HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Pacific Division > Vancouver Canucks
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

Jan 6/13: CBA reached to end the Lockout. Rejoice! (Post#783)

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-07-2012, 01:10 AM
  #176
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Stovepipe Cup View Post
No one in their right mind did not see 50% coming. Every other major sports league has 50% rev share or the players earning less of that share. Owners asking players to have a lower shared rev; unfair? How about players earning disproportionate amount of revenue; this is unfair too. That's why anything with half a brain right now knows the middle ground was and is 50% each. The fact that the NHL is willing to concede and offer "make whole" payments to honour contracts proves that they are willing to work to transition the rev sharing.

And contract limits? Let's get this straight, you haggle over a couple things and get them to compromise at 6 or 7 UFA, 8 for own team signing. The trickle down effect of a UFA only getting 5 years, so a lesser calibre player would get even less, should not be a worry. The differentiating point is money still and it will always be money earned by the players, not the term. If Jason Garrison signed a 5 year deal as a UFA, Mike Weaver can still go out and sign the same 5 year deal as well. His contract may be a fraction of Jason's, but he still can get his term. This point affects so few players its ludicrous to think it's one of the sticking points.

And 5% variance, honestly, someone needs to explain the gigantic problem with this one to me. I don't see how this even starts to be a 'strikeable' issue. Top end players (who this effects) are still going to command top dollars on the market. All it means is that their cap should be closer to their true value. I don't think you can find a single player on the Canucks roster whose current contract doesn't fit into the 5% variance goal.


Anyways...

This has been the most embarrassing negotiations between a league and union possibly ever seen in sports history. They should come out feeling ashamed of themselves.
Obviously it was a given that players were going to have to make concessions on HRR, but that doesn't mean it's automatically just given to owners without significant concessions on their side. This isn't a charity case. The 7% of HRR the players gave up is the most valuable piece in the entire CBA, they deserve significant compensation to give it up...in both "make whole" and contracting issues.

Contract limits shouldn't be a big issue for the NHL and i have no idea why they feel that this is a "hill we are prepared to die on"? I can understand players wanting long term security but the same security can work for NHL teams too.

Variance works against the players, I think Variance is a good thing for the league...it closes the circumventing loopholes. But it's still something that the PA is going to give up without possibly negotiating in another area....these are all chips and if the league wants something they're going to have to pay for it, just as players will have to pay for issues they want.

As for the Canucks, I think Luongo's contract would fall into the category of over 5% variance.

Canucker is online now  
Old
12-07-2012, 01:14 AM
  #177
billvanseattle
Registered User
 
billvanseattle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: bellingham
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,072
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
I don't think it's a coincedence that the NHL presented their best movement to the players, on a day when Fehr wouldn't be present (look what you players did!)... I don't think it's a coincedence that the Daly stands with the other Fehr on a night when Donald hasn't had a chance to dissect or put his stamp on yet (look how close we are when dealing directly with you players!)... The NHL clearly, IMHO, is trying to show that Fehr is the problem to a deal getting done... I think it worked... I think there's a wedge in the NHLPA now... Or, if not a wedge... A crack... We should be hearing some player rumbling over the next week or so, IMO... Hell, players have left Europe to come back, and the players were all gung ho to come back... I wouldn't be surprised if there were players in the room saying (talking amongst the players themselves) just give the NHL the three vital things they want - and negotiate elsewhere, on non-vital things that can still really benefit us...

I think that things are pretty damn close... I'm not sold that the players are sold not to give on the three vital things the NHL says it wants... If the NHL extends an olive branch in a week, this finally gets done... Today was nothing more than a muscle flexing from the NHL, IMHO... I think they were genuinly insulted with the NHLPA leadership response to the amount of movement they made... "We feed you this, and you ask for more food?... Fine, I won't feed you any... Don't bite the hand that feeds you"... Obviously, the NHL wants to win this negotiation... They smell blood, and are going for the kill... If they don't get the kill within the week, IMO, the NHL I think will extend an olive branch - as there's no way I can see a lost season (or not a significant season in terms of games) over a disagreement regarding this... Lost weeks, sure... Lost months? Entire season? Would be completely silly... I think the NHL's response was an emotional response today... One they could afford to have and take... Tonight, I think more than a few players are questioning if they should have just accepted the three vital things, and negotiate elsewhere... I think Crosby is one who might be pissed... Both Fehr and Bettman will hold their absolute best hand until the last possible moment... and hope that they don't need to ever show it... Either one gets the deal done, IMO... But in the meantime, there's a few more weeks to squeeze more juice out of the fruit...
LOL its great to see the comments on here vs TSN.ca. Its going 30:1 in favour for Betman & company. My comment "it took Donald Fehr to make people like Betman" was + 50 or so. Everything was going ok until Betman and Fehr got back in ...and it looks like Fehr was the fuk up in everything.

