HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

3/2 Hotstove Tonight - on ROR offer sheet, realignment

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-03-2013, 04:09 PM
  #1
LadyStanley
Elasmobranchology-go
 
LadyStanley's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: North of the Tank
Country: United States
Posts: 64,838
vCash: 500
3/2 Hotstove Tonight - on ROR offer sheet, realignment

http://kuklaskorner.com/hockey/comme...ns-realignment

(Link to video on KK)

Panel believes that Bettman may have stepped in from having Flames "lose" draft picks if Colorado didn't match. Expect to have much clearer language in CBA than MOU in this regard.

Players will be talking this week to determine if full membership vote or player reps will vote on re-alignment; their decision is due by 3/8. Expect NHL to "grieve" re-alignment if it does not pass.

LadyStanley is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 04:20 PM
  #2
MuckOG
The Brodin Effect
 
MuckOG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: In a tree stand.
Country: United States
Posts: 7,383
vCash: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
[url]
Players will be talking this week to determine if full membership vote or player reps will vote on re-alignment; their decision is due by 3/8. Expect NHL to "grieve" re-alignment if it does not pass.


Interesting...I'm reading that the ownership can move forward with realignment regardless of what the players say...

http://www.startribune.com/sports/wild/194391411.html

Quote:
This is not a collective bargaining agreement issue. The league doesn't have to make this decision in concert with the union. It's doing so as a courtesy, but the league frankly doesn't care when New Jersey's Ilya Kovalchuk says, "I don't think it makes any sense to change it."

MuckOG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 04:33 PM
  #3
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
http://kuklaskorner.com/hockey/comme...ns-realignment

(Link to video on KK)

Panel believes that Bettman may have stepped in from having Flames "lose" draft picks if Colorado didn't match. Expect to have much clearer language in CBA than MOU in this regard.

Players will be talking this week to determine if full membership vote or player reps will vote on re-alignment; their decision is due by 3/8. Expect NHL to "grieve" re-alignment if it does not pass.
The only reason the PA should go to a full membership vote is if the 30 PA reps can't get the 2/3 vote among them, whether that be a Yes vote or a No vote. If the PA reps are also fairly deadlocked on this, then going to a full membership vote is a way to determine it definitively whether there is at least a majority for or against the owners latest realignment and scheduling proposal.

A question I have is: Are the 30 PA reps allowed to suggest certain alterations to the owners alignment proposal, or is it an all or nothing situation?


Last edited by MoreOrr: 03-03-2013 at 06:58 PM.
MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 06:24 PM
  #4
MuckOG
The Brodin Effect
 
MuckOG's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: In a tree stand.
Country: United States
Posts: 7,383
vCash: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
The only reason the PA should go to a full membership is if the 30 PA reps can't get the 2/3 vote among them, whether that be a Yes vote or a No vote. If the PA reps are also fairly deadlocked on this, then going to a full membership vote is a way to determine it definitively whether there is at least a majority for or against the owners latest realignment and scheduling proposal.

A question I have is: Are the 30 PA reps allowed to suggest certain alterations to the owners alignment proposal, or is it an all or nothing situation?
But what does it matter? If the NHLPA can't vote it down, it's all academic if the BoG votes to approve it.

MuckOG is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 07:00 PM
  #5
MoreOrr
B4
 
MoreOrr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Mexico
Country: Canada
Posts: 23,865
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MuckOG View Post
But what does it matter? If the NHLPA can't vote it down, it's all academic if the BoG votes to approve it.
Don't know about that. 5 or 6 No votes from the owners, plus the PA against it,... That's not resounding support.

MoreOrr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:05 PM
  #6
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 15,150
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoreOrr View Post
The only reason the PA should go to a full membership vote is if the 30 PA reps can't get the 2/3 vote among them, whether that be a Yes vote or a No vote. If the PA reps are also fairly deadlocked on this, then going to a full membership vote is a way to determine it definitively whether there is at least a majority for or against the owners latest realignment and scheduling proposal.

A question I have is: Are the 30 PA reps allowed to suggest certain alterations to the owners alignment proposal, or is it an all or nothing situation?
All the NHLPA can do is approve or disaprove whatever proposal the NHL presents - with only a simple majority vote required.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MuckOG View Post
But what does it matter? If the NHLPA can't vote it down, it's all academic if the BoG votes to approve it.
If the NHL goes ahead w/o NHLPA approval, the NHLPA would have to file a grievance to challenge it - and then the Impartial Arbitrator would have the final say on whether i) the NHLPA even have a say on the matter and ii) even if they do, whether that consent was being unreasonably withheld.

kdb209 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:44 PM
  #7
Kane One
Global Moderator
 
Kane One's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Brooklyn, New NY
Country: United States
Posts: 34,003
vCash: 1425
The NHL should lose in their grievance if they file one.

__________________


Glass from Girardi is practically a mathematical impossibility. I'm glad to have witnessed this great Rangers moment. -Bob Richards
I'd hate to know what the toilet facilities look like after a game with the way this team aims... -Megustaelhockey
Kane One is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:46 PM
  #8
MountainHawk
Registered User
 
MountainHawk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Salem, MA
Country: Vanuatu
Posts: 12,771
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Parker McDonald View Post
The NHL should lose in their grievance if they file one.
NHL wouldn't file one, the NHLPA would after the NHL implemented it despite their vote.

MountainHawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 09:59 PM
  #9
Oobz
Registered User
 
Oobz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Marquette, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 874
vCash: 500
They PA should be happy they even got a chance to give their input. I'm glad to hear they can't hijack the league on this hopefully.

Oobz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-03-2013, 11:42 PM
  #10
silvercanuck
Registered User
 
silvercanuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,824
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyStanley View Post
http://kuklaskorner.com/hockey/comme...ns-realignment

(Link to video on KK)

Panel believes that Bettman may have stepped in from having Flames "lose" draft picks if Colorado didn't match. Expect to have much clearer language in CBA than MOU in this regard.

Players will be talking this week to determine if full membership vote or player reps will vote on re-alignment; their decision is due by 3/8. Expect NHL to "grieve" re-alignment if it does not pass.
No, the panel absolutely did not say that. They said the exact opposite.

Ron Maclean said that he believed the league would not make them give up their draft picks, but he said so without any contact or clarification with the league. It is obvious that he was pandering to Calgary. Even PJ Stock came out and said "I know we're trying to defend Calgary as much we can tonight." when speaking about the issue.

silvercanuck is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:28 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. 2016 All Rights Reserved.