nhl tables new offer

  1. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

       I just do not understand the rational of the players. This is a battle they cannot win.

    They appear to be willing to throw away an entire season, even though that will result in a monetary loss, for many of them, greater than accepting the owners' current offer.

    I understand their distaste with salary rollbacks, but many of them will still be making millions of dollars.

    According to Hockey Central,every contract that a player willingly signs, contains a clause that allows currency adjustments to be made to the deal, if a new CBA is  signed during the life of the contract. The rollbacks were not a surprise to the players. They will still be making much more money, than in any other hockey league in the world.

    The NHL owners are not asking the players to take an unfair percentage. A 50-50 split is fair. The players need to put their pride aside, and do what's best for them.

    Sign a deal that includes the 7% rollback, and get back to making a lot of money, doing what they love to do.

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

    Re: NHL tables new offer

    If these whining owners are taking such a financial beating I suggest they sell their franchises.

    Pro sport franchises are not like a fast food franchises.

    Owners should generally have an interest in the sport. And have enough business sense to know that supporting expansion without running the numbers is not a smart business decision.

    They're taking the easy way out by cutting the players share. A lazy way of doing business and seems epidemic in the USA

     

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

     

    Skater68 - I certainly understand that perspective and I believe from the last lockout that they are certainly trying to make it into a turn key business.

    I don't think it's laziness, I think it's outright stupidity.  Most of these clowns were born into money.  Many believe in the US of A that most all the rich are the gifted and talented and earned their money.  Not the case, they were born into it and/or had the opportunities as suggested in the book Outliers.

    Look at their marketing.  Look at their "innovations".  Nothing but copy cat stuff from other sports.  The commisioner is a retread from another sport.  The PA director is a retread from another sport.

    These NHL owners are morons and their own worst enemies.

    Jeremy Jacobs and his son Charlie, look at how many times they have said things utterly stupid.  'Cam couldn't bring us a cup while playing for us' ?  And that was prefaced by 'they told me I shouldn't say this'.  and it's not as if they speak in public a lot.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from grizzlybear69. Show grizzlybear69's posts

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    Bettman 50 50 split no rollback.Fehr....oink oink oink oink.

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    In response to biggskye's comment:
    [QUOTE]

       I just do not understand the rational of the players. This is a battle they cannot win.

    They appear to be willing to throw away an entire season, even though that will result in a monetary loss, for many of them, greater than accepting the owners' current offer.

    I understand their distaste with salary rollbacks, but many of them will still be making millions of dollars.

    According to Hockey Central,every contract that a player willingly signs, contains a clause that allows currency adjustments to be made to the deal, if a new CBA is  signed during the life of the contract. The rollbacks were not a surprise to the players. They will still be making much more money, than in any other hockey league in the world.

    The NHL owners are not asking the players to take an unfair percentage. A 50-50 split is fair. The players need to put their pride aside, and do what's best for them.

    Sign a deal that includes the 7% rollback, and get back to making a lot of money, doing what they love to do.

    [/QUOTE]


    Well said Skye ! This is how I see it also.

    Pride is a big part but the player's stance this time around is not just pride but also sticking together .  Not sure how long the sticking together will last if the NHL cancels more games and guarantees less game , smaller pays . That is if they do return to the ice this season.

    I liked Crosby, Toews and Doan's press conferences (how many millions all together?) . How about they put on the stand Craig Adams , Brandon Bollig or Paille and Campbell ?  Fehr ? why not them ? or is it's not glamorous enough for the media ?

    I'm still hopeful they will reach an agreement to save the season but next week or next serious negotiation , after they decided to talk some more ,  if the PA continues with their stance on not moving towards the NHL's proposition then I will start to lose hope.

     

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    In response to skater68's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Owners should generally have an interest in the sport. And have enough business sense to know that supporting expansion without running the numbers is not a smart business decision.

    They're taking the easy way out by cutting the players share. A lazy way of doing business and seems epidemic in the USA

    [/QUOTE]

    Which part of the current mess would be different if every owner loved hockey?

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

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

    In response to skater68's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Owners should generally have an interest in the sport. And have enough business sense to know that supporting expansion without running the numbers is not a smart business decision.

    They're taking the easy way out by cutting the players share. A lazy way of doing business and seems epidemic in the USA

    [/QUOTE]

    Which part of the current mess would be different if every owner loved hockey?

    [/QUOTE]


    It would be worse.  You'd have every owner Gallisano-ing money away on Ville Leino every year until the players were getting 104% of HRR.  Because the owners were willing to lose money like Greece just because darn it, they love hockey.

