2458 replies to this topic

[drwscc]

And that's the problem. The owners are making demands and throwing a fit if the PA didn't accept it. The PA should have just said, fine, we'll give you contract term and variance, we want our $389M in make-whole. Would that have been fair then?

That's the thing. At some point, there has to be a line where you say "This is as far as I can come," and that's what's happened here, per Daly, I believe.

Fehr is the one that blew things up this round. According to Adrian Dater, a player involved said that the players were ready to take the latest offer to a vote with all the players, and Fehr said not to, because they were going to get a better offer. I hope that that's true, but I am betting this pushed the more moderate owners into the hardline camp.

[rrasco]

That's the thing. At some point, there has to be a line where you say "This is as far as I can come," and that's what's happened here, per Daly, I believe.

Fehr is the one that blew things up this round. According to Adrian Dater, a player involved said that the players were ready to take the latest offer to a vote with all the players, and Fehr said not to, because they were going to get a better offer. I hope that that's true, but I am betting this pushed the more moderate owners into the hardline camp.

I did read that quote from an undisclosed player.

This came out this morning, so maybe that had something to do with?

Andy Strickland ‏@andystrickland
Keep hearing players should be allowed to vote on deal....players tell me #NHL hasnt put formal proposal on table for them to even vote on

[vladdy16]

That's the thing. At some point, there has to be a line where you say "This is as far as I can come," and that's what's happened here, per Daly, I believe.

Fehr is the one that blew things up this round. According to Adrian Dater, a player involved said that the players were ready to take the latest offer to a vote with all the players, and Fehr said not to, because they were going to get a better offer. I hope that that's true, but I am betting this pushed the more moderate owners into the hardline camp.

Absolutely, but you have to inform them that this is the line. Players thought they were in negotiations, owners put out final offer. Major lack of communication there.

[haroldsnepsts]

According to Lebrun, it really did fall apart over max contract length (5 years NHL 8 NHLPA) and CBA length (10 years NHL 8 NHLPA).

Are you kidding me??

The owners see the 5 year contract length as a hill worth dying for, which is idiotic. Yes, contracts need to be shorter, but are you really willing to lose a season rather than agree on 6 years? Especially with the re-signing of free agents getting longer term. Throwing in a year would make the deal something the players need to absolutely accept. And they already have the 5% variance to eliminate back diving, which is much more important.


And as has been mentioned, I don't get why the 8 year CBA would be worth trashing a deal over on the NHLPA side. Bettman is only going to lock them out in 8 years anyway and the CBA will likely get worse for players no matter how the league recovers. Why not enjoy a decade of contract certainty?

Or as I mentioned before, there's this thing called 9, anyone heard of it? it's right between 8 and 10.

Unbelievable.

I don't think we ever really disagreed, we just misinterpreted what the other said

EDIT: or as the nhl/pa would say we were very close to a deal, but we differed on a few key issues which has caused us to break off talks for the next month

Exactly.

Enough with the tantrums on both sides. They're so friggin close. I don't get why Bettman is pretending they're not. And Fehr needs to knock of his passive aggressive crap.

Both sides needed to take a 30 minutes timeout so that their bottom lip stops quivering and they get rid of the sniffles, then get back in there and finish this deal like grown ass men.

[up2here]

According to Lebrun, it really did fall apart over max contract length (5 years NHL 8 NHLPA) and CBA length (10 years NHL 8 NHLPA).

Are you kidding me??

The owners see the 5 year contract length as a hill worth dying for, which is idiotic. Yes, contracts need to be shorter, but are you really willing to lose a season rather than agree on 6 years? Especially with the re-signing of free agents getting longer term. Throwing in a year would make the deal something the players need to absolutely accept. And they already have the 5% variance to eliminate back diving, which is much more important.


And as has been mentioned, I don't get why the 8 year CBA would be worth trashing a deal over on the NHLPA side. Bettman is only going to lock them out in 8 years anyway and the CBA will likely get worse for players no matter how the league recovers. Why not enjoy a decade of contract certainty?

Or as I mentioned before, there's this thing called 9, anyone heard of it? it's right between 8 and 10.

Unbelievable.



Exactly.

Enough with the tantrums on both sides. They're so friggin close. I don't get why Bettman is pretending they're not. And Fehr needs to knock of his passive aggressive crap.

