NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

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

    NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    Things will unravel for the NHLPA in the next seven days.

    The NHLPA will fade into extinction and we will have everyone gearing up for hockey within 14 to 20 days.

    And voila - we have hockey for the holidays.

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

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to Wheatskins' comment:

    Things will unravel for the NHLPA in the next seven days.

    The NHLPA will fade into extinction and we will have everyone gearing up for hockey within 14 to 20 days.

    And voila - we have hockey for the holidays.




    Huh?

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

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    Correction: If NHLPA gets decertified that will kill the remainder of the season. Lawsuits from players may fly left, right and centre.

    Players don't want to file suit - there are no Curt Floods in the bunch. Owners don't budge.


    Players force Fehr to accept new CBA as Owners want.

    Voila - we have hockey again.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    I'd like to take this opportunity to kill the decertify talk right now.

    It's never going to happen.

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

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    I'd like to take this opportunity to kill the decertify talk right now.

    It's never going to happen.



    I agree totally

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from bim09. Show bim09's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to Wheatskins' comment:

    Correction: If NHLPA gets decertified that will kill the remainder of the season. Lawsuits from players may fly left, right and centre.

    Players don't want to file suit - there are no Curt Floods in the bunch. Owners don't budge.


    Players force Fehr to accept new CBA as Owners want.

    Voila - we have hockey again.



     Respectfully, I disagree Wheats.  I think the owners will move towards the players, first, before a deal is done.  Most top players are playing hockey.  And those who were hopeful a deal would get done early, holding off on commiting to european teams, have made the move to play on those teams and, imo, signifies they're in this for the long haul.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wheatskins. Show Wheatskins's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    It looks like we're on target for hockey for the Holidays.

    They are giving us a "treat" for X-Mas, because both sides have been bad boys.

    My advise (and hopefully yours) to both sides:

    1. Gary Bettman, see you later. It's time for the Owners to find someone that puts the fans and the game first (in that order).

    2. Jeremy Jacob's, it's time for you to sell.

    3. The players and Owners, if you do this again you will lose me forever.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    1. Add Fehr too.

    2. JJ is one of the owners currently negotiating. Is this one of those opinions that a deal could get done in spite of him being there ? e.g. Julien winning a cup as Bruin's coach.

    3. If you don't take of yourself better then you have been Wheat we might lose you forever also.
    Take better care of the ticker !

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from SanDogBrewin. Show SanDogBrewin's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    " The NHL proposed more make-whole/transition money, to ease the players' drop from 57 percent of hockey-related revenue to 50. The league is now reportedly at $300 million (with $50 million going toward pensions) -- about the midpoint between its previous proposal ($211 million) and the union's ($393 million).

    The league bent on some contracting rights, keeping arbitration and free-agency eligibility the same (Salary arbitration would stay the same after four years pro). But the league reportedly continued to insist that contracts not vary by more than five percent from year to year, to stop back-diving, cap-circumventing deals, instead of adopting a union proposal that would recapture a team's salary cap advantage if a player retired before his contract ran out. The league continued to insist on a five-year contract limit, while allowing teams to re-sign their own players for seven years.

    The league also reportedly proposed a 10-year collective bargaining agreement, with an opt-out after eight years. The players had been proposing a five-year deal. "

    Today is critical and I would be fine with 50-55 games. I can't believe the players would want to go through this again in another 5 years.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from Wheatskins. Show Wheatskins's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:

    1. Add Fehr too.

    2. JJ is one of the owners currently negotiating. Is this one of those opinions that a deal could get done in spite of him being there ? e.g. Julien winning a cup as Bruin's coach.

    3. If you don't take of yourself better then you have been Wheat we might lose you forever also.
    Take better care of the ticker !




    Chowda, don't you worry, I'm going to be around for a long while.

    I walk everyday for a minimum of 30 minutes, at a good pace. I cover 6 kms in the 30. I can walk for hours with no ill effects whatsoever and no pain in the leg muscles.

    Next week I'll be working out with the athletes at York U Athletic Centre on a weekly basis.

    The following week I'll be taking to the ice for the first time in 10 years.

    I've dropped 12 pounds with a few more to go. And no cigarettes.

    When spring rolls around I'll be fitter than I was in my early thirties.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from Chowdahkid-. Show Chowdahkid-'s posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to Wheatskins' comment:

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:

    1. Add Fehr too.

    2. JJ is one of the owners currently negotiating. Is this one of those opinions that a deal could get done in spite of him being there ? e.g. Julien winning a cup as Bruin's coach.

