2458 replies to this topic

[Nightfall]

Coyotes had a buyer years ago

The city of Glendale and the league just should have sold the club to Jim Baisaille who could have taken the team to Winnepeg or some other Canadian province. Why the NHL decided to expand into these small markets is beyond me. Contraction or moving them is the best option.

[drwscc]

Coyotes had a buyer years ago

A potential owner that pissed all over the exclusive club he was trying to join, and then was shocked when they didn't approve him buying the team. Getting BOG approval is part of the process, and he didn't get past that part. He didn't when he tried to buy the Pens and the Preds either.

[haroldsnepsts]

That's the thing, Bettman's position is ridiculous. He is simultaneously pushing the franchises in non-hockey markets and bragging about the success and profitability of the nhl, while also claiming the league's current financial structure doesn't work and it's mostly the fault of player contracts.

The owners and Bettman want people to believe that the biggest problem is once again player salaries and not the financial disparity between franchises, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. The sad part is, it's starting to work.

Bettman stays on message, relying on the players caving and fans coming back even though he's costing us hockey and not addressing the actual problem. See you in 6 years when there's another lockout.

[Pskov Wings Fan]

A potential owner that pissed all over the exclusive club he was trying to join, and then was shocked when they didn't approve him buying the team. Getting BOG approval is part of the process, and he didn't get past that part. He didn't when he tried to buy the Pens and the Preds either.

So this exclusive club, members of which are crying poor now, was not willing to sell and cut their losses because the buyer did not meet their high standards.

I am sorry but I do not feel much sympathy for owners due to their troubles being self-inflicted.

[Johnz96]

That's the thing, Bettman's position is ridiculous. He is simultaneously pushing the franchises in non-hockey markets and bragging about the success and profitability of the nhl, while also claiming the league's current financial structure doesn't work and it's mostly the fault of player contracts.

The owners and Bettman want people to believe that the biggest problem is once again player salaries and not the financial disparity between franchises, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. The sad part is, it's starting to work.

Bettman stays on message, relying on the players caving and fans coming back even though he's costing us hockey and not addressing the actual problem. See you in 6 years when there's another lockout.

Not if we don't show up when they unlock the doors this time.
They give us empty arenas, let's give them empty arenas
If we stopped spending our money on the NHL last time, there wouldn't be a lockout now and Bettman would probably have been fired

[cusimano_brothers]

From Edmonton Journal:

A wrench has been thrown into Nail Yakupov's plans for the NHL lockout.

The 18-year-old forward was suspended from the Russian-based KHL on Tuesday after a dispute over his transfer to Nizhnekamsk Neftekhimik.

According to the International Ice Hockey Federation, Yakupov played illegally when he appeared in two games for his hometown team earlier this month because he failed to secure a transfer card.

[drwscc]

So this exclusive club, members of which are crying poor now, was not willing to sell and cut their losses because the buyer did not meet their high standards.

I am sorry but I do not feel much sympathy for owners due to their troubles being self-inflicted.

So, put something up for sale on craigslist. I'll respond to the ad, and make all kinds of hateful remarks in our correspondence, and then will show up to look at the item, right after taking a dump in your yard in front of you. I'll be loud and obnoxious, and make lots of obscene jokes. Then when you tell me you don't want me to buy your couch, I'll come back later when you're not home, and bribe someone else that lives there to sell me the couch without telling you. You'll come home and catch me in the act. Now will you sell me the couch?

And guess what? If you sell me the couch, I'll be over at your house at least once a year, sometimes lots more, until I die or sell your couch to someone else, and you have no choice in the matter since you sold it to me.

So, come on. Let's do some business. I have money, you have a couch. Let's get this thing done. Can't wait for our joint vacation over the summer, so we can talk about our couches. Hello?

Edited by drwscc, 26 September 2012 - 12:44 PM.

[Johnz96]

So, put something up for sale on craigslist. I'll respond to the ad, and make all kinds of hateful remarks in our correspondence, and then will show up to look at the item, right after taking a dump in your yard in front of you. I'll be loud and obnoxious, and make lots of obscene jokes. Then when you tell me you don't want me to buy your couch, I'll come back later when you're not home, and bribe someone else that lives there to sell me the couch without telling you. You'll come home and catch me in the act. Now will you sell me the couch?

