HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Everybody's talking at me; I don't hear a word they're saying (CBA/Lockout XXIX)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-16-2012, 11:39 AM
  #276
Freudian
Clearly deranged
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 33,668
vCash: 50
I guess it the intermission between Act 2 and Act 3 now, no matter if there is a moratorium or not, Bettman will get a break. It's all part of the game, as is Fehr saying you have to be at the negotiating table to get progress through one corner of his mouth and through the other he's telling the press he don't see how we can go forward from here.

Then in the last act they decide to either piss away a year for nothing or it'll end up where most reasonable people said it would end up. A pretty similar CBA to the last with the economic numbers slightly less in favor of the players.

Hopefully after that both employers decide to ditch both Bettman and Fehr. There is no way to move forward with them. They simply didn't have the tools to get a fairly easy job done. Shame on them.

Freudian is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:40 AM
  #277
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 13,586
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by meedle View Post
And yet the NHLPA still is offering delinked offers.
This is the joke of all jokes...and the PA crowd are cranky with Bettman...

Meanwhile Fehr hasn't negotiated in good faith since the day he took the job...

BLONG7 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:40 AM
  #278
Ziggy Stardust
Master Debater
 
Ziggy Stardust's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Parts Unknown
Posts: 34,955
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ScottyBowman View Post
They can't. The new talking point is "stalling". For some reason the NHLPA is stalling all this time although they weren't the ones that locked the players out and they aren't the ones offering a 2 week break. It seems to me that the players should take any offer and start playing tomorrow so they can go back to arguing about Crosby vs Ovechkin.
Funny, a number of posters just named a bunch of benefits that favor the players. A sensible person would also think that it is better to lose a couple of thousands of dollars than to lose millions, especially when you consider the fact that those lost wages will be earned back down the road. But no, the NHL should just guarantee that the players get $1.9 billion in a shrinking pie.

You do realize that Fehr is fighting to have the players earn a full paycheck even if they play a shortened season, and they're just as at fault for the stalled negotiations as the NHL is.

Ziggy Stardust is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:40 AM
  #279
cheswick
Non-registered User
 
cheswick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Peg City
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,602
vCash: 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darylman View Post
Name one concession or benefit the NHLPA has received from these negotiations. Go ahead. Name ONE.
2 years ELC insted of 3 years.

cheswick is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:44 AM
  #280
GordieHoweHatTrick
Registered User
 
GordieHoweHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
And so 18,500 workers are now jobless. Way to go union. Guess it's better to lose your job and wages and benefits than to accept a slight decrease in pay.
That depends how much they the were getting paid and what kinds of benefits they were receiving, doesn't it? If the wage and benefits weren't worth sticking around for then who can blame them

GordieHoweHatTrick is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:44 AM
  #281
Nanuk23
Registered User
 
Nanuk23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NB
Country: Canada
Posts: 382
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darylman View Post
Name one concession or benefit the NHLPA has received from these negotiations. Go ahead. Name ONE.
Revenue sharing ?

Nanuk23 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:47 AM
  #282
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,043
vCash: 500
So the NHL says they want to take a break on negotiations and yet it's the players who are stalling? Some logic there.

Quote:
Make Whole in the latest proposal, the players wanted more revenue sharing. That's 2 the owners gave.
Yeh, as long as the NHLPA accepted every other condition that the NHL proposed. Really, how is that giving in?

Listen, I will loan you $10 interest free for 7 days. Normally that interest is $10 a day so good deal huh? However, there is this little fee that I charge.. It's a $70 admin fee.

To the others:

If you feel that the owner's shell game of negotiations are honest, more power to you but giving in one area all the while ensuring that you make it up in another is not what I consider negotiating.

As to the NHLPA's proposals. You seem to think those are ridiculous so they don't count as proposals, but as long as the NHL keeps trying the same proposal over and over again expecting a different result, they do count?

At least try to be objective. They are both being tools... EQUALLY. People's jealousy of the player's positions is clouding objectivity.

shakes is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:49 AM
  #283
Ollie Weeks
Registered User
 
Ollie Weeks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Sioux Lookout, NWO
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,731
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz View Post
I find it quite interesting that on this board it looks like the majority of people have taken a side, and have taken the side of the owners. I feel like when I read through this thread when any new information is released on negotiations it's always spun on here that the owners are correct and most, if not all of the blame is placed on the PA.
Its not even pro-ownership.Its an understanding that business owners (believe it or not) own the business, and thats pretty much the end of it. Hostility toward the players is out of supreme frustration at their futile and inept battle to 1) Outlast the owners and 2) Win our support.

They're cutting off their nose to spite their face, with no hope of coming out ahead when a season's wages have been lost. And now, having gone in to deep, they're trying to dig they're way out the other side.

Some saw this coming back in August, and that number has only grown since.

