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
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

Mark Eaton Speaks

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-11-2005, 10:44 AM
  #26
triggrman
Registered User
 
triggrman's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Murfreesboro, TN
Country: United States
Posts: 23,335
vCash: 557
Quote:
Originally Posted by gc2005
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.

Have to agree.

triggrman is online now  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:47 AM
  #27
chara
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 894
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.

And what's stopping the players from putting together another proposal?
The owners have countered with 3 proposals since the players' Dec proposal. Its time for Mr.Goodenow and Mr.Saskin to step up to the plate and put together an offer and stop taking potshots at the owners. If this season is gassed, they will have done very little in the area of urgency to get a deal done. At least Daly and Bettman took a shot at it.

chara is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:54 AM
  #28
Digger12
Gold Fever
 
Digger12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Back o' beyond
Posts: 17,054
vCash: 500
''As far as players go, we've already given up one year, so what's two?"

I'm sure the host of people who got laid off from their jobs that work in and around the arenas really appreciate Mark Eaton's cavalier attitude to resolving this.

What a stupid, ignorant statement. If 4 or 5 teams fall into nothingness after this mess, I would consider it delicious irony if Mr. Eaton becomes an early casualty.

If he's got a wife and family to take care of, shame on him.

Digger12 is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:57 AM
  #29
mackdogs*
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Van, left coast
Country: Canada
Posts: 907
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.
Got a link that says the triggers would be enforced immediately? Everything I've read say that these triggers would be looked at next season at the earliest giving teams time to move players around for salary reasons. To think the league would enforce these right away is just silly and obviously something the PA wouldn't accept. Try to think through it with a shred of logic John, some of you posters are really embarassing yourselves.

mackdogs* is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 10:57 AM
  #30
CarlRacki
Registered User
 
CarlRacki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,438
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Digger12
''As far as players go, we've already given up one year, so what's two?"

I'm sure the host of people who got laid off from their jobs that work in and around the arenas really appreciate Mark Eaton's cavalier attitude to resolving this.

What a stupid, ignorant statement. If 4 or 5 teams fall into nothingness after this mess, I would consider it delicious irony if Mr. Eaton becomes an early casualty.

If he's got a wife and family to take care of, shame on him.
I've got to agree. Whichever side you're on in this disaster, Eaton's remarks should p--- you off.

CarlRacki is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 11:05 AM
  #31
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,063
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarlRacki
I've got to agree. Whichever side you're on in this disaster, Eaton's remarks should p--- you off.
At least on that, I agree with you.

CGG is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 11:05 AM
  #32
Hoek
#TomorrowSeason
 
Hoek's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Tampa, FL
Country: Argentina
Posts: 5,169
vCash: 500
He was misquoted. This is what he really said:

As far as the fans go, we've already screwed them over for one year, so what's two?

F*** both sides and their idiocy over a friggin' GAME. Quotes like this by both of them really do tick me off, agreed. I hope the money in the NHL shrivels to below MLS levels for players and owners. A-holes deserve it if they continue to have such cavalier attitudes. Bring on the soccer renaissance.

Hoek is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 11:14 AM
  #33
Sammy*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,501
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by gc2005
. It was a "final" offer, none of the triggers were negotiable.
Get a clue Bud. Daly himself said he was surprised the players wouldnt even attempt to negotiate on the numbers in the triggers, therby implying the amounts in the triggers were negotiable.

Sammy* is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 11:23 AM
  #34
mackdogs*
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Van, left coast
Country: Canada
Posts: 907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sammy
Get a clue Bud. Daly himself said he was surprised the players wouldnt even attempt to negotiate on the numbers in the triggers, therby implying the amounts in the triggers were negotiable.
You mean Ted Saskin speaks in untruths?

mackdogs* is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 11:23 AM
  #35
Lanny MacDonald*
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tuvalu
Posts: 4,457
vCash: 500
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.
Bull! There is always room for negotiation and everyone but Sakins stated that it was open for negotiation. The NHLPA took the stance that they would not negotiate. THEIR choice. Jesus, how ignorant of the facts can you be? The NHLPA asked the NHL to stay in Toronto so they could discuss issues further and then come the next morning they said they were not prepsared to negotiate. If the NHL was not expecting the NHLPA to come back and negotiate then why did they stay in Toronto? For Goodenow's and Sakskin's insight on the Canadian health care system? THINK man. The PA refused to negotiate.

Lanny MacDonald* is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 11:37 AM
  #36
futurcorerock
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Columbus, OH
Country: United States
Posts: 6,831
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.
First, the deal wouldnt have started until the next season, two... that wouldnt be the case with offseason signings.