billvanseattle is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 01:18 AM
  #178
JuniorNelson
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: E.Vancouver
Country: Australia-Aboriginal
Posts: 4,734
vCash: 50
Analysis! That will save the season, bring it on! More! More! I'll start; Fehr was grandstanding, trying to back the league into a corner. Bettman was openly awed at the stupidity of the PA trying such a maneuver. Negotiations, which were not progressing anyway, were called off until the players have earth-based leadership.

The players hired a clown and are now riding a wave of laughter. Hahahaha!

JuniorNelson is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 01:23 AM
  #179
The Bob Cole
Ohhhh Baby.
 
The Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Centre Ice
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
Obviously it was a given that players were going to have to make concessions on HRR, but that doesn't mean it's automatically just given to owners without significant concessions on their side. This isn't a charity case. The 7% of HRR the players gave up is the most valuable piece in the entire CBA, they deserve significant compensation to give it up...in both "make whole" and contracting issues.
**..}
Variance works against the players, I think Variance is a good thing for the league...it closes the circumventing loopholes. But it's still something that the PA is going to give up without possibly negotiating in another area....these are all chips and if the league wants something they're going to have to pay for it, just as players will have to pay for issues they want.

As for the Canucks, I think Luongo's contract would fall into the category of over 5% variance.
The fact that it was well known and predictable (established and viable comparison across major sports and recent negotiations) did mean that the PA was at a disadvantage in that regard from the start. They tried to hold on to it as long as possible to get something out of the league, which ends up being $300 Million to transition it, but they still were facing a loss everyone knew was coming. I don't think you would even consider a true concession from the players. Heading into negotiations with that context, one would try to minimize the extent of losses as much as possible. So, in my opinion, in all honesty this can't be thrown on the table as "Look at how much we've given to you! Give more to us!" It's, "How much can we hold on to while we get to the point where we have to go."

And Lu won't be on the team

The Bob Cole is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 01:29 AM
  #180
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
I don't think it's a coincedence that the NHL presented their best movement to the players, on a day when Fehr wouldn't be present (look what you players did!)... I don't think it's a coincedence that the Daly stands with the other Fehr on a night when Donald hasn't had a chance to dissect or put his stamp on yet (look how close we are when dealing directly with you players!)... The NHL clearly, IMHO, is trying to show that Fehr is the problem to a deal getting done... I think it worked... I think there's a wedge in the NHLPA now... Or, if not a wedge... A little crack... We should be hearing some player rumbling over the next week or so, IMO... Hell, players have left Europe to come back, and the players were all gung ho to come back... I wouldn't be surprised if there were players in the room saying (talking amongst the players themselves) just give the NHL the three vital things they want - and negotiate elsewhere, on non-vital things that can still really benefit us...

I think that things are pretty damn close... I'm not sold that the players are not sold to give on the three vital things the NHL says it wants... If the NHL extends an olive branch in a week, this finally gets done... Today was nothing more than a muscle flexing from the NHL, IMHO... I think they were genuinly insulted with the NHLPA leadership response to the amount of movement they made... "We feed you this, and you ask for more food?... Fine, I won't feed you any... Don't bite the hand that feeds you"... Obviously, the NHL wants to win this negotiation... They smell blood, and are going for the kill... If they don't get the kill within the week, IMO, the NHL I think will extend an olive branch - as there's no way I can see a lost season (or not a significant season in terms of games) over a disagreement regarding this... Lost weeks, sure... Lost months? Entire season? Would be completely silly... I think the NHL's response was an emotional response today... One they could afford to have and take... Tonight, I think more than a few players are questioning if they should have just accepted the three vital things, and negotiate elsewhere... I think Crosby is one who might be pissed... Both Fehr and Bettman will hold their absolute best hand until the last possible moment... and hope that they don't need to ever show it... Either one gets the deal done, IMO... But in the meantime, there's a few more weeks to squeeze more juice out of the fruit... Advantage, NHL...