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    In response to BadHabitude's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

    Skater68 - I certainly understand that perspective and I believe from the last lockout that they are certainly trying to make it into a turn key business.

    I don't think it's laziness, I think it's outright stupidity.  Most of these clowns were born into money.  Many believe in the US of A that most all the rich are the gifted and talented and earned their money.  Not the case, they were born into it and/or had the opportunities as suggested in the book Outliers.

    Look at their marketing.  Look at their "innovations".  Nothing but copy cat stuff from other sports.  The commisioner is a retread from another sport.  The PA director is a retread from another sport.

    These NHL owners are morons and their own worst enemies.

    Jeremy Jacobs and his son Charlie, look at how many times they have said things utterly stupid.  'Cam couldn't bring us a cup while playing for us' ?  And that was prefaced by 'they told me I shouldn't say this'.  and it's not as if they speak in public a lot.

    [/QUOTE]

    Ayn Rand, Atlus Strugged....me thinks I disagree with that premise.  The USA has the most productive agricultural areas in the world.... (Collapse/Jared Diamond).  It is has vast resources, and as a result a number of people who have the ability to seize opportunity rather than be lazy and seize the benefits of their labor.  So I politely disagree Bad Hab.  Now the hockey players have a right to make money and sign contracts.  If the above fore mentioned morons sign contracts with those players then they are inclined to honor those contracts imo!  What lies in between is not hyperbole but logical analysis worthy of non political bs.  

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    10/19/12

    As the NHL Lockout pushes on, more and more details have been released about the league's latest offer to the players. After reading through the fine print, it contains a lot of misleading numbers and deceptive ideas. Do they really think they can get away without honoring current contracts?

    Many of us in the media, yours truly included, simply saw a proposal that called for a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenue (HRR). That initial reaction shifted all the pressure to the players to agree to the deal or some variation of it.

    To think the economics of the deal were that cut-and-dry was foolish.

    It took Donald Fehr and several players to point out the NHL is actually looking to renege on current player contracts to assist in evening out the share of HRR. So for as much as we all want a deal to get done, it's impossible to expect the players to cave on that.

    Let's think about contracts in the real world for a minute.

    They exist for cars, bank loans, credit cards, cell phones, etc. When you enter into one, more often than not they're binding, and to get out of them usually requires you to accept some sort of penalty or fee.

    Defaulting on them altogether has serious consequences. Foreclosures, repossessions and civil or small claims suits are the best examples of what happens when we don't honor a contract we signed.

    In the workplace, employees are either paid on a set hourly rate or they collect a salary. Depending on what kind of profession you're in, some people can also earn bonuses, most of which are performance-based.

     

    Hi-res-151963375_crop_exact Gary Bettman and the owners' version of negotiating was over in 15 minutes.
    Bruce Bennett/Getty Images

     

    How ridiculous would it be if the owner of a car dealership asked one of his salesmen to give back some of his commission check to help out the business? Or for the good of the automobile industry as a whole?

    In essence, this is what Gary Bettman and the owners are asking of the players.

    Jason Chimera, a left wing for the Washington Capitals, told Chuck Gormley of CSNWashington.com as much:

    When you sign your name to a contract and you have set dollars—I don’t care where you are in life—some jobs you can sue the guy for not paying you [even though you have] a legal, binding contract. And the owners seem to think it’s OK not to honor the contracts.

    This now seems to be the central sticking-point in negotiations.

    According to the league, unless the players agree to put a portion of their current salary into an escrow account, the HRR split will never reach the 50-50 they're looking for. What they fail to mention is there's no guarantee the players will ever see a return on that money.

    What's always been comical is to hear owners of professional sports teams complain about player salaries. They act as if there was some outside influence that made them agree to sign a player for whatever they're paying him.

    Player salaries get out of control because of owners, not in spite of them. And when the league's coming off a seventh straight year of revenue growth, their gripes are falling on deaf ears.

     

    Should players be willing to risk losing some of their money from contracts that have already been signed? Yes No Submit Vote vote to see results Should players be willing to risk losing some of their money from contracts that have already been signed?
    • Yes 21.4%  
    • No 78.6%  
    Total votes: 538

     

    Now of course Bettman and his "minions" will say it's the most profitable teams' job to help support the struggling ones. Why?

    Contracting some of the teams in markets that, let's be honest could care less about hockey, would cure a lot of the league's collective economic woes. It should not be up to the Boston Bruins to help prop up a team like the Phoenix Coyotes.

