• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

uk_redwing

[Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Rate this topic

2,459 posts in this topic

TSN's Scott Cullen with the "elephant-in-the-room" tweet...

Lets put it this way....

If the shoe was on the other foot, and the players were making 43% while the owners were making 57%, how many people would be crying foul if the players went on strike in an attempt to get an even split of revenues? The ownership in that case would not be gaining anything either.

Edited by Nightfall
hillbillywingsfan and drwscc like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets put it this way....

If the shoe was on the other foot, and the players were making 43% while the owners were making 57%, how many people would be crying foul if the players went on strike in an attempt to get an even split of revenues? The ownership in that case would not be gaining anything either.

You take your logic elsewhere, good sir. There is no place for that here. This is a "Buttman is eeeeevil hurr hurr" board.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lets put it this way....

If the shoe was on the other foot, and the players were making 43% while the owners were making 57%, how many people would be crying foul if the players went on strike in an attempt to get an even split of revenues? The ownership in that case would not be gaining anything either.

You seem to be forgetting that the NHL's first offer (see July 13) was that exact same percentage, that you just "what-if'd"...

The NHL makes its first proposal to the NHL Players' Association in Toronto. The NHL wants the players' share of hockey-related revenue (HRR) reduced from 57 percent to 43 percent and include new definitions for HRR.

But what you're overlooking is the fact that the League is not only demanding that the players take less a share of the HRR pie (to say nothing of the fact that they're refusing to honor contracts already signed), they're also trying to impose massive restrictions on the player's contracting rights and free agency availability. The League is in a "take-take-take" mode, and has not been willing to concede anything to the PA as an incentive.

For instance, in 2004/05 the PA accepted a hard salary cap (which was a clear "win" for owners), and accepted that cap be tied to revenues (again, something the League insisted on), they still had things they could take away from the process as a "win" for their side. Most notably, the reduction in UFA age (was 31, dropped to 28 or 7 yrs) and the increase in the minimum salary (was $185,000, rose to $500,000 by deal's end).

So, it begs the "elephant in the room" question. What exactly has the League offered to the players as incentive? The right to come back and play again? If negotiation is a "give and take" process, then the League is only halfway involved in the process.

55fan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TSN's Scott Cullen with the "elephant-in-the-room" tweet...

The NHL is using the faulty logic that they've conceded a lot because they moved off their insane first proposal. I guess Daly would've preferred that Fehr's first counter was to remove salary cap. Then the players could've made the large concession of agreeing to the cap all over again. It would also likely mean we'd lose hockey for the whole year.

Instead, they started by accepting that the cap was here to stay. The players have moved from 57% to 50%. That doesn't count?

It's also not a coincidence that the league started with the ridiculous 43% demand, so 50/50 would actually seem like a concession by the NHL (a falsehood that people seem to be falling for) instead of what it actually is, the players making the large concession.

The league's concessions involve reducing the absurd demands they began with. The players concessions involve actually giving up millions of dollars.

55fan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what you're overlooking is the fact that the League is not only demanding that the players take less a share of the HRR pie (to say nothing of the fact that they're refusing to honor contracts already signed), they're also trying to impose massive restrictions on the player's contracting rights and free agency availability. The League is in a "take-take-take" mode, and has not been willing to concede anything to the PA as an incentive.

For instance, in 2004/05 the PA accepted a hard salary cap (which was a clear "win" for owners), and accepted that cap be tied to revenues (again, something the League insisted on), they still had things they could take away from the process as a "win" for their side. Most notably, the reduction in UFA age (was 31, dropped to 28 or 7 yrs) and the increase in the minimum salary (was $185,000, rose to $500,000 by deal's end).

So, it begs the "elephant in the room" question. What exactly has the League offered to the players as incentive? The right to come back and play again? If negotiation is a "give and take" process, then the League is only halfway involved in the process.

Exactly.

Every single element of every proposal is worse for the players. The league should hang tough on the back-diving restrictions because they prevent cap circumvention, but the other contract restrictions don't affect how much owners will spend on players. It only affects the allocation of those dollars among a franchise.

The league may have gotten less than the absurd amount they wanted at the start, but so far they're the ones who've gained everything in this negotiation. To claim they union doesn't want to concede anything is idiotic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The league's concessions involve reducing the absurd demands they began with. The players concessions involve actually giving up millions of dollars.

The league may have gotten less than the absurd amount they wanted at the start, but so far they're the ones who've gained everything in this negotiation. To claim they union doesn't want to concede anything is idiotic.

