registered User
 
mikelvl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,958
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Likewise, there is a deal out there to be done if the players looked to their counterparts in both the NBA and NFL and realized 50% of revenues from the sport isn't out of the question, a deal that would go a long way in making the league stronger.

Players want to play but, and this is a big but, not unless they are guaranteed even more cash year to year then they have been getting which is already millions and millions of dollars. That's a very important amendment to your statement you seem to have missed. Owners want their teams to play and are willing to increase revenue sharing to do it, but want player expenses curbed so smaller market teams can thrive as well and the sport can grow (and they aren't noble in this pursuit, they want the sport to grow because obviously that will make them even more money).
Then just meet the players halfway, add $90m to the make whole and end this freakin' thing. $3m more per team over 5 years. But it will never happen. We'll see a full season of baseball before we see another NHL game.

mikelvl is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 11:36 AM
  #712
WBC8
Registered User
 
WBC8's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: July 21st, 2013
Country: United States
Posts: 37,280
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to WBC8
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemis View Post
If they had no interest, they could say "thanks, but no thanks."
No, they will just just throw their hands up and say "SEE" when the mediators can't help them come to an agreement... Saves a tiny bit of face...nothing more...The owners have no interest in making a deal and the players seem to have no problem going down in Fehr's Titanic.. Will be interesting to see how the players act after they miss their paycheck the 13th....

WBC8 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 12:12 PM
  #713
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikelvl View Post
Then just meet the players halfway, add $90m to the make whole and end this freakin' thing. $3m more per team over 5 years. But it will never happen. We'll see a full season of baseball before we see another NHL game.
Halfway doesn't fix the issues. All the way likely won't with the lack of popularity for hockey in the bigger markets down south but it will help.

And why exactly should NHL players get 53 or 54% of revenues for their sport when players in the NBA and NFL both agreed to 50% for the duration of their CBA deals (with NO make whole) in theirs? I thought NBA players were supposed to be the whiny drama queens.

Kaoz* is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 12:33 PM
  #714
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Why not, if as you say both sides are at fault? Aren't they the ones taking home bags of cash from the game? Everyone talks about how teams like Toronto, New York and Edmonton make good money and therefore the players should get more... do you know where that money comes from? It comes from them charging outlandish prices at the gate, from the fans.

And players want more money.

Neither side is blameless for any of the lockouts, nor is either side completely to blame. Pretending otherwise is foolish and bias. It's easy and a cop out to blame a guy like Bettman or Fehr but neither are the driving forces behind the lockout. Players and owners are, and those are the two deserving of all the angst imo for yet another lockout debacle.

As for why I support the owners... I see it as common sense, and not really supporting the owners but the NHL. I'm also selfish, I could care less about owners or players, I want the best NHL experience. All teams need to make money for the NHL to be competitive and for it to be as enjoyable as possible for myself. I like parity. I don't like it when my team can't or won't pay the outlandish contracts others will and is therefore handicapped. I sympathize with other fanbases who have to deal with things like internal cap limits that prevent them from building cmpetitive teams and by extension, making money and garnering fan support. NHL players whining because they might not get guaranteed raises each year when they already make millions over the course of their careers doesn't evoke my sympathy.
Excuse me for a few minutes. Gary Bettman said the last lockout was for affordable ticket prices. What happened? The ticket prices are not being rolled back with the players taking a 50-50 split. The ticket prices will continue to increase across the board. The owners will be making a ton. Revenue will continue to increase.

Big market teams will always have an advantage over smaller market teams. Hard cap or soft cap. The Dallas Cowboys don't operate on the same level as the Jacksonville Jaguars. The NFL has the purest hard cap system in pro sports. Biggest TV contracts. Revenue sharing. The teams are not equal footing. There is nothing in the NHL CBA designed to put the small market teams on the same footing as the big market teams.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 12:33 PM
  #715
bp13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 11,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Halfway doesn't fix the issues. All the way likely won't with the lack of popularity for hockey in the bigger markets down south but it will help.

And why exactly should NHL players get 53 or 54% of revenues for their sport when players in the NBA and NFL both agreed to 50% for the duration of their CBA deals (with NO make whole) in theirs? I thought NBA players were supposed to be the whiny drama queens.
Short answer Kaoz is because it is completely irrelevant how much other sports make.

What matters to NHL players is that they get whatever percentage is actually attainable through negotiation. For example, when they negotiated this last CBA, did they not negotiate a higher % of revenue than other sports had at that time? If it was attainable then, they'll push for it now. And they should.

The owners can hold their line falling back on these other sports and maybe they'll end up winning those percentages, but if I'm an NHL player I don't care about those percentages until my league falls BELOW them, then I use it to my advantage. Until then I go for every % point I can get.

bp13 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 12:45 PM
  #716
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,010
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Likewise, there is a deal out there to be done if the players looked to their counterparts in both the NBA and NFL and realized 50% of revenues from the sport isn't out of the question, a deal that would go a long way in making the league stronger.

Players want to play but, and this is a big but, not unless they are guaranteed even more cash year to year then they have been getting which is already millions and millions of dollars. That's a very important amendment to your statement you seem to have missed. Owners want their teams to play and are willing to increase revenue sharing to do it, but want player expenses curbed so smaller market teams can thrive as well and the sport can grow (and they aren't noble in this pursuit, they want the sport to grow because obviously that will make them even more money).
The players have offered a 50-50 split.

