HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > National Hockey League Talk
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
National Hockey League Talk Discuss NHL players, teams, games, and the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

Lockout XXIX: Your questions have become more redundant than the Highlander movies

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-13-2012, 11:40 PM
  #26
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
How far is it off their last offer? There is give and take from both sides there.
They offered 8 years with 6 year out clause for the CBA length, 8 year contract term lengths (for signing new free agents and re-signing your own players), and buyouts that don't count against the cap IIRC. Issue is the NHL doesn't want to budge off its last offer. It's take it or leave it as of right now.

__________________
http://hfboards.com/image.php?u=53946&type=sigpic&dateline=1320361610
NYRFAN218 is online now  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:40 PM
  #27
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
You're right, I didn't. That doesn't mean that I don't believe the NHL has a right to bargain with the union, it means that I think that the economic model that the two sides collectively bargained for was a poorly conceived one.

I suspected then that a salary cap/revenue sharing model wouldn't solve the problem that NHL franchises would continue to struggle in places like Tennessee, Georgia, Arizona et. al

I'm not saying that I know what the answer is, but I virtually guarantee you that dropping the players' share by some small percentage figure won't magically put butts in seats in these crappy markets and thus we'll be facing the same problems at the expiration of the next CBA.
There is no alternative to "socialism" I'm afraid unless you want to cut half the teams or more from the nhl. Every major league in North America has some form revenue sharing and/or salary cap that results in the rich teams giving some of their wealth to the poor teams. The fact that hockey is a foreign sport to many American markets means that the disparity in team revenue is even greater in the nhl than in the other leagues.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:41 PM
  #28
LickTheEnvelope
6th Overall Blows
 
LickTheEnvelope's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 27,859
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
That looks like a "fair" deal for both sides - given their respective stated wants - to me. It doesn't address the league's actual economic problems, but it's nonetheless a decent looking compromise based on what each side says will work for them.
I agree. But it was league proposed through back channels so it will instantly be dismissed by the PA.

I have zero hope of actually seeing a full PA offer until the middle of January and even then i'm skeptical.

LickTheEnvelope is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:44 PM
  #29
Boltsfan2029
Registered User
 
Boltsfan2029's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: In deleted threads
Country: United States
Posts: 6,285
vCash: 698
Quote:
Originally Posted by DyerMaker66 View Post
Maybe, maybe not, but it's largely semantics at that point imo (unless we're talking about certainties like Ovechkin): The difference between players 700 and 701 is probably no greater or less than the difference between player 701 and player 699.
True of 701/700 and 701/699. But you said:

Quote:
Not when compared to players 1-698 perhaps, but certainly when compared to people 700-7 Billion.
That's what I was referring to, I thought that meant world-wide.

Boltsfan2029 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:45 PM
  #30
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
There is no alternative to "socialism" I'm afraid unless you want to cut half the teams or more from the nhl. Every major league in North America has some form revenue sharing and/or salary cap that results in the rich teams giving some of their wealth to the poor teams. The fact that hockey is a foreign sport to many American markets means that the disparity in team revenue is even greater in the nhl than in the other leagues.
So, I'm actually in favor of to the idea of the NHL downsizing considerably. I wouldn't mind a 15-20 team league that saw only a modicum of revenue sharing (yes, I am aware of what this means vis-a-vis the term "socialism"), or - better yet - the realization of the ever-elusive collective revenue streams that would close the disparity between the big-market and medium-market teams. There could be a very healthy 15-team NHL without the need for reinventing the economic wheel as the various pro sports leagues have attempted with varying degrees of success. I know that a half-contracted NHL is a pipe dream, but it's equally as much of a pipe dream to think that the current economic model (or one with only minor adjustments to the current one) will work.

LetangInTheSO is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:54 PM
  #31
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYRFAN218 View Post
They offered 8 years with 6 year out clause for the CBA length, 8 year contract term lengths (for signing new free agents and re-signing your own players), and buyouts that don't count against the cap IIRC. Issue is the NHL doesn't want to budge off its last offer. It's take it or leave it as of right now.
I'm referring to the article by ESPN, stating the source of the leak is a NHL Governor. This is the middle ground. It's all speculation of course but why is this deal so unbelievable? I'm not talking about what we heard last via mediation. The response from the other poster is the PA will never go for this. I don't see that.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:56 PM
  #32
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
So, I'm actually in favor of to the idea of the NHL downsizing considerably. I wouldn't mind a 15-20 team league that saw only a modicum of revenue sharing (yes, I am aware of what this means vis-a-vis the term "socialism"), or - better yet - the realization of the ever-elusive collective revenue streams that would close the disparity between the big-market and medium-market teams. There could be a very healthy 15-team NHL without the need for reinventing the economic wheel as the various pro sports leagues have attempted with varying degrees of success. I know that a half-contracted NHL is a pipe dream, but it's equally as much of a pipe dream to think that the current economic model (or one with only minor adjustments to the current one) will work.
The thing is there are only 3 nhl franchises in the post-67 expansion era that have never had financial problems: New York, Montreal, and Toronto. All the rest have had their rough patches, due to the economy or more often a poor product on the ice alienating fans. If the nhl had decided for some reason to downsize to 15 franchises in the early 2000s, Pittsburgh would have been one of the first to go.

