Where is the Loyalty?

[Aussie_Wing 354]

Nowadays 10 years is considered a very long time to stay at your job. Most people, at least in my generation (late 20's) change 3-4-5 years on average.

I really don't understand what your big hangup is. It's pro sports. It's a business. If Markov had a bad season, should Ilitch be expected to offer him a contract out of loyalty? Should the Red Wings have kept McCarty on the payroll after the lockout, out of loyalty? The answer to both those questions is no. The owners show no loyalty to the players. They have to run their organization in a way that's the best for the team, and the bottom line.

Likewise, the players are going to what's best for them. They know that they can be cut, or not offered a contract, or be an injury any from reitirement, and that there's always someone younger, faster, and hungier trying to take their spot on a team. Why should they show any loyalty to an organization? I can understand older guys taking a paycut to go to a Cup contending team if they've never won the Cup, or old guys sticking around if they're close to retirement have kids in school or something like that.

As Red Wings fans, we've been lucky to have so many guys stick around with the Wings for lunch a long period of time. But that's the exception in the league, not the rule.

Well, Markov HAS been offered a new contract but declined. As much as you might think so it's not THAT big of a deal to me. It’s just that IMO it doesn’t say much about a person’s character if they go from one team to another, without even considering whether it will get them close to a Cup, just so they’ve got a bit more money.

As I said, not a huge deal, just something that irritates me.

[shanny is the man 0]

The color is loyalty is Green.

[shanny is the man 0]

The color is loyalty is Green.

[OsGOD 3]

another thin'.. if E'eryone is no hung up on loyalty... why the obessi'e need t' change the team t' get new players each second o' the day? Do you feel loyal by askin' those players you co'et t' break their loyalty t' their former teams? I mean come on get o'er yoursel'es... You be askin' the players t' be loyal t' certain organizations when in fact all you be loyal t' is the "w" word... Winnin', shiver me timbers!

[Spongewingredpants 75]

loyalty goes both ways. we told Lang and Calder to take a hike. Maybe in retrospect....

[Bad Vlad Forever 1]

It was said in the 2nd post, loyalty in the NHL died with Yzerman. The NHL is now like the rest of professional sports where players go where the money is. It's just a reflection of american sports. Just took a few more years to catch up.

[NeverForgetMac25 483]

It was said in the 2nd post, loyalty in the NHL died with Yzerman. The NHL is now like the rest of professional sports where players go where the money is. It's just a reflection of american sports. Just took a few more years to catch up.

It's funny you mention that, because all of a sudden some huge name Soccer players in Europe aren't being loyal anymore either. It's not typical of American sports......its typical of sports with a lot of money.

[Guest jaytan]

There's loyalty in the NHL.

Loyalty to agents.

Loyalty to the players association.

Maybe even loyalty to Brian Burke.

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Fans are funny.

Loyalty to whom? The Owners? The same Owners who voted unanimously to "starve" the Players into accepting a salary cap, by not allowing them to play, at ALL, until they gave in to the Owners demands? Because it was, as we can all see NOW, the sole fault of the PLAYERS for the state the NHL found itself in. Ayup.....you betcha.....

Loyalty to the GM's? Ask Dave Andreychuk where the Loyalty has gone. Ask Dallas Drake. I'm sure they'd like to know, too.

Loyalty to the fans? Those very same fans who, only a few short years ago, were screaming "Greedy!" and "Selfish!", and calling for scabs, stating that at least SCABS would play with some heart, some desire, unlike the spoiled, greedy, rich pigs in the NHLPA, and then rubbing their hands in glee when the Players finally gave in and accepted the Cap, (now, it appears, under less than "official" terms), because they were so glad that those greedy bast@rds had finally gotten their comeuppance?

The Owners got what they wanted. So did the vast majority of NHL fans.

Welcome to the New NHL.

