• Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

uk_redwing

[Retired] Official Lockout Thread

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

well i've just been reading ove the q&a nhl exec article that i posted earlier

responses that i found interesting (and yes i was bored)

....

I don't believe that person is really an NHL exec, or at least not one with any actual knowledge of what's going on. At best he's probably some 24 yo kid fresh out of college whose dad got him a job with an official sounding title, like 'Assistant Director of Corporate Partnership'. Some of the answers are factually wrong, some implausible, and some suggest a general lack of any real knowledge. I wouldn't put much stock in anything from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute No sense of urgency from the nhlpa to get a deal done. NHL on the verge of cancelling the winter classic. No scheduled talks. Yeah, I'd say a few more weeks of this and the entire season will get canceled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"At every opportunity we have continued to state that we are ready to meet and willing to discuss all open issues, including the owners' last offer," Fehr wrote.

"Nonetheless, to date, their group has declined to commit to a meeting unless it can dictate what the agenda is. We will update you further as soon as there is anything more to report. Regards, Don."

What does that even mean? What other agenda is there aside from "Let's Make a Deal?" Sounds like more PR garbage, and lack of urgency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

TL:DR synopsis: I disagree.

The NHLPA could and should give up something. How much is really up in the air. Yes, they made concessions during the last lockout. The current deal favors the players by far. So for all the concessions they made last time, they have seen great prosperity since the last lockout. The salary of the average NHL player has almost doubled since the players returned to work after the last stoppage. As I have said before I think a 52-48 split is reasonable, but 50/50 would seem to be what the market dictates being as that the NFL and NBA both negotiated successfully last year at that rate. Like it or not, the negotiations of other sports typically do dictate what the NHL is going to do.

Most pro NHLPA fans don't see the timeline as an issue. I do and always will. Nothing is set in stone. No one is able to say for sure if a deal would have been reached or not. To say with all certainty one way or the other is really supposition. My point is simply this.....if more time were given to the negotiations then we may have possibly avoided the lockout. To rob the negotiations of that time doesn't excuse the NHLPA.

Just the fact that you are also willing to pardon Fehr's delays while bashing Bettman's horrible first lowball proposal also shows bias. IMHO, you can't excuse one while bashing the other in good conscience. Which is why I bash them both.

Sorry, but in my opinion both leaders should be canned for the reasons I gave. A new fresh start has to be initiated in order to start a new era of labor peace. Keeping one or both of these guys around will do nothing positive. I would prefer two leaders who have an interest in working together. People who favor one side or the other look at this conflict like a political party system. These aren't Republicans or Democrats we are talking about here. These are two sides that are in need of labor peace. The two sides have to work together, and that takes two uniters. There are no uniters in Fehr and Bettman. If Bettman is fired, the cycle will repeat again in another 6 years or whenever the new CBA hits.

Nice of you to mention Bettman's lockouts, but not mention Fehr's tubing of the World Series. So far, the game of hockey and the MLB have one thing in common, both have lost a championship series due to the morons in command of the players and the league. Is this the type of leadership you want from your leaders in the NHL?

You favor the NHLPA all the way. I am fine with that, but don't defend the actions of the NHLPA like they haven't done anything wrong over the course of the last 6 months. Their actions resulted in where we are today. Just as the NHL actions have also contributed to where we are now.

Looks like we will have to agree to disagree then. Course, I disagree with most people who are proudly standing on the side of the NHL or NHLPA. My disdain for both sides has really drove me away from the NHL. Pardon my French, but both sides can go f*** themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"At every opportunity we have continued to state that we are ready to meet and willing to discuss all open issues, including the owners' last offer," Fehr wrote.

"Nonetheless, to date, their group has declined to commit to a meeting unless it can dictate what the agenda is. We will update you further as soon as there is anything more to report. Regards, Don."

What does that even mean? What other agenda is there aside from "Let's Make a Deal?" Sounds like more PR garbage, and lack of urgency.

Fehr is saying the league refuses to meet unless the PA basically agrees to their proposal. From what Fehr said before, the league is only willing to discuss the "make whole" provision, and that only on the condition that the PA accept all the owners' other terms.