Removing the salary cap and downsizing the league would do nothing to solve this problem.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:57 PM
  #33
PrototypeX85
Registered User
 
PrototypeX85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 590
vCash: 500
That "leaked CBA" doesn't make sense to me. The players will NOT give up back-diving contracts. Fehr has no plan on making any agreement before he breaks the owners. I hope I'm wrong, but I've lost all hope.

PrototypeX85 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:57 PM
  #34
HavlatMach9
Registered User
 
HavlatMach9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,547
vCash: 500
So has the NHL come up with the very final proposal? If true, a job well done and now they can relax until the PA agrees, a day, month, or year from now.

HavlatMach9 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:58 PM
  #35
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LickTheEnvelope View Post
I agree. But it was league proposed through back channels so it will instantly be dismissed by the PA.

I have zero hope of actually seeing a full PA offer until the middle of January and even then i'm skeptical.
That's actually how a deals often get done. They don't want to offer it because they don't want a counter. It's leaked.... everybody sees it. There is pressure from all players, all owners to get it done.

Being optimistic of course. There is no reason for either side to not do that deal at this point.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
12-13-2012, 11:58 PM
  #36
DyerMaker66
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 4,496
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boltsfan2029 View Post
True of 701/700 and 701/699. But you said:



That's what I was referring to, I thought that meant world-wide.
Then yes I do. As you drop from 701 to 7 Billion the vast difference in ability would show itself, imo.

DyerMaker66 is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:00 AM
  #37
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,238
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrototypeX85 View Post
That "leaked CBA" doesn't make sense to me. The players will NOT give up back-diving contracts.
Um, the PA's last offer had a provision to prevent back loaded contracts.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HavlatMach9 View Post
So has the NHL come up with the very final proposal? If true, a job well done and now they can relax until the PA agrees, a day, month, or year from now.
No, this deal has been leaked to ESPN via a NHL Governor, pure speculation as to the validity.

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:05 AM
  #38
LetangInTheSO
Registered User
 
LetangInTheSO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country:
Posts: 2,103
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
The thing is there are only 3 nhl franchises in the post-67 expansion era that have never had financial problems: New York, Montreal, and Toronto. All the rest have had their rough patches, due to the economy or more often a poor product on the ice alienating fans. If the nhl had decided for some reason to downsize to 15 franchises in the early 2000s, Pittsburgh would have been one of the first to go.

Removing the salary cap and downsizing the league would do nothing to solve this problem.
People always seem to point this out to me (the Penguins argument) as though it will give me some sort of pause. Of course that's true. It doesn't change my perspective on the issue.

What you have described above is the ebb and flow of business. In a league with competent, well-backed owners who operate franchises located in viable markets, ebbs and flows and short-term losses can be sustained (again, these are business 101 tenets).

I couldn't disagree more with your argument. You are saying that the only way for a league to exist is a hard salary cap and that a 15-franchise NHL with a free labor market could never succeed. I completely disagree.

LetangInTheSO is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:07 AM
  #39
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,900
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
I'm referring to the article by ESPN, stating the source of the leak is a NHL Governor. This is the middle ground. It's all speculation of course but why is this deal so unbelievable? I'm not talking about what we heard last via mediation. The response from the other poster is the PA will never go for this. I don't see that.
Yeah but the issue right now is the NHL wants the offer they presented taken and that's it. The PA countered the NHL's proposal last week with what I mentioned before and the NHL shot it down. I'm sure that deal is the end game for both sides but as of right now, the NHL isn't budging in hopes that the PA takes the current offer I suppose.

NYRFAN218 is online now  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:18 AM
  #40
5 Minute Major
Registered User
 
5 Minute Major's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Binghamton, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 2,577
vCash: 500
Just not buying the ESPN rumor. That could have been proposed Wednesday or Thursday, yet it wasn't.

I suspect it is one owner's view of how to settle the matter....not the owners as a whole.

5 Minute Major is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:22 AM
  #41
CpatainCanuck
Registered User
 
CpatainCanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,702
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LetangInTheSO View Post
People always seem to point this out to me (the Penguins argument) as though it will give me some sort of pause. Of course that's true. It doesn't change my perspective on the issue.

What you have described above is the ebb and flow of business. In a league with competent, well-backed owners who operate franchises located in viable markets, ebbs and flows and short-term losses can be sustained (again, these are business 101 tenets).