You're too hung on the guarantee. The players won't need that because revenue will continue to increase. The business will continue to grow. Even the NHL proposal from October was based on 5% growth which might be conservative. The CBC contract expires soon.

Revenue sharing. The PA proposed revenue sharing at $240M. The owners proposed $190M from $150M. Then it was increases to $200M. Why isn't it at $240M if the big market owners care so much about the suffering small market brethren? The PA had to get the NHL to up their offer on revenue sharing. Jim Dolan,Ed Snider,Molson and the guys in Toronto really care about the teams in Nashville,Phoenix,Florida and Columbus.

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 01:02 PM
  #717
Lobster57
#nofreepasses
 
Lobster57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,417
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
Halfway doesn't fix the issues. All the way likely won't with the lack of popularity for hockey in the bigger markets down south but it will help.

And why exactly should NHL players get 53 or 54% of revenues for their sport when players in the NBA and NFL both agreed to 50% for the duration of their CBA deals (with NO make whole) in theirs? I thought NBA players were supposed to be the whiny drama queens.
I suppose the owners could point at the other leagues and claim 50/50 is fair. The players can point to my store and claim 75/25 is fair. There is about the same level of relevance

Lobster57 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 01:09 PM
  #718
Shaun
Registered User
 
Shaun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Italy
Posts: 22,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhamBamCam8 View Post
No, they will just just throw their hands up and say "SEE" when the mediators can't help them come to an agreement... Saves a tiny bit of face...nothing more...The owners have no interest in making a deal and the players seem to have no problem going down in Fehr's Titanic.. Will be interesting to see how the players act after they miss their paycheck the 13th....
Don't worry instead of going to meetings and trying to make things better the players will go on twitter and call Bettman and Jacobs names while they are on vacation in Europe.

Shaun is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 01:18 PM
  #719
Artemis
Took the red pill
 
Artemis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mount Olympus
Country: United States
Posts: 19,067
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crossfire View Post
Don't worry instead of going to meetings and trying to make things better the players will go on twitter and call Bettman and Jacobs names while they are on vacation in Europe.
Funny, players get *****ed at BECAUSE they go to meetings.

Damned if they do, damned if they don't.

Artemis is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 01:25 PM
  #720
patty59
***************
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobster57 View Post
I suppose the owners could point at the other leagues and claim 50/50 is fair. The players can point to my store and claim 75/25 is fair. There is about the same level of relevance
You really believe that?

If this were to go to arbitration, they would look at those leagues that have a cap in place and with the precedent already set would likely rule in favor of the 50-50 split. If the players showed up with an argument of Lobster57's store being 75-25 they would be laughed at.

patty59 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 01:33 PM
  #721
Lobster57
#nofreepasses
 
Lobster57's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,417
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by patty59 View Post
You really believe that?

If this were to go to arbitration, they would look at those leagues that have a cap in place and with the precedent already set would likely rule in favor of the 50-50 split. If the players showed up with an argument of Lobster57's store being 75-25 they would be laughed at.
Hyperbole my friend. Other leagues should have no bearing on each other. I understand that they do, but they shouldn't.

Lobster57 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 01:39 PM
  #722
patty59
***************
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lethbridge, Alberta
Country: Canada
Posts: 16,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lobster57 View Post
Hyperbole my friend. Other leagues should have no bearing on each other. I understand that they do, but they shouldn't.
Of course they should. It's the same as other players contracts having a bearing when negotiating your own. Almost everything is set off precedent.

patty59 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 02:08 PM
  #723
EverettMike
Registered User
 
EverettMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Everett, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 23,341
vCash: 500
The only major league that has a hard cap near 50/50 is the NFL.

The "floor" essentially doesn't exist, because owners have guaranteed to spend something crazy like 98% of the cap at least eventually. (Can't look up the exact number right now, but I know I am in the right ballpark.)

Also, the NFL has a dramatically higher revenue sharing program.

So yeah, they don't have guaranteed contracts, but the players have a lot of other guarantees that the NHL owners would never ever agree to.

Oh, and I do not believe any group of players has ever had a rollback like the NHLPA gave up after 2004. And no one has signed a deal since where the players were not going to overwhelmingly be paid the money they were already contractually promised.

The NHL owners would never go to a soft cap like the NBA, nor would they go back to no cap, high threshold for a luxury tax, like MLB.

EverettMike is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 02:15 PM
  #724
bp13
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 11,615
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by patty59 View Post
Of course they should. It's the same as other players contracts having a bearing when negotiating your own. Almost everything is set off precedent.
Precedent when it's relevant.

Other players' contracts are relevant because you can make an apples to apples comparison within the same sport. When different sports have different markets, market share, revenue sharing, free agency terms, retirement plans, draft rules, franchising costs, TV contracts, merchandising contracts, etc., they quickly become apples to oranges comparisons.

It's easy to see why pro-owner folks would say "look at the other leagues" because the splits benefit them. If they didn't, pro-player folks would make the same claim. Doesn't make it valid. It's just more rhetoric ******** one group uses to defend their side.


Last edited by Dogberry: 11-27-2012 at 04:00 PM. Reason: swear filter circumvention
bp13 is offline  
Old
11-27-2012, 03:06 PM
  #725
Fire Julien
Registered User
 
Fire Julien's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bergen
Country: Norway
Posts: 18,781
vCash: 500
Katie Strang ‏@KatieStrangESPN

#CBA Richards questioned NHL's bargaining position, said league's "concessions" are "biggest crock I've ever heard."

Fire Julien 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 05:31 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.