One wonders if fans in small markets like Buffalo, Edmonton, and Atlanta are still patting themselves on the backs because their Teams NOW have a level playing field, without the Flyers, Leafs and Rangers being able to ****** up all the "good" players.

Ayup.....fans sure are funny.....

[Viperar 16]

Loyalty be a two way street... Guys wants more than one year so they go t' th' crew that offers more than one year t' them...

its funny, cause everyone here always complains about how long contracts and signings are, but then if we offer them a 1-2 year deal, oh look, they go elsewhere. Dilemma huh?

[OsGOD 3]

its funny, cause everyone here always complains about how long contracts and signings are, but then if we offer them a 1-2 year deal, oh look, they go elsewhere. Dilemma huh?

Aye, 'ery much a delimia... and as Me stated abo'e... fans Do Not want loyalty from players... they want a Win... why else would the same people bitchin' about loyalty o' players Want another player t' lea'e (becomin' unloyal) t' their current team by signin' har? It is an odd way that fans contradtict themsel'es constantly.

bert was a 'ictim o' lea'in' teams because o' trades... he was nah unloyal t' them. Then when he wants t' stay pat for a long time he gets a one year bulls*** contract.

Edited July 3, 2007 by OsGOD

[Houdini 0]

So what? It's a percentage. If you made $10,000/year would you take the opportunity to make $11,000/year? The same goes for a larger amount, if you made $5 million/year would you take the opportunity to make $5.5 million/year?

Please. I made decent money and had the opportunity to make about $15,000 - $20,000 more. Now, I make DECENT money, but I still have to worry about retirement and my family (paying for my kid's college, etc). However, I stayed at my current job because they decided to pay me about $7,500 more. Sure, I could have made more at the other job, but I LIKE my current job, and I'm not exactly hurting for money.

But it was still a hard decision because money is still an issue. But if I was making millions of dollars and I had the opportunity to make a million more, who cares? My family would have already been taken care of ten fold, as well as my retirement. I certainly have no desire to drive a $300,000 car, or own a private jet, so what would I do with all of that extra money?

Sounds like most of you would do whatever it takes to make more and more money, no matter how much you already have. That's cool, it's your life. But to actually compare pay increases for someone who's trying to make ends meet and a multi-millionaire who never has to worry about money (unless they are stupid enough to waste it all) is just plain dumb. There is nothing to compare.

- Houdini

[Aussie_Wing 354]

Please. I made decent money and had the opportunity to make about $15,000 - $20,000 more. Now, I make DECENT money, but I still have to worry about retirement and my family (paying for my kid's college, etc). However, I stayed at my current job because they decided to pay me about $7,500 more. Sure, I could have made more at the other job, but I LIKE my current job, and I'm not exactly hurting for money.

But it was still a hard decision because money is still an issue. But if I was making millions of dollars and I had the opportunity to make a million more, who cares? My family would have already been taken care of ten fold, as well as my retirement. I certainly have no desire to drive a $300,000 car, or own a private jet, so what would I do with all of that extra money?

Sounds like most of you would do whatever it takes to make more and more money, no matter how much you already have. That's cool, it's your life. But to actually compare pay increases for someone who's trying to make ends meet and a multi-millionaire who never has to worry about money (unless they are stupid enough to waste it all) is just plain dumb. There is nothing to compare.

- Houdini

Excellent post.

[Dixie Wingslover 0]

Fans are funny.

Loyalty to whom? The Owners? The same Owners who voted unanimously to "starve" the Players into accepting a salary cap, by not allowing them to play, at ALL, until they gave in to the Owners demands? Because it was, as we can all see NOW, the sole fault of the PLAYERS for the state the NHL found itself in. Ayup.....you betcha.....

Loyalty to the GM's? Ask Dave Andreychuk where the Loyalty has gone. Ask Dallas Drake. I'm sure they'd like to know, too.