QFE, over and over again. Whether the PA accepted 43%, or 46%, or eventually accepts 50%, it's still a massive gain for the League, and a massive concession for the PA.

To be fair, I think the owners' desire to have a larger share of HRR is perfectly reasonable, which inevitably means the players will have to take a smaller share. And the owners are also perfectly reasonable to place restrictions on contracts to eliminate the "back-diving" practices. However, the league needs to soften it's demands to make something equitable for the players too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But what you're overlooking is the fact that the League is not only demanding that the players take less a share of the HRR pie (to say nothing of the fact that they're refusing to honor contracts already signed), they're also trying to impose massive restrictions on the player's contracting rights and free agency availability. The League is in a "take-take-take" mode, and has not been willing to concede anything to the PA as an incentive.

For instance, in 2004/05 the PA accepted a hard salary cap (which was a clear "win" for owners), and accepted that cap be tied to revenues (again, something the League insisted on), they still had things they could take away from the process as a "win" for their side. Most notably, the reduction in UFA age (was 31, dropped to 28 or 7 yrs) and the increase in the minimum salary (was $185,000, rose to $500,000 by deal's end).

So, it begs the "elephant in the room" question. What exactly has the League offered to the players as incentive? The right to come back and play again? If negotiation is a "give and take" process, then the League is only halfway involved in the process.

As I said before, if the shoe was on the other foot and the roles were reversed, the players would be take-take-taking while the owners would be giving. It is a very limited two way street when one side has a far superior deal than the other. Now, how much the side getting the weaker deal should give up, that is up for debate. When the players were raping the owners for 76% of the revenues, and they had to take a giant rollback, people were on the sides of the owners for the most part. I guess 57% is enough to swing things back in favor of players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

QFE, over and over again. Whether the PA accepted 43%, or 46%, or eventually accepts 50%, it's still a massive gain for the League, and a massive concession for the PA.

To be fair, I think the owners' desire to have a larger share of HRR is perfectly reasonable, which inevitably means the players will have to take a smaller share. And the owners are also perfectly reasonable to place restrictions on contracts to eliminate the "back-diving" practices. However, the league needs to soften it's demands to make something equitable for the players too.

Exactly.

My main point was the absurdity of Daly claiming the union doesn't want to negotiate or make concessions. That's all they've done.

One of the only "concessions" where the league moved towards the union's proposal was regarding revenue sharing, which doesn't really even help the players. That helps the league and works toward addressing the biggest problem in the league, the disparity between franchises.

All the fans and the media have a pretty good guess as to what the final CBA will look like and the two sides aren't that far away. It's what makes this whole thing so idiotic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHL has lost a lot more games due to labor disputes (all lockouts during Bettman's regime) than any other league

During bettman's reign as commissioner not including the current lockout the NHL has lost 1698 games due to lockouts

MLB has lost 948 games due to labor disputes and the NBA has lost 704 games while the NFL hasn't lost any.

Athletes are athletes, there are hundreds of them. Hockey players are not much different than athletes in other sports

The biggest difference between the NHL and other sports leagues is that the other ones aren't run by Bettman

Edited by Johnz96

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whatever side of the fence they're on, I know many, many fans that aren't all that interested in watching this year. This is going to cost them much more than they're aware of. We may be the greatest fans on earth, but we're not suckers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The League is in a "take-take-take" mode, and has not been willing to concede anything to the PA as an incentive.

that's not true. while the nhl hasn't given anything up as far as economics or contracting issues go

here are some of the things the players have reportedly gotten

-artificially inflate the salary cap in Year 1 so teams don’t have to trade or release players;

- trade player salary and cap charges in trades (this is something both teams and players have wanted);

-eliminate re-entry waivers

- Increase revenue sharing with further increases as revenues grow, and the top grossing teams making the biggest contributions (revenue sharing is something Don Fehr is passionate about; wants it so the teams that really need assistance are assisted)

- Introduction of appeal rights to a neutral third-party arbitrator in cases involving on- and- off-ice discipline (player-proposed wish)

-Joint NHL/NHLPA Health and Safety Committee with equal representation by the league and union;

-Establishment of a “standard of care” and “primary allegiance” obligations between the team medical staff and players (this is directly due to the tragic Derek Boogaard situation that remains ongoing);

-Offseason rehab activities would no longer be required in the team’s home city;

-Players have access to second medical opinions at the club expense;

- Ice time restrictions and days off during training camp;

-Improved facility standards in visiting locker rooms;

