HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
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.

Mirtle: NHLPA’s hard-liners hint at decertification after latest offer rejected

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-23-2012, 02:17 PM
  #351
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Fehr does they say.
Yep and I'm assuming you meant as they say

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:19 PM
  #352
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Actually as a complete group the players are overpaid, and as individual players many more are overpaid than are underpaid.

We don't really know what the free market would look like, but you'd probably have some incredible salaries (Crosby and his ilk). The 4th liners would be a smidge above AHL levels. The middle class would generally do very well too.

Keep supply and demand in mind. These are the best players in the entire WORLD. You have to stay somewhat above the competition for their services in other leagues, and then you're competing with 30 teams who have 22-25 roster spots. It would sort out as a bell curve, wrt to player salaries and team spending.

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:20 PM
  #353
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Yep and I'm assuming you meant as they say

Edited. Thanks.

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:21 PM
  #354
jimmycrackcorn
HFBoards Sponsor
 
jimmycrackcorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Winnipeg
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,305
vCash: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
Fehr does as they say.
Tell me you honestly believe this and aren't kidding.

jimmycrackcorn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:22 PM
  #355
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 35,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by KINGS17 View Post
Actually as a complete group the players are overpaid,
There's really no way to tell if this is true or not.

Quote:
and as individual players many more are overpaid than are underpaid.
But this part is almost certainly true. The question, which can't really be answered hypothetically, is if the re-distribution of salary in a free market system towards the best players would end up with more total revenue spent or not.

Epsilon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:23 PM
  #356
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Halibut View Post
Well the problem with contracts is that they all include a standard players contract (SPC) which is defined in the CBA and subject to it's rules. Without a CBA there really is no SPC so all of their contracts are technically invalid. A team and a player could decide to keep using all the terms of a SPC but if any player decided he didnt like those terms, like Sidney Crosby or Shea Weber or even Taylor Hall, I dont think it would take that long for a court to decide that those contracts are no longer valid.

No one really knows if this would work. The NBA in anticipation of a decertification filed to get a court ruling that would allow them to nullify contracts if the PA moved to disband. It never got that far.

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:26 PM
  #357
Erik Estrada
One Country United!
 
Erik Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of the Habs
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,681
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
My point was it will drag the process out further it will not force the NHL to the table. Something that some on here seem to think is what will take place if the NHLPA moves to decertify. Each of your post furthers that point. I'm not saying the NHLPA won't be allowed to decertify by the courts.
I don't believe the general NHL negotiation strategy changes, decertification or not. They need to sway the Players to accept their position.

Will decertification speed up the process? It raises the stakes and adds pitfalls. However, the NHL has very smart advisors that can appreciate all the risks involved. I don't know how that advice will affect the negotiation timeline going forward.

Erik Estrada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:26 PM
  #358
KINGS17
Smartest in the Room
 
KINGS17's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Country: United States
Posts: 15,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
We don't really know what the free market would look like, but you'd probably have some incredible salaries (Crosby and his ilk). The 4th liners would be a smidge above AHL levels. The middle class would generally do very well too.

Keep supply and demand in mind. These are the best players in the entire WORLD. You have to stay somewhat above the competition for their services in other leagues, and then you're competing with 30 teams who have 22-25 roster spots. It would sort out as a bell curve, wrt to player salaries and team spending.
I don't see why. The top salaries in Europe don't come close to what is being paid to the middle class players in the NHL.

KINGS17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:26 PM
  #359
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 35,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oiLowe View Post
Why? The NHL as one business can do as they please, no? Nothing to stop other leagues from being started. It would purely be internal restrictions within the company that is the NHL.
The United States Supreme Court unanimously disagrees with you:

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/05/24/...t-against-nfl/

Quote:
The case pitted American Needle, Inc., an apparel manufacturer, against the NFL. The dispute started back in 2000 when the NFL signed an exclusive apparel licensing deal with Reebok International, now a unit of Adidas AG.

American Needle, which had individual licensing deals with NFL teams, sued, arguing the NFL’s exclusive deal with Reebok violated antitrust rules. The NFL argued that it is a single entity with 32 teams that compete with each other in football but not in business, where the teams collectively compete with other sports and forms of entertainment. American Needle countered by arguing that the league was actually a collection of 32 independent entities — i.e., all the teams.