Loyalty to the fans? Those very same fans who, only a few short years ago, were screaming "Greedy!" and "Selfish!", and calling for scabs, stating that at least SCABS would play with some heart, some desire, unlike the spoiled, greedy, rich pigs in the NHLPA, and then rubbing their hands in glee when the Players finally gave in and accepted the Cap, (now, it appears, under less than "official" terms), because they were so glad that those greedy bast@rds had finally gotten their comeuppance?

The Owners got what they wanted. So did the vast majority of NHL fans.

Welcome to the New NHL.

One wonders if fans in small markets like Buffalo, Edmonton, and Atlanta are still patting themselves on the backs because their Teams NOW have a level playing field, without the Flyers, Leafs and Rangers being able to ****** up all the "good" players.

Ayup.....fans sure are funny.....

Be careful who you lump in here..... not all fans are like that..... just like not all players are money motivated, cash grabbers...... I for one fan.... was well aware of what was going to happen and agreed with the PLAYERS. I never forgot it was the OWNERS ( Bettman) that were responsible for the play stoppage. That is why it was called a LOCKOUT - not a STRIKE. The entire fault lies with greedy management that is now shooting itself in the foot. The whole reason there was a gag order on the owners during the LOCKOUT was that some owners- ( like Ilitch) were vocal in their opposition to the FIRST LOCKOUT and that ended it before Bettman could get the owners what he wanted...... the NHLPA on it's knees. Most of the reason that Detroit could not deal with Bert was the CAP - new MHL style...... I would bet that he could have gotten a deal he was looking for in Detroit, if not for the Cap considerations.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Terrible comparison. So because someone might want/need a change of direction in their job once every 10 odd years that’s the same as changing NHL club from season to season? Give me a break. Markov’s been in Detroit for 12 months, there’s a difference between changing jobs because it’s become stale and changing NHL clubs after 12 months because you’re flat out greedy.

WTF. Okay dude, I hereby nominate you Master of the Universe. Why? Because you obviously feel you know what's best for everybody, especially NHL players. Since you are now the Supreme Being on this Earth you can tell everybody where to work, whom to work for and how long they have to stay there to make you satisfied.

Terrible comparison? Hardly. What's terrible is your position on this issue. You don't like that they change teams. Well too ******* bad. Get over yourself. You're no better than anybody else and you don't know what's best for everybody else so instead making statements like "players who change teams from year to year don't deserve any respect" why don't you button it up because s*** like that makes you look like an egomaniac. It's your opinion that they should stay with one team longer. That's a personal preference that has no real baring on who these players are, what they should do that's best for them or anything else. It's just what you want. Repeat, GET OVER YOURSELF.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Please. I made decent money and had the opportunity to make about $15,000 - $20,000 more. Now, I make DECENT money, but I still have to worry about retirement and my family (paying for my kid's college, etc). However, I stayed at my current job because they decided to pay me about $7,500 more. Sure, I could have made more at the other job, but I LIKE my current job, and I'm not exactly hurting for money.

But it was still a hard decision because money is still an issue. But if I was making millions of dollars and I had the opportunity to make a million more, who cares? My family would have already been taken care of ten fold, as well as my retirement. I certainly have no desire to drive a $300,000 car, or own a private jet, so what would I do with all of that extra money?

Sounds like most of you would do whatever it takes to make more and more money, no matter how much you already have. That's cool, it's your life. But to actually compare pay increases for someone who's trying to make ends meet and a multi-millionaire who never has to worry about money (unless they are stupid enough to waste it all) is just plain dumb. There is nothing to compare.

- Houdini

Yeah, I guess since they make so much money they should have to forego their rights as unrestricted free agents. Hey Matt Schnieder, you want to play on the coast in beautiful weather with the defending champs? TOO BAD, you're not allowed because you make millions so YOU MUST STAY IN DETROIT FOREVER, BWAHAHAHA!

