HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Atlantic Division > Boston Bruins
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

2012 CBA/Lockout talk Part VII..Will a deal get done..

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-31-2012, 11:10 AM
  #501
RussellmaniaKW
Registered User
 
RussellmaniaKW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 7,940
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
It will be interesting to see what they deem needs changed.

They wanted the league to move in their direction on transition... the league moved in their direction on transition with an agreement to 1 amnesty buyout per team.

They wanted the league to move in their direction on contract length, the league moved in their direction with a 6 year minimum contract for UFAs, 7 for your own players.

They wanted the league to move to their direction with the fundamental finances, the league upped make whole to 300 mill on the condition 50 mill goes to the pension... players should love that as they are apparently just as motivated to protect future and past player rights.

They wanted the league to move on variance... they moved from 5% to 10%.

The league already completely conceded on arbitration, UFA age... What real issues is left? CBA length I guess? Go 9 years with a mutual opt out option at 7. Ta da. Finito.

There is obviously a lot more to a complete CBA, but if the PA comes back and tries to re-adjust those concessions they asked the league to move on (and they did), then not sure how anyone can come to the players defense.
I think the cap is the remaining "big" issue. The PA will probably try and get them to move on the CBA length too, but I really don't see how that would benefit anyone. Personally I think Fehr is trying to get them to demand a shorter CBA so he can make money off the inevitable next lockout. He doesn't want to wait around another 10 years to be relevant again. It's really the only reason I can see why the players would be asking for a shorter CBA. They are the ones who end up giving up money every time the CBA expires so why wouldn't they want the new one to last as long as possible unless they were getting bad advice?

RussellmaniaKW is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 11:10 AM
  #502
chizzler
Registered User
 
chizzler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Country: Portugal
Posts: 3,374
vCash: 500
I think the players are stupid and getting duped by Fehr. if your a good player and a owner or GM wants you(free agency), your going to get your money! they can'y resist.

chizzler is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 11:28 AM
  #503
DKH
Registered User
 
DKH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 31,900
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DKH
Quote:
Originally Posted by KnightofBoston View Post
losing the season would be pathetically catastrophic, not saying you should lose sleep over it, but no fan should be ok with it either.
they will not lose the season- the proof they are at the final issue is the one that was always going to be last one addressed- the Cap figure/reduction for next year.

They'll bargain this as well.

If they lose 1 in 10 hockey fans and directly related revenue that is not growing 'the pie' but shrinking it.

They blow off the season I think conservative estimate would be 15-20% not being interested for years if ever and thats about $600 Mil in lost HRR per year.

I'm rooting for Fehr on the last issue- and why not. The higher the Cap next year the better for Boston who will be one of 15 or so who will spend to it. I don't want to see even minor cuts. I cringed at what it did to Chicago and Boston would not suffer like that but still.

Cant believe the big boys like Rangers, Canucks, Bruins, Flyers and Leafs are going to be so worried about being at 66.7 instead of 60 for a year or so until the scale balances out.

Go Don Fehr!!!!!! fight for the Cap and get this done by the 11th

DKH is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 11:38 AM
  #504
PatriceBergeronFan
Dismayed B's Fan
 
PatriceBergeronFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: USA
Country: United States
Posts: 15,168
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lost Horizons View Post
" "We're going to find out how bad the NHL wants a season," said a union source." The NHLPA needs to get its act together and stop this nonsense.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
It will be interesting to see what they deem needs changed.

They wanted the league to move in their direction on transition... the league moved in their direction on transition with an agreement to 1 amnesty buyout per team.

They wanted the league to move in their direction on contract length, the league moved in their direction with a 6 year minimum contract for UFAs, 7 for your own players.

They wanted the league to move to their direction with the fundamental finances, the league upped make whole to 300 mill on the condition 50 mill goes to the pension... players should love that as they are apparently just as motivated to protect future and past player rights.

They wanted the league to move on variance... they moved from 5% to 10%.

The league already completely conceded on arbitration, UFA age... What real issues is left? CBA length I guess? Go 9 years with a mutual opt out option at 7. Ta da. Finito.