True nor not, who can say. I'd expect believability is proportional to your level of support for the PA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"At every opportunity we have continued to state that we are ready to meet and willing to discuss all open issues, including the owners' last offer," Fehr wrote.

"Nonetheless, to date, their group has declined to commit to a meeting unless it can dictate what the agenda is. We will update you further as soon as there is anything more to report. Regards, Don."

What does that even mean? What other agenda is there aside from "Let's Make a Deal?" Sounds like more PR garbage, and lack of urgency.

The NHL and NHLPA are saying the same thing. They want to negotiate, but only on what each of them propose. Its PR garbage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The writing has been on the wall since 1995. Bettman = lockout.

In the meantime, Fehr was nice enough to rob MLB of a World Series in 1995.

Great to see both sides with leaders who have both led efforts to lockout the other side and eliminate a championship in the sports they represented.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the meantime, Fehr was nice enough to rob MLB of a World Series in 1995.

Great to see both sides with leaders who have both led efforts to lockout the other side and eliminate a championship in the sports they represented.

You forgot to mention they've had labor peace since that strike. Including new CBA's in 2002 and 2006. Want to guess who was head of the union for those?

Prior to the 1994-5 strike every negotiation had resulted with a work stoppage. 8 times since 1972.

I don't really follow baseball anymore but aside from the obvious problem of equating two very different situations in two very different sports, Fehr played a major role in successfully busting the owners for collusion three times. And since the 1995 strike, MLB has not lost a game. Not exactly the same situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You forgot to mention they've had labor peace since that strike. Including new CBA's in 2002 and 2006. Want to guess who was head of the union for those?

Prior to the 1994-5 strike every negotiation had resulted with a work stoppage. 8 times since 1972.

I don't really follow baseball anymore but aside from the obvious problem of equating two very different situations in two very different sports, Fehr played a major role in successfully busting the owners for collusion three times. And since the 1995 strike, MLB has not lost a game. Not exactly the same situation.

Very true.

Between 931-948 games lost in the first MLB strike, but there has been labor peace since then.

Just keep in mind that the score from the leaders of these respective sides should be 0-0. Anything more than that is a travesty.

Fehr - 1

Bettman - 3

AND the players offered to start the season WITHOUT a CBA; owners said no. The preponderance of fault lies with the owners on this one.

The players were the side that benefited the most from the CBA. Its a no brainer why they wanted to keep the season going.

Edited by Nightfall

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fehr - 1

Bettman - 3

AND the players offered to start the season WITHOUT a CBA; owners said no. The preponderance of fault lies with the owners on this one.

fehr has a history of striking in times of the league's biggest revenue making season, the playoffs and also at the time in which the owners have already paid most of their expenses. coincdentally the players do not get paid in the playoffs and have already recieved their checks before then. this gives the players pretty much all the leverage in negotations

let's not forget also, the former pa head bob goodenow led the players on strike back in 1992 on the eve of the stanley cup finals.

i'm pretty sure the owners don't want to go down that road again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very true.

Between 931-948 games lost in the first MLB strike, but there has been labor peace since then.

The first MLB strike was in 1972. Then there was the one in 1981, again in 1985 and then the one in 1994. So I'm not sure what point you're making exactly.

The fact is that Fehr has done something Bettman never has. Negotiated a CBA without a work stoppage. Twice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The writing has been on the wall since 1995. Bettman = lockout.

actually i think the players animosity towards the owners can be traced back even further than that to Alan Eagleson, the most crooked nhlpa head in the history of the union, who was essentially in the owners back pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first MLB strike was in 1972. Then there was the one in 1981, again in 1985 and then the one in 1994. So I'm not sure what point you're making exactly.

The fact is that Fehr has done something Bettman never has. Negotiated a CBA without a work stoppage. Twice.

I was referencing the lockout in 1994-1995 season that wiped out 931-948 games when it was under Fehr's watch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The players were the side that benefited the most from the CBA. Its a no brainer why they wanted to keep the season going.

You keep saying this but I haven't heard you explain logically how the players who gave up 24% of their salary and and agreed to a hard cap benefitted more than the owners.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to praise the Wings during the lockout, I just heard something from my mother. My 11 year old brother is part of their kids club thing and in the past he got a cheap little Red Wings bag as a perk. They called my mom and said that they were lowering the price and offering gloves, a hat and something else as a consolation prize of sorts for the lockout. Pretty classy, I think. Give more for less? Unheard of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was referencing the lockout in 1994-1995 season that wiped out 931-948 games when it was under Fehr's watch.