What if a player doesn't like it here? And let's not forget a very basic concept here. Who is to say you should accept an offer from your current team if in your mind its too low? What if Kenny offered Lidstrom 2 million instead of 7 million last contract and he bolted? Would we hate on Nick for being disloyal?

You and Aussie dude need to get your heads out of your asses already. Just because you make a s***load of money doesn't mean you give up your right to work where you want, for whom you want and for how long you ******* WANT TO!!!!!

And dude, you don't make decent money. If you did you'd grasp this whole thing quite easily. As it stands this rather banal topic has you completely baffled and has poor Aussie vexed beyond all get out. Being a pro athlete means making a s***load and not having to worry about affording your kids tuition or paying your mortgage. It can also mean buying expensive freaking cars. So what. Those are personal choices that even though you have no desire for (yeah, who wouldn't want to drive a Ferrari if it was a drop in the bucket to you personally) it still doesn't mean the players have to stick with any one team. They've earned the right to play for whoever they want. The amount of money means absolutely nothing. Seriously, if these guys made 40-50 thousand a year would your argument be any different? No, you'd still harp on them for going somewhere to make an extra grand or 2. Repeat: GET OVER YOURSELVES!

[poolerman 0]

Couldn't have said it better myself...Detroit is a classy organization, & we're fortunate to have a group of core players whom are the epitome of class as well.

Markov should realise that the Wings helped make him look good this past season. Don't get me wrong - Danny is a solid Dman, but I'd question his effectiveness this upcoming season without Nick Lidstrom as his defense partner.

The redwings are built off drafting...there is no loyalty unless your winning

see alot of guys sticking around chicago ??? If we weren'twinng no one would be around

still wouldlike to have markov I like Rafalski but $6 million ???

leads me to believe we are about to watch Lidstrom's last year as a redwing

bertuzzi for $4 million a year....not $ 2.5-3.0 as some 'dreamers' were hoping for good ridence

lookat the future...everyone overpays for at least 1 free agent

[Kp-Wings 3]

Loyalty hasn't existed in this town since Fedorov left.

Yeah, I said it.

[Houdini 0]

Yeah, I guess since they make so much money they should have to forego their rights as unrestricted free agents. Hey Matt Schnieder, you want to play on the coast in beautiful weather with the defending champs? TOO BAD, you're not allowed because you make millions so YOU MUST STAY IN DETROIT FOREVER, BWAHAHAHA!

What if a player doesn't like it here? And let's not forget a very basic concept here. Who is to say you should accept an offer from your current team if in your mind its too low? What if Kenny offered Lidstrom 2 million instead of 7 million last contract and he bolted? Would we hate on Nick for being disloyal?

You and Aussie dude need to get your heads out of your asses already. Just because you make a s***load of money doesn't mean you give up your right to work where you want, for whom you want and for how long you ******* WANT TO!!!!!

And dude, you don't make decent money. If you did you'd grasp this whole thing quite easily. As it stands this rather banal topic has you completely baffled and has poor Aussie vexed beyond all get out. Being a pro athlete means making a s***load and not having to worry about affording your kids tuition or paying your mortgage. It can also mean buying expensive freaking cars. So what. Those are personal choices that even though you have no desire for (yeah, who wouldn't want to drive a Ferrari if it was a drop in the bucket to you personally) it still doesn't mean the players have to stick with any one team. They've earned the right to play for whoever they want. The amount of money means absolutely nothing. Seriously, if these guys made 40-50 thousand a year would your argument be any different? No, you'd still harp on them for going somewhere to make an extra grand or 2. Repeat: GET OVER YOURSELVES!

Wow, apparently you never even read my post. Amazing. So let me re-iterate for you:

1) Never in my post did I say players should not be free to work for whoever they want, whenever they want, and for how long they want.

2) Never in my post did I say that I think Bertuzzi or any other Wing left because of money and not other reasons.

3) Comparing someone who makes enough that they don't need to worry about the future to someone who is living week to week trying to make ends meet is not a fair comparison.

