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.

What's your status with the latest NHLPA proposal?

View Poll Results: I still believe the NHL are in the right after the latest NHLPA proposal.
Yes, I side with the owners. 89 58.55%
No, the NHLPA appears to be trying harder. 15 9.87%
No and never did believe Bettman and the owners. I don't trust them. 48 31.58%
Voters: 152. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
11-21-2012, 10:55 PM
  #1
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,717
vCash: 500
What's your status with the latest NHLPA proposal?

Does anybody still believe the owners after the players went with a direct percentage and it was still rejected? The PA had a clause in there that revenue one year cannot be less than that of the previous year; but considering how the NHL added the rollback to the salary cap last CBA, they had to have a nugget in there for protection. Their premise, however, is now direct linkage and speaking the language of the NHL.

The NHL still rejected the NHLPA's proposal after 50 minutes. Does anybody still trust the owners?

Ginu is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 11:01 PM
  #2
Florida Ranger
Bring back Torts!
 
Florida Ranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tampa, FLA
Country: United States
Posts: 6,000
vCash: 500
Screw em all.

Florida Ranger is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 11:01 PM
  #3
Butch 19
King me
 
Butch 19's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A. suburb
Country: United States
Posts: 8,858
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu View Post
Does anybody still believe the owners after the players went with a direct percentage and it was still rejected? The PA had a clause in there that revenue one year cannot be less than that of the previous year; but considering how the NHL added the rollback to the salary cap last CBA, they had to have a nugget in there for protection. Their premise, however, is now direct linkage and speaking the language of the NHL.

The NHL still rejected the NHLPA's proposal after 50 minutes. Does anybody still trust the owners?
What choice to fans have? None.

The owners supply us with NHL hockey, period. End of story.

Butch 19 is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 11:01 PM
  #4
hotpaws
Registered User
 
hotpaws's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 7,571
vCash: 1142
The players haven't offered anything different since the summer and i'm getting really tired of there stalling . If i was the league i wouldn't meet with the players until the 2nd week of Dec because it's obvious Fehr won't negotiate until the deadline to lose the season is close .

hotpaws is online now  
Old
11-21-2012, 11:03 PM
  #5
Ginu
Registered User
 
Ginu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,717
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Butch 19 View Post
What choice to fans have? None.

The owners supply us with NHL hockey, period. End of story.
So you want the players to take whatever deal puts the game back on the ice?

Ginu is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 11:06 PM
  #6
MikeK
Registered User
 
MikeK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,692
vCash: 8000
Serves Fehr right for waiting until the last minute to open up negotiations. Fehr seriously misjudged the situation, Bettman and the Owners. I think this last offer was just like the rest only worded differently. Fehr has cost the players a season and millions of dollars.

MikeK is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 11:30 PM
  #7
Paranoid Android
ERMAHGERD
 
Paranoid Android's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: CO
Posts: 11,561
vCash: 500
I don't trust either side. Never did. Where's the option for that?

Paranoid Android is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 11:38 PM
  #8
Wingsfan2965*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 6,610
vCash: 500
Somebody should've told Fehr that he wasn't dealing with an idiot like Selig.

Like Bettman or not, he's good at what he does. Players are fighting a battle in which they have 0% of the leverage, why they still think they can win it is a mystery.

It's foolishness. The owners, whether right or wrong, are going to win, the players know it, and they'd rather lose money AND still be handed the deal the owners want. In the mean time we're the ones who get screwed out of hockey.

Wingsfan2965* is offline  
Old
11-21-2012, 11:52 PM
  #9
rt
Usually Incorrect
 
rt's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Rarely Sober
Country: United States
Posts: 42,008
vCash: 500
I honestly can't believe the NHLPA has been offered anywhere near as sweet a deal as theyve been offered. I take their refusal to capitulate as a personal offense. I feel the NHLPA is shockingly entitled and i hope to see them humbled. Crawling around in the dirt forced to eat insects and filth humbled. That kind of humbled.

__________________
This poster should not be taken seriously under any circumstances.
rt is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 12:02 AM
  #10
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wingsfan2965 View Post
Somebody should've told Fehr that he wasn't dealing with an idiot like Selig.

Like Bettman or not, he's good at what he does. Players are fighting a battle in which they have 0% of the leverage, why they still think they can win it is a mystery.

It's foolishness. The owners, whether right or wrong, are going to win, the players know it, and they'd rather lose money AND still be handed the deal the owners want. In the mean time we're the ones who get screwed out of hockey.
But according to many people here Bettman doesn't do anything.