And guess what? If you sell me the couch, I'll be over at your house at least once a year, sometimes lots more, until I die or sell your couch to someone else, and you have no choice in the matter since you sold it to me.

So, come on. Let's do some business. I have money, you have a couch. Let's get this thing done. Can't wait for our joint vacation over the summer, so we can talk about our couches. Hello?

This makes just about as much sense as Bettman and the owners did regarding the situation

[drwscc]

This makes just about as much sense as Bettman and the owners did regarding the situation

Good comeback. Boy, I feel the sting on that one. Your arguments are so persuasive.

[Pskov Wings Fan]

So, put something up for sale on craigslist. I'll respond to the ad, and make all kinds of hateful remarks in our correspondence, and then will show up to look at the item, right after taking a dump in your yard in front of you. I'll be loud and obnoxious, and make lots of obscene jokes. Then when you tell me you don't want me to buy your couch, I'll come back later when you're not home, and bribe someone else that lives there to sell me the couch without telling you. You'll come home and catch me in the act. Now will you sell me the couch?

And guess what? If you sell me the couch, I'll be over at your house at least once a year, sometimes lots more, until I die or sell your couch to someone else, and you have no choice in the matter since you sold it to me.

So, come on. Let's do some business. I have money, you have a couch. Let's get this thing done. Can't wait for our joint vacation over the summer, so we can talk about our couches. Hello?

I am not sure that your couch the analogy describes the Balsillie case correctly. Some of the stuff happening with that couch is plain illegal.

My point was that if NHL can afford to be selective when choosing a buyer and force conditions like keeping team in Phoenix than maybe owners are not really in as desperate position as they are trying to portray themselves.

[Nightfall]

That's the thing, Bettman's position is ridiculous. He is simultaneously pushing the franchises in non-hockey markets and bragging about the success and profitability of the nhl, while also claiming the league's current financial structure doesn't work and it's mostly the fault of player contracts.

The owners and Bettman want people to believe that the biggest problem is once again player salaries and not the financial disparity between franchises, in spite of all the evidence to the contrary. The sad part is, it's starting to work.

Bettman stays on message, relying on the players caving and fans coming back even though he's costing us hockey and not addressing the actual problem. See you in 6 years when there's another lockout.

Speaking of stating something that isn't accurate.

No one knows how the negotiations are going. No one has seen the proposals aside from the initial ones that each group put out. There really has been nothing revealed about the negotiations. Does Bettman want to break the league or does Fehr have no intentions of talking salary cap at this stage and now wants a luxury tax system? The point is that we really don't know what either side wants to do. Sure, if you go off of their initial proposals, you may make that assumption, but we really don't know the level of bargaining and concessions that each side is willing to be flexible with.

In short, I don't believe for a second that the ownership group wants to break the league just based off an initial proposal that was offered back in June. Just like I believe the players are putting their best foot forward and negotiating in good faith since they came to the table in June, even though they stalled and didn't come to the table early in January like the ownership wanted. The owners want NHL hockey going as well.

Not if we don't show up when they unlock the doors this time.
They give us empty arenas, let's give them empty arenas
If we stopped spending our money on the NHL last time, there wouldn't be a lockout now and Bettman would probably have been fired

This not only sends a message to greedy owners, but it would also send a message to the NHLPA. This is why when they unlock the doors, I won't be paying for tickets to NHL games for a long time.

[drwscc]

My point is, you can't equate buying a team with buying anything else. It's not simply a money for product transaction. Whoever the team gets sold to, the rest of the owners HAVE to deal with that person forever, until they either sell the team or die. If you sell the team to a douchebag, he's going to vinegar up everything to do with the league, from CBA negotiations to giving out insane contracts, to rules changes, etc. That's why you have to be approved by the other owners. It's not simply a product. You have to be selective, or things can get ruined really fast for the other 29 ownership groups.

It's not so much "Hey, he will give us x dollars, so let's sell" as it is "Hey, this guy is doing all kinds of wacky stuff that may or may not be illegal trying to get his hands on a team, and he has repeatedly told and showed us he doesn't give a crap about the rules or anything. Maybe if he gets a team he is going to screw up the good thing we have going."