I agree. This is a show, and I agree it was one to put doubt on the inclusion of Don Fehr in talks. Mission accomplished.


That said, I think the union holds and Fehr is allowed to lead on. The fact that he isn't reaching for decertification just yet speaks to that. He is still intent on getting a deal done and I think he's read the situation right. This is about dates and timelines... Looks like it's January before anything is agreed upon.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 01:30 AM
  #181
The Bob Cole
Ohhhh Baby.
 
The Bob Cole's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Centre Ice
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,635
vCash: 500
Proud that our players have remained respectful throughout the whole process (unless you consider Henrik's benign comments the other day something to get upset over...). Speaks to their integrity, despite how many fans around the league wish to dismiss them.

The Bob Cole is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 01:40 AM
  #182
CCF23
Registered User
 
CCF23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Richmond, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,575
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CCF23
Fehr isn't interested in getting the best deal possible for his union, he's interested in cementing his legacy. That's the whole issue here. He doesn't care at all about hockey...His impact on the game will be this lockout and this lockout only and that's an issue. It's clear to everyone except the people it should be clear to that the PA will get screwed far harder by losing a year than they will by getting what they can and getting it now.

They just cannot win an extended lockout.

CCF23 is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 01:52 AM
  #183
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF23 View Post
Fehr isn't interested in getting the best deal possible for his union, he's interested in cementing his legacy. That's the whole issue here. He doesn't care at all about hockey...His impact on the game will be this lockout and this lockout only and that's an issue. It's clear to everyone except the people it should be clear to that the PA will get screwed far harder by losing a year than they will by getting what they can and getting it now.

They just cannot win an extended lockout.
If Fehr was interested in "cementing his legacy" he would have played the decertification card before the season even started (or he never would have taken the job in the first place). This was a CBA that the players were going to lose before it even started, it was just a matter of how many pounds of flesh the owners were going to try and peel off the players...it's Fehr's job to minimize the bleeding, if that means taking a short term hit, so be it.

Canucker is online now  
Old
12-07-2012, 02:00 AM
  #184
I in the Eye
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Country:
Posts: 4,177
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I agree. This is a show, and I agree it was one to put doubt on the inclusion of Don Fehr in talks. Mission accomplished.


That said, I think the union holds and Fehr is allowed to lead on. The fact that he isn't reaching for decertification just yet speaks to that. He is still intent on getting a deal done and I think he's read the situation right. This is about dates and timelines... Looks like it's January before anything is agreed upon.
I picture God (owners) telling Adam and Eve (players) you can have all that paradise has to offer... Just don't touch the apple, banana, and peach (three vital things that I hold most dear)... Adam and Eve feel really good about this... Picture themselves living in paradise, forever... Then, the snake enters (Fehr)... Tells Adam and Eve they can get everything in paradise, plus parts of an apple, banana, and peach... Adam and Eve say, "I don't know, snake... God was pretty damn clear not to touch those things"... Snake says, "C'mon, you can get parts of it... They taste so good... and God doesn't really mean it"... So, Adam and Eve are convinced by the snake to ask God for parts of the apple, banana, and peach... Feel really good about it, while the snake is meeting with God... The snake has Adam and Eve convinced that they can get more, they can taste parts of the forbidden fruit, and God would be ok with it...

Oops, God got angry... and took away paradise... Who is Adam and Eve mad at? God? The snake? Themselves? IMO, All of the above...

Thankfully, God is a forgiving god... Adam and Eve just have to say sorry, and not try to taste the forbidden fruit again... Promise to not listen to the snake... Besides, God doesn't want to lock Adam and Eve out of paradise forever... as without Adam and Eve, there is no paradise... There's a time and a place when God would probably let Adam and Eve eat the apple, banana, and peach... The snake was right... God knows it... God is a snake, himself...

