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.

NHL Lockout Discusion XXXIII: It's the same old song. **MOD WARNING POST 274

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-20-2012, 04:07 PM
  #476
JAX
Registered User
 
JAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sault Ste. Marie
Country: Canada
Posts: 896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Well, there you go, a couple of posts above I acknowledged the PA's role:

"People insult him for doing a poor job. It's possible for other leagues to settle disputes without losing full seasons. Do the players bear their share of the balme? Absolutely. But why is it a bad thing to hold the guy who is supposed to run the league to a high standard. What would it take for people to actually come out and criticize Bettman? One more lost season? Two? Three?"

Maybe if there were a couple or more work stoppages even you would start to place some blame on Bettman. Clearly 3 work stoppages isn't enough.
Could you please tell me what you would have done in 04 when the players were getting 75% of league revenue and refusing to put a system in place to contain it? Goodenow was willing to go 2 years to avoid the cap and he would have if the players didn't lynch him....how would you or anybody else solved that prob?

And this year the league continually asked the PA to come to the table a year before the CBA expired to get things started, but as you seen Fehr pulled one of the biggest stalling acts in recent memory basically refusing to come to the table with any intention of getting a deal done.
Again what would,could you have done,

NOt to mention 94 when the league was going after the salary cap and Goodenow was at the helm then. Fehr and Goodnow are prob the 2 worst villans for commishes to go against so that's why I don't beat the "3 work stoppages" drum because I don't see anyway around them with the PA leadership in place.

JAX is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:08 PM
  #477
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Ok, you argue that these are minor issues that should not hold up a deal. I agree with you. See we can agree on things.
No I argue that they are minor things for the PA. They are not minor things for the owners (I realize you don't agree with that). My point is that these contracting rights should not be whats holding up a deal from the PA perspective since it affects so few of them. I know if I was a 4th liner who was never going to sniff a 7+ year deal and the only thing keeping me from earning my living was those issues I would be pissed.

Chelios is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:08 PM
  #478
T-Funk
Registered User
 
T-Funk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie to Brownie View Post
After the cancellations today I'll say there's maybe a 5% chance of a season.
On the plus side, I don't think there's anyone who doesn't think this season's fate will be decided within the next few weeks.

T-Funk is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:09 PM
  #479
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Funk View Post
minor issues to PA, major issues to the owners
You lost me there. If they affect a minor number of players then why are they major to the owners? Because they say they are? And why does a compromise with say 7 year contract lengths and say a 7% variance not solve that major issue? And let's assume that the PA are being total dickheads on the issue. Why don't the owners have some obligation to act like adults and get a deal? Are their feelings hurt by the way Fehr negotiates? I hold the owners and Bettman to a higher standard than the palyers. They own the league. They should start acting like it!

vanwest is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:10 PM
  #480
domdo345
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAX View Post
Could you please tell me what you would have done in 04 when the players were getting 75% of league revenue and refusing to put a system in place to contain it? Goodenow was willing to go 2 years to avoid the cap and he would have if the players didn't lynch him....how would you or anybody else solved that prob?

And this year the league continually asked the PA to come to the table a year before the CBA expired to get things started, but as you seen Fehr pulled one of the biggest stalling acts in recent memory basically refusing to come to the table with any intention of getting a deal done.
Again what would,could you have done,

NOt to mention 94 when the league was going after the salary cap and Goodenow was at the helm then. Fehr and Goodnow are prob the 2 worst villans for commishes to go against so that's why I don't beat the "3 work stoppages" drum because I don't see anyway around them with the PA leadership in place.
Don't you forget the refusing of the new associations stunt. This probably pissed alot of owners.

domdo345 is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:10 PM
  #481
Noob616
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Halifax
Country: Canada
Posts: 1,431
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanklite View Post
That is news to me and the NHL!
They're willing to go to 50/50 over the life of the deal, we can skip the semantics.

Noob616 is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:11 PM
  #482
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JAX View Post
Could you please tell me what you would have done in 04 when the players were getting 75% of league revenue and refusing to put a system in place to contain it? Goodenow was willing to go 2 years to avoid the cap and he would have if the players didn't lynch him....how would you or anybody else solved that prob?