The Seventh Circuit in 2008 ruled for the NFL, prompting the appeal.

The Supreme Court on Monday essentially ruled that the NFL is composed of 32 separate business entities. Click here for the opinion; here for the story from Dow Jones Newswires.

Each of the teams is a substantial, independently owned, and independently managed business. . . . Directly relevant to this case, the teams compete in the market for intellectual property. To a firm making hats, the Saints and the Colts are two potentially competing suppliers of valuable trademarks. When each NFL team licenses its intellectual property, it is not pursuing the “common interests of the whole” league but is instead pursuing interests of each “corporation itself,”. . . teams are acting as “separate economic actors pursuing separate economic interests,” and each team therefore is a potential “independent cente[r] of decisionmaking” [Citations omitted].

Therefore, the Court ruled that Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act applies to the NFL, and ruled that any unilateral decision made by the NFL that affect all the teams shall be viewed under the so-called “Rule of Reason” for antitrust purposes.

Epsilon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:28 PM
  #360
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Pacific NW
Country: Canada
Posts: 21,159
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmycrackcorn View Post
Tell me you honestly believe this and aren't kidding.
... what do you think jimmy, he doesnt lay out the various options & scenarios' openly, honestly & honourably, looking for consensus & then direction from the 30 Player Reps? He just does what he wants, has an agenda? Darwined the players like Eagleson?

Killion is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:29 PM
  #361
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
There's really no way to tell if this is true or not.



But this part is almost certainly true. The question, which can't really be answered hypothetically, is if the re-distribution of salary in a free market system towards the best players would end up with more total revenue spent or not.
Thats not a question at all. It would definitely lead to the players getting a larger percentage, at least initially.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:30 PM
  #362
SJeasy
Registered User
 
SJeasy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: San Jose
Country: United States
Posts: 12,270
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greschner4 View Post
Edmonton won how many Stanley Cups, and the Rangers and Leafs won how many again?

This will be the new bit of league propaganda -- we need the players to cave or Edmonton and Ottawa won't be able to compete. The more and more you hear it, the more and more close decert is.

This can't be repeated enough: There has never been an era in NHL history in which Ranger, Maple Leaf, and Los Angeles money buried the rest of the league. There has never been an era in which that came anywhere close to happening.
I agree about the history, but we wouldn't be talking about a comparable landscape.

You are not incorporating the intervening legal history around free agency. You wouldn't have the same landscape. The league had the draft before unions became tied up in the rights that the draft usurps. The draft is now inextricably tied up with the presence of a union. As of now, no union, no draft. Edmonton wouldn't have a chance at precluding a big market team from jumping on Gretzky at 18yo.

I do think contracts would still be in force in a transition period and most of the star players are tied to their teams for a very long time. However over time, I do think the "stars" would migrate to the bigger markets and it wouldn't be all that long as the draft would be ancient history. I do think small market teams would offer term to players who were marginally stars at reduced rates and that some would take term over the chance that they could score bigger a couple years down the road. I do think that teams and players would find ways to make contracts binding on both parties such that a player couldn't just walk away from a contract and vice versa, at least for the more gifted players.

SJeasy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:31 PM
  #363
Epsilon
#TeamHolland
 
Epsilon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Florence, SC
Posts: 35,482
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by joshjull View Post
Thats not a question at all. It would definitely lead to the players getting a larger percentage, at least initially.
Based on historical precedent (pre-2005 CBA) I'm sure you are correct. In the long run there would be the obvious issue of whether or not teams would fold.

Epsilon is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:39 PM
  #364
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 29,110
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmycrackcorn View Post
Tell me you honestly believe this and aren't kidding.

Yes, I do. Fehr is an attorney by training. He has a fiduciary responsibility to represent the interests of the people who pay him.

To claim otherwise would mean I needed to believe he had some personal, ulterior motive, which would mean not only is he duplicitous (and a liar), but that he is hijacking this process for his own purposes while misrepresenting the issues to his players.

People get sent to jail for that type of thing, and/or even stripped of their right to represent by the legal associations in which they have earned the right to practice.

