905 replies to this topic

[cusimano_brothers]

Talks begin Friday; let the games begin!

[frankgrimes]

I hope, Fehr will wipe the floor with this stupid commisioner and some of the "play it cheap because others are paying for us" owners.


Last time owners got what they wanted and now their *own* ideas aren't good enough any longer?

Screw them, I'll side with Fehr and the NHLPA, lets go!

[Nightfall]

I hope, Fehr will wipe the floor with this stupid commisioner and some of the "play it cheap because others are paying for us" owners.


Last time owners got what they wanted and now their *own* ideas aren't good enough any longer?

Screw them, I'll side with Fehr and the NHLPA, lets go!

Christ.....

What we need are less people to side with one side or the other and more people who want to see BOTH sides work out a deal. Lets make sure as fans of the sport that we want to see an NHL season. To hell with one side over the other. Its a sport with 3.3 billion dollars of revenue. They should be able to work out a deal and not sacrifice part or all of the season. If there are any games lost, or a season lost, I will be blaming both sides equally for being idiots. After all, it was both sides that contributed to the last lockout.

[frankgrimes]

Sure it were both, but the owners celebrated like they "won" and well they got *everything* in the CBA.

Now they are saying it's not good enough anymore? Give me a break.

Fehr already said the players would be willing to accept status quo. This to screams another lockout > owners fault.

[Nightfall]

Sure it were both, but the owners celebrated like they "won" and well they got *everything* in the CBA.

Now they are saying it's not good enough anymore? Give me a break.

Fehr already said the players would be willing to accept status quo. This to screams another lockout > owners fault.

Actually, both sides celebrated because they got what they wanted in the last CBA. The league got "cost certainty" while the players got to keep their guaranteed contracts and early unrestricted free agency. The owners did get a little more, but that was to be expected.

Fehr has said that he would continue with the new CBA, and there is no indication that the league will initiate a lockout, which is good news. They can keep negotiating under the current CBA until a new one is hashed out. So to say that its a foregone conclusion that we will have a lockout is flawed thinking at this juncture.

One thing is certain, the CBA does need to be fixed a bit. Just like last year when players were making HUGE salaries, the pendulum has swung back the other way slightly. There needs to be realignment of the teams. The salary cap floor and ceiling needs to be adjusted a bit. To say the system is broken would be false, but it can be tweaked.

What we need less of are people willing to side with someone and more angry fans who are willing to yell at both sides. This is a two way street, and the players caved in last time, maybe its time for the owners to give up some of their profits to get some of the salary cap issues taken care of. It all depends on how flexible both sides are going to be in this process. To blame one side for a lockout is a stretch. I didn't blame the players for giving up a lot last time, and we lost a whole season. I blame both sides equally.

Edited by Nightfall, 27 June 2012 - 12:44 PM.

[frankgrimes]

We have to keep in mind this war is based on millionaires fighting billionaires. That said for sure it needs to be fixed a bit (lower the floor and increase the highest celling, get rid off revenue sharing...). Teams would be wise to spend on their own revenue, otherwise we will end up with more situations like New Jersey and Phoenix.

Being an angry fan won't help us, if there is a another lockout so be it, going to watch SEL, AHL and some lesser tiered leagues then would it suck? Sure but its not the end of the world. There are many reasons, why I'd rather side with the NHLPA than the owners but in the end we all want the same > another great season of hockey without losing games.

btw. how do you edit your postings using the mobile app on this site?

[cusimano_brothers]

From TSN:

The NHL season could start without a new labour agreement if both sides agree to continue talks beyond the Sept. 15 expiration of the current deal.
...

A rather unique approach; but, it's still up to the membership.

[Nightfall]

We have to keep in mind this war is based on millionaires fighting billionaires. That said for sure it needs to be fixed a bit (lower the floor and increase the highest celling, get rid off revenue sharing...). Teams would be wise to spend on their own revenue, otherwise we will end up with more situations like New Jersey and Phoenix.

Being an angry fan won't help us, if there is a another lockout so be it, going to watch SEL, AHL and some lesser tiered leagues then would it suck? Sure but its not the end of the world. There are many reasons, why I'd rather side with the NHLPA than the owners but in the end we all want the same > another great season of hockey without losing games.

btw. how do you edit your postings using the mobile app on this site?

You and I are in total agreement, except on the point of siding with the NHLPA. I won't side with either again this CBA. This is because they both hold the keys for getting a deal done. Its not like the NHLPA has no power in this situation and they are waiting on the league to make it happen. The NHLPA has the talent, and that is just as huge of a bargaining chip as the owners have. If there is a lockout, both sides will be at fault. Plain and simple.