I don't think that Adam (Crosby) cares all that much about peaches, anyways... to try a peach and see how it tastes, I don't think is much of a concern (8 year CBA? 10 year CBA? Does Crosby really care all that much, to anger God?)... I could see Crosby enjoying the thought of eating a banana or apple though... Just not care enough, when he could eat any other fruit (that is not on God's "do-not-touch" list)...

Hockey by January 1st, I think


Last edited by I in the Eye: 12-07-2012 at 02:06 AM.
I in the Eye is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 02:04 AM
  #185
craigcaulks*
Registered Luser.
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: East Van!
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,000
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniorNelson View Post
Analysis! That will save the season, bring it on! More! More! I'll start; Fehr was grandstanding, trying to back the league into a corner. Bettman was openly awed at the stupidity of the PA trying such a maneuver. Negotiations, which were not progressing anyway, were called off until the players have earth-based leadership.

The players hired a clown and are now riding a wave of laughter. Hahahaha!
I am going to credit a bottle of wine for making me laugh at this post. Thanks.

craigcaulks* is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 02:12 AM
  #186
Lard_Lad
Registered User
 
Lard_Lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Kelowna
Country: Canada
Posts: 6,678
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I agree. This is a show, and I agree it was one to put doubt on the inclusion of Don Fehr in talks. Mission accomplished.

That said, I think the union holds and Fehr is allowed to lead on. The fact that he isn't reaching for decertification just yet speaks to that. He is still intent on getting a deal done and I think he's read the situation right. This is about dates and timelines... Looks like it's January before anything is agreed upon.
Yeah, I agree with all of that. The (relatively) good news is that the league went about trying to split the players on Fehr in a pretty ham-handed manner by refusing to talk with the guy present. I don't think it'll be too tough to keep the players united after that, and unless the guys on the league side have completely lost their minds, this should be the last serious attempt at trying to get Fehr out of the picture.

On the downside, if this was all pre-planned, the league may not be willing to give up what they offered this week. So there'll be a lot more ground to cover in negotiations than it appears right now.

Lard_Lad is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 03:04 AM
  #187
Chubros
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,152
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
I've been trying to get into the NHLs head when it comes to 5 year contracts.

a) 5 years? ELC + 5 years = still RFA?

b) insurance issue? (doesn't that come out of the 50% anyway).

c) NHL wants player churn - help keep talent roughly equal around the league

d) avoids de facto cap evasion through inflation and front weighting. Surely they could work something out around $=cap hit for the last few years.

None of the above reasons seem like deal killers even combined they don't seem enough for the NHL to refuse to deal. The only thing I can think of that might force the NHLs hand is the new "can't hide a cap hit, ever, anywhere, anytime" rule. Are they trying to avoid 10 years of a potentially bad franchise killing bad contract ie stuck with Bryzgalov's contract for 10 years no matter where you hide him.

There must be something being the NHLs paranoia.
I've been thinking about this as well, from the perspective of what it will do to the league. Here's how I see it:

A term limit will help ensure that the most deserving players get the loot. Besides helping to eliminate the number of obviously bad contracts, it will generally put player performance up for review more frequently. If the best player in the league signs a deal that expires in 5 years, he still needs to be the best in the league at the end of that term to continue being paid as so. This could actually potentially end up in the superstars getting more - maybe some teams would be willing to pay out the max 20% of team cap hit to one player if the term isn't so long.

It will help the league's weaker sisters be more competitive. The league's most popular teams like the Leafs and the Flyers don't need to worry so much about bad contracts. They can spend to the cap and still be profitable regardless of whether or not they are a winning team. Essentially they can afford to budget a portion of their cap for gambles that don't pan out. Less established teams that are more reliant on on ice success and are subject to internal caps don't have the luxury of being able to take on more term risk.

The insurance angle doesn't really make much sense to me. In fact, it doesn't make sense to me why teams would want to purchase injury insurance in the first place. Why invest in something with negative expected value? Anyone investing in a pro-sports team must have a reasonable tolerance for risk. Perhaps it would make sense for the expansion teams. They could be a little more risk averse and might be more harmed by the increased payroll volatility that would come with operating without insurance, especially if they aren't cap teams and are forced to sign an extra contract to replace a player who's out for more than a year.

