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, 12:27 AM
  #76
wilty00
Registered User
 
wilty00's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Kelowna/Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,314
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flameaholic View Post
Why do the players? Last time I checked the owners made $3.3 billion in revenues.
Bolded the part that you probably should've spent more time emphasizing.

Are people still really not understanding the revenue/profit idea now that we're 2 months into this thing?

wilty00 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:27 AM
  #77
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
At least you're honest. This negotiation is all about taking anything and everything they want.


Why do the players have to yield on their rights?

To play?


I thought the NHL only wanted to get to 50/50.
The NHL wants a CBA that's more favourable to them and more likely to see more teams profit. If the Last CBA was even in the first place and didn't see over half the teams losing money (or at the very least, struggling to break even if not losing money) there'd be a better argument to 'but the players aren't gaining anything in return.' The owners aren't perfect and they've played their fair share of hardball too but you seem to buy right into the whole 'but the owners won't give up contract rights' as if its contract rights that are holding up a deal. It's still the HRR split holding up a deal. NHLPA gives up on de-linkage, the NHL will be more likely to give up some of the contracting rights issues. But they aren't just going to keep sweetening their offer while the NHLPA keeps throwing the de-linked proposal in their face over and over and over again.

PensFanSince1989 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:28 AM
  #78
flameaholic
Registered User
 
flameaholic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdawg1234 View Post
And that's a pretty reasonable thing to ask I'd say at this point.

offer a proposal on the same framework(or very similar) as the NHL's and this thing ends quite fast.
Or how about you accept my proposal and this thing ends just as fast.

See how that works?

flameaholic is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:28 AM
  #79
NJDevs26
Moderator
Status quo
 
NJDevs26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 25,313
vCash: 237
Quote:
Originally Posted by Renbarg View Post
Why does any side have to give up anything?
It's called a negotiation, both sides have to give up something at least for it to be a negotiation and not an extortion. Obviously the players have to give up a lot more than the owners since the structure (57-43 on HRR and 27-7 FA rules with no contract length restrictions) still favors them and since the leverage lies with the owners anyway.

What I find amusing is how much the NHL trumpted the fact they sat out a year to get the cap and now the deal they lost a whole season for is so bad everything about it needs to be improved at the cost of losing another season

I don't really get what's so wrong with the game with different Stanley Cup winners every year, cap ensuring small-market teams can get a crack at the big FA's. The only thing that needs to be changed is to eliminate the cap circumventing contracts. Everything else about this negotiation is flat greed.

NJDevs26 is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:28 AM
  #80
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
It's gotten them this far. The NHL could decide they're being unreasonable and salvage the season.

Of course, that would mean they would leave the contracting rights alone.

Remember when everyone was screaming that the league was ONLY interested in the HRR and linkage rate. Yup. So do I.
If the PA was not hell bent on $600 million to be "made whole." They could very well negotiate around the contract issues by just accepting the variance clause. I admit, there is no guarantee of this but their position would be far better than now. When you include the possibility of the PA demanding a full 82 game salary. I question who is being unreasonable.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:29 AM
  #81
Hockey Crazy
Registered User
 
Hockey Crazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 552
vCash: 500
Fehr keeps saying the the owner are taking so much without giving up any concessions. If he truly is upset about this, I wonder if he has made ANY suggestions on what the PA would like? They said that revenue sharing was important and the NHL has made a large movement in that area.

Why doesn't he just tell the NHL what the players want? He just seems to say no, no, no.

I really don't get why the NHL doesn't just say... look you accept our linked 50-50 system, and we will knock a year off the UFA age. It's pretty rare that you see a star player go to another team anyway and the league seems to be getting younger, so it makes sense. The one thing that the NHL should insist on with regards to contracts is the 5% limit year to year in salary fluctuation.

Hockey Crazy is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:29 AM
  #82
SidTheKid8787
Registered User
 
SidTheKid8787's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,610
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DPyro View Post
The problem is the NHLPA is acting like they are entitled to 57%, as if going down to 50% is really a concession. Well guess what, going to 50% isn't a concession in the eyes of the league. And nor should it be. The players have had it too good and the NHL wants a 'fair' deal. Give them their 50%, 5% year-to-year variance on contracts and stop the back-diving deals and I think the owners would sign on the dotted line. The truth is they don't really care about the UFA or ELC.
To continually ask the players to pay for the owners mistakes is fair?

SidTheKid8787 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:29 AM
  #83
SuperUnknown
Registered User
 
SuperUnknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
What alternate reality has come over these negotiations.

What will the NHL give up in these negotiations?
Give me ONE thing the players will gain that they didn't have at the end of the CBA.
Well you can gain by not losing more. I know that's not what you want to hear, but if you can get $0 or $1.5B, even if $1.5B is below what you wish you had, it's still better than $0.

SuperUnknown is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:29 AM
  #84
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 12,298
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by njdevil26 View Post
It's pretty easy to release a statement through the press. Hell... TG is probably waiting by his phone for someone to call him.

