Calling the lockout

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from lambda13. Show lambda13's posts

    Re: Calling the lockout

    Why wait chowda? We can start that right now!

    Although I agree with Recchi, the longer the players wait the more it hurts them. The players have more to lose than the owners. The players lose a year of playing, thats more than likely going to be 1/5 of most players earnings over their careers. For the average owner? They'll hardly feel the loss as they will have the team as long as they want.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bookboy007. Show Bookboy007's posts

    Re: Calling the lockout

    Ah, yes, the pending apocalypse strategy.  Of course.

    I can't bear listening to the usual talking heads on this any longer.  If I hear one more guy with a clothing allowance talk about how the people really hurt by all this are the fans, I'll...well let's face it, I'll come on here and b--ch about it.  But the one thing I have heard pretty consistently is that the players aren't going to accept a moratorium of exactly one pay period.

    In an abstract way, I think proposing a moratorium is brilliant from Bettman's point of view.  Apparently, Fehr called him and said he didn't know how to proceed from where they left off.  Now,  obviously we know less than we think we know about the negotiations, but it has seemed for a while now that the NHL brings proposals to the table and the PA comes back with nothing.  The first exchange was stupid on both sides, but I don't recall hearing much about the players coming back to subsequent NHL proposals with tangible responses.  Bettman knows better than to negotiate with himself, and right now, I bet he's frustrated that the contracting issues that seemed like backburner issues have now become front burner after the owners moved on make whole.  The owners went to 50%, then came up with a way to protect dollars in current contracts, then took on the burden of the make whole, and now there's a new dealbreaker.  A moritorium is Bettman's way of saying the NHL isn't coming back to the table with another proposal.  If Fehr doesn't know what to do next, then everyone can sit on their hands and the players can ask Fehr why they're losing more money while their leader sends the message that he has no ideas.  The players can reject an official moratorium, but they can't exactly force the owners to the table short of bringing forward something to discuss.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from BadHabitude. Show BadHabitude's posts

    Re: Calling the lockout

     

    No business as usual.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from stevegm. Show stevegm's posts

    Re: Calling the lockout

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Recchi said today that the players should accept the current offer because as it goes on, the offer is just going to get worse.

    Last time, the players refused to accept a salary cap of $50M+.  They ended up signing at a $39M cap instead.

     

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Are you sure about that?  Certainly not what I thought

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from BsLegion. Show BsLegion's posts

    Re: Calling the lockout

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Ah, yes, the pending apocalypse strategy.  Of course.

    I can't bear listening to the usual talking heads on this any longer.  If I hear one more guy with a clothing allowance talk about how the people really hurt by all this are the fans, I'll...well let's face it, I'll come on here and b--ch about it.  But the one thing I have heard pretty consistently is that the players aren't going to accept a moratorium of exactly one pay period.

    In an abstract way, I think proposing a moratorium is brilliant from Bettman's point of view.  Apparently, Fehr called him and said he didn't know how to proceed from where they left off.  Now,  obviously we know less than we think we know about the negotiations, but it has seemed for a while now that the NHL brings proposals to the table and the PA comes back with nothing.  The first exchange was stupid on both sides, but I don't recall hearing much about the players coming back to subsequent NHL proposals with tangible responses.  Bettman knows better than to negotiate with himself, and right now, I bet he's frustrated that the contracting issues that seemed like backburner issues have now become front burner after the owners moved on make whole.  The owners went to 50%, then came up with a way to protect dollars in current contracts, then took on the burden of the make whole, and now there's a new dealbreaker.  A moritorium is Bettman's way of saying the NHL isn't coming back to the table with another proposal.  If Fehr doesn't know what to do next, then everyone can sit on their hands and the players can ask Fehr why they're losing more money while their leader sends the message that he has no ideas.  The players can reject an official moratorium, but they can't exactly force the owners to the table short of bringing forward something to discuss.

    [/QUOTE]

    Glad though it's out that the PA has not brought up to the table anything new in form of an offer.  To me it's the PA saying it's our way or no way.

    First comes the 2week moratorium, then comes the next cancellation of games till about end of December and finally comes the deadline for a season. 

    Call it pressure tactics if you want , I see it as a "to do list "  in process of having a season or not.

    Players are feeling it with all their comments of frustration to the media. Where's Chelios when you need him!!!

     

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share