STRIKE OVER?

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to bim09's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And talk about 2 different takes on how negotiations were going.

    Fehr looked calm, cool and collected while throwing out his bullzhit spiel on how he thought they were close to an agreement.

    Bettman looked haggard, buldgey-eyed and downright pissed with every part of his body herky-jerking all over the place.

    I almost felt when Bettman was talking he was going to lose it or drop right on the spot.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's how big business looks when it get's beat at its own game.

    [/QUOTE]


    More like - thats how they look when they're about to drop the hammer on you.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Because as explained, the $100m extra that was put on the table by the owners was tied into to it being a 10 year deal ( with a 8 year out clause by both ). Not a 6-7 year deal. It would have raised the rates they had to pay out at.

    It was a take it or leave it package deal. Not a "I'll have these three and let's negotiate these other three deal".

    [/QUOTE]

    Just like the first offer on Oct. 16th that was "the best they could do".  With Bettman saying as much.  

    Also mentioning it would consider a 6 year deal.  "Commissioner Bettman said the League's offer -- which he termed a "long-term" deal -- includes a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenue for the duration of the deal. NHLPA Executive Director Donald Fehr revealed the League's offer calls for "at least" a six-year CBA."

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    So they added 100 million and watered it down by adding 4 more years.  Essential nullifying any percievable concession.

     

    It's the shell game and Fehr called them on it.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to bim09's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Because as explained, the $100m extra that was put on the table by the owners was tied into to it being a 10 year deal ( with a 8 year out clause by both ). Not a 6-7 year deal. It would have raised the rates they had to pay out at.

    It was a take it or leave it package deal. Not a "I'll have these three and let's negotiate these other three deal".

    [/QUOTE]

    Just like the first offer on Oct. 16th that was "the best they could do".  With Bettman saying as much.  

    Also mentioning it would consider a 6 year deal.  "Commissioner Bettman said the League's offer -- which he termed a "long-term" deal -- includes a 50-50 split of hockey-related revenue for the duration of the deal. NHLPA Executive Director Donald Fehr revealed the League's offer calls for "at least" a six-year CBA."

    [/QUOTE]

    Uggh . You still don't get it.

    In negotiating, offers are taken on and off the table as negotiations proceed. What was said in the past has nothing to do with the NHL's present bundled package which is  tied together. 

    It was put out as a package. A 6 year deal was not in on the equation. It was a yes or no answer on this bundled offer. No negotiating. If the NHLPA wouldn't take this package the NHL would take it off the table. And they did.

    There is no choosing sides in my info for you. It's what was reported to have happened.

    ( Slap on the side of bim's head ) Pay attention next time.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to bim09's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    And talk about 2 different takes on how negotiations were going.

    Fehr looked calm, cool and collected while throwing out his bullzhit spiel on how he thought they were close to an agreement.

    Bettman looked haggard, buldgey-eyed and downright pissed with every part of his body herky-jerking all over the place.

    I almost felt when Bettman was talking he was going to lose it or drop right on the spot.

    [/QUOTE]

    That's how big business looks when it get's beat at its own game.

    [/QUOTE]

    You're not very good at reading facial expressions. Stick to crotches.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    You're not very good at reading facial expressions. Stick to crotches.

    [/QUOTE]

    Second.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to bim09's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:
    [QUOTE]
    Yeah, a 50/50 split should be good enough. Heck, a 25% share should be good enough for these players. I honestly cannot believe that these guys are trying to hold the line on player contract length and a few other smaller details. I honestly hope that this is true:

    @Real_ESPNLeBrun: Bettman says the Make Whole provision in its entirety as a concept is OFF the table.


    Now the players are going to feel the sting of getting too big for their britches. Sometimes, you have to say "yes". It's like having your girlfriend finally bring her twin sister to bed with you, but you fouling it all up because you demanded to record the ordeal.

    Kel, the owners that signed the longer term deals (see: Minnesota) are one of the reasons for demanding the lenght cap. The other, of course, is to stop players and agents from asking for deals that long. The length being capped at 5 years is logical. How many contracts have been for more than seven years, anyway? Less than 20 I'd guess. Maybe even less than 10. And yet, the players are going to hang onto the extended length with all of their might. SO DUMB.

    [/QUOTE]

    Star players get that kind of deal because they are a rare commodity.  The length of contract primarily pertains to them.  And i support it.