Right. I think you know what Bettman's magic number is. Not to mention MLB plays 80 more games a season.

So if you want to try and equate the two, let's call 1995 for Bettman and Fehr a tie.

That leaves Fehr's two successful CBA negotiations with no work stoppages. Whereas Bettman has two more lockouts. One that cost the entire season and playoffs. A first in history for one of the 4 major sports.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep saying this but I haven't heard you explain logically how the players who gave up 24% of their salary and and agreed to a hard cap benefitted more than the owners.

I think you know where the sport was back in the lockout. Clubs were spending 76% of their gross revenues on player salaries.

The history lesson is here....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004%E2%80%9305_NHL_lockout

If you look at the last 6 years, the players salaries have doubled in that time. The players may have taken those concessions back in 2005, but the 57% of revenues kept the players very happy. By and far, they were making out better than the owners. Which is why its a no brainer why they wanted to keep the gravy train rolling.

Right. I think you know what Bettman's magic number is. Not to mention MLB plays 80 more games a season.

So if you want to try and equate the two, let's call 1995 for Bettman and Fehr a tie.

That leaves Fehr's two successful CBA negotiations with no work stoppages. Whereas Bettman has two more lockouts. One that cost the entire season and playoffs. A first in history for one of the 4 major sports.

Not disputing those facts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you look at the last 6 years, the players salaries have doubled in that time. The players may have taken those concessions back in 2005, but the 57% of revenues kept the players very happy. By and far, they were making out better than the owners. Which is why its a no brainer why they wanted to keep the gravy train rolling.

Given that players share is a fixed percentage of league revenues and those increased by about 50% since the previous lockout how exactly did players manage to double their salaries?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NHLPA could and should give up something. How much is really up in the air. Yes, they made concessions during the last lockout. The current deal favors the players by far. So for all the concessions they made last time, they have seen great prosperity since the last lockout. The salary of the average NHL player has almost doubled since the players returned to work after the last stoppage. As I have said before I think a 52-48 split is reasonable, but 50/50 would seem to be what the market dictates being as that the NFL and NBA both negotiated successfully last year at that rate. Like it or not, the negotiations of other sports typically do dictate what the NHL is going to do.

Most pro NHLPA fans don't see the timeline as an issue. I do and always will. Nothing is set in stone. No one is able to say for sure if a deal would have been reached or not. To say with all certainty one way or the other is really supposition. My point is simply this.....if more time were given to the negotiations then we may have possibly avoided the lockout. To rob the negotiations of that time doesn't excuse the NHLPA.

Just the fact that you are also willing to pardon Fehr's delays while bashing Bettman's horrible first lowball proposal also shows bias. IMHO, you can't excuse one while bashing the other in good conscience. Which is why I bash them both.

Sorry, but in my opinion both leaders should be canned for the reasons I gave. A new fresh start has to be initiated in order to start a new era of labor peace. Keeping one or both of these guys around will do nothing positive. I would prefer two leaders who have an interest in working together. People who favor one side or the other look at this conflict like a political party system. These aren't Republicans or Democrats we are talking about here. These are two sides that are in need of labor peace. The two sides have to work together, and that takes two uniters. There are no uniters in Fehr and Bettman. If Bettman is fired, the cycle will repeat again in another 6 years or whenever the new CBA hits.

Nice of you to mention Bettman's lockouts, but not mention Fehr's tubing of the World Series. So far, the game of hockey and the MLB have one thing in common, both have lost a championship series due to the morons in command of the players and the league. Is this the type of leadership you want from your leaders in the NHL?

You favor the NHLPA all the way. I am fine with that, but don't defend the actions of the NHLPA like they haven't done anything wrong over the course of the last 6 months. Their actions resulted in where we are today. Just as the NHL actions have also contributed to where we are now.

...