Ollie Weeks is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:49 AM
  #284
Bobby Lou
Moustache Power
 
Bobby Lou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: The Crease
Country: Canada
Posts: 15,459
vCash: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust View Post
Both sides apparently came to an agreement on a number of issues that benefit the players in regards to their pensions and boarding and other benefits that work in favor for the players (such as them getting their own hotel rooms as opposed to rooming with a teammate).
Apparently as soon as the NHL and NHLPA agree on an issue it is no longer of benefit to the players.

Bobby Lou is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:51 AM
  #285
Barrie22
Shark fan in hiding
 
Barrie22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: ontario
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,046
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by cheswick View Post
2 years ELC insted of 3 years.
that helps the owners more then the players. it looks as if it is a good thing for the players but its not. there are only a handful of players that can say that they are to good to be paid rookie salary, after 2 years. most break out in the 3rd year of the rookie contract or later.

crosby, ovechkin are the obvious ones that could of been paid 8 million the moment they stepped onto the ice, every one could see that from the world jr's to when they were both drafted.

stamkos broke out in his 2nd year (which would be the new pay day for him).

malkin even though 85 points as a rookie is amazing in most cases, it was his 2nd year in the league that would of gotten him paid just like stamkos.

giroux under the new rules would of signed for much much less then the 3.5 million he did sign after the 76 point season he put up in his final year of the rookie contract.

tavares would of been paid as a 64 point player with potential, instead of a 81 point player with potential.

Barrie22 is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:52 AM
  #286
Martyros
Allow me to retort
 
Martyros's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Holly Hood
Country: Armenia
Posts: 5,784
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darylman View Post
Name one concession or benefit the NHLPA has received from these negotiations. Go ahead. Name ONE.
Name one that doesn't benefit the NHLPA. Go ahead. Name ONE.

NHL has repeatedly negotiated towards the NHLPA's favor after each proposal, yet the NHLPA continues to offer the same damn thing (through reports). NHL doesn't have to do anything, owners are businessmen, they WILL find something else to do if the NHL goes out of business. What are the players going to do? Play for less than a third of what they're "earning" right now?

Martyros is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:52 AM
  #287
Samzilla
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Samzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 11,211
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes View Post
So the NHL says they want to take a break on negotiations and yet it's the players who are stalling? Some logic there..
Fehr's the one who said he didn't know where to go from here. Let's say Bettman makes a suggestion on how to proceed. Do you think Fehr's going to let Bettman tell him what to do? He'd never take the suggestion. If I'm Bettman, it's really the only thing I could say. Let Fehr figure out on his own how to proceed. He's a big boy. This isn't his first rodeo. He should know by now, and if he truly doesn't, then god help us all.

Samzilla is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:55 AM
  #288
Freudian
Clearly deranged
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 33,668
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes View Post
So the NHL says they want to take a break on negotiations and yet it's the players who are stalling? Some logic there.
That's not what the NHL are saying. They are saying it's not fruitful to have another go at getting everyone together, NHLPA tables the same proposal they know have no chance of succeeding and then getting nowhere, while talking to the press.

There is no reason to meet until NHLPA starts negotiating from the leagues proposal.

Freudian is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 11:56 AM
  #289
GordieHoweHatTrick
Registered User
 
GordieHoweHatTrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 13,990
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes View Post
Bettman is an idiot. Until he started to become the "hero saving hockey from themselves" around here, he was derided all the time; by everyone. You do know people use the term all the time and don't necessarily mean it relating to book smarts. Even still, what does that have to do with economics? In your quote, he didn't mention the CBA at all.
You're quoting hero saving hockey from themselves. Who said that?

I'm sure if you polled everyone here Bettman would still be villified in the grand scheme of things but he's done more in these specific negotiations than the PA has, hence the displeasure towards the PA. We'd love to all side with the PA and say they did the right thing and "stuck it to the man" but they have to be reasonable. Seems like they don't even have an end game either

GordieHoweHatTrick is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:04 PM
  #290
MtlPenFan
Registered User
 
MtlPenFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes View Post
Dude, you know what I mean. Sorry.. IN GOOD FAITH.

Better?
Name one thing the PA has done in "Good faith"

•Not negotiating starting last November?
•Not "crunching numbers" with their own so called proposals?
•Showing up late to meetings and going for long water breaks, with the only goal being to agitate?
•A healthy chunk of the union not even on the same continent as negotiations continue?
•Wanting to be paid for a locked out season even though there is quite literally no contract between the NHL and the union?
•Wanting guaranteed raises regardless of whether or not league revenues drop?

Should I go on, or...

MtlPenFan is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:07 PM
  #291
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudian View Post
That's not what the NHL are saying. They are saying it's not fruitful to have another go at getting everyone together, NHLPA tables the same proposal they know have no chance of succeeding and then getting nowhere, while talking to the press.