     

    What i don't get is why didn't the owners just make a counter offer for 6 or 7 years and call it a day?  I dont think it a stretch to say the PA probably would have agreed to it.

    [/QUOTE]

    Because as explained, the $100m extra that was put on the table by the owners was tied into to it being a 10 year deal ( with a 8 year out clause by both ). Not a 6-7 year deal. It would have raised the rates they had to pay out at.

    It was a take it or leave it package deal. Not a "I'll have these three and let's negotiate these other three deal".

    [/QUOTE]


    and that's the high school math I was talking about.  Either the players (Sidney) were too dumb to crunch the numbers when he said he was very optimistic or that was one hell of an acting job !  Fehr on the otherhand is not dumb, great actor and did this for a reason.

     

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Uggh . You still don't get it.

    In negotiating, offers are taken on and off the table as negotiations proceed. What was said in the past has nothing to do with the NHL's present bundled package which is  tied together. 

    It was put out as a package. A 6 year deal was not in on the equation. It was a yes or no answer on this bundled offer. No negotiating. If the NHLPA wouldn't take this package the NHL would take it off the table. And they did.

    There is no choosing sides in my info for you. It's what was reported to have happened.

    ( Slap on the side of bim's head ) Pay attention next time.

    [/QUOTE]


    Dude, i'm not gonna argue with you.  I know how the bargaining process goes.  No offer is a best I can do offer.  As proven by the owners willingness to move on the term of the CBA and the added $100 million.

     

    And in the spirit of Christmas I'll give you a little math lesson:  Under the first deal, probably 6+2, the deal was giving the players $35.2 million. The current offer was 8+2 totaling 37.5 million with 18% going to pensions. The difference of 2 million over an extra 2 years.  Not much concession there.

     

    You should stick to NHL2012.

     

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to Chowdahkid-'s comment:[/QUOTE] Uggh . You still don't get it.

    In negotiating, offers are taken on and off the table as negotiations proceed. What was said in the past has nothing to do with the NHL's present bundled package which is  tied together. 

    It was put out as a package. A 6 year deal was not in on the equation. It was a yes or no answer on this bundled offer. No negotiating. If the NHLPA wouldn't take this package the NHL would take it off the table. And they did.

    There is no choosing sides in my info for you. It's what was reported to have happened. [QUOTE]

    There were multiple proposals sent back n forth between the two parties on Wednesday, no reporting of take it or leave it. I also have not seen any reports that the owners last proposal Thursday was a "take it or leave it", Bettman's statement was the first and last that I saw a statement of the "make whole" is now gone.

    This is twice now that the owners have walked away from an NHLPA counter offer without any mention of a "take it or leave it" stance. Most NHL fans all over the social media right now are still pondering "Why didn't the owners counter ?".

    And I am not disagreeing that the owners Thursday offer was bad, I thought it was good. However I do question the owners negotiating skills. I agree that if the owners countered last night instead of leaving a voicemail that the NHLPA probably would have accepted.

    To walk away after three days of marathon negotiating with a voicemail is childish!

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to SanDogBrewin's comment:
    [

    To walk away after three days of marathon negotiating with a voicemail is childish!

    [/QUOTE

    I don't know how anyone could argue that comment much.  They are fairly close.  The haggling over these contracts still bugs me.  Both sides are insisting on something that "could" bite them on the ass.  The length shouldn't be an issue, just how it's paid annually.    There's a downside to both sides when renegotiating contracts every 5 or 7 years max.  You'd think these guys would realize that.

    This thing is now down to the best interests of about 15% of the players, and a smaller number of owners.



     

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    this thread

    headline:

    WRONG, it isn't a strike

    content of first post:

    WRONG, Burton was talking out of his ash

    Content thereafter improved as time went on.

    I hate this thread.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    Hey... here's the deal, we're offering you a 50/50 split on the multi billion dollar industry that we own. We'll handle all of the overhead (which is insanely costly). You just show up and play, and we'll take care of your every need. There will be an entire organization supporting you every step of the way. You'll all have the chance to become millionaires and be set for the rest of your life, some of you will make 50-100 million or more. We need to set some parameters on contract length and eligibility to control skyrocketing costs on our end. Additionally, we'd guarantee you this agreement stays in place for the next 10 years.

    Umm...no way. That's not fair to us because we're conceding too much from the last deal.

    OK...we asked you to come in - now your locked out.