Fugu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:41 PM
  #365
MeestaDeteta
Registered User
 
MeestaDeteta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Saskazoo
Posts: 7,409
vCash: 139
IMO, the biggest concern the players would have to watch out for in decertifying, is that it would result in a large number of players losing NHL jobs as several teams would close up shop, due to not being able to compete with the big market teams. We would be down to 10 or less NHL teams in short order.

Are individuals of the PA (made up of 700 members) willing to bet that they are skilled enough to be retained when the league is down to 10 teams? Not only that, if you're a bubble player with a ten team league and you're injured, consider yourself done.

I personally don't see decertification benefiting the majority of players.

MeestaDeteta is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:42 PM
  #366
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,504
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
Based on historical precedent (pre-2005 CBA) I'm sure you are correct. In the long run there would be the obvious issue of whether or not teams would fold.
I think in the short run (2-5 years) teams would fold in that environment. Thus leading to less NHLPA jobs. Which makes me wonder if the lower paid guys (the 17th-23rd players on the 23 man roster pecking order) realize the ramifications of what could happen to them if this moves forward. Giving up a years salary for a cause is one thing. Losing your career is quite another.

joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:51 PM
  #367
Erik Estrada
One Country United!
 
Erik Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of the Habs
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,681
vCash: 500
Hockey Night in Canada (Friedman): Answers to NHLPA decertification questions:

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/opin...questions.html

Sample:

What would be the league's response?

Well, it won't be a happy dance, that's for sure.

Last year, there were complaints the NBA players waited too long to utilize this strategy, that it would destroy any chance of a season.

"That's obviously false," Feldman said. "It may spell saving the season, force movement."

But he knows the NHL will fight hard, arguing the players are simply doing it to gain leverage, "stay in negotiation while exerting pressure, [hoping] once there's a threat of treble damages, the owners would cave."

"The players will say, 'We don't want to dissolve the union to blow up the sport, we want to blow up the union because collective bargaining is no longer working.' The owners will have a different spin, that [the NHLPA] is just using it as a tactic. The NBA and NFL made the argument, which the NHL will certainly make, that [decertifying] is a just a sham and should not be recognized."

"It's the 'Duck Defence.' If it looks like a union and talks like a union, is it still a union?"


Legal article by Feldman following 2011 NFL NBA lockouts:Antitrust Versus Labor Law in Professional Sports: Balancing the Scales after Brady v. NFL and Anthony v. NBA
http://lawreview.law.ucdavis.edu/iss...-4_Feldman.pdf


Last edited by Erik Estrada: 11-23-2012 at 02:59 PM.
Erik Estrada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 02:53 PM
  #368
rockinghorse
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 577
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
The United States Supreme Court unanimously disagrees with you:

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/05/24/...t-against-nfl/
How does the Reebok contract with the NHL work? Do they deal with each individual team as the NFL did?

rockinghorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:05 PM
  #369
cbcwpg
Registered User
 
cbcwpg's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Between the Pipes
Country: United Nations
Posts: 5,736
vCash: 350
Ken Campbell : Decertifying union dangerous step for players

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/dece...0813--nhl.html

Decertifying union dangerous step for players

And that’s exactly what the NHL would argue in court if the NHLPA moved to decertify according to Eric Macramalla, a legal analyst for TSN who writes an excellent blog at offsidesportslaw.com (@ericonsportslaw on Twitter). In fact, Macramalla said that when the National Football League argued precisely the same thing in court during its lockout, the NHL submitted what is called an amicus brief as an interested third party.

“And (the NHL) would argue the same thing, that decertification is a sham,” Macramalla said. “(They’ll maintain) it’s akin to switching a light switch on and off. ‘I’m a union, but now it’s no longer convenient, so I hit the light switch and I’m no longer a union.’ So their argument will be that it’s a sham designed to extract leverage in CBA negotiations and for no other reasons.”