[Johnz96]

My point is, you can't equate buying a team with buying anything else. It's not simply a money for product transaction. Whoever the team gets sold to, the rest of the owners HAVE to deal with that person forever, until they either sell the team or die. If you sell the team to a douchebag, he's going to vinegar up everything to do with the league, from CBA negotiations to giving out insane contracts, to rules changes, etc. That's why you have to be approved by the other owners. It's not simply a product. You have to be selective, or things can get ruined really fast for the other 29 ownership groups.

It's not so much "Hey, he will give us x dollars, so let's sell" as it is "Hey, this guy is doing all kinds of wacky stuff that may or may not be illegal trying to get his hands on a team, and he has repeatedly told and showed us he doesn't give a crap about the rules or anything. Maybe if he gets a team he is going to screw up the good thing we have going."

If it such a good thing, why do they need to lock us out every time the CBA expires

[drwscc]

Move the goalposts again there, cheif.

Jim Balsille has nothing to do with the lockout. He's not an owner.

Aren't you one of the ones saying the NHL is awesome right now with revenues and such? Sounds like a good thing to me.

[haroldsnepsts]

Speaking of stating something that isn't accurate.

No one knows how the negotiations are going. No one has seen the proposals aside from the initial ones that each group put out. There really has been nothing revealed about the negotiations. Does Bettman want to break the league or does Fehr have no intentions of talking salary cap at this stage and now wants a luxury tax system? The point is that we really don't know what either side wants to do. Sure, if you go off of their initial proposals, you may make that assumption, but we really don't know the level of bargaining and concessions that each side is willing to be flexible with.

In short, I don't believe for a second that the ownership group wants to break the league just based off an initial proposal that was offered back in June. Just like I believe the players are putting their best foot forward and negotiating in good faith since they came to the table in June, even though they stalled and didn't come to the table early in January like the ownership wanted. The owners want NHL hockey going as well.

No, see the difference is I'm stating my opinion on matters. You have been misrepresenting cold hard facts about what the union has offered so far. The bolded section is a perfect case in point.

You mention Fehr and a luxury tax system. No proposal put forward by the players union has had such a detail. That we do know for sure. Every NHLPA proposal has been based on the current capped system. Are you suggesting that in spite of every NHLPA proposal being based on the current salary cap, that in the room Fehr is somehow bargaining for a luxury tax system? That's absurd, and shows how far you'll stretch the truth to try and implicate the union in the lockout.

Details of every proposal and counter proposal have been released. I'm not pretending to know what either side is saying in the room, but Bettman has made many statements to the media as the negotiations have gone on, where he takes his cheapshots at the union and beats the drum about franchises not being profitable.

And then there's the fairly reasonable proposals from the union compared to the insane one from the owners. When the league moves a few baby steps away from an insane proposal, that doesn't suddenly doesn't make it a good one. That is information we do have.

It's pretty obvious to journalist and fans alike that the biggest issue with the league is the financial disparity between franchises. Yet Bettman and the owners proposals almost completely ignore that issue.

I never said the owners wanted to break the league. I've said multiple times that because their initial proposal was so insanely aggressive, the only way they could expect to players to agree to it would require breaking the will of the union.

My point is, you can't equate buying a team with buying anything else. It's not simply a money for product transaction. Whoever the team gets sold to, the rest of the owners HAVE to deal with that person forever, until they either sell the team or die. If you sell the team to a douchebag, he's going to vinegar up everything to do with the league, from CBA negotiations to giving out insane contracts, to rules changes, etc. That's why you have to be approved by the other owners. It's not simply a product. You have to be selective, or things can get ruined really fast for the other 29 ownership groups.

It's not so much "Hey, he will give us x dollars, so let's sell" as it is "Hey, this guy is doing all kinds of wacky stuff that may or may not be illegal trying to get his hands on a team, and he has repeatedly told and showed us he doesn't give a crap about the rules or anything. Maybe if he gets a team he is going to screw up the good thing we have going."

So when it comes to players cattle is a fine analogy, but when it comes to buying a franchise suddenly the NHL is a totally unique business?