And this year the league continually asked the PA to come to the table a year before the CBA expired to get things started, but as you seen Fehr pulled one of the biggest stalling acts in recent memory basically refusing to come to the table with any intention of getting a deal done.
Again what would,could you have done,

NOt to mention 94 when the league was going after the salary cap and Goodenow was at the helm then. Fehr and Goodnow are prob the 2 worst villans for commishes to go against so that's why I don't beat the "3 work stoppages" drum because I don't see anyway around them with the PA leadership in place.
This is something I have never actually heard explained from the pro-PA crowd. They love to point to the work stoppages under Bettman but offer no alternative of what should have been done. The players said they would NEVER play under a salary cap. There was literally no way to avoid a lockout back then. None.

Chelios is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:11 PM
  #483
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whakahere View Post
So in my rec league I should be paid to play cause I am taking a risk each time I go out on the field. Or everyday I go to work I should be paid a hell of a lot more because I'm a teacher and we have more deaths that hockey players do each year.

What about my brother who works in the mines, you need what he digs for and risks his life and health a hell of a lot more. He should get more money. Bottom fact is they get paid damn over the top if they claim that they are risking their health. Many of us do that in our everyday jobs.

Asserting otherwise is disingenuous in my opinion.
I don't believe any of your points are relevant save for possibly your brother, who works in an industry that has historically had major impacts to worker/employer relationships. Dare I say even geopolitical impacts - see coal workers strike in the UK and the Atacama mines during the 50s. But I digress.

If you believe that your rec league hockey, or job of teaching kids, is equivalent to NHL players then we will simply agree to disagree.

CommonMeans* is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:13 PM
  #484
quackquackquack
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,126
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richie to Brownie View Post
After the cancellations today I'll say there's maybe a 5% chance of a season.
Was that before or after you heard about the rumored Jan 15 Drop Date? I don't understand how anyones expectations fluctuate after this announcement. If a deal isn't reach by a few days after Jan 1, they your chances can waver. There needs to be a 2 week buffer for teams to prepare for the season.

quackquackquack is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:13 PM
  #485
JAX
Registered User
 
JAX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Sault Ste. Marie
Country: Canada
Posts: 896
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
Well, there you go, a couple of posts above I acknowledged the PA's role:

"People insult him for doing a poor job. It's possible for other leagues to settle disputes without losing full seasons. Do the players bear their share of the balme? Absolutely. But why is it a bad thing to hold the guy who is supposed to run the league to a high standard. What would it take for people to actually come out and criticize Bettman? One more lost season? Two? Three?"

Maybe if there were a couple or more work stoppages even you would start to place some blame on Bettman. Clearly 3 work stoppages isn't enough.
Could you please tell me what you would have done in 04 when the players were getting 75% of league revenue and refusing to put a system in place to contain it? Goodenow was willing to go 2 years to avoid the cap and he would have if the players didn't lynch him....how would you or anybody else solved that prob?

And this year the league continually asked the PA to come to the table a year before the CBA expired to get things started, but as you seen Fehr pulled one of the biggest stalling acts in recent memory basically refusing to come to the table with any intention of getting a deal done.
Again what would,could you have done,

NOt to mention 94 when the league was going after the salary cap and Goodenow was at the helm then. Fehr and Goodnow are prob the 2 worst villans for commishes to go against so that's why I don't beat the "3 work stoppages" drum because I don't see anyway around them with the PA leadership in place.

JAX is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:13 PM
  #486
Baggy Spandex
The Nightman Cometh
 
Baggy Spandex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Fake Rangerfanville
Country: United States
Posts: 3,881
vCash: 500
Every time the Devils are good again the league locks out. Thanks Devils, this is obviously your fault.

Baggy Spandex is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:13 PM
  #487
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
You lost me there. If they affect a minor number of players then why are they major to the owners? Because they say they are? And why does a compromise with say 7 year contract lengths and say a 7% variance not solve that major issue? And let's assume that the PA are being total dickheads on the issue. Why don't the owners have some obligation to act like adults and get a deal? Are their feelings hurt by the way Fehr negotiates? I hold the owners and Bettman to a higher standard than the palyers. They own the league. They should start acting like it!
Again, I would appreciate an explanation as to why contracting issues should hold up a deal from the PA's perspective. I understand you don't feel it should be a big deal for the owners, but that is beside the point. Explain to me how it makes sense to hinge a deal on these issues from a PA perspective.