There is obviously a lot more to a complete CBA, but if the PA comes back and tries to re-adjust those concessions they asked the league to move on (and they did), then not sure how anyone can come to the players defense.
Exactly. Watch Fehr try to negotiate on every one of those points, he really seems to be motivated primarily to serve his own needs. The players are worse than sheep behind him.

PatriceBergeronFan is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 11:42 AM
  #505
Alberta_OReilly_Fan
Bruin fan since 1975
 
Alberta_OReilly_Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Edmonton Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bp13 View Post
Kind of a one-sided view, no?

Kaoz you seem to suggest that any move is good enough. Isn't it realistic, if not probable, that those moves aren't meaningful enough? So if the players view these "moves" as way to little, there's no defense for that?
the players might easily see these moves as 'not good enough' BUT considering there is NO COMPETITION to the NHL anywhere on the face of the earth... if the players decide to refuse these very 'good enough' compromises then i personally go on record right now hoping the owners BREAK this union and teach it a little dose of REALITY.

and yes you can call me a one-sided viewer if you want

Alberta_OReilly_Fan is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 11:56 AM
  #506
ksp1957
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: South Shore
Posts: 17,211
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to ksp1957
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_OReilly_Fan View Post
the players might easily see these moves as 'not good enough' BUT considering there is NO COMPETITION to the NHL anywhere on the face of the earth... if the players decide to refuse these very 'good enough' compromises then i personally go on record right now hoping the owners BREAK this union and teach it a little dose of REALITY.

and yes you can call me a one-sided viewer if you want
^THIS !!! I think both sides need a dose of reality. The fact of the matter is that the league and the players need the fans a lot more than the fans need them. We can always find another sport to watch or even college hockey or AHL hockey to watch while the players and owners can go **** themselves. I'm heartily sick of this crap and hope that the season gets cancelled and it takes the league 4-5 years to undo the damage that their stupidity has caused.

The shelf life of your average NHL player is not worth the stalling, back and forth and general farting around that everyone is doing to try and 'solve' this. The fact of the matter is we can wait. Players that are on the downside of their careers can't.

ksp1957 is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 12:00 PM
  #507
JMiller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Watertown
Posts: 17,241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alberta_OReilly_Fan View Post
the players might easily see these moves as 'not good enough' BUT considering there is NO COMPETITION to the NHL anywhere on the face of the earth... if the players decide to refuse these very 'good enough' compromises then i personally go on record right now hoping the owners BREAK this union and teach it a little dose of REALITY.

and yes you can call me a one-sided viewer if you want
They've been trying to break the union since the beginning. Its a large part of the reason this whole thing is taking as long as it is. Hell, it's almost January and they're finally meeting to negotiate?

JMiller is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 12:46 PM
  #508
EverettMike
Registered User
 
EverettMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Everett, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 25,284
vCash: 500
This deal, even if it gets tweeked just a little (maybe 15% variance, 7 year deals/8 for your own guys, whatever) is still a huge win for the owners.

Huge.

I wish the players would counter with this: "We will accept this offer 100% as is if Gary Bettman resigns when it is signed."

Fehr has already said he is leaving after this.

EverettMike is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 12:48 PM
  #509
duckchobbins
Registered User
 
duckchobbins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 24,944
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by EverettMike View Post
This deal, even if it gets tweeked just a little (maybe 15% variance, 7 year deals/8 for your own guys, whatever) is still a huge win for the owners.

Huge.

I wish the players would counter with this: "We will accept this offer 100% as is if Gary Bettman resigns when it is signed."

Fehr has already said he is leaving after this.
It was always going to be a huge win for the owners. The players never really had a chance at a fair shake imo.

duckchobbins is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 12:56 PM
  #510
Alberta_OReilly_Fan
Bruin fan since 1975
 
Alberta_OReilly_Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Edmonton Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JMiller View Post
They've been trying to break the union since the beginning. Its a large part of the reason this whole thing is taking as long as it is. Hell, it's almost January and they're finally meeting to negotiate?
do unions really get broken when the average member is making 2.5 mill a year? is that truely considered breaking a union by todays standards?

these arent little children being sent into the coal mines we are talking about here... its not men and women being exposed to toxic fumes and 16 hour work days

i will admit as much as anyone that unions have a proud place in the history of our civization and did a world of NEEDED good in days of past... and we shouldnt just outlaw them now even if they are a pain in the rear sometimes now...