I for one, and many others, would rate teammates, how good the team was, how happy my family was living in that area, etc, over money when I'm already making millions a year. There's so much more important things than money.

Now, if you'd like to have a rational discussion on what I've actually posted, I'm all for it. But I swear your last post was meant to be a reply to someone else's post...

- Houdini

[OsGOD 3]

I for one, and many others, would rate teammates, how good the team was, how happy my family was living in that area, etc, over money when I'm already making millions a year. There's so much more important things than money.

and signin' a one year deal is Not goin' t' satisfy your family because they might just as well have t' up and lea'e the followin' summer.

Compare that t' someone who hates flyin'. They go on 'acation for a week or so... sure they have fun the first few days but then the reality that in a few more days they will have t' get back on that dreaded plane.

Same can be said about 1 year offers, if you be tryin' t' find stability for your family.. do you take the 1 year and possibly out deal or do you take the multi-year deal?

Savvy?

Edited July 3, 2007 by OsGOD

[Nightfall 871]

The new NHL is less about loyalty and more about the all mighty dollar. However, there are new factors in play that help teams retain their players for less money. The NHL is a market where there are great employees all looking for a job position. If you find yourself in a good job, where it is a great environment, then you probably won't go anywhere unless they can't afford to pay you what you think you are worth. Then, on top of that, you have 29 other companies calling looking for your services.

Look at what NHL teams are doing to attract players to their organizations. Toronto made a video last year to ship to unrestricted free agents talking about the culture in Toronto, benefits, and so on. I believe Detroit was considering doing the same thing. Point is that these teams should be trying to sell their job to these unrestricted free agents they are trying to bring in.

Every team has had their share of loyal players. Look at Rob Neidermayer who has been with the Ducks for years. Yzerman and Draper from the Wings. Iginla from the Flames. There are a lot of journeymen out there that are less about the place they play and more about the money.

Then you have the chance to win a championship. Some of the players who are serious about that don't look at clubs like Florida and Chicago. They want to go to teams like the Red Wings, Ducks, Devils, etc. The ones that can hopefully bring them closer to winning a title.

In conclusion, some players are all about loyalty. Some are all about money. Some are about a chance to win. You aren't going to find a team of all loyal player who will play together for years. Just won't happen.

[#19=Legend 29]

Doesn’t anyone believe in sticking around and staying with one team for a decent amount of time anymore? Take Markov for example, “Defenseman Danny Markov rejected a contract offer from the Wings last week at the entry draft in Columbus and is not expected to return.â€Â

We gave him a healthy salary for 2006/07 despite the fact he’s injury prone, and yet he rejects our offer probably to get a bit more $$$ from a mediocre team. There is just no loyalty in sports anymore and it's sickening. It’s all about the money.

thats one thing that i hate when players do that type of s***. that is why i like Yzerman and Lidstrom so much.

[Guest GordieSid&Ted]

Wow, apparently you never even read my post. Amazing. So let me re-iterate for you:

1) Never in my post did I say players should not be free to work for whoever they want, whenever they want, and for how long they want.

2) Never in my post did I say that I think Bertuzzi or any other Wing left because of money and not other reasons.

3) Comparing someone who makes enough that they don't need to worry about the future to someone who is living week to week trying to make ends meet is not a fair comparison.

I for one, and many others, would rate teammates, how good the team was, how happy my family was living in that area, etc, over money when I'm already making millions a year. There's so much more important things than money.

Now, if you'd like to have a rational discussion on what I've actually posted, I'm all for it. But I swear your last post was meant to be a reply to someone else's post...

- Houdini

Well, I guess I was reading between the lines. When you come out and say your family, their happiness and the "so much more important things than money" comments it lead me to believe that you were looking down on the players for leaving. It appeared to me you were insinuating that certain players (that you didn't name) left solely for money (which, how would you know that). That's how I took your post. Anyway, Aussie seems to think you're spot on with your comments and thus far that guy hasn't been right about anything so I put two and two together. I guess I made a mistake. But it sure sounded like you were implying that you would have better reasons for staying or leaving than the guys we're talking about even though we're not naming names. Ssshhhh!