There is no reason to meet until NHLPA starts negotiating from the leagues proposal.
And how is that different from the NHL tabling the same proposal?

The NHL shouldn't be saying that at all from a PR standpoint. Doesn't really sound like they are negotiating in good faith. Here is a proposal. Take it or leave it. We won't negotiate until you say you will.

shakes is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:07 PM
  #292
Stewie Griffin
Moderator
Stewie Hockey™
 
Stewie Griffin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Salt Mines
Country: Bermuda
Posts: 9,061
vCash: 7904
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
Name one thing the PA has done in "Good faith"

•Not negotiating starting last November?
•Not "crunching numbers" with their own so called proposals?
•Showing up late to meetings and going for long water breaks, with the only goal being to agitate?
•A healthy chunk of the union not even on the same continent as negotiations continue?
•Wanting to be paid for a locked out season even though there is quite literally no contract between the NHL and the union?
•Wanting guaranteed raises regardless of whether or not league revenues drop?

Should I go on, or...
Being ineffective (or just generally being MOD) does not mean they're not negotiating in good faith.


Last edited by LadyStanley: 11-16-2012 at 02:38 PM. Reason: junk
Stewie Griffin is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:08 PM
  #293
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,554
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by GordieHoweHatTrick View Post
You're quoting hero saving hockey from themselves. Who said that?

I'm sure if you polled everyone here Bettman would still be villified in the grand scheme of things but he's done more in these specific negotiations than the PA has, hence the displeasure towards the PA. We'd love to all side with the PA and say they did the right thing and "stuck it to the man" but they have to be reasonable. Seems like they don't even have an end game either
Exactly. I've stated many times I don't like Gary.

I am anti-PA, anti-Fehr.

Gary-neutral

Pro-players (note not PA - they are a different animal)

This is how bad this thing has gotten: Fehr's sheer ineptitude makes Gary Bettman look reasonable. Seriously. That is freaking bizarro world.

Fehr has not done a good job, and all anyone on here can do to support him is to point to some secret magical plan that will make this all better for the players or to argue moral points on what is a 'concession'.

Again, notice noone bothers defending the NHLPA proposals. Why? Because there is nothing of substance to defend.

I have posted previously that the league had shown willingness to go to 50/50, increase revenue sharing and do some sort of grandfathering of contracts in SEPTEMBER. I have links and quotes too. So what has Fehr accomplished except cost the players a lot of money and piss off the NHL?

So many are concerned about the players being right - I just want them to get paid.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:09 PM
  #294
shakes
Ancient Astronaut
 
shakes's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,043
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MtlPenFan View Post
Name one thing the PA has done in "Good faith"

•Not negotiating starting last November?
•Not "crunching numbers" with their own so called proposals?
•Showing up late to meetings and going for long water breaks, with the only goal being to agitate?
•A healthy chunk of the union not even on the same continent as negotiations continue?
•Wanting to be paid for a locked out season even though there is quite literally no contract between the NHL and the union?
•Wanting guaranteed raises regardless of whether or not league revenues drop?

Should I go on, or...
None of that is bad faith negotiating. Sorry.

shakes is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:09 PM
  #295
The Bob Cole
Ohhhh Baby.
 
The Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Centre Ice
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,692
vCash: 500
I am somewhat in awe at the stupidity of both sides. Instead of thinking about how to expand the business both sides are more focused on how to harvest what is there and make it more 'efficient' by reducing costs. Harnessing in your costs are necessary in any business, but they just shot themselves in the foot. There was a deal within reach and a partnership to transition over time to an equal revenue sharing plan.

The 2004.05 lockout, while still hurtful to fans and the business, could at least be considered in context a fight over something meaningful. Following it, there was a promise of a more exciting game, thanks to the competition committee that introduced rule changes to open up the flow of the game. There were two baby-faced superstars waiting in the wings, ready to thrill fans, draw international attention and lift the game from the depths it had fallen. These two superstars saved two franchises in the States and brought a new generation of fans to the rink.

The revenue in 2004.05 was approximately $2.24 Billion dollars. On average each team earned $74.6 Million per year of revenues. In the years following the lockout revenue rose to an average of $103.5 million per team and $3.2 Billion. However, the league had only a few true healthy teams, that propped up and propelled the earnings of the league skyward. There is an imbalance.