BUT it has to be reasonable. In the auto industry... i heard what the unions were DEMANDING for their work forces in previous contracts before everything went to hell. They actually negotiated PAID SPA DAYS for their workers as one of the 'necessary requirments' of a new deal

The auto bosses gave in... it was part of the contract.. so blame them too but you know where it ended up leading? To us taxpayers and massive massive massive bailouts.

Those paid spa days didnt end up getting paid for by any rich owners. Little mom and pop stock holders saw their lifetime investments go down the drain. And us little mom and pop taxpayers ended up shelling out billions to try to keep the jobs here in unionized countries rather then see the jobs expored overseas to sweat shops instead {which was the alternative of course}

now hockey isnt auto unions, but I hope you understand the point im making. At some point, businesses must be ALLOWED to cover their own expenses {and yes even make a profit too} or else they will ultimately shut down/or move/or come to us taxpayers for bail outs {or all three}

unions have to understand that their benefits do ultimately have to be paid by someone...

and if they cant come to terms with the notion that owners do deserve some profits and that tax payers shouldnt end up covering the shortfalls... then YES the union does NEED to be broken {again if a 2.5 million average salary for working around 100 days a year playing a game can be considered being broken in the first place}

Alberta_OReilly_Fan is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 01:00 PM
  #511
Artemis
Took the red pill
 
Artemis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Mount Olympus
Country: United States
Posts: 19,575
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckdobbins View Post
It was always going to be a huge win for the owners. The players never really had a chance at a fair shake imo.
Agreed. Looks to me that Fehr has at the least made chicken salad out of chicken ****.

And I agree with DKH, and can't understand any Bruins fan not wanting a higher cap. Chiarelli hasn't given out insane contracts, but if the Bruins have to sell off players to satisfy JJ's avarice I'm going to be pissed.

Artemis is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 01:04 PM
  #512
Alberta_OReilly_Fan
Bruin fan since 1975
 
Alberta_OReilly_Fan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Edmonton Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,603
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by chuckdobbins View Post
It was always going to be a huge win for the owners. The players never really had a chance at a fair shake imo.
ultimately whoever wins the deal.. is the winner.

we know that human nature among the owners is well established by history. they LOVE their shinny toys that they can use to boost their egos. They want to be BIG MAN ON CAMPUS and have the glory of victory on the battlefields to make them feel like they matter with their billions of dollars.

their other businesses are for nickle and diming profit margains... hockey teams are their toys.

so theres 30 owners in competition against one another all wanting to be true to their nature. The players are going to do just fine in the system that exists. They will still get 50% of revenues as it looks now {or more} and 50% of a pot that everyone agrees will likely grow will still be well over 2.5 mill on average per player. the money is still guaranteed. the job is still the childhood dream come true.

maybe with a fixed economy for the league... the league can go ahead with expansion? expansion leads to new union jobs. the union can try to ***** and complain about teams like phoenix and atlanta killing revenues the last couple years but there is around 50 players earning NHL salaries as a result of these teams existing.

if the owners make a bit of progress in this cba and the last one... it just goes to show how crappy their deal was to start. They might need a better deal next time too. And the players will still WIN more then the owners do even after on more of these negotiations cause the players are ahead in the scoreboard about 93-5 at this point over the past 30 years or so {at least how i see the score anyhow} and even if the owners score 4-5 late goals now... the players are still doing just fine for themselves

Alberta_OReilly_Fan is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 01:08 PM
  #513
Kaoz*
Ima Krejciist.
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,635
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bp13 View Post
Kind of a one-sided view, no?

Kaoz you seem to suggest that any move is good enough. Isn't it realistic, if not probable, that those moves aren't meaningful enough? So if the players view these "moves" as way to little, there's no defense for that?
I don't believe it's a one sided view at all. I think it's accurate as in this discussion there is far less grey now then there was a month ago. The league tendered an offer, the PA countered asking for the league to give more. The league refused but have now submitted a proposal that does exactly that, that meets players half way on each of the big issues aside from one or two. Contract length, variance, make whole, revenue sharing, and transition.