The alumni game/Sandy benefit was organized by the team. The Devils have done a lot and have done a great job. Has nothing to do with the NHLPA or their members.
Some Rangers just held charity clinics today with the proceeds going to Sandy help. Richards, Callahan, Gaborik, and Boyle were some of the players there. Also, some Rangers, Flyers and other players are hosting a charity game in Atlantic City next Saturday. Tickets supposedly range from $20-$100 and those are also going to Sandy help. Richards and Hartnell are captaining the teams.

__________________
http://hfboards.com/image.php?u=53946&type=sigpic&dateline=1320361610
NYRFAN218 is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:30 AM
  #85
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
You're making a straw man argument. The NHL is offering a deal similar to what the NFL and NBA already have in place. You talk as if 50% of league revenue going to the players is slavery. The players are overpaid at the moment, and as a result the owners have leverage. Because of this they will win the lockout. I'm tired of those on the PA's side whining about victimization.
No one's forcing you to read. Just sayin'.

No, you're going off on the NBA and NFL got it, and I'd say well isn't the MLB a pro league too, so why don't they count? And then we'd all realize that the CBAs from those leagues are chock full of things like luxury taxes, soft caps, players exempt from caps, revenue sharing of a massive proportion of revenues.... and TV contracts are much bigger.......

.... then someone would come along and say that league X is nothing like the NHL, so why are we comparing them.

Been there. Done that.
Quote:
On the question of contract rights: the nhl would be willing to negotiate them when Fehr agrees to a linked 50%. Why would Bettman negotiate that chip when Fehr refuses to even budge at the biggest obstacle in the negotiatons?

Chicken and egg argument perhaps.

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:30 AM
  #86
Freudian
Deja vu again?
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 31,477
vCash: 50
Daly is confirming what most of us have knows for quite a while. NHLPA aren't negotiating. They keep tabling the same proposal, that they know have zero chance of success because it pushes all the risk over at the owners, over and over again and doesn't really negotiate.

The players needs to wake up and take control of the situation.

Freudian is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:31 AM
  #87
Timmy
Registered User
 
Timmy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,729
vCash: 500
The previous CBA has expired.

While it may be a touchstone to players and/or owners, it is no longer relevant.

What is relevant is hard dollars.

The time value of money notwithstanding, the amount of real dollars being paid out to players will not change under the League's last proposal if the NHLPA-provided revenue growth projections prove to be correct.

Their percentage of HRR will decrease, as will their ability to access funds sooner rather than later, but given their willingness to forego salary during this current lockout, the players should be okay with this.

Once the NHLPA accepts this, the league will give in on contract restrictions (with a reasonable 10% variance 10-year max restriction and existing UFA timelines).

IMHO, of course.

Timmy is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:31 AM
  #88
supahdupah
Registered Boozer
 
supahdupah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
The league is financially unsustainable due to the owners, not the players. They were happy to take (and not share) the expansion fee. Maybe they should have done their homework.
Wth. Players are completely free to go play in a league of their choice. Maybe the players should go to a career college in the off season to help start a league of their own. I have no idea what your point is anymore.

supahdupah is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:32 AM
  #89
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by flameaholic View Post
Why do the players? Last time I checked the owners made $3.3 billion in revenues.
Key word there is Revenues, not profits. You know where $1.83 billion, or 57% of those $3.3 billion in revenues went? Straight to the players. Most of the others went to other fixed costs. The NHL saw less than 5% profit, most teams losing money or barely scrapping by.

PensFanSince1989 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:32 AM
  #90
SuperUnknown
Registered User
 
SuperUnknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidTheKid8787 View Post
To continually ask the players to pay for the owners mistakes is fair?
Is it fair to continually expect the players to benefit from the owners mistake of signing a CBA in 2004-2005 that allowed too much money to the players?

SuperUnknown is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:32 AM
  #91
Roland of Gilead
The Gunslinger
 
Roland of Gilead's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oulu
Posts: 840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PensFanSince1989 View Post
But they aren't just going to keep sweetening their offer while the NHLPA keeps throwing the de-linked proposal in their face over and over and over again.
My thoughts exactly. NHLPA must give some to get some. I hope that idiot Fehr gets it sooner than later.

Roland of Gilead is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:33 AM
  #92
rdawg1234
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,740
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidTheKid8787 View Post
To continually ask the players to pay for the owners mistakes is fair?
at least they improved the revenue sharing greatly, so technically they're only asking for the players to foot part of the bill.

50/50 is in all other leagues roughly, players knew they would end up around there going into this.

I don try to look at it as fair, it's not really fair and I probably wouldnt be happy either, but I'd know that not negotiating with them directly would just end up in more lost money, I'd know that they have far more leverage than I do as a player.