I do like the provision that allows a team to resign a player for 2 extra years. Anything that allows a team to increase continuity is a good thing in my book. It's a positive thing for fans when players can stick with one team. I wonder, however, if this system would see a UFA signing a one-year deal with a new team and re-sign for another 7?

Anyway, as we both know, term limits don't make an ounce of difference in a linked system to the total dollar amount being paid out from the league to the players in any given year, so neither side should care too much about this issue. I guess the players might derive a sense of security knowing that a career ending injury or drop in ability will have less of a financial impact. That security comes out of the players' end though - the healthy players end up paying a sort of tax where they get less so injured and under-performing players can continue getting paid. Or maybe they just want the chance to be opportunistic at the end of the next CBA, sign max deals, and then demand that their contracts be "honoured" or "made whole".

In the end though, neither side should care too much about the term limits. Just meet in the middle so games can start: settle at 6 year term-limit with 8 for players that re-sign. Make the CBA 9 years in length with an option at 7. Done and done.

Chubros is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 03:05 AM
  #188
CCF23
Registered User
 
CCF23's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Richmond, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,575
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to CCF23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canucker View Post
If Fehr was interested in "cementing his legacy" he would have played the decertification card before the season even started (or he never would have taken the job in the first place). This was a CBA that the players were going to lose before it even started, it was just a matter of how many pounds of flesh the owners were going to try and peel off the players...it's Fehr's job to minimize the bleeding, if that means taking a short term hit, so be it.
Do you agree that nuking an entire season is definitely not in the players best interest?

If they're interested in the best deal they can get, I think they just missed the boat. I seriously doubt it gets any better for them.

CCF23 is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 03:37 AM
  #189
Bleach Clean
Registered User
 
Bleach Clean's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 15,332
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by I in the Eye View Post
I picture God (owners) telling Adam and Eve (players) you can have all that paradise has to offer... Just don't touch the apple, banana, and peach (three vital things that I hold most dear)... Adam and Eve feel really good about this... Picture themselves living in paradise, forever... Then, the snake enters (Fehr)... Tells Adam and Eve they can get everything in paradise, plus parts of an apple, banana, and peach... Adam and Eve say, "I don't know, snake... God was pretty damn clear not to touch those things"... Snake says, "C'mon, you can get parts of it... They taste so good... and God doesn't really mean it"... So, Adam and Eve are convinced by the snake to ask God for parts of the apple, banana, and peach... Feel really good about it, while the snake is meeting with God... The snake has Adam and Eve convinced that they can get more, they can taste parts of the forbidden fruit, and God would be ok with it...

Oops, God got angry... and took away paradise... Who is Adam and Eve mad at? God? The snake? Themselves? IMO, All of the above...

Thankfully, God is a forgiving god... Adam and Eve just have to say sorry, and not try to taste the forbidden fruit again... Promise to not listen to the snake... Besides, God doesn't want to lock Adam and Eve out of paradise forever... as without Adam and Eve, there is no paradise... There's a time and a place when God would probably let Adam and Eve eat the apple, banana, and peach... The snake was right... God knows it... God is a snake, himself...

I don't think that Adam (Crosby) cares all that much about peaches, anyways... to try a peach and see how it tastes, I don't think is much of a concern (8 year CBA? 10 year CBA? Does Crosby really care all that much, to anger God?)... I could see Crosby enjoying the thought of eating a banana or apple though... Just not care enough, when he could eat any other fruit (that is not on God's "do-not-touch" list)...

Hockey by January 1st, I think



You put a smile on my face. Bravo! Another gem analogy. This is how it's done folks.


Oh, and god is a snake, himself. That line clinched it.




Quote:
Originally Posted by Lard_Lad View Post
Yeah, I agree with all of that. The (relatively) good news is that the league went about trying to split the players on Fehr in a pretty ham-handed manner by refusing to talk with the guy present. I don't think it'll be too tough to keep the players united after that, and unless the guys on the league side have completely lost their minds, this should be the last serious attempt at trying to get Fehr out of the picture.