There was so little room between the leagues offer and the PA's counter on these that meeting in the middle on most was all but guaranteed with any movement on the leagues part. The PA already agreed to the make whole, they agreed to the 50/50... there is no where left to go on either of those issues. In fact, make whole was being offered by the league based on how many games they could put out this year. The fact that they are still offering the same total for a minimal schedule is a concession on their part.

Transition was an issue and made up of two big demands from the PA, transition time and amnesty buyout. Owners gave completely on the amnesty, should the players not give on their 2 year transition demand and go with the owners 1? You can't do 1.5 years.

Variance is something they could fight perhaps, but when you get up to the 15% figure on variance it no longer means anything. A 7 year contract starting out at 10 mil per could have a cap hit of 5.5 mil. Why would owners give even more on that issue when it (a) renders the entire thing pointless and (b) when they just doubled the figure from their original demand?

CBA term is the easiest to attack I suppose, meeting the middle would be 9 years with either a 7 or 8 year mutual buyout. Doubt that's much of a stickler.

Perhaps their counter contains no demands on the above, perhaps the issues are others that are of less import and the players can win easily... I doubt it though. That hasn't been the way this negotiation seems to have gone. I believe Fehr will again try to "move the goal posts" because frankly, he has time left to try and win more. It's been the strategy all along, and although it's worked I'm not sure why a fan would be supportive of it. It didn't work for you in fact its done the exact opposite, it only potentially works for the players. Will he care that each added delay hurts the fans and the sport, or as someone mentioned above the people who's lively hood is largely dependent on the sport? Will he care if he misjudges the NHL's willingness to call the season? Will he care if each concession he forces now, if he gets them that is, likely means less of a permanent fix and a worse on ice product? I know I don't want to watch an NHL where a third of the NHL can compete personnel wise financially with the rest of the league, just so players could get an extra 5 or 10% variance on their contracts.

Again, perhaps it's much ado about nothing, but judging by the way things have gone to date when I hear Fehr is about to launch a counter proposal my optimism takes a major hit.

Kaoz* is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 02:05 PM
  #514
Donnie Shulzhoffer
Rocket Surgery
 
Donnie Shulzhoffer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Foxboro, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 4,759
vCash: 500
I am now convinced that Fehr's only goal is to win this thing no matter how long it takes or what the result is, he wants the owners to accept his proposal and not the other way around.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=412474

Donnie Shulzhoffer is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 02:08 PM
  #515
08SeaBass08
Lucic and Chong
 
08SeaBass08's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Foxboro, MA
Country: United States
Posts: 392
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
That hasn't been the way this negotiation seems to have gone. I believe Fehr will again try to "move the goal posts" because frankly, he has time left to try and win more. It's been the strategy all along, and although it's worked I'm not sure why a fan would be supportive of it.
I don't see how you can be as critical of the NHLPA's strategy, when it was the owners whose strategy all along was lockout. How could the NHLPA have started negotiations before the season, when the owners weren't interested in negotiating then? Once the owners showed what they were really after, what would you expect the union to do?

08SeaBass08 is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 02:15 PM
  #516
DKH
Registered User
 
DKH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 31,900
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DKH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post
I don't believe it's a one sided view at all. I think it's accurate as in this discussion there is far less grey now then there was a month ago. The league tendered an offer, the PA countered asking for the league to give more. The league refused but have now submitted a proposal that does exactly that, that meets players half way on each of the big issues aside from one or two. Contract length, variance, make whole, revenue sharing, and transition.

There was so little room between the leagues offer and the PA's counter on these that meeting in the middle on most was all but guaranteed with any movement on the leagues part. The PA already agreed to the make whole, they agreed to the 50/50... there is no where left to go on either of those issues. In fact, make whole was being offered by the league based on how many games they could put out this year. The fact that they are still offering the same total for a minimal schedule is a concession on their part.