Both sides needed to take a 30 minutes timeout so that their bottom lip stops quivering and they get rid of the sniffles, then get back in there and finish this deal like grown ass men.

I cant be a coincidence that negotiations were going well until Fehr and Bettman arrived yesterday. If you want to win fans back the 10 year cba is a damn good start.

[irishock]

I just watched Fehr's press conference. That voicemail s*** is a bigger work than HBK's "I lost my smile" speech.

[Learn2LuvIt]

After reading/watching/following (twitter/facebook/etc...) everything that I possibly can get access to, I'm siding with the owners. I guess more specifically, I'm siding against the Fehr brothers. I think they are doing a disservice to the NHLPA by giving them a false sense of bargaining power in this negotiation. Although both sides can say what they want, I believe the owners compromised on a few of the NHLPA "top priority" issues that they previously had refused to, in an effort to display some good will toward the players and get a deal done. However, the owners did express that just as the players had "top priority issues", so did the owners. The owners compromised and I truly believe the Fehr brothers took this not as good will, but weakness on the part of the owners....which led to them cheer lead to the players that there is an even better deal to be had...."we've got em on the ropes boys!!"

These owners have put millions and billions of THEIR OWN MONEY into purchasing/maintaining their respective clubs. Huge money that was made in another industries. Do you think they are going to let the Fehr brothers "pull punches" in the waning hours when a deal was very likely headed to be signed?? I don't think Fehr have installed a true sense of reality into the players. It may and should be construed as fear. Fear of what?....Fear that they really are replaceable. Fear that, in reality, a lot of these players don't have a lot of attractive options beyond the NHL. You worked your whole life to play in the NHL and now....you play in AHL....you play in Europe? Second rate league, half way around the world from your home...with sub par accommodations (some say dangerous accommodations...look at just the travel accommodations alone and the tragedy of the plane crash that took our former coach BC and so many other players lives). A league that puts on average 1/2 of the people in the seats night after night. Fear that for a lot of these guys without hockey they'd be back working the family farm in Manitoba. How much does that pay??

So let's get real players. You are paid a huge salary under the last CBA and any future agreement. You are going to make a TON of money for playing a GAME. Mr. Player, what did you contribute to make the whole Detroit Red Wings enterprise work?? Your 3rd line play and constant injuries after being left for dead by the entire NHL and given one last chance with the Wings?? (sorry Dan Cleary, but your tweets and rhetoric have gotten under my skin). A big goal in a playoff game?? An NOW YOUR ENTITLED to the revenues and business compromising advantages of the entire business?? Get real. Players; we wear your jerseys and have unwavering support for you....and you can't even have our backs as fans? "Well look at how much money the owners are making....we want some of it for ourselves"....I say...GET REAL, WHAT OTHER BUSINESS LETS YOU LOOK AT THE BALANCE SHEET AND START MAKING DEMANDS OF YOUR OWNER ABOUT WHAT YOU WANT!! They paid hundreds of millions of their dollars to own the business and with that, the risk of owning and NHL team. They earned that right to run their business. You earn your right to wear the jersey (Winged Wheel) and you earn your right to more playing time and potentially a salary raise. You don't do anything but play hockey and know nothing to very little about running a business. So Dan Cleary....go back to Newfoundland and earn your living back there...go play in Europe year after year if you don't like it...maybe try real estate. I realize that might screw up your 3 golf rounds a week at Oakland HIlls (true), but hey, we should be falling all over you right....YOUR DAN CLEARY!!!

A bit aggravated this morning. As a fan who loves this game and have supported this game and players for 35 years...players need to fire Fehr and start making rational/reality for themselves. Decisions for the fairness of yourselves as millionaires playing a game, and for the fans who you all claim you "can't thank enough" (excerpt from any player interview regarding the fans).

Edited by Learn2LuvIt, 07 December 2012 - 12:16 PM.

[amato]

According to Lebrun, it really did fall apart over max contract length (5 years NHL 8 NHLPA) and CBA length (10 years NHL 8 NHLPA).

That is absolutely sickening.. as if either of those things are really that big of a deal??

[kipwinger]

Absolutely, but you have to inform them that this is the line. Players thought they were in negotiations, owners put out final offer. Major lack of communication there.

Don't go making excuses for the players, both Daly and Bettman expressly stated that the 300 million in make whole was contingent upon either accepting or rejecting the contract and cba lengths. They didn't accept. The owners walked. It's not like they didn't know, Fehr thought he smelled blood and over played his hand. Don't go making it seem as if they players had no idea that one was contingent on the other, they did.