On the downside, if this was all pre-planned, the league may not be willing to give up what they offered this week. So there'll be a lot more ground to cover in negotiations than it appears right now.


Ham-handed doesn't even begin to describe it. It was so blatantly obvious so as to come off as a farce. "We'll die on this hill" for contract limits? Please... Just like you said 211m make whole was the best the players would get? Is anyone buying this anymore?


If the NHL retracts what they gave up this week, decertification is around the corner. They won't go backwards IMO. 300m make whole is on the table from here on out, which means the money (HRR + Make Whole) part is resolved. Now it's just the contracts limits that remains the sticking point.



Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF23 View Post
Do you agree that nuking an entire season is definitely not in the players best interest?

If they're interested in the best deal they can get, I think they just missed the boat. I seriously doubt it gets any better for them.


People were saying this when the "best deal" was $211 make whole and a negative change to UFA and arbitration rights. Looks like the NHL proved that was a lie. Meaning, they're still lying. Perhaps they get to a point on the calendar where they will stop with the base tactics and close the deal on good faith... Nah.

Bleach Clean is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 07:08 AM
  #190
Askel
Registered User
 
Askel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Malmö/Vancouver
Posts: 1,215
vCash: 500
I´m pissed. Bettman says the players have offended the Owners. I dont give a ****, the Owners and the PA has offended me. Get this season started. This is BS from both sides.

Its Bettmans fault , its Fehrs fault, Its Owners and players fault that I cant watch good hockey (and yes the SEL sucks).

Im not pro owner or pro player, im pro hockey.

sorry guys had to vent

Askel is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 07:52 AM
  #191
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 18,184
vCash: 50
When do the players lose their next check?

me2 is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 08:34 AM
  #192
Vajakki
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country:
Posts: 1,258
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2 View Post
When do the players lose their next check?
Don't they get paid every 2 weeks? Not 100% sure though.

It's funny. I just can't keep a straight face watching guys like Crosby and Richards standing there behind Fehr being all serious and s*** while fully knowing that these 2 players for example make more money with 2 paychecks than I will in my whole life REGARDLESS of what happens with the CBA. Don't get your jimmies rustled by that, not taking any sides here or saying what is right and what is wrong, just trying to point out how hard it is for a regular person like me to relate and actually support the players here.

That being said, I kinda see their point here. 6-8 year long CBA would probably make more sense than 8-10, and also 5 year contract limit seems a bit low. 6-8 seems more reasonable from a neutral fan perspective who despises both parties involved here.


Last edited by Vajakki: 12-07-2012 at 08:40 AM.
Vajakki is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 08:58 AM
  #193
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by west in the east View Post
The have the Fehr blinders on. And if you're anti-Fehr you must be pro-Betman. Betman is an idiot and bad for the game, but the NHL has successfully make it look like Fehr threw the grenade in this one. Indeed, there are numerous sources which have indicated that is what happened. Does help having Betman come out with his ******* exploding offers after and make a crap situation worse.

Fehr could care less if hockey was played this year. Betman wants to cement his "legacy". You have two egomaniacs who have their own agendas here. At least it seemed that the owners like Burkle and Tannenbam are starting to pull Betman in (or had until now)
No, it's far simpler than that. Fehr came out, broke how close they were in a number of negotiations (honestly, it appears), and forced the NHL to throw a giant hissy fit and leave a voicemail telling him they were taking their ball and going home. Then Bettman ran out and angry blinked for 10 minutes and whined and cried about how emotional the owners were and how they made it all part of one offer (their 'best offer!') and how much the owners had given (nothing, under any normal understanding of "give").

It was brilliant PR work. League is cracking and Fehr exudes calm.

Proto is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 09:40 AM
  #194
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF23 View Post
Do you agree that nuking an entire season is definitely not in the players best interest?

If they're interested in the best deal they can get, I think they just missed the boat. I seriously doubt it gets any better for them.
Nuking the season isn't in anyone's best interest, but rolling over every time owners try to strong arm a deal down your throat isn't acceptable either. If I were a PA member I'd be fine sitting out a year if it put an end to Bettman and ownership's BS negotiating tactics.