    When asked by Bruce Garrioch of the Ottawa Sun why the league doesn't want to abide by the deals that were signed, Fehr responded by saying:

    They want to pay less money. That's all. It's really very simple: 'We've agreed to pay to the dollar all the contracts we've signed.' We've now decided that's more money than we'd like to pay.' The reason we made the last proposal the way we did was simply because they want to move toward 50-50. The players have already indicated they are willing to do that over time. The question is: Should you agree to honour the contracts you signed between now and then? Players think that's a straight-forward thing to do and not an unusual thing to do. It's sort of the way everybody does business.

    Don't expect Bettman and the owners, though, to have some sort of moment of clarity or self-realization. Their first proposal over the summer was insulting and set the stage for this level of animosity between the two sides. That aura only continues to fester as this thing drags out.

    So once again, it looks like the players are going to have to bite the bullet if we want hockey to be played this season.

    However, this time we need to realize it's not the players who are the greedy ones.

        Flag This Article    
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from JWensink. Show JWensink's posts

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    "So once again, it looks like the players are going to have to bite the bullet if we want hockey to be played this season."

    I think that is referred to as leverage. All the principles and pride go out the window when you give up 5 or 6 million in salary while sitting out. That is a loser anyway you slice it. So go ahead listen to that Dbag Fehr, and kiss away millions that you can never get back. It's beyond stupid -

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    [/QUOTE]


    Ayn Rand, Atlus Strugged....me thinks I disagree with that premise.  The USA has the most productive agricultural areas in the world.... (Collapse/Jared Diamond).  It is has vast resources, and as a result a number of people who have the ability to seize opportunity rather than be lazy and seize the benefits of their labor.  So I politely disagree Bad Hab.  Now the hockey players have a right to make money and sign contracts.  If the above fore mentioned morons sign contracts with those players then they are inclined to honor those contracts imo!  What lies in between is not hyperbole but logical analysis worthy of non political bs.  

    [/QUOTE]


    I only got to page 40 or so of Atlas Shrugged, too boring.

    Honoring contracts?  And then proposing a 20% rollback?

    OK, politics aside, disregard how the owners got their money and whether or not they are "worthy" of it.

    Look at their marketing plan, look at the sport.  A cross between NASCAR and WWF.

    I've been to a game in Tampa, aside from the fans who travelled from the visiting side and transplants from the north, no one knew what was going on.

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    Every contract states that it can be changed upon changes to the CBA.

     

    And every contract has the player's signature on it.

     

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

    Re: NHL tables new offer

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

    In response to skater68's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Owners should generally have an interest in the sport. And have enough business sense to know that supporting expansion without running the numbers is not a smart business decision.

    They're taking the easy way out by cutting the players share. A lazy way of doing business and seems epidemic in the USA

    [/QUOTE]

    Which part of the current mess would be different if every owner loved hockey?

    [/QUOTE]


     

     A lockout is unnecessary for honest negotiations.

     

    Honest negotiations in good faith would have been in place.

    Instead of the money hungry owners trying to bully their way into an unreasonable contract

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    Are those players contracts signed required to mention the CBA agreement, yes I believe so.  If a player's name is on the contract it is because he has no choice.  Legalese mumbo jumbo.  My point is if an owner offers a contract for 6 years at 6 million a year, then uses the new CBA not to change the number of years but is willing to roll back that player's contract, well, that a major contradiction.  Legaese mumbo jumbo.

    You know my opinion NAS, owners should be the sole party to determine what revenue is shared.  I also believe there should be no CBA, players should only sign one year contracts and let free enterprize work.  Haha.  Now anything different is one taking the advantage of the other.  To wit, the current state, a NHL lockout.  

    BadHab, yup Ayn Rand is verbose.  Chapter 8 though is worthy of reading.  Essentially outlining why free enterprize should be recognized in this country.  That is for all human beings, in this case the owners and players.  

     

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    I have no doubt there will be a NHL season, maybe not a full 82 games , a compromise. Leagues look at each other , NFL and NBA learnt from the last NHL lockout what the consequences of a lost season can mean.  NHL has been there and both sides don't want that to happen again.

    How many times during the NFL and NBA lockout did I hear it's not looking good for a season ? Heard a lot on the NBA's lockout . I don't follow the NBA that much but if I would have believed the media the NBA season 2011/12 was done and only a grand scale miracle saved them.

    I like what I heard from Bob McKenzie this morning on the radio;  He said he has trouble understanding the players when they complain about giving too much the last CBA and this time around they'll stand their ground .  Then if that CBA they gave up too much (as they claim ) why did they play under that CBA and wanted to start with the same CBA ?

    Players had it good and even of the last NHL proposal they'll be rich . Their agents will play their game and make them lots of money, no worries there.