Most people understand the NHL will always be considerably smaller than the competing major sports. Yet therein lies the secret to future growth for hockey. What makes each team in those leagues operable are the lucrative media deals that share millions and now billions of dollars of revenue amongst every team. The NHL will never reach the magnitude of those deals, but it was on the right path. NHL broadcasting revenue jumped from $75 Million to $200 Million with NBC Sports Network. Canadian broadcast rights bring in roughly $140 Million, with those rights set to expire in the near future. With these numbers, it is easy to understand why the NHL is a gate-driven league. But they were on the right path. Business deals and sponsorship were up in most hockey markets. The Florida Panthers were once again building a base of fan and business support in their community, finally making it to the playoffs after years of mediocrity. If the 2012.13 season were played, revenue would have certainly increased. Two of the largest American markets, Los Angeles and New York, were coming off their most successful season in recent years. There was interest. There was support. There was opportunity. There were fans knocking at the door. There was sponsorship dollars knocking at the door. That is the key to a sustainable sports league.

Now, we sit and wait as the two sides squabble over what was there (past) instead of helping each other solve their problems at the moment and pushing the league in the right direction, towards growth (future). A part of a bigger pie, not a bigger part of a smaller pie. Undoubtedly, there are many fans that will never return following this lockout and almost more importantly, there are business and sponsorship deals that will never come to fruition. Why would any business want to invest, advertise, associate or sponsor a group of athletes and owners who have shown no stability or accountability?

The NHL and NHLPA had the opportunity to take the game that so many love, to new levels. There was an opportunity over the next 10 to 20 years to greatly increase revenues and popularity of the league. Instead, we are set back in to the dark ages once again. A fringe sport that will struggle to generate equal profitability amongst the 30 teams. Instead of going down the right path as a partnership, we're heading back to the start, each side pulling the other a different direction. This lockout disgraces the integrity of the beautiful sport and the fans that love it. This situation arises because of two groups facing backwards and not having the courage to trust each other, look each other in the eye, and move forward, together.

[/Rant of an angry, disgruntled "fan"]

The Bob Cole is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:15 PM
  #296
Crease
Registered User
 
Crease's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 9,833
vCash: 500
MOD NOTE

Please stay on topic here. This is an all-purpose Lockout thread but bear in mind that posts that do not serve to move the discussion forward are considered noise and will be removed. Posts about the intellect of players and/or executives do NOT further the discussion.

Crease is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:15 PM
  #297
SuperUnknown
Registered User
 
SuperUnknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,612
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darylman View Post
Name one concession or benefit the NHLPA has received from these negotiations. Go ahead. Name ONE.
I think there's a misconception that negociating is "give and take". Negociating is getting the better deal you can get, it doesn't mean you get an extra cherry on top of it.

When Walmart tells you they're going to give you $1 less per article they buy from you, what can you hope to "get" from negociating? Well you try to reduce that $1 to 50 cents. In the end, you don't receive anything, you negociated that they take less than they wanted. You still have the option to sell your articles elsewhere after all. The only way you could deny that $1 cut is if Walmart was making enough money from you that they couldn't get around losing you as a supplier.

The same thing happens in hockey. Who's to say that if the owners showcased a worse product but with higher margins that they wouldn't make more money than they do with NHL players? Why should they accept to continue earning pennies by overpaying the players? So they come out and tell the players "You know what, here are our financials, you'll see that we're not doing fine profit wise compared to total revenues". We propose that to make things fairer between the share you keep and the share we keep that we should split revenues 57-43% in our favour. Btw, it's not worth our efforts to keep the league ongoing while you earn 57% so you're going to sit down until we agree on a percentage that would make it worth our while to keep our association standing. Just like in the example above, the players have to negociate the best agreement they can make but in the end they won't keep what they had. On the other hand, they'll lose the least possible by negociating hard.

The problem for the players is that sitting out a year is the equivalent of accepting a 14% rollback if they can ultimately reconduct the old cba for 6 years. So if they can't strike a deal for a decent enough season, then they will have failed negociating the best potential deal (in other words, they will have negociated poorly).

SuperUnknown is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:15 PM
  #298
MtlPenFan
Registered User
 
MtlPenFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 12,492
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakes View Post
None of that is bad faith negotiating. Sorry.
My bad. Negotiating in good faith means there are actual negotiations going on.

Way I see it, the NHL is negotiating against itself.

MtlPenFan is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:18 PM
  #299
BringBackStevens
Registered User
 
BringBackStevens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Country: United States
Posts: 12,735
vCash: 500
I still think the NHL's position is more of a cash grab than addressing the core issues for some of these franchises. We don't need to be saving a cent for a lot of the higher echelon teams in the league. To me, the NHL proposal looks a lot like "We need to help these poorer franchises, so while fixing that lets also grab some cash for our richer teams too, becuase why not, they will cave." I'm not saying there doesn't need to be some giveback from the players side, but the problem here seems to be some especially weak markets that need major help and some borderline franchises that could use some help, rather than some system wide core issue with expenses. That's why I've been slightly pro-PA through this one

BringBackStevens is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:21 PM
  #300
Slatsmsg
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Airdrie
Posts: 556
vCash: 500
Another thing the NHL is willing to concede to the players:

A year off.

Slatsmsg 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 09:06 PM.

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.