[drwscc]

No, it still works. It's just a select group of 30 cattle ranchers that have Kobe cows. There are other ranches with angus cows, longhorns, etc, but in order to get a Kobe ranch, you have to be approved by the other ranchers. They can't have you going insane, selling your cows for pennies on the dollar, or making changes to the breed that will hurt the other ranchers.

[haroldsnepsts]

No, it still works. It's just a select group of 30 cattle ranchers that have Kobe cows. There are other ranches with angus cows, longhorns, etc, but in order to get a Kobe ranch, you have to be approved by the other ranchers. They can't have you going insane, selling your cows for pennies on the dollar, or making changes to the breed that will hurt the other ranchers.

Right. Because 20,000 people travel for miles and pay hundreds of dollars to watch cows graze several times a week. Buy cow outfits to wear with the brand of their favorite cow on the side. Watch cows grazing on television for hours on end.

Totally a solid analogy.

And if ranchers did that it would be collusion. The NHL is a pretty specific situation.

[Nightfall]

No, see the difference is I'm stating my opinion on matters. You have been misrepresenting cold hard facts about what the union has offered so far. The bolded section is a perfect case in point.

You mention Fehr and a luxury tax system. No proposal put forward by the players union has had such a detail. That we do know for sure. Every NHLPA proposal has been based on the current capped system. Are you suggesting that in spite of every NHLPA proposal being based on the current salary cap, that in the room Fehr is somehow bargaining for a luxury tax system? That's absurd, and shows how far you'll stretch the truth to try and implicate the union in the lockout.

Details of every proposal and counter proposal have been released. I'm not pretending to know what either side is saying in the room, but Bettman has made many statements to the media as the negotiations have gone on, where he takes his cheapshots at the union and beats the drum about franchises not being profitable.

And then there's the fairly reasonable proposals from the union compared to the insane one from the owners. When the league moves a few baby steps away from an insane proposal, that doesn't suddenly doesn't make it a good one. That is information we do have.

It's pretty obvious to journalist and fans alike that the biggest issue with the league is the financial disparity between franchises. Yet Bettman and the owners proposals almost completely ignore that issue.

I never said the owners wanted to break the league. I've said multiple times that because their initial proposal was so insanely aggressive, the only way they could expect to players to agree to it would require breaking the will of the union.

Please provide a link or source to what I bolded. If you know where the proposals each side has given, including each subsequent one after the initial one, I would love to read them. It would go a long way towards seeing if the league came down from their demands or where the players ended up.

As for what you bolded, I think you need to go back and re-read what I said. I said that I have no idea if Fehr is going to ask for a luxury tax system or not. I am just merely suggesting that Fehr mentions it enough that he could make that an option during the negotiations. The point is that we don't know for sure. Course, you have read every proposal that has been released supposedly or you know where to find them. I look forward to you releasing that information to me so I can read up on them as well. Since you are making suppositions, I can do that as well.....oh wait.....it was against the NHLPA. That was the problem. Of course the supposition I made about the league was left unbolded because you agree with it. Ok, got it.

As for the owners, if they don't want to break the league like you say you believe, then you should have at least a little faith that they are going to bargain in good faith with the league.

[hillbillywingsfan]

Right. Because 20,000 people travel for miles and pay hundreds of dollars to watch cows graze several times a week. Buy cow outfits to wear with the brand of their favorite cow on the side. Watch cows grazing on television for hours on end.

Totally a solid analogy.

And if ranchers did that it would be collusion. The NHL is a pretty specific situation.

Yeah but analogies deal with similarities and comparable situations not exacts. We in big corp america have been compared to cattle many many times but I don't go out back and graze in the fields but I do snack all day which is a form of grazing.

Edited by hillbillywingsfan, 26 September 2012 - 02:28 PM.

[esteef]

Right. Because 20,000 people travel for miles and pay hundreds of dollars to watch cows graze several times a week. Buy cow outfits to wear with the brand of their favorite cow on the side. Watch cows grazing on television for hours on end.

Totally a solid analogy.

And if ranchers did that it would be collusion. The NHL is a pretty specific situation.

Are you trying to tell us you DON'T have a cow outfit? I call bulls***!

esteef