HFBoards

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

Leiweke: Kings Hockey back this Fall

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-28-2005, 12:54 PM
  #26
Old Hickory
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
The only thing I accuse "the owners" of is not having the nads to stand up to the players in 1994 and cancel THAT season instead of this one. But that was a damn hard choice to make then because they were making at lease some money then...now most aren't making any.
Unfortunately that was the fault of a few clubs that negotiated with the PA behind Bettman's back. That is why the proviso was in there this time that Betteman can override deals that don't have a major majority of the teams on board

 
Old
03-28-2005, 01:01 PM
  #27
Mat
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Magnetomountaineer
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 2,054
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Mat Send a message via MSN to Mat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dooney & Bourke
Well you just might see some Ice Dogs as replacement players too

Seriously though, The NHL put an offer out and the PA was just not willing to negotiate in good faith IMO on the players behalf.
a) most ice dogs are either too young to compete in the nhl, or wont play as they are under nhlpa agents

b) the nhl's offers were put out knowing they would be rejected. the owners never wanted the PA to accept, which is evident by the last-drive for an uncancellation when the owners made it look like they were willing to talk numbers but in reality they went back on the QO and Arbitration stances to widen the gap. the owners are the only ones bargaining in bad faith here, they just have the media swinging public perception in their favor.

and if you think goodnow isnt bargaining on the players behalf then you're an idiot

Mat is offline  
Old
03-28-2005, 01:03 PM
  #28
Mat
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Magnetomountaineer
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 2,054
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Mat Send a message via MSN to Mat
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt
I mean, how can you say any of these teams are greedy: Hawks.
this statement right here proves you know nothing about the hockey business world.

Mat is offline  
Old
03-28-2005, 01:08 PM
  #29
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingsjohn
Unfortunately that was the fault of a few clubs that negotiated with the PA behind Bettman's back. That is why the proviso was in there this time that Betteman can override deals that don't have a major majority of the teams on board
Yep, when I read that a month or two ago it was really eye-opening. While I blame a few specific owners for some of these problems, blaming "the owners" for this is wrong. "The owners" aren't a collective like the players are. They aren't "all for one and one for all" whereas the players via the NHLPA are exactly that. The players practically give ORDERS to the top UFA's each year to max out their contracts even if it hurts their teams or the salary structure. The owners don't (and can't) do that because it would be collusion.

blind willie is complaining that the majority of owners can't trust a minority of owners to maintain a profitable cost structure. This is true. But that's not the end of the discussion. Since the majority can't FORCE the minority to spend reasonably, what exactly are they supposed to do? Continue to operate at huge losses or, at best, very small profit margins? Fold 23 teams? He's mad at the owners but I honestly don't see any system that can work other than one that is (or acts like) a cap. Well, other than an entire redistribution of income, which I personally think would be THE BEST solution. But the NHLPA hasn't proposed that and likely never will because it would be tantamount to a cap as well.

So, Mr. Cookie Man...you want the owners to negotiate some sort of system that benefits both sides, right? What kind of system do you think would do that?

(Of course, there is a false assumption in all this that the owners' proposal doesn't benefit the players, which it does...it just benefits them less than the previous CBA which gave the players a COMPLETELY unfair 76% of revenues.)

jt is offline  
Old
03-28-2005, 01:18 PM
  #30
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat
a) most ice dogs are either too young to compete in the nhl, or wont play as they are under nhlpa agents
Link to Ice Dogs Roster

17 of 23 players are age 23 or older and none are under 20. I'm pretty sure they are old enough to compete in the NHL. As to whether they will or won't cross the line, we'll see...but based on the informal polls of teams like the Pirates and Phantoms, most players are willing to. Also, the NHL has filed an unfair labor practices complaint against the NHLPA for threatening to kick out any agent who represents a replacement player...and I'd bet they win that complaint as it is patently unfair.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat
this statement right here proves you know nothing about the hockey business world.
Alrighty then.

Wirtz is a greedy ******* but his team isn't making much, if any, money and will make even less the further he runs it into the ground.

jt is offline  
Old
03-28-2005, 01:46 PM
  #31
Dooney
Love me some Carter!
 
Dooney's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sunny So Cal.
Country: United States
Posts: 10,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat
a) most ice dogs are either too young to compete in the nhl, or wont play as they are under nhlpa agents

b) the nhl's offers were put out knowing they would be rejected. the owners never wanted the PA to accept, which is evident by the last-drive for an uncancellation when the owners made it look like they were willing to talk numbers but in reality they went back on the QO and Arbitration stances to widen the gap. the owners are the only ones bargaining in bad faith here, they just have the media swinging public perception in their favor.

and if you think goodnow isnt bargaining on the players behalf then you're an idiot
And a Jt said take a peek at the age of the Ice dogs or any of the players in the minors, I did not realise they were considered triple A high school level.

The owners are the ones trying to get some form of hockey back on the ice come september. I don't see the players doing that, I have not heard the players pushing the PA to get a deal done. Most of the older players are just going to hang up their skates and say so long and move on.

Like I said I have a distaste for Bettman, however, I feel that he was willing to meet in the middle but the PA was not.

Dooney is offline  
Old
03-28-2005, 01:49 PM
  #32
Mat
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Magnetomountaineer
Country: Ukraine
Posts: 2,054
vCash: 500
Send a message via AIM to Mat Send a message via MSN to Mat
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dooney & Bourke
Bettman...I feel that he was willing to meet in the middle but the PA was not.
get real buddy.

Mat is offline  
Old
03-28-2005, 02:20 PM
  #33
Fingolfin
Registered User
 
Fingolfin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 468
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mat
b) the nhl's offers were put out knowing they would be rejected. the owners never wanted the PA to accept, which is evident by the last-drive for an uncancellation when the owners made it look like they were willing to talk numbers but in reality they went back on the QO and Arbitration stances to widen the gap. the owners are the only ones bargaining in bad faith here, they just have the media swinging public perception in their favor.
For the record, it was Vincent Damphousse, Trevor Linden and the NHLPA that backed off the numbers and started quibbling about QOs and arbitration. Read *any* of the articles about Gretzky and Lemieux feeling used and lied to by the PA about what was really going to happen at the "uncancellation" meeting.

Everyone thought the PA was gonna walk in and propose $45m, the owners would accept, and a deal would get done. Instead, the PA came in and refused to talk dollars until the minor details were hashed out.

Sorry bro, but it looks like you got your facts backwards.

- Fin

Fingolfin is offline  
Old
03-28-2005, 02:20 PM
  #34
jt
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Orange County
Country: Norway
Posts: 963
vCash: 500
Yeah buddy. Get real.

jt is offline  
Old
03-28-2005, 04:01 PM
  #35
nedaynow
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 5
vCash: 500
The next time the players want to risk getting a pay check or not for playing hockey will be the first time they are on par with the owners .Even If the owners painted themselves into this corner they have the right to fix this .It is painful for fans , But who wants to do this again in the future.Fix it now ! Let the stupidstars fade away .Let the youth play they are the future anyway.The PA has earned the right to fold ,the sooner the better.

nedaynow is offline  
Old
03-28-2005, 05:33 PM
  #36
guzmania
Registered User
 
guzmania's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: SCV
Country: United States
Posts: 2,492
vCash: 500
I won't be there for replacements. I have not been to a MLB game since they struck. Spare the rod, spoil the commisioner. Truly, I am wounded by this whole experience

guzmania 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 06:14 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.