Transition was an issue and made up of two big demands from the PA, transition time and amnesty buyout. Owners gave completely on the amnesty, should the players not give on their 2 year transition demand and go with the owners 1? You can't do 1.5 years.

Variance is something they could fight perhaps, but when you get up to the 15% figure on variance it no longer means anything. A 7 year contract starting out at 10 mil per could have a cap hit of 5.5 mil. Why would owners give even more on that issue when it (a) renders the entire thing pointless and (b) when they just doubled the figure from their original demand?

CBA term is the easiest to attack I suppose, meeting the middle would be 9 years with either a 7 or 8 year mutual buyout. Doubt that's much of a stickler.

Perhaps their counter contains no demands on the above, perhaps the issues are others that are of less import and the players can win easily... I doubt it though. That hasn't been the way this negotiation seems to have gone. I believe Fehr will again try to "move the goal posts" because frankly, he has time left to try and win more. It's been the strategy all along, and although it's worked I'm not sure why a fan would be supportive of it. It didn't work for you in fact its done the exact opposite, it only potentially works for the players. Will he care that each added delay hurts the fans and the sport, or as someone mentioned above the people who's lively hood is largely dependent on the sport? Will he care if he misjudges the NHL's willingness to call the season? Will he care if each concession he forces now, if he gets them that is, likely means less of a permanent fix and a worse on ice product? I know I don't want to watch an NHL where a third of the NHL can compete personnel wise financially with the rest of the league, just so players could get an extra 5 or 10% variance on their contracts.

Again, perhaps it's much ado about nothing, but judging by the way things have gone to date when I hear Fehr is about to launch a counter proposal my optimism takes a major hit.
he may be doing more than that- he is just milking, stalling, slowing, gnawing, anything to keep this going- the longer it takes the more he figures he gets. Suprise, surprise he doesn't like a deadline imposed....

apparently he is talking about a cut of any expansion fees ummm- how about being happy new jobs are created.

Well, only about 8 more hours of this for me because my New Years resolution is swear off this board until I hear their is an agreement or the game is dead. I'll run into the streets when I hear the news with the others but I'm out,

My record is 2 months last summer so I can do another week or two

DKH is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 02:22 PM
  #517
neelynugs
Registered User
 
neelynugs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Vote Quimby!
Posts: 29,992
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaoz View Post

Again, perhaps it's much ado about nothing, but judging by the way things have gone to date when I hear Fehr is about to launch a counter proposal my optimism takes a major hit.
exactly how i see it. the faster this guy is gone from hockey's landscape, the better it'll be for everyone. and until all the documents are signed, sealed and delivered, there's reason to believe that donald fehr could potentially ruin hockey as we know it...IMO.

neelynugs is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 02:39 PM
  #518
DKH
Registered User
 
DKH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 31,900
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to DKH
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie Shulzhoffer View Post
I am now convinced that Fehr's only goal is to win this thing no matter how long it takes or what the result is, he wants the owners to accept his proposal and not the other way around.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=412474
then Bettman has to set the Jan 11th date and stick to it. Fehr aint doing jack **** until the end is real. He'd milk this for the entire spring, summer, and fall if they let him. The longer he waits the more he gets- simple and proven correct.

Part of me wants to see what happens if they cancel the season. They will be a laughing stock. They will have done irepareable damage to the game. The pie will drop a third- the players will be left wondering what the bleep hit them next year. The owners will be so pissed they will pull it all and screw them like they never dreamed of.

Fehr knows this, hopefully the players do- but until the owners and Bettman draw a line on the ice then this is what will happen. Fehr must have to conjure up bad thoughts just to keep from laughing during these negotitations.

DKH is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 03:44 PM
  #519
Pie O My
Registered User
 
Pie O My's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Shawmut Center
Country: Armenia
Posts: 7,626
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKH View Post
then Bettman has to set the Jan 11th date and stick to it. Fehr aint doing jack **** until the end is real. He'd milk this for the entire spring, summer, and fall if they let him. The longer he waits the more he gets- simple and proven correct.