-Ice condition improvements and standards;

-More player friendly rules for parent-son trips, teams would have to pay for parents travel and lodging to first-ever games, other milestones;

-Different standards for rent and mortgage reimbursements from teams;

-increased access to tickets for visiting players and also a game ticket policy that minimizes the tax impact on players;

-And also, the league has agreed to consider a player proposal for single rooms for all players on the road, which would be thousands of extra dollars spent on travel. Typically, players share rooms on the road unless you’re a longstanding player (600 games), or in a lot of cases, goaltenders

http://www.startribu.../177160641.html

now obviously these aren't as big as the revenue split or contracting issues but the notion that the owners haven't conceded a single thing yet is misinformed. i do agree that the owners contracting demands are outrageous and they should be willing to give on those

Whatever side of the fence they're on, I know many, many fans that aren't all that interested in watching this year. This is going to cost them much more than they're aware of. We may be the greatest fans on earth, but we're not suckers.

neither side couldn't care less about the game of hockey as long as they get their money

Edited by chances14
55fan likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.sportsnet...wn_nhl_spector/

When the plan has gone so awry -- when history now tells us that so many of Bettman’s signature moves have strayed -- we’re not surprised that the NHL has no "ideas" left. It was, of course, a series of NHL "ideas" that got us here in the first place.

How about tagging extra years on those old CBA’s with Bob Goodenow, so that the NHL could get the players’ permission to take part in the Olympic Games? It still baffles that 85 per cent of the NHLPA membership would receive a 12-day mid-season vacation window, and the other 15 per cent would be furnished with a spot in the Olympics -- a life-changing experience -- yet it was the league that had to give concessions to make that happen, not the players

Bad call, Gary.

Decisions like that are what led to the players raking in 75 per cent of league revenues. They resulted in salary escalation that would pay hockey players like Major League Baseball players, without the underlying economy to justify it

.

The players are equally at fault. They and their agents -- in orchestration with the NHLPA -- never missed a chance to sign a ridiculous deal, to prey on some GM whose job was on the line if he didn’t improve his roster to win some games, to drive salaries through the roof.

Today, players are paying the costs for 25 years of doing what was good for themselves, yet not good for the game as a whole. They drove the NHL’s economy into the ground. Like driving your car too hard, eventually it stops, and there’s a big bill involved in getting it started again.

Nightfall likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The players are equally at fault. They and their agents -- in orchestration with the NHLPA -- never missed a chance to sign a ridiculous deal, to prey on some GM whose job was on the line if he didn’t improve his roster to win some games, to drive salaries through the roof.

Today, players are paying the costs for 25 years of doing what was good for themselves, yet not good for the game as a whole. They drove the NHL’s economy into the ground. Like driving your car too hard, eventually it stops, and there’s a big bill involved in getting it started again.

This. Articulated the point better than I have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@AnsarKhanMLive: Red Wings' Ian White lashes out at Gary Bettman, calling him 'an idiot' who's damaged the game | http://t.co/gJ1ojxIv http://t.co/7uhIO5jw

I think Ian White posts on LGW.

another red wing personnel making himself look like an idiot. so we've had devellano, zetterberg, and now white making stupid comments in public. wonderful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This. Articulated the point better than I have been.

The NHL has lost a lot more games due to labor disputes (all lockouts during Bettman's regime) than any other league

During bettman's reign as commissioner not including the current lockout the NHL has lost 1698 games due to lockouts. He uses them as a negotiating tactic to get what he wants for the new CBA

MLB has lost 948 games due to labor disputes and the NBA has lost 704 games while the NFL hasn't lost any.

Athletes are athletes, there are hundreds of them. Hockey players are not much different than athletes in other sports

The biggest difference between the NHL and other sports leagues is that the other ones aren't run by Bettman

http://www.sportsnet...wn_nhl_spector/

another red wing personnel making himself look like an idiot. so we've had devellano, zetterberg, and now white making stupid comments in public. wonderful.

The only Red Wing personnel posting stupid comments about the lockout was Devallano.

Edited by Johnz96

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This part made me laugh out loud.

The players are equally at fault. They and their agents -- in orchestration with the NHLPA -- never missed a chance to sign a ridiculous deal, to prey on some GM whose job was on the line if he didn’t improve his roster to win some games, to drive salaries through the roof.

Yes, those poor poor GM's, who with their approval of their owners extended ridiculous contracts to the players, which the players then signed.