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 12:05 AM
  #11
Oshie97
Registered User
 
Oshie97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 2,374
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotpaws View Post
The players haven't offered anything different since the summer and i'm getting really tired of there stalling . If i was the league i wouldn't meet with the players until the 2nd week of Dec because it's obvious Fehr won't negotiate until the deadline to lose the season is close .
100% agree, all they have done is reword offers this whole time. Fehr is treating this like a waiting game to get the best offer he can by stalling until the season is on the line. The players are now finding out that the lockout is going to cost them more than just taking the owners offer. This is why they asked for the league to pay for lost wages in the last proposal. In the end the owners will get what they want, the players will lose money, and the fans will get screwed.

Oshie97 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 12:33 AM
  #12
octopi
Registered User
 
octopi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 30,795
vCash: 703
My give a damn is busted. Where's that option?

octopi is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 12:41 AM
  #13
Kimota
Nation of Poutine
 
Kimota's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: La Vieille Capitale
Country: France
Posts: 21,820
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by rt View Post
I honestly can't believe the NHLPA has been offered anywhere near as sweet a deal as theyve been offered. I take their refusal to capitulate as a personal offense. I feel the NHLPA is shockingly entitled and i hope to see them humbled. Crawling around in the dirt forced to eat insects and filth humbled. That kind of humbled.
Yea i'm shocked by all their getting in the proposal(like three years rookie entry contract to two years for example).

Also i've heard they agreed about the 50/50 split but the way they want to do it, doesn't it make it like the players would go from 57% to 56%? I mean that's a joke.

Kimota is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 02:03 AM
  #14
mranderson
Registered User
 
mranderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ginu View Post
Does anybody still believe the owners after the players went with a direct percentage and it was still rejected? The PA had a clause in there that revenue one year cannot be less than that of the previous year; but considering how the NHL added the rollback to the salary cap last CBA, they had to have a nugget in there for protection. Their premise, however, is now direct linkage and speaking the language of the NHL.

The NHL still rejected the NHLPA's proposal after 50 minutes. Does anybody still trust the owners?
My guess would be that the answer to this poll will depend mostly on how each forum user views this (additional) clause in the NHLPA offer:

Quote:
Originally Posted by NHLPA
The Upper Limit may not fall below 67.25M in any year of the agreement.
This is one of the major differences between the PA's and NHL's proposals regarding player share.

Those who view this difference in player share as being "immaterial *" (as per Don Fehr *) will likely choose one of the two "no" options.

Conversely, those who consider this as being a material difference will probably vote "yes."



* source: http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/nhl-l...sal_full_text/

mranderson is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 02:39 AM
  #15
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mranderson View Post
My guess would be that the answer to this poll will depend mostly on how each forum user views this (additional) clause in the NHLPA offer...
Do you now.... First of all mranderson, Welcome to hfBoards. I hope you find it a long strange trip, enjoy.... Second, no need to Bold for the readership. I understand you did so for shock value & dramatic effect, however, we have seen such tricks & pyrotechnics of the like in the past, and though novel, rather old hat.... now, would you care to explain why you felt it necessary to stoop to such dramatic pause? Outlining an entirely out of context unverifiable "source" in making such claims here, there & everywhere mine Scarlet Pimpernel? You do know who pays the freight at Sportsnet yes?

Killion is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 03:00 AM
  #16
mranderson
Registered User
 
mranderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
Do you now.... First of all mranderson, Welcome to hfBoards. I hope you find it a long strange trip, enjoy.... Second, no need to Bold for the readership. I understand you did so for shock value & dramatic effect, however, we have seen such tricks & pyrotechnics of the like in the past, and though novel, rather old hat.... now, would you care to explain why you felt it necessary to stoop to such dramatic pause? Outlining an entirely out of context unverifiable "source" in making such claims here, there & everywhere mine Scarlet Pimpernel? You do know who pays the freight at Sportsnet yes?
Since you feel so strongly about my response, I hope you're willing to explain to me why you feel this was this taken out of context?

The section that I highlighted regarding player share was right there at the bottom of section 4. Furthermore, it was a statement released by the NHLPA. Sportsnet simply reported it.

Also, if you don't consider Sportsnet a reputible source, please do state why.

mranderson is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 03:18 AM
  #17
Killion
Global Moderator
 
Killion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Morocco
Country: Morocco
Posts: 22,198
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mranderson View Post
...if you don't consider Sportsnet a reputible source, please do state why.
I dont think Sportsnet, TSN, the CBC are anything more than shills for the National Hockey League. Bought & paid for. I'll wait for the rubber to actually hit the road before Im biting on anything they have to advertise in the hopes that people will actually buy it.