I couldn't disagree more with your argument. You are saying that the only way for a league to exist is a hard salary cap and that a 15-franchise NHL with a free labor market could never succeed. I completely disagree.
How does cutting 15 teams and removing the salary cap solve the problem? You want to go back to the system that existed prior to 2005? Sorry, that system not only solves no problems, it deepens them. Players were receiving about 70% of league revenue as salaries in 2003/2004. Salaries can not be controlled in a free market system. That has been demonstrated time and time again.

I also do find it odd that you'd approve of a league without the Pittsburgh Penguins.

CpatainCanuck is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:22 AM
  #42
Orca Smash
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Country: Canada
Posts: 7,134
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5 Minute Major View Post
Just not buying the ESPN rumor. That could have been proposed Wednesday or Thursday, yet it wasn't.

I suspect it is one owner's view of how to settle the matter....not the owners as a whole.
Thought this was pretty clear from the article.

"One NHL governor provided ESPN.com with the framework for a deal he insisted would be palatable to both sides."

Orca Smash is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:25 AM
  #43
McRib
2nd Rate Fan
 
McRib's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Saskatoon
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,466
vCash: 500
Bettman knows exactly where the middle is. So does Fehr. Neither is going to reach there until there's a fire lit under their *****. That doesn't come until January.

Funny though. We thought the fire would come in December. Evidently not.

McRib is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:25 AM
  #44
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,238
vCash: 500
There is a reason this was leaked. I'm not buying it was just a casual conversation. I'm not saying it will work but there is more to it. Have we seen an NHL Governor do this prior?

HawksFan74 is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:37 AM
  #45
rdawg1234
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,592
vCash: 500
I think both the owners and players think they still have time left to wait it out.

And they arent entirely wrong in thinking that, you'd only lose about 5 more or so games if you start by early jan, so you could essentially waste another couple of weeks waiting for one side to crack.

I dont think we're at the full-pressure weeks/days yet, 2 weeks from now yes, but before that I think especially the owners feel they can wait a little longer.

I think the PA will definitely feel pressured come WJC, cause if seeing that hockey doesnt make you badly want to come back and play I dont know what will.

rdawg1234 is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:41 AM
  #46
IDuck
Registered User
 
IDuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Country: United States
Posts: 4,817
vCash: 500
intereting "leak"....although i have learned to take all rumors with grain of salt

IDuck is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:42 AM
  #47
PrototypeX85
Registered User
 
PrototypeX85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 590
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by HawksFan74 View Post
There is a reason this was leaked. I'm not buying it was just a casual conversation. I'm not saying it will work but there is more to it. Have we seen an NHL Governor do this prior?
I'm sure that it's just an owner stating what he feels the proposal would be if the two sides met in the middle. It likely doesn't mean anything.

PrototypeX85 is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:48 AM
  #48
DPyro
Registered User
 
DPyro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,308
vCash: 500
With the 'make whole' being pro-rated it's in the owners best interest to have as little amount of games as possible. Less games = less $$ paid back to players in make whole money.

DPyro is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:52 AM
  #49
DuklaNation
Registered User
 
DuklaNation's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,827
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CpatainCanuck View Post
How does cutting 15 teams and removing the salary cap solve the problem? You want to go back to the system that existed prior to 2005? Sorry, that system not only solves no problems, it deepens them. Players were receiving about 70% of league revenue as salaries in 2003/2004. Salaries can not be controlled in a free market system. That has been demonstrated time and time again.

I also do find it odd that you'd approve of a league without the Pittsburgh Penguins.
Increase the supply of players and reduce the demand will certainly cause a drop in non-star salaries.

DuklaNation is offline  
Old
12-14-2012, 12:53 AM
  #50
HawksFan74
Tread Lightly
 
HawksFan74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Chicago
Country: United States
Posts: 15,238
vCash: 500
More from the ESPN article.

Quote:
When the proposal was described to one high-profile veteran player, he agreed it was the kind of offer that at the very least could be put to a vote by the players’ association.

Another player familiar with the often-tumultuous nature of the negotiations agreed that the governor's offer should prompt a vote. He wasn’t certain it would pass, but at least it would give an accurate gauge of the union membership’s feelings about settling. Such an offer would also show that the owners were negotiating as opposed to merely making demands, which is the perception many players were left with after a second attempt at mediation Wednesday in New Jersey.

“I think it's definitely worth looking at,” another veteran player told ESPN.com. "We'd have to look it over and see what the implications are, but it's something to work with for sure. I think that will get some traction.

“But I would like our people to look at it before we say it's worth a vote. We hire them for these reasons, so I would like to hear their input.”

Several players and agents we spoke to asked to reach out to the deal's author.

A veteran agent agreed that this is the kind of compromise on both sides that is needed for a deal, although he remained skeptical that hard-line owners would go for it.
This is the entire point of leaking it. This is not some random tweet. It was leaked to freaking ESPN.

HawksFan74 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 11:50 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.