[rrasco]

After reading/watching/following (twitter/facebook/etc...) everything that I possibly can get access to, I'm siding with the owners.

Not saying the Fehr's are not driving the bus the wrong way down the interstate, but AFAIK this is no longer about money. It's about contracting rights.

[vladdy16]

Don't go making excuses for the players, both Daly and Bettman expressly stated that the 300 million in make whole was contingent upon either accepting or rejecting the contract and cba lengths. They didn't accept. The owners walked. It's not like they didn't know, Fehr thought he smelled blood and over played his hand. Don't go making it seem as if they players had no idea that one was contingent on the other, they did.

Whoa, calm down. I'm not making anybody out to be a bad guy here. I have no idea who's more to blame at this point. And I also stated it was a lack of communication, not intentional.
Everything I've read has stated that players were unaware it was take it or leave it at that point.

[chances14]

Nobody is forcing the owners to hand out 8 year contracts, but they do provide safety for players and some are going to offer them.

yes in theory nobody is forcing the owners to hand out 8 yr contracts, just like in theory nobody is forcing the players to accept them. but once one owner steps out of line and offers a long term contract, the market value is set. if the owners had a gentleman's agreement to not offer a certain length contract, it could be considered collusion and grounds for legal action. that is what a cba is for.

That's the thing. At some point, there has to be a line where you say "This is as far as I can come," and that's what's happened here, per Daly, I believe.

Fehr is the one that blew things up this round. According to Adrian Dater, a player involved said that the players were ready to take the latest offer to a vote with all the players, and Fehr said not to, because they were going to get a better offer. I hope that that's true, but I am betting this pushed the more moderate owners into the hardline camp.

i strongly believe that fehr has brainwashed these players into thinking that the longer they hold off, the better the deal. they are going to be sorely mistaken.

I did read that quote from an undisclosed player.

This came out this morning, so maybe that had something to do with?

they still could have done an unofficial vote on the owner's proposal, even if it wasn't an official proposal.

According to Lebrun, it really did fall apart over max contract length (5 years NHL 8 NHLPA) and CBA length (10 years NHL 8 NHLPA).

Are you kidding me??

The owners see the 5 year contract length as a hill worth dying for, which is idiotic. Yes, contracts need to be shorter, but are you really willing to lose a season rather than agree on 6 years? Especially with the re-signing of free agents getting longer term. Throwing in a year would make the deal something the players need to absolutely accept. And they already have the 5% variance to eliminate back diving, which is much more important.


And as has been mentioned, I don't get why the 8 year CBA would be worth trashing a deal over on the NHLPA side. Bettman is only going to lock them out in 8 years anyway and the CBA will likely get worse for players no matter how the league recovers. Why not enjoy a decade of contract certainty?

Or as I mentioned before, there's this thing called 9, anyone heard of it? it's right between 8 and 10.

Unbelievable.

i think it's ridiculous for both sides to be arguing contract term lengths. and both sides should want the longest cba possible. it's ridiculous that a deal is being held up over these petty issues

I just watched Fehr's press conference. That voicemail s*** is a bigger work than HBK's "I lost my smile" speech.

maybe if fehr wasn't so busy telling the media that the lockout was essentially over, he wouldn't have missed the nhl's call

Don't go making excuses for the players, both Daly and Bettman expressly stated that the 300 million in make whole was contingent upon either accepting or rejecting the contract and cba lengths. They didn't accept. The owners walked. It's not like they didn't know, Fehr thought he smelled blood and over played his hand. Don't go making it seem as if they players had no idea that one was contingent on the other, they did.

agreed.

while i disagree with the owner's take it or leave it approach, fehr purposely misled the public. he knew full well that the league wasn't going to accept his proposal.

Edited by chances14, 07 December 2012 - 01:32 PM.

[haroldsnepsts]

while i disagree with the owner's take it or leave it approach, fehr purposely misled the public. he knew full well that the league wasn't going to accept his proposal.

That or he badly misread the situation. Either way it's not good.

Someone should have had a sense of how the owners felt, many that they had already offered too much, so even if the NHLPA wasn't going to accept that offer outright, that is should have been handled more delicately than it was. Like maybe more conversation about the contracting issues instead of making an outright proposal that doesn't include what the owners want.