If the PA says it, that doesnt make it so.

futurcorerock is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 11:50 AM
  #37
jpsharkfan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 742
vCash: 500
Every thing is negotiable and pretending otherwise is just another PR ploy.
One of the saddest aspects of this whole situation is that for the most part the players have allowed themselves to be brainwashed by the PA's propaganda. The "we will never accept a cap" comments baffle me. Do they honestly believe they are better than all other professional athletes? Didnt their mamma's tell them to never say never?
My favorite commonly heard players comment is the "we are protecting the future for the up and coming players. Can they really believe this? They are not protecting anything, in fact they are assuring that there will be no future for up and coming players. It must make it easier for the players to sleep at night if they believe they are making sacrifices now for the good of the future. Does future mean Europe?

jpsharkfan is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 11:58 AM
  #38
barnburner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 567
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.
The association never even attempted to negotiate the triggers, for obvious reasons.

barnburner is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 12:13 PM
  #39
AdvDave
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 37
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.
I know exactly who Mark Eaton is... He dominated with the Utah Jazz. I surely thought he had retired, but I am sure he is still worth one million.

AdvDave is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 12:19 PM
  #40
Crazy Lunatic
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gc2005
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!"
The only peoiple who keep bringing that up are you and your 2 or 3 NHLPA lackeys. Give it up.

 
Old
02-11-2005, 12:24 PM
  #41
deathbear
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Manitoba
Country: United Kingdom
Posts: 2,428
vCash: 500
i still don't know who mark eaton is.

deathbear is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 12:25 PM
  #42
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,063
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
Bull! There is always room for negotiation and everyone but Sakins stated that it was open for negotiation. The NHLPA took the stance that they would not negotiate. THEIR choice. Jesus, how ignorant of the facts can you be? The NHLPA asked the NHL to stay in Toronto so they could discuss issues further and then come the next morning they said they were not prepsared to negotiate. If the NHL was not expecting the NHLPA to come back and negotiate then why did they stay in Toronto? For Goodenow's and Sakskin's insight on the Canadian health care system? THINK man. The PA refused to negotiate.
The NHLPA tried to discuss the NHL's disappearing revenue sharing shenanigans, which pissed off the league, so they left. Do you honestly think the league was (1) perfectly willing to negotiate (or eliminate) the triggers and (2) willing to negotiate them to the length that they would no longer be automatic, so that the PA proposal would be given a full and fair trial period? I don't buy that for a second.

But better say after the fact that they were willing to negotiate these ridiculous triggers, that makes the league look better in the eyes of the public who take everything said by Daly and Bettman at face value and automatically label anything Bob & Ted say as a baldface lie.

CGG is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 12:28 PM
  #43
Greschner4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Iconoclast
Bull! There is always room for negotiation and everyone but Sakins stated that it was open for negotiation. The NHLPA took the stance that they would not negotiate. THEIR choice. Jesus, how ignorant of the facts can you be? The NHLPA asked the NHL to stay in Toronto so they could discuss issues further and then come the next morning they said they were not prepsared to negotiate. If the NHL was not expecting the NHLPA to come back and negotiate then why did they stay in Toronto? For Goodenow's and Sakskin's insight on the Canadian health care system? THINK man. The PA refused to negotiate.
Exactly.

Like everybody means it's not negotiable when they say, "Yeah, I'll go to $500 for it but I can't really go much higher." Nobody in world history has EVER said that in a negotiation.

F/in idiots.

Greschner4 is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 12:30 PM
  #44
Greschner4
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 755
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpsharkfan
Every thing is negotiable and pretending otherwise is just another PR ploy.
One of the saddest aspects of this whole situation is that for the most part the players have allowed themselves to be brainwashed by the PA's propaganda. The "we will never accept a cap" comments baffle me. Do they honestly believe they are better than all other professional athletes? Didnt their mamma's tell them to never say never?
My favorite commonly heard players comment is the "we are protecting the future for the up and coming players. Can they really believe this? They are not protecting anything, in fact they are assuring that there will be no future for up and coming players. It must make it easier for the players to sleep at night if they believe they are making sacrifices now for the good of the future. Does future mean Europe?
Okay, let's canvas the up and coming players to see how they feel about you bums reducing the league they hoped to showcase their talents in and make some good money from to a smoldering wreckage of a joke.

I bet the up and coming players are REAL happy about your "sacrifice."

Greschner4 is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 12:32 PM
  #45
Crazy Lunatic
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by gc2005
The NHLPA tried to discuss the NHL's disappearing revenue sharing shenanigans, which pissed off the league, so they left. Do you honestly think the league was (1) perfectly willing to negotiate (or eliminate) the triggers and (2) willing to negotiate them to the length that they would no longer be automatic, so that the PA proposal would be given a full and fair trial period? I don't buy that for a second.

But better say after the fact that they were willing to negotiate these ridiculous triggers, that makes the league look better in the eyes of the public who take everything said by Daly and Bettman at face value and automatically label anything Bob & Ted say as a baldface lie.
Saskin admitted yesterday... it's their Dec.9 proposal or nothing. You can talk (or type) untill you are blue in the face (or blue in the fingers) but there is no way you could ever justify their position.