    Why doesn't the PA put out a vote to all the players ? I think we'll then see how united they really are, not just the millionaires the media gets to speak to.

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    This. I think we tend to oversimplify the issues here, partly because we aren't party to the accounting, but "honour the contracts" has become as simplistic as '50/50 is fair'. When the contracts themselves say that they can be adjusted as a consequence of collective bargaining, then...how is seeking to adjust them in collective bargaining not honouring the contract? It's like some tool trying to sue you because he ignored your "beware of dog sign" and tried to break into your house. You were warned....

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from red75. Show red75's posts

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    Book, we live in a world where 7 seismologists can get convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to prison for six years each because they said "the likelihood of a major earthquake is improbable, but can not be excluded because the predicting of earthquakes is not an exact science" and then an earthquake happens a week later, so for some reason that lands them in prison - the whole world seems to be made up of tools like the tool who ignores the beware  of dog sign, or those who ignore the fine print in hockey contracts.

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    In response to skater68's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     A lockout is unnecessary for honest negotiations.

     

    Honest negotiations in good faith would have been in place.

    Instead of the money hungry owners trying to bully their way into an unreasonable contract

    [/QUOTE]


     

    Mark Cuban loves basketball.  Do you think he'd let the players walk all over him?

    Nope.

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    In response to Bookboy007's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    This. I think we tend to oversimplify the issues here, partly because we aren't party to the accounting, but "honour the contracts" has become as simplistic as '50/50 is fair'. When the contracts themselves say that they can be adjusted as a consequence of collective bargaining, then...how is seeking to adjust them in collective bargaining not honouring the contract? It's like some tool trying to sue you because he ignored your "beware of dog sign" and tried to break into your house. You were warned....

    [/QUOTE]


     

    I think you're spot on regarding the "oversimplification part.  Red also gave a real life example(as sickening as it is) of how things actually work sometimes, in real life.

    Here's more simplicity to chew on.

    with a 50-50 split, the real value of an NHL franchise will skyrocket...overnight.  Whether the team makes money or not...doesn't matter(all smoke and mirrors anyway), the "selling" value for any of the original 30, will immediately be increased by 10's of millions.  As one poster wisely pointed out, NHL teams will be "turn key businesses".  A money train, impossible to derail by even the dumbest owner.

    At risk of untold wrath from those that disagree, I would suggest the greatest amount of oversimplification is coming from the pro-owner side.  "They own the company, it's their right to pay whatever they want", seems to be the argument.  I agree with that statement, however, the owners aren't arguing to "pay what they want"...they're arguing to take what's basically left of that.... away.

    At a 50-50 split...in all  reality, in about 2 years max...it won't be Sidney Crosby who is the highest paid "employee" in the NHL........It'll be Gary Bettman.  He's darn near there now.(8 mil currently, and his salary has more than doubled since the last lockout).

    If the "game" just can't afford these salaries, you'd think the owners would have the same sense of "economics" for all of their employees.

     

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

    Re: NHL tables new offer

     "At a 50-50 split...in all  reality, in about 2 years max...it won't be Sidney Crosby who is the highest paid "employee" in the NHL........It'll be Gary Bettman.  He's darn near there now.(8 mil currently, and his salary has more than doubled since the last lockout).

    If the "game" just can't afford these salaries, you'd think the owners would have the same sense of "economics" for all of their employees."

     

    ]


    Well said

    Mediocrity at the top in the NHL is far too prevalent. There seems to be an inability or an unwillingness to put out an effort to run their business using fundamental business practices .

    The easy way out to make money for these types in cut salaries of the workers.

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

    Re: nhl tables new offer

    Interesting, if Seguin is signed to a 6 year contract worth aproximately 6 million a year in a contract and he has the right to think it is a six year contract worth 6 million, in the real world (Dartmarth vs. NH).  Ok, now a CBA (contract) clause states his contract can be modified if the HRR status is changed.  Well, it looks like it could change.  Parentheitcally a contract superceding a contract.  Then why would it be "incredible" to think that the owners are manipultating the circumstances to roll back salaries for self serving purposes?  They are! My point Book et al., is why don't they then offer a clause to allow players to change the years of the individual players contract?  Why, cause it is in their best interest!  Self serving! So to wit, if the owners can act in self interest (yes with a contract that can be modified by a new CBA) then why not change other aspects of the contract to benefit the individual player?  An element of control over negioatiations is involved here from the 2004 CBA that must be addressed by the NHLPA in their negiotiations with the NHL.  Why is that hard to understand!?  They have a right to disagree.  It is called free enterprize.  

    Look above to have a picture of my personal view.   

     

Share