Chelios is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:14 PM
  #488
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
 
CerebralGenesis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 23,927
vCash: 500
Why is the cancellation a sign of no season again? So dramatic around these parts...

CerebralGenesis is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:14 PM
  #489
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelios View Post
No I argue that they are minor things for the PA. They are not minor things for the owners (I realize you don't agree with that). My point is that these contracting rights should not be whats holding up a deal from the PA perspective since it affects so few of them. I know if I was a 4th liner who was never going to sniff a 7+ year deal and the only thing keeping me from earning my living was those issues I would be pissed.
I agree. And it should also not be holding up the owners. You need to show me why a compromise like I have proposed many times does not address the owners needs. And you can't just keep saying because they say so. The PA can equally say that it's a critcial issue for them. It doesn't make either side right. Both should move towards a compromise. We could have had a deal over a month ago if Bettman and Fehr were interested in one.

vanwest is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:15 PM
  #490
Dellstrom
Pastrnasty
 
Dellstrom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Boston
Country: United States
Posts: 19,840
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by CerebralGenesis View Post
Why is the cancellation a sign of no season again? So dramatic around these parts...
Nothing else to talk about, so we'll just be even mopier than we usually are.

Dellstrom is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:16 PM
  #491
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Funk View Post
Oh fiddlesticks kind sir, but your arguments are based on poppycock and tomfoolery. You shall not thimble-rig me henceforth.


You cad!

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:17 PM
  #492
Do Make Say Think
& Yet & Yet
 
Do Make Say Think's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 26,166
vCash: 50
The players kept talking about having to wait for the drop dead date for owners, well the time has come.
The owners grew tired of Fehr antics of asking about something, the owners giving and then Fehr asking for more of something else that had not been brought up. It's quite clear that the owners want to know what the players want and they will see what they can do about it, this can't be done when they keep adding things to their demands.

Crunch time is upon us

Do Make Say Think is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:18 PM
  #493
T-Funk
Registered User
 
T-Funk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 9,345
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
You lost me there. If they affect a minor number of players then why are they major to the owners? Because they say they are? And why does a compromise with say 7 year contract lengths and say a 7% variance not solve that major issue? And let's assume that the PA are being total dickheads on the issue. Why don't the owners have some obligation to act like adults and get a deal? Are their feelings hurt by the way Fehr negotiates? I hold the owners and Bettman to a higher standard than the palyers. They own the league. They should start acting like it!
Let's say they affect 5% of the players like some have said. So that means 35 players would be affected. That could mean that every single team (and sometimes the same team multiple times) can be affected by these contracts. Possibly 100% of the owners affected vs 5% of players affected.

They should start acting like they own the league.... that's quite funny considering every time the league acts like it is in charge, you get upset.

In the end this will be a wasted comment. I don't know why anyone would want to deal with the Canadian equivalent of Captain Bob.

T-Funk is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:18 PM
  #494
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelios View Post
Again, I would appreciate an explanation as to why contracting issues should hold up a deal from the PA's perspective. I understand you don't feel it should be a big deal for the owners, but that is beside the point. Explain to me how it makes sense to hinge a deal on these issues from a PA perspective.
No, it's not beside the point. It's exactly the point. You need to explain to me why the contracting issues taking into account thePA's proposals should be holding up a deal from the owners perspective. Both sides say it is important. Hence we have no deal and a stalemate. One side or both have to move. It will probably end up being both. How about some leadership from one side. I don't really care which.

vanwest is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:18 PM
  #495
CommonMeans*
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,319
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chelios View Post
Again, I would appreciate an explanation as to why contracting issues should hold up a deal from the PA's perspective. I understand you don't feel it should be a big deal for the owners, but that is beside the point. Explain to me how it makes sense to hinge a deal on these issues from a PA perspective.
I would look at the contractual issues within this context: The CBA hurts the all-star players in the end. It limits their earning potential in an environment that would otherwise be higher. Of course, the CBA protects players who are not stars of the league. That is, most of the players. Yet, many of the faces of the lockout (and NHL) are those players who could, potentially, thrive outside of (any) the CBA.