My real beef is with Aussie, he doesn't know why they left and just states that players who jump from team to team don't deserve respect. I take umbrage with that. If you're implying what I thought you were implying then I meant every word I said. If not, then my apologies. Everybody will have their own reasons for staying with a team or not. Some will be more "noble" than others. In the end though, its nobody's business why anybody leaves and I don't think any player should be blamed for taking more money. That's the bottom line. I don't care if they are making thousands, millions or billions. If somebody offers you more and you have no problems taking it, then nobody else should have a problem with you taking it. The fact that some people cry and ***** about it and diss on the players is ludicrous in my opinion. Maybe you weren't doing that but that's the tone I got from your posts.

[Guest jaytan]

Please. I made decent money and had the opportunity to make about $15,000 - $20,000 more. Now, I make DECENT money, but I still have to worry about retirement and my family (paying for my kid's college, etc). However, I stayed at my current job because they decided to pay me about $7,500 more. Sure, I could have made more at the other job, but I LIKE my current job, and I'm not exactly hurting for money.

But it was still a hard decision because money is still an issue. But if I was making millions of dollars and I had the opportunity to make a million more, who cares? My family would have already been taken care of ten fold, as well as my retirement. I certainly have no desire to drive a $300,000 car, or own a private jet, so what would I do with all of that extra money?

Sounds like most of you would do whatever it takes to make more and more money, no matter how much you already have. That's cool, it's your life. But to actually compare pay increases for someone who's trying to make ends meet and a multi-millionaire who never has to worry about money (unless they are stupid enough to waste it all) is just plain dumb. There is nothing to compare.

- Houdini

Well, are you pressured hard by your colleagues or your union to leave and go elsewhere for more money,

even if you like your current situation and understand that your employer has a limit to the salary they can give you? Do you have an agent shopping you around the market, maybe more aggressively than you'd like?

It's similar, but I think it's more complicated than "These guys are multi-millionaires, how can they possibly care about a couple of hundred thousand bucks?".

[RedRockit 0]

There's a couple of considerations that have maybe been overlooked, as thought-provoking and spot-on as much of the debate raging here has been.

For one: These days even high school athletes, if they can, jump to schools that they think will best contend for championships and hence, put them into consideration for top college scholarship $$. Why do they, or more importantly, their parents, go to this trouble-- which often entails moving, changing jobs, expensive tuition, or at best, long commutes to schools?

Because they want to ensure a better future for their family, pure and simple. Why should an NHL player be expected to feel any differently about the career which supports their own family? That same career that, for many, effectively ends in their mid-30s and may be the only thing they can do well... not every former player is a savvy investor, a viable newscaster, or even a good real-estate or car salesman or bar owner. Add to that that a great many players suffer physically and have pricey bills relating to injuries incurred on the ice... and the dawn of understanding why a player might choose to take the best money an run begins.

(and BTW, though a yearly salary of, say, $4.5 million sounds paradisiacal to most of us struggling to make the rent this month, it may surprise you to find that many millionaires have the same problem. It's a fact of human nature that the more you make the more you spend. 'S'truth!)

The other thing I'd like to mention is that, for many pro athletes, the salary they can command is enormously tied into their pride in themselves as a player. Call it egotism if you want-- a great deal of it may well be, but personally I wouldn't give tuppence for a player wholly without ego!

One final consideration for players jumping ship: they may just be looking for a better fit for their style, a happier work environment. If you dislike coming to work every day (for whatever reason: don't like the boss, don't mesh with your colleagues, hate the climate/city,feel underpaid, underappreciated, UnderDawg, etc), then you won't be a productive employee.

You won't give the company your best feeling your worst.