Part of me wants to see what happens if they cancel the season. They will be a laughing stock. They will have done irepareable damage to the game. The pie will drop a third- the players will be left wondering what the bleep hit them next year. The owners will be so pissed they will pull it all and screw them like they never dreamed of.

Fehr knows this, hopefully the players do- but until the owners and Bettman draw a line on the ice then this is what will happen. Fehr must have to conjure up bad thoughts just to keep from laughing during these negotitations.
so why is everyone bandying about jan 11th? Thats as real as the hill the owners will die on. now i'm convinced nothing will happen by feb 16th. that date has a history and is as real as you can get.

Pie O My is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 04:18 PM
  #520
smithformeragent
Moderator
 
smithformeragent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Manchester NH
Country: United States
Posts: 10,736
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to smithformeragent
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pie O My View Post
so why is everyone bandying about jan 11th? Thats as real as the hill the owners will die on. now i'm convinced nothing will happen by feb 16th. that date has a history and is as real as you can get.
IIRC, that's when the 94 L/O ended and the abbreviated 95 season started a week later. 48 game schedule, (which GB said is the min this year).

smithformeragent is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 04:22 PM
  #521
Shaun
Registered User
 
Shaun's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Country: Italy
Posts: 23,005
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie Shulzhoffer View Post
I am now convinced that Fehr's only goal is to win this thing no matter how long it takes or what the result is, he wants the owners to accept his proposal and not the other way around.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=412474
Jesus Christ.


Does anyone know a cleaner in NY? This problem needs to be taken care of.

Shaun is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 05:00 PM
  #522
Bruwinz37
Registered User
 
Bruwinz37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by neelynugs View Post
exactly how i see it. the faster this guy is gone from hockey's landscape, the better it'll be for everyone. and until all the documents are signed, sealed and delivered, there's reason to believe that donald fehr could potentially ruin hockey as we know it...IMO.
This lockout is fairly simple to explain. The second Fehr was hired by the NHLPA it sent a message of war to the owners. They will always be able to afford to dig their heels in and once they knew Fehr was involved it was loser town for the players. They sealed their own fate IMO. So now they are basically at a "take what we can get" point and should sign something sooner rather than later or they will just keep getting less.

Bruwinz37 is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 05:07 PM
  #523
Bruwinz37
Registered User
 
Bruwinz37's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 27,229
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie Shulzhoffer View Post
I am now convinced that Fehr's only goal is to win this thing no matter how long it takes or what the result is, he wants the owners to accept his proposal and not the other way around.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=412474
What this proposal states is basically: We will give you the 50/50 but we are going to bend you over on every other front.

Bruwinz37 is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 05:19 PM
  #524
JMiller
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Watertown
Posts: 17,241
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruwinz37 View Post
This lockout is fairly simple to explain. The second Fehr was hired by the NHLPA it sent a message of war to the owners. They will always be able to afford to dig their heels in and once they knew Fehr was involved it was loser town for the players. They sealed their own fate IMO. So now they are basically at a "take what we can get" point and should sign something sooner rather than later or they will just keep getting less.
This is loser talk. Fehr is a strong leader for the players and he's bleeding out everything that can be bled from ownership (or holding on to everything that can be held onto during a mugging). Anyone who thinks the league would have been kinder if the NHLPA had picked a pushover probably thinks that the bully would leave em alone if they just kept their head down at recess.

JMiller is offline  
Old
12-31-2012, 06:13 PM
  #525
cat400
Registered User
 
cat400's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Country: Canada
Posts: 5,354
vCash: 500
History has a way of repeating.

I look upon last year's 1st round upset as a repeat of the 1971 upset which was sandwiched in between two Cups. I was looking forward to a rebound this season with another Cup win.

The 1972 Cup Team and additional Cups in the '70's was greatly affected by money issues: in that case those created by the birth of the WHA and its luring of NHL players with big dollar contracts.

Now in 2012 we face the spectre of money issues (the reduced Cap in 2013-14) having a similar effect on the team and prospects that the Bruins have currently assembled which appears well-positioned to be Cup contenders for the foreseeable future.

Hopefully the drop in salary cap will not be as low as currently proposed at $60million.

cat400 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 02:26 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2015 All Rights Reserved.