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.

Mark Eaton Speaks

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-11-2005, 09:40 AM
  #1
gerbilanium
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 274
vCash: 500
Mark Eaton Speaks

''As far as players go, we've already given up one year, so what's two?'' Eaton said. ''We've taken our stand and we're solidified. We've offered to give more than (the owners), so I think it's time for them to come to us.

'If they take the rest of the season and the summer and decide they're not going to change anything, I don't think the players are going to budge.''


http://tennessean.com/sports/predato...nt_ID=65517892

Ok now who here thought Mark Eaton was a writer in Nashville?

Who here cannot believe this fringe NHL'er makes $1 million?

Who here thinks that Eaton should answer his true calling and become a pure math professor at MIT?

gerbilanium is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 09:45 AM
  #2
The Maltais Falcon
Registered User
 
The Maltais Falcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,156
vCash: 500
Didn't the owners offer to give the players' 12/9 proposal a try yesterday with the proviso that if things didn't work out, the system would flip to the owners' most recent proposal? I've yet to see the players reach out in such a manner to solve this mess.

The Maltais Falcon is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 09:47 AM
  #3
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,405
vCash: 500
Who??

Pepper is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 09:56 AM
  #4
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Maltais Falcon
Didn't the owners offer to give the players' 12/9 proposal a try yesterday with the proviso that if things didn't work out, the system would flip to the owners' most recent proposal?
The short answer is, NO.

John Flyers Fan is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 09:58 AM
  #5
Ar-too
Registered User
 
Ar-too's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 10,139
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Ar-too
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
The short answer is, NO.
Or it could be a yes too, depending on how you see it...

Ar-too is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:03 AM
  #6
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s3por2d
Or it could be a yes too, depending on how you see it...
Only if you see it in a mind-altering state. The answer is clearly no. The league proposed their hard cap salary ranges system super-imposed on top of the NHLPA's offer, with the added fun that if the PA offer didn't act EXACTLY like the league proposal, it would instantly and automatically revert to the owner's proposal. On top of that, the league actually altered the revenue sharing aspect of the PA proposal before doing this, so the rich wouldn't have to share as much with the poor.

Do some research, and don't pay too much attention to quotes or thread titles that erroneously claim crap like "Union Rejects Their Own Offer!"

CGG is online now  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:05 AM
  #7
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s3por2d
Or it could be a yes too, depending on how you see it...
Not when the triggers will be hit immediately. 3 teams are already over the $42 million threshold, and after teams finish signing players to their roster another 2 or 3 teams would be over $42 million as well.

John Flyers Fan is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:06 AM
  #8
snakepliskin
Registered User
 
snakepliskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wilmington NC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,899
vCash: 500
embarrassed, saddened and somewhat guilty that I could be part of ruining the game of hockey for decades to come,'' Predators captain Greg Johnson said. ''That's not a pleasant feeling to have in the pit of your stomach i like this guys position a lot better than mark eatons--and for mark -2 exactly as twice as much as 1 --and probably half of your career and earnings!

snakepliskin is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:09 AM
  #9
Ar-too
Registered User
 
Ar-too's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 10,139
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Ar-too
Trust me, I take everything I read here with a grain of salt, but saying that the players rejected their own offer isn't that big of a stretch. It's clear that they don't believe enough in it to try and negotiate some of the triggers to the point where it would actually be in place long enough to really test it out.

If Goodenow had come out and said something to the effect of, "you know what? The owners were actually willing to give our proposal a try but at this point, we need to figure out how we're going to go about doing that..." etc., that would've been fine. That's not what he did - at least as I read the news. They just rejected any kind of stipulations. That's not negotiating and it does promote the idea that you don't believe it will work and that you believe salaries will continue to escalate out of control.

Ar-too is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:10 AM
  #10
hipcheck85
Where is Triggrman?
 
hipcheck85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Nashville / Via NYC
Country: United States
Posts: 1,237
vCash: 500
Well I hope Mr. Eaton enjoyed his time in the NHL because if the small market teams don't survive a 2 year lockout he will have played his last NHL game.

hipcheck85 is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:11 AM
  #11
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbilanium

http://tennessean.com/sports/predato...nt_ID=65517892

Ok now who here thought Mark Eaton was a writer in Nashville?

Who here cannot believe this fringe NHL'er makes $1 million?

Who here thinks that Eaton should answer his true calling and become a pure math professor at MIT?
Name one thing in Eaton's quote that is not true. This "fringe" NHLer was Nashville's best dman for the most part of last year and lead the team with a plus-16. I'm surprised he only makes $1 million. Anyone such as yourself who thought he was a writer in Nashville is truly the ignorant one in this equation.