Either way, the fact that both sides got this close and it fell apart over contract issues takes it to a new level of idiocy, and the idiocy level was already extremely high.

[kipwinger]

That or he badly misread the situation. Either way it's not good.

Someone should have had a sense of how the owners felt, many that they had already offered too much, so even if the NHLPA wasn't going to accept that offer outright, that is should have been handled more delicately than it was. Like maybe more conversation about the contracting issues instead of making an outright proposal that doesn't include what the owners want.

Either way, the fact that both sides got this close and it fell apart over contract issues takes it to a new level of idiocy, and the idiocy level was already extremely high.

I agree with your assessment, but it's not like everybody in the hockey universe didn't know that these frontloaded contracts were going to be a big sticking point in the CBA talks. After the Kovalchuk fiasco it was only a matter of time. As it happens this is the last issue in a long line of issues that needed to be resolved, but certainly it was going to be addressed. And obviously there was going to be considerable disagreement over it.

[haroldsnepsts]

I agree with your assessment, but it's not like everybody in the hockey universe didn't know that these frontloaded contracts were going to be a big sticking point in the CBA talks. After the Kovalchuk fiasco it was only a matter of time. As it happens this is the last issue in a long line of issues that needed to be resolved, but certainly it was going to be addressed. And obviously there was going to be considerable disagreement over it.

but haven't both sides already agreed to the 5% variance?

If that's already agreed upon then contract length is a much smaller issue as the 5% eliminates backdiving.

i can still understand wanting some term length for owners, at least small market owners, but to say 5 years is a hill worth dying for is pretty extreme. with the 5% variance, 6 or 7 year length would still be a huge win for owners compared to the last CBA.

[amato]

Kronwall has it right....

"I think if we're this close, I don't see the reason why we shouldn't just keep at it until we have something," Kronwall said. "I don't see the reason why we should all of a sudden step away and get all dramatic. Just stick with it and let's get this done."


link

Edited by amato, 07 December 2012 - 02:57 PM.

[kipwinger]

but haven't both sides already agreed to the 5% variance?

If that's already agreed upon then contract length is a much smaller issue as the 5% eliminates backdiving.

i can still understand wanting some term length for owners, at least small market owners, but to say 5 years is a hill worth dying for is pretty extreme. with the 5% variance, 6 or 7 year length would still be a huge win for owners compared to the last CBA.

No, in their counter offer the players wanted 25% variance. Here's an article that explains the player's counter proposal, they talk about variance in the paragraph right above the picture of Fehr and Crosby...

http://aol.sportingn...r-hockey-strike

Edited by kipwinger, 07 December 2012 - 03:03 PM.

[Jedi]

No doubt there's a fair amount of spin to this given the source, but if there's even a kernel of truth to it, it's pretty outrageous...

John Hoven, professional freelance hockey reporter, with a few bits of information from Mathieu Schneider as heard on NHL Radio...

Mathieu Schneider on NHL Radio confirms owners told PA that if Don Fehr came back in room, talks would end... but...

...he vehemently denies that Don Fehr told players to hold out for more this week when deal seemed close

[kipwinger]

No doubt there's a fair amount of spin to this, but if there's even a kernel of truth to it, it's pretty outrageous...

John Hoven, professional freelance hockey reporter, with a few bits of information from Mathieu Schneider as heard on NHL Radio...

It's sort of a moot point because Fehr did come back, and talks didn't end...well not until the players rejected the NHL offer and issued their counter proposal anyway.

[frankgrimes]

yes in theory nobody is forcing the owners to hand out 8 yr contracts, just like in theory nobody is forcing the players to accept them. but once one owner steps out of line and offers a long term contract, the market value is set. if the owners had a gentleman's agreement to not offer a certain length contract, it could be considered collusion and grounds for legal action. that is what a cba is for.

NO T in theory also in the real hockey world, if an owner can't or wont offer such a contract too bad but it is on his own terms. I am freaking sick and tired of hearing Mr. ANTI hockey and his hardline ******* trying to support franchises that shouldn't even have an NHL team, while teams who are providing more revenue are left out (I.E QUEBEC, Hamilton).

I now want the players to go nuclear and into decertification, they know some franchises won't survive an open market too bad the stubborn hardliners couldn't see that.

The PA provided a fair proposal the NHL didn't even bother reading it so to hell with this league.