[Nightfall]

NHL Players Association executive director Don Fehr said Wednesday "the players haven't considered what they would do on Sept. 15 or any other date if no agreement is in place."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=399382

Not really something to get excited about. Apparently Don Fehr isn't saying that they will play for sure, but that the possibility is there for them to play if there isn't a contract. It makes sense to me to play on and settle the contract beyond the 15th if it goes that far, but I am not in charge.

[Hatethedrake!]

At least so far both sides do not seem confrontational in any way. Back in 2004 both sides were very confrontational. I take this as a good sign.

[cusimano_brothers]

NHL Players Association executive director Don Fehr said Wednesday "the players haven't considered what they would do on Sept. 15 or any other date if no agreement is in place."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=399382

Apparently Don Fehr isn't saying that they will play for sure, but that the possibility is there for them to play if there isn't a contract.

There would be an agreement in place: the current agreement.
From a public relations standpoint, taking this stance borders on genius. IF NHLPA votes to enter next season without a new CBA and agrees to play under the current one, it backs the League into a corner and has the owners muttering to themselves "never saw this coming".

[cusimano_brothers]

NHL.

[vladdy16]

What about the NHL?

[cusimano_brothers]

From Winnipeg Free Press:

Fehr unveiled a 31-player negotiating committee that includes a true cross-section of the union's membership: recognizable faces in Henrik Zetterberg, Shea Weber and Shane Doan; journeymen in Dominic Moore, Alex Auld and Craig Adams; and even John Tavares, who is only 21 years old and just completed his entry-level contract.

[Nightfall]

There would be an agreement in place: the current agreement.
From a public relations standpoint, taking this stance borders on genius. IF NHLPA votes to enter next season without a new CBA and agrees to play under the current one, it backs the League into a corner and has the owners muttering to themselves "never saw this coming".

Thats a big IF.

I will agree that the league could look like the good guys here if they didn't initiate a lockout and the owners did. I know I would be on the players side if that happened.

[F.Michael]

There would be an agreement in place: the current agreement.
From a public relations standpoint, taking this stance borders on genius. IF NHLPA votes to enter next season without a new CBA and agrees to play under the current one, it backs the League into a corner and has the owners muttering to themselves "never saw this coming".

With the new cap set at $70.2 million - it'll put a smile on Holland's face (not to mention smiles on all free agents be it RFA, or UFA).

The only ones who'll be unhappy are those having a tough time meeting the cap floor; it's now up to $54.2 million.

I'm most certainly fine with the current CBA being extended to include the 2012/2013 season - however me thinks there's a growing number of owners/gm's who'll want to scrap the current CBA, and risk losing another season

Thats a big IF.

I will agree that the league could look like the good guys here if they didn't initiate a lockout and the owners did. I know I would be on the players side if that happened.

Right now with the cap set at $70.2 million the players should really push for an extension of the current CBA with the "promise" to work out a deal for the 2013/2014 season.

My guess is that it'll be a longshot that the BOG would accept this idea.

[cusimano_brothers]

Maybe this is stating the obvious, but...For the players to say that they would go beyond the deadline of the current agreement and possibly play games in the new season isn't enough; the Owners would have to be in agreement with that proposal (liability and insurance stuff would come into play here). If both sides are in agreement with that proposal, the message is usually loud and clear: that both sides want to hammer out a new agreement.

[haroldsnepsts]

Maybe this is stating the obvious, but...For the players to say that they would go beyond the deadline of the current agreement and possibly play games in the new season isn't enough; the Owners would have to be in agreement with that proposal (liability and insurance stuff would come into play here). If both sides are in agreement with that proposal, the message is usually loud and clear: that both sides want to hammer out a new agreement.

Exactly.

And honestly I can't see the owners agreeing to that. They call it a lockout for a reason.

[cusimano_brothers]

The League always knows what's best for it's fans.

[WizardOfOz30]

You and I are in total agreement, except on the point of siding with the NHLPA. I won't side with either again this CBA. This is because they both hold the keys for getting a deal done. Its not like the NHLPA has no power in this situation and they are waiting on the league to make it happen. The NHLPA has the talent, and that is just as huge of a bargaining chip as the owners have. If there is a lockout, both sides will be at fault. Plain and simple.

Thats a big IF.

I will agree that the league could look like the good guys here if they didn't initiate a lockout and the owners did. I know I would be on the players side if that happened.

I'm confused are you taking sides or not?


I do hope that they are serious about getting this worked out before the deadline. The summer is long enough without having to worry about part of the season not being played.