The economic model of the NHL was not sustainable, which is why a cap was installed. The owners drove contracts up amongst themselves. Of course players (and certainly agents) were happy to take advantage of that. It's not realistic to think a player would pass up money for the good of the league, as if they gave up $3 million, the owner would use that money to somehow benefit all of the NHL instead of just putting it in his pocket.

The responsibility of running a successful franchise ultimately is on the owners and GM's. We're lucky enough with Detroit to have a great owner who knows what he's doing.

Rick D, CapnSmitty and thegerkin like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only Red Wing personnel posting stupid comments about the lockout was Devallano.

players calling the commissioner an idiot in public is not going to get negotiations going any faster. if anything it will only hinder it. if you are pro hockey, i don't see why you would support any name calling in the media by either side. it will only hinder progress

This part made me laugh out loud.

Yes, those poor poor GM's, who with their approval of their owners extended ridiculous contracts to the players, which the players then signed.

The economic model of the NHL was not sustainable, which is why a cap was installed. The owners drove contracts up amongst themselves. Of course players (and certainly agents) were happy to take advantage of that. It's not realistic to think a player would pass up money for the good of the league, as if they gave up $3 million, the owner would use that money to somehow benefit all of the NHL instead of just putting it in his pocket.

it's also not realistic for owners and gm's to pass up the chance of trying to make their teams better. if one owner didn't offer the big contract, someone else would. If the owners all secretly agreed on keeping contracts at a certain limit, that would be considered collusion and grounds for legal action by the players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

players calling the commissioner an idiot in public is not going to get negotiations going any faster. if anything it will only hinder it. if you are pro hockey, i don't see why you would support any name calling in the media by either side. it will only hinder progress

it's also not realistic for owners and gm's to pass up the chance of trying to make their teams better. if one owner didn't offer the big contract, someone else would. If the owners all secretly agreed on keeping contracts at a certain limit, that would be considered collusion and grounds for legal action by the players.

They are lucky the players are wiling to help them out and go to 50/50, they just want what is contractually owed to them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

players calling the commissioner an idiot in public is not going to get negotiations going any faster. if anything it will only hinder it. if you are pro hockey, i don't see why you would support any name calling in the media by either side. it will only hinder progress

White and zette are just being honest.. :P

Rick D likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are lucky the players are wiling to help them out and go to 50/50, they just want what is contractually owed to them

and they are with the make whole provision which the nhl revised in the lastest round of talks so that the owners pay 100% of the make whole provision. but the players didn't like that the make whole was based on projected growth, which is the ultimate hypocrisy considering that every pa proposal to get to 50/50 has been based on projected revenue growth. can't have it both ways.

the issue now seems to be with the contracting issues, which i agree the nhl is making outrageous demands for.

White and zette are just being honest.. :P

they can be honest all they want, just keep it within the conference calls and meetings and out of the media.

Edited by chances14
Nightfall likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

players calling the commissioner an idiot in public is not going to get negotiations going any faster. if anything it will only hinder it. if you are pro hockey, i don't see why you would support any name calling in the media by either side. it will only hinder progress

it's also not realistic for owners and gm's to pass up the chance of trying to make their teams better. if one owner didn't offer the big contract, someone else would. If the owners all secretly agreed on keeping contracts at a certain limit, that would be considered collusion and grounds for legal action by the players.

I agree on both points.

If he hasn't already, Fehr should tell the players to generally avoid off the cuff comments like that. And certainly to avoid calling Bettman names. It's not helping anything.

I don't fault GM's for trying to make their teams better but when the cost exceeds something your franchise can afford, you stop bidding. If they keep getting outbid then it gets back to the underlying problem of disparity between franchises. That's not the fault of the players.

Rick D likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and they are with the make whole provision which the nhl revised in the lastest round of talks so that the owners pay 100% of the make whole provision. but the players didn't like that the make whole was based on projected growth, which is the ultimate hypocrisy considering that every pa proposal to get to 50/50 has been based on projected revenue growth. can't have it both ways.

the issue now seems to be with the contracting issues, which i agree the nhl is making outrageous demands for.

I agree. Everyone who stood behind the players and said that their proposals were spot on cannot possibly be against the owners proposals to make whole based on the projected revenues. Hell, the players proposals were based on projected revenue. I don't think basing any proposal based on a projection is really fair, as both sides know that the future is not certain. Which is why when key points of the other sides' proposal is being proposed using "projected revenues", that side balks.

The best thing that can happen at this stage is for both sides to take a 2 year break and let the league die.

chances14 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.