    3. If you don't take of yourself better then you have been Wheat we might lose you forever also.
    Take better care of the ticker !




    Chowda, don't you worry, I'm going to be around for a long while.

    I walk everyday for a minimum of 30 minutes, at a good pace. I cover 6 kms in the 30. I can walk for hours with no ill effects whatsoever and no pain in the leg muscles.

    Next week I'll be working out with the athletes at York U Athletic Centre on a weekly basis.

    The following week I'll be taking to the ice for the first time in 10 years.

    I've dropped 12 pounds with a few more to go. And no cigarettes.

    When spring rolls around I'll be fitter than I was in my early thirties.



    Good for you Wheat to take the initiative to do this. I know of some who've not done a thing after receiving a scare as you have.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    Supposedly, the Big Heads are returning to the meeting room.  Let's hope they don't F up the positive discussions between the players-owners group.  If they do as their respective constitutents tell them, perhaps there's hope for a settlement.

    If this process actually leads to a deal, then it should be resolved amongst both the PA and the League that Bettman and Fehr (if they're still around) do not participate in future negotiations.

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

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    " The NHL proposed more make-whole/transition money, to ease the players' drop from 57 percent of hockey-related revenue to 50. The league is now reportedly at $300 million (with $50 million going toward pensions) -- about the midpoint between its previous proposal ($211 million) and the union's ($393 million).

    The league bent on some contracting rights, keeping arbitration and free-agency eligibility the same (Salary arbitration would stay the same after four years pro). But the league reportedly continued to insist that contracts not vary by more than five percent from year to year, to stop back-diving, cap-circumventing deals, instead of adopting a union proposal that would recapture a team's salary cap advantage if a player retired before his contract ran out. The league continued to insist on a five-year contract limit, while allowing teams to re-sign their own players for seven years.

    The league also reportedly proposed a 10-year collective bargaining agreement, with an opt-out after eight years. The players had been proposing a five-year deal. "

    Today is critical and I would be fine with 50-55 games. I can't believe the players would want to go through this again in another 5 years.




    I'm stunned if this is all true.  Stunned.  What was said in those meetings for the owners to volunteer to split the difference on make whole and keep some of the most inflationary elements of the current system in place?!?!  Wasn't at least part of the point of losing 30 games that the owners wanted to fix those aspects of the system that distorted salaries?  And are the players really willing to lose a season because they want big money up front and retirement contracts for 27 year old players?  That's the rock they want to die on?

    It seems insane to think that there has been no hockey for what comes down to a tweak in the percentages under the old system and closing a loophole that violates the spirit of the cap.  Insane.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from 50belowzero. Show 50belowzero's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    Maybe the players really want to live and die on the "right" to sign 13 to 15 year guaranteed contracts. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from xdrive. Show xdrive's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

    I'd like to take this opportunity to kill the decertify talk right now.

    It's never going to happen.



    DING!!!

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from 49-North. Show 49-North's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    What a surprise! 

    The Big Heads get involved, and all the air is let out of the balloon.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    Yeah, looks like the season will be lost.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from Not-A-Shot. Show Not-A-Shot's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to ipotnyc's comment:

    Looking more and more like: "See y'all in Fall 2013." 

    I'm not even going to argue/debate sides any more. 




    Ipot,

    Thanks for you hep with some of the contractual stuff here over the last couple of months.  Your knowledge and presentation were very helpful.

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

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    " The NHL proposed more make-whole/transition money, to ease the players' drop from 57 percent of hockey-related revenue to 50. The league is now reportedly at $300 million (with $50 million going toward pensions) -- about the midpoint between its previous proposal ($211 million) and the union's ($393 million).

    The league bent on some contracting rights, keeping arbitration and free-agency eligibility the same (Salary arbitration would stay the same after four years pro). But the league reportedly continued to insist that contracts not vary by more than five percent from year to year, to stop back-diving, cap-circumventing deals, instead of adopting a union proposal that would recapture a team's salary cap advantage if a player retired before his contract ran out. The league continued to insist on a five-year contract limit, while allowing teams to re-sign their own players for seven years.

    The league also reportedly proposed a 10-year collective bargaining agreement, with an opt-out after eight years. The players had been proposing a five-year deal. "

    Today is critical and I would be fine with 50-55 games. I can't believe the players would want to go through this again in another 5 years.