 
Old
02-11-2005, 12:41 PM
  #46
PeterSidorkiewicz
Original *** allstar
 
PeterSidorkiewicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Michigan
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 22,855
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.

The Rational explanation is that it was strictly a PR move, and judging by most people on this boards actually believing the NHLPA rejected their own offer it worked. Ok look both sides are to blame for this mess but the NHL NEEDS TO OFFER REVENUE SHARING FOR THE REGULAR SEASON AS WELL. People need to get it through their heads. I may go out on a limb here but I pretty much 100% believe if the NHL OFFERED revenue sharing like that close to the NFL's to start we would have basis for negotiations and we would have a season. Brian Burke said this as well, and since Burke has been fairly objective throughout all of this for the most part I believe him as well.

PeterSidorkiewicz is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 12:51 PM
  #47
SENSible1*
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,543
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz
The Rational explanation is that it was strictly a PR move, and judging by most people on this boards actually believing the NHLPA rejected their own offer it worked. Ok look both sides are to blame for this mess but the NHL NEEDS TO OFFER REVENUE SHARING FOR THE REGULAR SEASON AS WELL. People need to get it through their heads. I may go out on a limb here but I pretty much 100% believe if the NHL OFFERED revenue sharing like that close to the NFL's to start we would have basis for negotiations and we would have a season. Brian Burke said this as well, and since Burke has been fairly objective throughout all of this for the most part I believe him as well.
Ok So the NHL offers 100% revenue sharing and 33% of the revenues to the PA.

Deal?

Revenue sharing is a smokescreen. The % of revenue is all that matters. How the owners share revenue to get the money to the PA is 100% the owners business.

SENSible1* is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 12:51 PM
  #48
CGG
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: 416
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,063
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy Lunatic
Saskin admitted yesterday... it's their Dec.9 proposal or nothing. You can talk (or type) untill you are blue in the face (or blue in the fingers) but there is no way you could ever justify their position.
Likewise, by all their actions, the league is simply re-stating that it's their payroll ranges / cap / linkage / negligible-revenue-sharing way or nothing. Whether the PA agrees to it or gets "tricked" into accepting something else that gets replaced by it.

Both sides absolutely refuse to negotiate off of the other's proposed framework. That's the way it was in Sept, that's the way it is now. They are both within their rights to do so. Call it the PA's fault if it makes you feel better, but the owners are just as bad.

CGG is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 12:59 PM
  #49
PeterSidorkiewicz
Original *** allstar
 
PeterSidorkiewicz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Michigan
Country: Czech_ Republic
Posts: 22,855
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thunderstruck
Ok So the NHL offers 100% revenue sharing and 33% of the revenues to the PA.

Deal?

Revenue sharing is a smokescreen. The % of revenue is all that matters. How the owners share revenue to get the money to the PA is 100% the owners business.
I really have to disagree what revenue sharing is just a smokescreen. The #1 reason the NFL is so successful besides the bigass TV contract is revenue sharing. And I think you'd agree that most people here want a NFL styled system. If no meaningful revenue sharing is offered then I can't see anything ever getting done. If the owners did agree to share regular season revenues that would be a massive step and bridge the gap in getting a deal done and I think it needs to be done. Of course the PA has to give in a lot too but the revenue sharing is definitely a key component of making talks work.

PeterSidorkiewicz is offline  
Old
02-11-2005, 01:05 PM
  #50
mackdogs*
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Van, left coast
Country: Canada
Posts: 907
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterSidorkiewicz
The Rational explanation is that it was strictly a PR move, and judging by most people on this boards actually believing the NHLPA rejected their own offer it worked. Ok look both sides are to blame for this mess but the NHL NEEDS TO OFFER REVENUE SHARING FOR THE REGULAR SEASON AS WELL. People need to get it through their heads. I may go out on a limb here but I pretty much 100% believe if the NHL OFFERED revenue sharing like that close to the NFL's to start we would have basis for negotiations and we would have a season. Brian Burke said this as well, and since Burke has been fairly objective throughout all of this for the most part I believe him as well.
Why is it the responsibility of the 'have' teams (NYR, TO, PHI, etc) to help out the have nots? The NHLPA's stance has changed and they now are all over revenue sharing to fix the league's problems. The way I see it, the PA realizes that the small-smallish market teams are having serious financial trouble and can't even make the recently proposed cap minimum without operating at a loss. Instead of taking a step back and saying 'wow, maybe the players are making too much' they have changed directions a bit and are now stressing revenue sharing. They want the richer teams to prop up the poorer teams so the players can continue to make their inflated salaries. This is obviously a terrible way to run a business, and at the same time puts a large amount of undeserved pressure on the have teams to keep bringing in as much revenue as they do. It's business suicide yet the league is happy to go down that avenue. Just disgraceful

mackdogs* 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 04:51 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. @2017 All Rights Reserved.