CGG is online now  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:12 AM
  #12
FanSince2014
What'd He Say?
 
FanSince2014's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Country: Slovenia
Posts: 3,045
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbilanium
[I]Who here cannot believe this fringe NHL'er makes $1 million?
I can't.

FanSince2014 is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:15 AM
  #13
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s3por2d
Trust me, I take everything I read here with a grain of salt, but saying that the players rejected their own offer isn't that big of a stretch. It's clear that they don't believe enough in it to try and negotiate some of the triggers to the point where it would actually be in place long enough to really test it out.

If Goodenow had come out and said something to the effect of, "you know what? The owners were actually willing to give our proposal a try but at this point, we need to figure out how we're going to go about doing that..." etc., that would've been fine. That's not what he did - at least as I read the news. They just rejected any kind of stipulations. That's not negotiating and it does promote the idea that you don't believe it will work and that you believe salaries will continue to escalate out of control.
Like I said, it wasn't even the PA proposal. The owners took out revenue sharing, and only proposed this farce since their own system would be implemented automatically. It was a "final" offer, none of the triggers were negotiable.

CGG is online now  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:16 AM
  #14
Ar-too
Registered User
 
Ar-too's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 10,139
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Ar-too
Quote:
Originally Posted by gc2005
Like I said, it wasn't even the PA proposal. The owners took out revenue sharing, and only proposed this farce since their own system would be implemented automatically. It was a "final" offer, none of the triggers were negotiable.
Link?

Ar-too is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:16 AM
  #15
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,405
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Flyers Fan
Not when the triggers will be hit immediately. 3 teams are already over the $42 million threshold, and after teams finish signing players to their roster another 2 or 3 teams would be over $42 million as well.
I have been thinking about this and there HAS to be some rational explanation to this like 3-year transition period or something (which has been offered earlier), I mean it doesn't make any sense to have a proposal with triggers been hit immediately.

You may like NHL or not but they are not stupid, they have the best lawyers in the world working for them and anyone can see through the the proposal like that, especially labor court.

It simply doesn't make sense so I'm certain that it included some sort of transition period, hell even one year or so.

Pepper is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:18 AM
  #16
John Flyers Fan
Registered User
 
John Flyers Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 22,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pepper
I have been thinking about this and there HAS to be some rational explanation to this like 3-year transition period or something (which has been offered earlier), I mean it doesn't make any sense to have a proposal with triggers been hit immediately.

You may like NHL or not but they are not stupid, they have the best lawyers in the world working for them and anyone can see through the the proposal like that, especially labor court.

It simply doesn't make sense so I'm certain that it included some sort of transition period, hell even one year or so.
If true it hasn't been reported anywhere, and you would think that when the NHLPA ripped their proposal if their was a grace period the NHL would have shown that to the media immediately.

John Flyers Fan is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:20 AM
  #17
Bauer83
Registered User
 
Bauer83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 516
vCash: 6065
Quote:
Originally Posted by gc2005
Like I said, it wasn't even the PA proposal. The owners took out revenue sharing, and only proposed this farce since their own system would be implemented automatically. It was a "final" offer, none of the triggers were negotiable.
Boy can people be ignorant. The reason why the triggers were so low, was that the league wanted the players to take the bait and negogiate the triggers. Allowing both the owners and players to save face. If you actually think that one of these proposals will be outright accepted, you are out to lunch. Just like the players proposal of 12/9 had a lame excuse for a luxury tax. The reason for it, so if the owners decide to use it, they can feel good about raising the levels of the luxury tax. Nobody in the right mind gives the best offer first in these kind of negogiations, so if people choose to actually think about what the NHL presented on Wednesday, instead of spew out the same facts that all the biased journalists are, you can see those triggers for what they were. A negogiating point.

Now don't try to quote me saying that I thought that was the best deal, and the players should have taken it. But they should have negogiated it, just as the owners should be putting in revenue sharing. But unfortunately we have two ignorant sides ruining the game.

Bauer83 is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:22 AM
  #18
Mess
Global Moderator
 
Mess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 59,997
vCash: 500
Looks like even the little Foot Soldiers are still unified and united ..

Don't expect scab players from these guys ..


Mess is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:24 AM
  #19
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bauer83
Boy can people be ignorant. The reason why the triggers were so low, was that the league wanted the players to take the bait and negogiate the triggers. Allowing both the owners and players to save face. If you actually think that one of these proposals will be outright accepted, you are out to lunch. Just like the players proposal of 12/9 had a lame excuse for a luxury tax. The reason for it, so if the owners decide to use it, they can feel good about raising the levels of the luxury tax. Nobody in the right mind gives the best offer first in these kind of negogiations, so if people choose to actually think about what the NHL presented on Wednesday, instead of spew out the same facts that all the biased journalists are, you can see those triggers for what they were. A negogiating point.