Canucker is online now  
Old
12-07-2012, 09:44 AM
  #195
y2kcanucks
Cult of Personality
 
y2kcanucks's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Surrey, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 46,577
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to y2kcanucks
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF23 View Post
Do you agree that nuking an entire season is definitely not in the players best interest?

If they're interested in the best deal they can get, I think they just missed the boat. I seriously doubt it gets any better for them.
It's in my best interest. I don't want to have to go through my old fantasy hockey thread to set up a draft order

Nuke the season! Maybe we'll get MacKinnon out of it. Nuke for Nathan? Job Action for Jones?

__________________
http://www.vancitynitetours.com
y2kcanucks is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 09:45 AM
  #196
Canucker
Registered User
 
Canucker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Prince Rupert, BC
Posts: 18,371
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by y2kcanucks View Post
It's in my best interest. I don't want to have to go through my old fantasy hockey thread to set up a draft order

Nuke the season! Maybe we'll get MacKinnon out of it. Nuke for Nathan? Job Action for Jones?
Imagine if Edmonton got another 1st overall.

Canucker is online now  
Old
12-07-2012, 09:56 AM
  #197
brownbello
Registered User
 
brownbello's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Powell River
Country: Canada
Posts: 229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Proto View Post
No, it's far simpler than that. Fehr came out, broke how close they were in a number of negotiations (honestly, it appears), and forced the NHL to throw a giant hissy fit and leave a voicemail telling him they were taking their ball and going home. Then Bettman ran out and angry blinked for 10 minutes and whined and cried about how emotional the owners were and how they made it all part of one offer (their 'best offer!') and how much the owners had given (nothing, under any normal understanding of "give").

It was brilliant PR work. League is cracking and Fehr exudes calm.
Really?? That what you got out of that?? hahaha Even Kypros had a hard time defending his players last night. Fehr screwed up. And I think that messed it up for everybody.

Dan Murphy ‏@sportsnetmurph
Wow RT @adater: From deep inside players side: "We were ready to play again. But Don came in and told us we could get more and to hold out"

brownbello is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 10:02 AM
  #198
crazycanuck
Registered User
 
crazycanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 7,387
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by brownbello View Post
Dan Murphy ‏@sportsnetmurph
Wow RT @adater: From deep inside players side: "We were ready to play again. But Don came in and told us we could get more and to hold out"
Really? Doesn't Fehr work for the players, TELL HIM TO SIGN THE DAMN DEAL!!!!

crazycanuck is online now  
Old
12-07-2012, 10:03 AM
  #199
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean View Post
I agree. This is a show, and I agree it was one to put doubt on the inclusion of Don Fehr in talks. Mission accomplished.


That said, I think the union holds and Fehr is allowed to lead on. The fact that he isn't reaching for decertification just yet speaks to that. He is still intent on getting a deal done and I think he's read the situation right. This is about dates and timelines... Looks like it's January before anything is agreed upon.
Of course the union holds and Fehr continues. It wasn't even a good show by the NHL -- I'm not even convinced it was a show at all, to be honest. If this was an internet meme, Fehr is all, "I'm in ur collective heads, bargainin ur brains".

Fehr has somehow managed to consolidate the union to the point where guys like Ryan Miller are yelling at owners in meetings, and the league is pulling deals off tables and running home and petulantly leaving voicemails. I'm sure there are some players that just want to play, but any player that wanted a strong union after the mess of the past 7 years has to be cherishing this.

Why would they fold now?

Proto is offline  
Old
12-07-2012, 10:05 AM
  #200
Proto
Registered User
 
Proto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,461
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CCF23 View Post
Do you agree that nuking an entire season is definitely not in the players best interest?

If they're interested in the best deal they can get, I think they just missed the boat. I seriously doubt it gets any better for them.
What is this hand-wringing based on? Of course they'll get a better deal. The players came out of the last lockout better for scuttling the season than they would have coming back in February. If the PA folds up shop, then the league will come back with the same sad-sack routine the next time they're bargaining.

This is nothing to do with Fehr cementing his legacy. His legacy has been cemented long before this. This is about Fehr doing what the players asked him to do when they hired him.

Proto 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 09:44 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.