    I heard the home depot in moose jaw is hiring. Or, you and your family can always live and work in eastern europe for less. Your call -

    oh yeah...and you know the 5 million you were supposed to get this year ??? Kiss it goodbye forever, we'll keep it and earn interest on it while your busy being treated unfairly -

     

     

     

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    The CBA was doomed the second the NHLPA hired Donald Fehr.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    don't read too much into tghe voicemail message,  NHL (Daly or Bettman) called and of course it was during Donald's presser, maybe Steve should have answered ?   It's all a script . Besides do we really know what was said on the voicemail ? 

     

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to jalvis's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The CBA was doomed the second the NHLPA hired Donald Fehr.

    [/QUOTE]


    I started a thread back then , didn't like it. I love when he mentions we offered to play under the old CBA while negociating.  Yes good idea, worked out great in baseball.  I recall how my Expos were having a dream season and in the middle of it they pulled the plug. 

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Stuke50. Show Stuke50's posts

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    Starting up a players/owned league. No rinks. No tv deals = small paycheques. Must be why we haven't heard any talk about the players starting up their own league. So. They better get a deal done with the present owners. It will still be a hell of a lot more dollars than a league of their own.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to BsLegion's comment:

    don't read too much into tghe voicemail message,  NHL (Daly or Bettman) called and of course it was during Donald's presser, maybe Steve should have answered ?   It's all a script . Besides do we really know what was said on the voicemail ?



    "Union special counsel Steve Fehr was stunned by the NHL's quick rejection of the players offer. He missed Daly's call that came during Donald Fehr's initial news conference.

     

    " Not only is it unusual, I would be hard-pressed to think of anything comparable in my experience," he said of the instant rejection. "

    Pierre LeBrun @Real_ESPNLeBrun
    "Fehr says NHL left a voicemail message saying NHLPA counter wasn't acceptable. No need to stick around today or Friday."

     

    What exactly were you looking for ? to catch a lie ?

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    The 5 year cap on new contracts " is the hill we'll die on ", is all you need to know on how further negotiations will go. I better break out my " Fistful of dollars", " For a few dollars more", and " The good,the bad, and the ugly " trilogy and hunker down for the weekend and see just how that works out.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from schlich. Show schlich's posts

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    Now the players are going to feel the sting of getting too big for their britches.  Sometimes, you have to say "yes".  It's like having your girlfriend finally bring her twin sister to bed with you, but you fouling it all up because you demanded to record the ordeal. 

     

    Awesome!

     

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    Wasn't the 5% max. increase(per contract year) another issue NOT agreed to by the NHLPA and still insisted upon by the NHL?

    From what I understand, the two side had agreed to: HRR $$$ split, age/service of UFA, 'make whole' provisions, entry level contract cap and length...but they are stuck on the players' contract length. Owners say 5 yrs max.(own teams' FA signings @ 7 yrs) and the NHLPA are OK for 8 yrs max(not sure if they had a provision for own team FAs).

    This seems close from this fan's point of view...how did it come crashing down so hard, so fast?

    Maybe Bettman didn't like Fehr leaking some things to the press in his early address?

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from Crowls2424. Show Crowls2424's posts

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    The press conferences are pure theater.  A contest of which side can comes across as more exasperated by the other.  Brutal.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    Well I've pretty much given up hope for the NHL this year - there's a good three-game hockey series in Boston this weekend, Blades vs. Alberta. I figure that will have to be enough to sate my appetite for Black and Gold this year. (waits for the inevitable shot from NAS).

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from NeelyOrrBourque. Show NeelyOrrBourque's posts

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    In response to BsLegion's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to jalvis's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The CBA was doomed the second the NHLPA hired Donald Fehr.

    [/QUOTE]


    I started a thread back then , didn't like it. I love when he mentions we offered to play under the old CBA while negociating.  Yes good idea, worked out great in baseball.  I recall how my Expos were having a dream season and in the middle of it they pulled the plug. 

     

    [/QUOTE]

    And they had quite the dream team too didn't they! I was choked over that too. I'm a Red Sox fan, but I thought it was criminal to what they did to the PO's that year.

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

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    As a diehard Expo's fan, I still haven't gotten over that.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from Stuke50. Show Stuke50's posts

    Re: STRIKE OVER?

    All I want for Christmas is an NHL league !!!  ( that plays hockey )   Think Santa is listening ? Or am I getting a lump of coal ?

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share