Now don't try to quote me saying that I thought that was the best deal, and the players should have taken it. But they should have negogiated it, just as the owners should be putting in revenue sharing. But unfortunately we have two ignorant sides ruining the game.
Hey ... somebody gets it.

CarlRacki is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:24 AM
  #20
Otter
Registered User
 
Otter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Burke, VA
Country: United States
Posts: 890
vCash: 500
For what it is worth froma anew guy, I think GC is explaining things quite well and making tons of sense and I thank him for going through the trouble.

Otter is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:26 AM
  #21
gerbilanium
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 274
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gc2005
Name one thing in Eaton's quote that is not true. This "fringe" NHLer was Nashville's best dman for the most part of last year and lead the team with a plus-16. I'm surprised he only makes $1 million. Anyone such as yourself who thought he was a writer in Nashville is truly the ignorant one in this equation.
Name one thing in my post that called his comments lies. One year of being an alright defenceman should not entitle on to make $1 million and it won't in the new system that WILL happen because the owners WILL make it happen. To not recognize a hopeless situation is insane, which does not have anything to do with ignorance. I've already lost one arm, what's another. That's not honorable or principled, it's stupid.

I applaud the players for fighting till this point try to get the best deal, but if this is cancelled they will get a worse deal and also be out salary for at least 1.5 years.

And to not know every teams lineup in the NHL may be ignorant but it also indicates 'having a life'.

gerbilanium is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:33 AM
  #22
The Maltais Falcon
Registered User
 
The Maltais Falcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,156
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by s3por2d
Trust me, I take everything I read here with a grain of salt, but saying that the players rejected their own offer isn't that big of a stretch. It's clear that they don't believe enough in it to try and negotiate some of the triggers to the point where it would actually be in place long enough to really test it out.
Exactly. They didn't even try to negotiate the triggers. They just flat-out rejected the offer. That tells me they knew their offer didn't really do anything to address the league's financial issues and was just a big PR stunt (not that the league's offer of Wednesday didn't smack of some of the same.)

The Maltais Falcon is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:33 AM
  #23
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bauer83
Boy can people be ignorant. The reason why the triggers were so low, was that the league wanted the players to take the bait and negogiate the triggers. Allowing both the owners and players to save face. If you actually think that one of these proposals will be outright accepted, you are out to lunch. Just like the players proposal of 12/9 had a lame excuse for a luxury tax. The reason for it, so if the owners decide to use it, they can feel good about raising the levels of the luxury tax. Nobody in the right mind gives the best offer first in these kind of negogiations, so if people choose to actually think about what the NHL presented on Wednesday, instead of spew out the same facts that all the biased journalists are, you can see those triggers for what they were. A negogiating point.

Now don't try to quote me saying that I thought that was the best deal, and the players should have taken it. But they should have negogiated it, just as the owners should be putting in revenue sharing. But unfortunately we have two ignorant sides ruining the game.
From an article today in the Star (http://www.thestar.com):

Quote:
For example, Saskin said that when Bettman presented the league's proposal on Wednesday afternoon, the NHLPA was told it was its best and last proposal and was not negotiable. But Daly said yesterday the four "trigger points" of the league's proposal were indeed open to negotiation and expressed surprise the union didn't seem interested in negotiating them.
Believe who you want, I'd vote for Saskin, since Daly said the day before there was little wiggle room with the triggers, and they were all necessary.

CGG is online now  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:36 AM
  #24
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,245
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gerbilanium
And to not know every teams lineup in the NHL may be ignorant but it also indicates 'having a life'.
Before declaring someone a fringe NHL player who is overpaid you might want to actually figure out who he is. Only makes sense.

CGG is online now  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:38 AM
  #25
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gc2005
From an article today in the Star (http://www.thestar.com):



Believe who you want, I'd vote for Saskin, since Daly said the day before there was little wiggle room with the triggers, and they were all necessary.
Daly didn't discuss the triggers the day before. That was Bettman.

Regardless, Saskin never denied that Daly told the PA Thursday that the triggers were open for negotiaiton. When asked that question directly, Saskin only referred to what Bettman said in a press conference the evening before.

Now, either you believe Ted Saskin is a dumb man or you believe he knows better than to believe everything said in a press conference during a labor negotiation. Which is it?

CarlRacki 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 07:06 AM.

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.