And as you have argued previously, these contract lengths will impact only a small percentage of players. Those players being the ones who are required to expand the game. So I would counter your question with another. Why is the league hell-bent on hurting the players they require to grow the game?

It can go both ways.

CommonMeans* is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:19 PM
  #496
Do Make Say Think
& Yet & Yet
 
Do Make Say Think's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 26,166
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CerebralGenesis View Post
Why is the cancellation a sign of no season again? So dramatic around these parts...
Bettman said no season under 48 games and no games until January 14th takes us very close to that. People are thinking this is the last cancellation of games until the owners shutdown the season entirely.

Do Make Say Think is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:19 PM
  #497
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
I agree. And it should also not be holding up the owners. You need to show me why a compromise like I have proposed many times does not address the owners needs. And you can't just keep saying because they say so. The PA can equally say that it's a critcial issue for them. It doesn't make either side right. Both should move towards a compromise.
No, I don't have to show anything. I don't even necessarily disagree that what you propose wouldn't address the owners needs. I have also said time and time again, that had the PA negotiated these things in October there would have been more flexibility on the owners part if it meant saving an 82 game season. But all that matters is that the owners feel very strongly about this, rightly or wrongly. There is literally no reason for these issues to hold up an agreement for 85% of the PA.

You have yet to explain why the players should let these issues hold up an agreement.

Chelios is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:20 PM
  #498
vanwest
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Vancouver, BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 14,932
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Funk View Post
Let's say they affect 5% of the players like some have said. So that means 35 players would be affected. That could mean that every single team (and sometimes the same team multiple times) can be affected by these contracts. Possibly 100% of the owners affected vs 5% of players affected.

They should start acting like they own the league.... that's quite funny considering every time the league acts like it is in charge, you get upset.In the end this will be a wasted comment. I don't know why anyone on the owner's side would want to deal with the Canadian equivalent of Captain Bob.
See if you can figure out the difference between trying to show 'you are in charge' and acting responsibly for the good of the league. I am an employer of a number of people, I don' get results by showing them I'm in charge.

vanwest is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:22 PM
  #499
mossey3535
Registered User
 
mossey3535's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,533
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Canadian Guy View Post
The players kept talking about having to wait for the drop dead date for owners, well the time has come.
The owners grew tired of Fehr antics of asking about something, the owners giving and then Fehr asking for more of something else that had not been brought up. It's quite clear that the owners want to know what the players want and they will see what they can do about it, this can't be done when they keep adding things to their demands.

Crunch time is upon us
I agree, but those other deadlines should have been taken seriously. It wasn't just owner posturing, there were dates that meant that a certain amount of games WOULD BE LOST because there simply wasn't enough TIME to play them.

Not only that, but there were real and measurable financial losses from the players with each milestone - 10 games, 20 games, 30 games.

I don't know how you can go into a negotiation and ignore significant events such as the progressive loss of your salary in 10% increments. The last NHLPA offer basically confirms that there was, is and will never be some magical recuperative CBA agreement that will make those lost games worthwhile. It also confirms that all those delinkage offers were a waste of time. That could have been offered once to make a point, just like the 43% owner's offer.

mossey3535 is offline  
Old
12-20-2012, 04:22 PM
  #500
Chelios
Registered User
 
Chelios's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 3,622
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by vanwest View Post
No, it's not beside the point. It's exactly the point. You need to explain to me why the contracting issues taking into account thePA's proposals should be holding up a deal from the owners perspective. Both sides say it is important. Hence we have no deal and a stalemate. One side or both have to move. It will probably end up being both. How about some leadership from one side. I don't really care which.
You have been told numerous reasons why the owners want a cap on terms and a cap on variance. You disagree. Fine. But they are reasons none the less. 15% of the NHLPA, those that would actually be affected by these changes, have a legitimate reason not to want these restrictions. 85% don't. My point is, and has always been, that the entire PA should not be resisting restrictions that only affect a very small % of its constituents.

Chelios 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 08:40 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.