Killion is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 09:32 AM
  #18
mranderson
Registered User
 
mranderson's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 71
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Killion View Post
I dont think Sportsnet, TSN, the CBC are anything more than shills for the National Hockey League. Bought & paid for. I'll wait for the rubber to actually hit the road before Im biting on anything they have to advertise in the hopes that people will actually buy it.
That's a pretty extreme view that you have on TSN, Sportsnet, and CBC.

In any event, details of the NHLPA proposal itself came from a memo released by the NHLPA itself.

Now with respect to the OP and the whole issue of the NHLPA finally proposing a linked proposal: When you factor in the minimum cap amount must be $67.5 M, that sort of defeats the pupose of having linkage in the first place.

mranderson is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 09:51 AM
  #19
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
PensFanSince1989's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mranderson View Post
That's a pretty extreme view that you have on TSN, Sportsnet, and CBC.

In any event, details of the NHLPA proposal itself came from a memo released by the NHLPA itself.

Now with respect to the OP and the whole issue of the NHLPA finally proposing a linked proposal: When you factor in the minimum cap amount must be $67.5 M, that sort of defeats the pupose of having linkage in the first place.
Now, I could be wrong, but I do not believe the upper limit cap really affects the split of revenue. Having it at the guaranteed minimum f $67.5 million just means that if revenues aren't high enough to support it, that players will lose a bunch of money to escrow. Seems like a transitional rule to me, to make it so teams don't have to go dumping players to get under the cap. Instead, they'll just let escrow take care of it. And this is similar to how the NHL handled the transition (at least in earlier proposals) no? Just keep the high salary cap and let escrow take the money away.

PensFanSince1989 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 09:53 AM
  #20
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
PensFanSince1989's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,722
vCash: 500
Though calling Sportsnet a mouthpiece for the NHL is laughable.

PensFanSince1989 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 09:54 AM
  #21
optimus2861
Registered User
 
optimus2861's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Bedford NS
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,673
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PensFanSince1989 View Post
Now, I could be wrong, but I do not believe the upper limit cap really affects the split of revenue. Having it at the guaranteed minimum f $67.5 million just means that if revenues aren't high enough to support it, that players will lose a bunch of money to escrow.
No, the PA covered that one too. They added a clause that says their share in absolute dollars can not decline from any year to the next. The league probably laughed at that one in private before telling them "Hell no" in the bargaining room.

I can't answer the poll question; I'm still on the owners' side but there are elements in the PA proposal to negotiate from. At this point I feel the two sides really ought to stop talking to reporters, sit in the room, beat the crap out of each other and come to an agreement where neither side gets everything they want but they each get enough that they can live with it.

optimus2861 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 09:57 AM
  #22
PensFanSince1989
Registered User
 
PensFanSince1989's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 9,722
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by optimus2861 View Post
No, the PA covered that one too. They added a clause that says their share in absolute dollars can not decline from any year to the next. The league probably laughed at that one in private before telling them "Hell no" in the bargaining room.

I can't answer the poll question; I'm still on the owners' side but there are elements in the PA proposal to negotiate from. At this point I feel the two sides really ought to stop talking to reporters, sit in the room, beat the crap out of each other and come to an agreement where neither side gets everything they want but they each get enough that they can live with it.
Yes,but that's a different clause. the $67.5 Million upper limit isn't really de-linkage.

PensFanSince1989 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 10:02 AM
  #23
The Phil
Registered User
 
The Phil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger de FLA View Post
Screw em all.
Dear lord, this!


We are going to lose a second full season in less than a decade. How could anyone possibly support either side? We're the only fans who get this sort of treatment.

The Phil is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 10:03 AM
  #24
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,453
vCash: 500
That nugget of protection that you like to call it is delinkage. The players have proposed a 'we want part of all revenue growth but you can keep all the losses to your self, we still want our money'.

The players have still offered a framework that the league said they aren't prepared to accept. Those supporting the owners are bias, similarly, your take on the PA proposal is also bias. It's a step forward going 50/50 and negotiating off make whole and I do think that the premise of the economics are workable - mainly by eliminating such clauses which you like to call nuggets for protection.

The players had the opportunity to negotiate make whole back in October and potentially save an 82 game season and lose no games or money. They decided to play the waiting game with the league only to find that that false deadline wasn't so false after all. Players aren't entitled to compensation because their gamble of waiting didn't pay off.

Ari91 is offline  
Old
11-22-2012, 10:06 AM
  #25
saffronleaf
Registered User
 
saffronleaf's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Ann Arbor, MI
Country:
Posts: 3,042
vCash: 500
**** 'em both.

saffronleaf 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 07:02 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.