Which is why I disagree with the PA's position, wait this out, lose far more money than just negotiating early in hopes of a miracle that the NHL will accept delinkage and a full 82-game season's pay for playing half a season!

rdawg1234 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:34 AM
  #93
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJDevs26 View Post
It's called a negotiation, both sides have to give up something at least for it to be a negotiation and not an extortion. Obviously the players have to give up a lot more than the owners since the structure (57-43 on HRR and 27-7 FA rules with no contract length restrictions) still favors them and since the leverage lies with the owners anyway.

What I find amusing is how much the NHL trumpted the fact they sat out a year to get the cap and now the deal they lost a whole season for is so bad everything about it needs to be improved at the cost of losing another season

I don't really get what's so wrong with the game with different Stanley Cup winners every year, cap ensuring small-market teams can get a crack at the big FA's. The only thing that needs to be changed is to eliminate the cap circumventing contracts. Everything else about this negotiation is flat greed.
I don't know, the fact that over half the teams in the league are losing money by our best estimates, with a good chunk of other teams just scraping to stay even. That seems like a problem....

PensFanSince1989 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:34 AM
  #94
SuperUnknown
Registered User
 
SuperUnknown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 4,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJDevs26 View Post
lmao I'm sure the players are just running to accept billions of dollars less money, a more restrictive contract system and decreased FA rights all for the sake of getting their own hotel room. If that's the NHL's only 'concession' Fehr's entering the nuclear launch codes as we speak.
By not signing a deal this year, they're already accepting to lose out at least $1.5B. Even if they do get their deal in the end, that's still a 25% paycut for a player with a 4 year contract left.

SuperUnknown is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:34 AM
  #95
supahdupah
Registered Boozer
 
supahdupah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 3,257
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SidTheKid8787 View Post
To continually ask the players to pay for the owners mistakes is fair?
How else could it work? What fantasy does it work any other way? It is their league. The problem is people see players as some kind of partner; they aren't. They are key ingredient in the NHL product.

supahdupah is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:34 AM
  #96
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,974
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PensFanSince1989 View Post
The NHL wants a CBA that's more favourable to them and more likely to see more teams profit. If the Last CBA was even in the first place and didn't see over half the teams losing money (or at the very least, struggling to break even if not losing money) there'd be a better argument to 'but the players aren't gaining anything in return.' The owners aren't perfect and they've played their fair share of hardball too but you seem to buy right into the whole 'but the owners won't give up contract rights' as if its contract rights that are holding up a deal. It's still the HRR split holding up a deal. NHLPA gives up on de-linkage, the NHL will be more likely to give up some of the contracting rights issues. But they aren't just going to keep sweetening their offer while the NHLPA keeps throwing the de-linked proposal in their face over and over and over again.

Are you at least willing to consider that the last system maybe hastened some teams' financial decline?

If you say yes, then do you feel that going to 50/50 alone will make it all work better (setting aside the variance issue for the moment)?


The numbers don't bear that out. What we always come back to is that the richest teams will simply pocket most of that money, while the poor will continue to be poor and we'll feel sorry for them. (Sense and Sensibility quote, iirc.) This is what justifies a lockout--- from a fan perspective?

Fugu is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:34 AM
  #97
Renbarg
Registered User
 
Renbarg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: NY
Country: United States
Posts: 9,064
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJDevs26 View Post
It's called a negotiation, both sides have to give up something at least for it to be a negotiation and not an extortion. Obviously the players have to give up a lot more than the owners since the structure (57-43 on HRR and 27-7 FA rules with no contract length restrictions) still favors them and since the leverage lies with the owners anyway.

What I find amusing is how much the NHL trumpted the fact they sat out a year to get the cap and now the deal they lost a whole season for is so bad everything about it needs to be improved at the cost of losing another season

I don't really get what's so wrong with the game with different Stanley Cup winners every year, cap ensuring small-market teams can get a crack at the big FA's. The only thing that needs to be changed is to eliminate the cap circumventing contracts. Everything else about this negotiation is flat greed.

"to confer with another so as to arrive at the settlement of some matter" - Webster

Negotiation =/= I give something up and you do as well.

Renbarg is online now  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:35 AM
  #98
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by supahdupah View Post
Wth. Players are completely free to go play in a league of their choice. Maybe the players should go to a career college in the off season to help start a league of their own. I have no idea what your point is anymore.
If the NHLPA doesn't even know what it wants, how can the people who support them no matter what?

What would the players get by accepting the NHL deal that they didn't have at the end of the last CBA?

A paycheque.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:35 AM
  #99
Bourne Endeavor
Moderator
HFBoards: Night's Watch
 
Bourne Endeavor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Montreal, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 25,330
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
What alternate reality has come over these negotiations.

What will the NHL give up in these negotiations?
Give me ONE thing the players will gain that they didn't have at the end of the CBA.
Not every negotiation necessarily assures both sides gain. In some scenarios, an opposing side has to consider mitigating their losses as a gain.

Bourne Endeavor is offline  
Old
11-16-2012, 12:36 AM
  #100
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
I guess it's too late to expect any more comments from either side. Hopefully tomorrow will have some big words thrown around from both sides. About the only damn thing they're good for now

Ari91 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 01:45 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.