    I'm stunned if this is all true.  Stunned.  What was said in those meetings for the owners to volunteer to split the difference on make whole and keep some of the most inflationary elements of the current system in place?!?!  Wasn't at least part of the point of losing 30 games that the owners wanted to fix those aspects of the system that distorted salaries?  And are the players really willing to lose a season because they want big money up front and retirement contracts for 27 year old players?  That's the rock they want to die on?

    It seems insane to think that there has been no hockey for what comes down to a tweak in the percentages under the old system and closing a loophole that violates the spirit of the cap.  Insane.




    I feel the same way.  There "must' be something more though.

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

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:

    " The NHL proposed more make-whole/transition money, to ease the players' drop from 57 percent of hockey-related revenue to 50. The league is now reportedly at $300 million (with $50 million going toward pensions) -- about the midpoint between its previous proposal ($211 million) and the union's ($393 million).

    The league bent on some contracting rights, keeping arbitration and free-agency eligibility the same (Salary arbitration would stay the same after four years pro). But the league reportedly continued to insist that contracts not vary by more than five percent from year to year, to stop back-diving, cap-circumventing deals, instead of adopting a union proposal that would recapture a team's salary cap advantage if a player retired before his contract ran out. The league continued to insist on a five-year contract limit, while allowing teams to re-sign their own players for seven years.

    The league also reportedly proposed a 10-year collective bargaining agreement, with an opt-out after eight years. The players had been proposing a five-year deal. "

    Today is critical and I would be fine with 50-55 games. I can't believe the players would want to go through this again in another 5 years.




    I'm stunned if this is all true.  Stunned.  What was said in those meetings for the owners to volunteer to split the difference on make whole and keep some of the most inflationary elements of the current system in place?!?!  Wasn't at least part of the point of losing 30 games that the owners wanted to fix those aspects of the system that distorted salaries?  And are the players really willing to lose a season because they want big money up front and retirement contracts for 27 year old players?  That's the rock they want to die on?

    It seems insane to think that there has been no hockey for what comes down to a tweak in the percentages under the old system and closing a loophole that violates the spirit of the cap.  Insane.




    I feel the same way.  There "must' be something more though.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    Ah Pearl Harbor Day, the fans are about to lose a season of NHL hockey.  I will read no more of the CBA, I will read posts like Tom O'Brien's recent post.  Today is very depressing for this fan.  

    BTW, good to hear you have the right attitude Wheats.  Happy Holidays and a New Year to you and all.  

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from islamorada. Show islamorada's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    Ok, I like ween, pis up a rope!  Seriously, the matter of the blame is nonsensical at this point.  I have to think it is the clash of egos, and yes smiles of beguile "we won".  Pragmatically thinking though the players are asserting their beliefs after several years of "circumventing" and paying for the "90s" expansion.  The owners are dealing with uncertainity over the expansion clubs in the south, growing dollar in Canada and a debt ridden society in the United States. Those are the perimters imo.  

    10 years, yikes if I was an owner I would look to 5 years, unless I had some facsimile of more money to be made.  If I was a player I would want 5 years as well, for the truth of the matter the last CBA turned out to be the "golden egg" to many players including Sidney Crosby.  The owners last stand?  

    Change, a future canadian dollar luring teams under financial duress back to where the game belongs.  Change, to make players understand the limitation of their own careers, five years at even 500,00 per year is better than most people in NA.  Change for Bettman, may he leave after this CBA, who sought expansion only to see "Medusa" in our current CBA.    Change for JJ to relize his age like his old compadre Sinden, a death knell in the night for the NHL.  Change, where a sport noted for Canadian and Old American values are lost to the monied interest.  Change where players realize the negative of 2004 was a boom to their long term salairies.  Change where the fan realizes it is not about hockey but about money.  I shall at my age, older, seek to find a better way to use my time and interest, ie. outdoor sports.  

    Reason strikes out!

     

     

     

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from skater68. Show skater68's posts

    Re: NHL Hockey for The Holidays?

    Lets face it the owners tried to force a ridiculous contract down the throat of the players.

     

    The owners have an arrogant attitude and expect the players to just except their deal without any intention of honest negotiations

    I'm glad the players are standing up.

     

    I'll miss hockey but I'm tired of seeing CEO greed take over this country

     

    Labor is labor whether you're making 5 million a year or minimum wage

    If you have the skill set to be a professional athlete then you deserve the money

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share