But it can also be a long, drawn-out process which the players themselves will have to support financially and there’s no guarantee they would be successful. But as Macramalla argued, it worked for NFL players, largely because the ramifications for the owners have the potential to be catastrophic, which in turn prompts them to get back to the bargaining table. And the players know this will never get to court because in order for that process to play out, it would take three or four years to unfold.

cbcwpg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:06 PM
  #370
Halibut
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,019
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
No one really knows if this would work. The NBA in anticipation of a decertification filed to get a court ruling that would allow them to nullify contracts if the PA moved to disband. It never got that far.
No you cant say for sure but the poster I was replying to was suggesting the teams might be able to pick and choose which contracts they would honor the main point I was making was that the SPC applies to all contracts so it's very doubtful the owners could pick and choose. Most likely they either all remain valid or none of them do with of course the proviso that a lot of court cases would have to happen before any of that gets resolved.

The owners could move to challenge the validity of contracts signed under previous CBA's so could any player or group of players.

Halibut is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:11 PM
  #371
Erik Estrada
One Country United!
 
Erik Estrada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Land of the Habs
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,681
vCash: 500
Jonathan Willis: NHL Lockout is the threat of decertification

http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/201...for-the-nhlpa/

NHL Lockout is the threat of decertification a bluff or legitimate option for the NHLPA

... On the whole, it seems likely that the changes in a post-collective agreement NHL world would favour the players. But it will take a long time to get there and nobody knows what that world would look like, exactly.

"That is why, in both the NFL and the NBA, the end result was a return to collective bargaining. While various representatives of the league are hinting both on and off the record that pursuing decertification would wipe out the season, in both leagues the end result was actually a quick agreement and a return to playing games. In the case of the NBA, anti-trust lawsuits were filed on November 15; a tentative agreement between owners and players was reached 10 days later.

That is the most likely outcome here. The players will make a strong move toward decertification, talks will suddenly restart, and the two sides will come to an agreement. Based on previous negotiations, this is what will happen.

However, decertification would not have re-energized talks in other leagues if not for the fact that it is a legitimate threat. Depending on how talks between the two sides go, it might even be a threat that the players’ association acts on."

Erik Estrada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:14 PM
  #372
joshjull
Moderator
 
joshjull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Hamburg,NY
Country: United States
Posts: 32,504
vCash: 500
Something thats somewhat bizarre as a Sabre fan during this lockout is Pegula as the owner. He's already stated he doesn't care about making money with the team. As he famously said, he would drill another well if he wanted more money. Any economic system like ones that have been discussed potentially coming out of decertification would have been very detrimental to the Sabres in the past. But it would actually benefit a Pegula owned Sabres. He will essentially operate as a big market regardless of revenues.


Last edited by joshjull: 11-23-2012 at 03:21 PM.
joshjull is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 03:58 PM
  #373
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 12,392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by oiLowe View Post
Wouldn't you only need a majority of vote from the owners? The big pocket owners would most certainly be out voted as they have been time and time again. I think this IS the likely scenario if the union were to decertify and I haven't seen a clear response yet as to why it wouldn't be the case.
Restructuring the League into a Single Entity would require amending Articles III & IV of the NHL Constitution - which would require unanimous consent.

And has been posted before, any such restructuring would need US DoJ & FTC approval (and probably approval by the CCB) - after an anti trust investigation on the anti-competitive effects of such a merger/restructuring, including the effects on the labor market - and I find it very unlikely it would ever get approved.

kdb209 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 04:03 PM
  #374
billybudd
5 Mike Rupps
 
billybudd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 9,618
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Epsilon View Post
Based on historical precedent (pre-2005 CBA) I'm sure you are correct. In the long run there would be the obvious issue of whether or not teams would fold.
Is that a historical precedent, though? Pre-2005, the CBA included arbitration (salary inflator) and a minimum wage. Neither would be true now. AHL/KHL plugger wages could act as a new minimum wage. Would that act as a magnet for everybody who isn't unique to his role?

billybudd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
11-23-2012, 04:17 PM
  #375
Ducks DVM
Moderator
There is no grunion
 
Ducks DVM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Long Beach, CA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,220
vCash: 500
How would winning an antitrust lawsuit actually benefit the players? Am I incorrect in thinking it would cause the league to go bankrupt and basically cost all the players all their jobs? I get it that it's the THREAT of that occurring and the fear of the owners losing everything that provides the NHLPA leverage, but wouldn't it be a case where winning would be losing? Someone who knows please educate me as to how said bankruptcies would or would not eliminate any money coming the way of the players as well.

Ducks DVM is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 09:49 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.