I wasn't referring to the concessions made in the last lockout. Though for the record, total player expenses have increased around 56% from the first year after, and only around 28% from the year before. What I was referring to is the concessions they've made relative the the 57% split they had last year. That split was a real thing. In my view, going from a real 57% split to 54% is a far more meaningful concession than going from an imaginary 57% to 50% (when you had been at 43%).

Negotiations in other sports may influence the NHL, true, but not absolutely dictate. Furthermore, you can't just cherry pick certain terms and say, "we have to have this exactly, right now". Yeah, the NBA has a 50% split, sort of. It was actually 51.15% in year 1, and could be anywhere between 49-51% the remaining years (depending on how close actual revenue comes to the projections). NBA also has a soft cap, which you don't mention. The current cap in the NBA is $58.044M. Current average team salary is ~$66.9M. Slightly higher than it was in 10-11 (just before their new CBA), and below the projected players' share. The reduction in the actual dollars of the players' share wasn't as drastic. NBA has a maximum escrow of 10%, which you don't mention. That could potentially push the players' share higher. You don't mention MLB, which doesn't have a cap at all and does just fine. Point is, there are differences. Furthermore, ending at 50% doesn't seem to be a problem for the PA.

I'll try to explain my take on why I don't care about the timeline again. It really has nothing to do with whether or not more time would have helped. Everything boils down to the offers being made. The only reason to complain about the timeline, or the lack of negotiations, is that you reason that more time or talking would result in better proposals. So your real problem isn't with the time, it's with the proposals. If the sides had put off meeting until 9/14, but reached an agreement that day, you wouldn't be complaining that they only spent a single day on it. I don't have a problem with the proposals from the PA. I thought even their first was good enough to use as a framework. I thought the financials of the second were fine as they were, and should have served as an agreement in principle while the secondary issues were worked out. I think the players' latest offers were good enough that the owners should have taken them without even asking for concessions on contracting rights. In short, I believe the PA got where they needed to be, and got there soon enough that the lockout wasn't necessary. Would more time have been enough to get the owners there? Maybe, but I don't care. Owners had just as much time as the players. If the players got there, the owners should have too. So again, I don't care about the timeline because I think the players' offers are good. You don't, so I understand why you'd be critical. I don't quite understand why you only criticize the PAs delays though, nor do I understand why bashing the owners' apples should make me obligated to bash the players' oranges.

And I would argue that Fehr is exactly the person to help establish peaceful labor relations, as he did exactly that in an even more hostile MLB environment. And I'd like to know how exactly you interpreted the phrase, "Fehr was party to a devastating strike", as "not mentioning" it. Seems like a mention to me. I guess you just missed that part. I don't think a conciliator like Kelly would work. Weak leadership on either side would lose the respect of the people they represent. To have a peace both sides are happy with I think takes leadership that has the confidence of their constituency and the respect of their counterparts. The leaders don't have to be friends, don't need any shiny, happy handshakes. Just respect, maybe a little fear. Cold war style. MAD and all that. I think Fehr has proven himself capable of that in baseball, so he deserves a shot in hockey. What has Gary proven?

(Sidenote: I found this line a little hilarious, from here. "Bettman's mission is simple: Put a stop to labor unrest...". I think it's been mentioned before, but still funny.)

Lastly, you're getting one thing completely backwards. I don't think the way I do because I support the PA. I support the PA because I think the way I do. It's not about what has or hasn't been done wrong on either side, it's what has and hasn't been done right. The PA making the right (IMO) offer, makes any wrongs I might have had a problem with meaningless. They can only be wrong insofar as they contribute to making the offer wrong. If the offer isn't wrong, the actions leading to the offer aren't wrong. The actions themselves are meaningless. All anyone should be concerned with is the offers. You don't agree with the offers. You have your theories on what you think has contributed to those offers (or more accurately, the lack of better ones), but don't let that confuse your true issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From TSN:

Locked-out NHL players had the pain of missing their first full pay period offset Tuesday when they received last season's escrow cheque.

Players were returned 7.98 per cent of what they earned last year, plus interest, one day before their second paycheque of the 2012-13 season would have been due, according to a spokesman for the NHL Players' Association

The escrow payments amount to about $80,000 for every million dollars a player earned -- before deductions. For example, New York Rangers forward Brad Richards grossed approximately $960,000 after being the league's highest-paid player last season.

Share this post


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