2458 replies to this topic

[chances14]

Yeah, and? Is your contention that only one of those statements can be true?

yes because negotations went nowhere the day after that memo leaked. yet somehow at the end of that day the pa and league were closer on the economic issues.

What is the deadline date before the season is cancelled?

well in the last lockout, the season wasn't cancelled until mid february, so i would say by late janurary at the latest

From Sportsnet:

yea i don't really understand why bettman would need both a max 5% contract variance and a max contract limit when either one of them will do just fine in ending the cap circumvention.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409346

A new NHL labour deal might not be as far off as it seems.
Steve Fehr, special counsel to the NHL Players' Association, believes the collective bargaining agreement can be wrapped up in a hurry once the sides make a breakthrough in negotiations.
"One thing (deputy commissioner) Bill Daly and I agree upon is that when the moment is right the deal could be done very quickly," Fehr said Monday during a panel discussion at the PrimeTime Sports Management Conference. "One days, three days or whatever."
Asked later if he agreed with that assertion, Daly replied: "I hope he's right."

Edited by chances14, 12 November 2012 - 11:54 PM.

[Dabura]

"One days, three days or whatever."

I think I've found the problem.

[cusimano_brothers]

Sidney Crosby: motivational speaker? Interesting.

[RedWingsDad]

So basically, the NHLPA's position from the start is that they would ultimately agree to the 50/50 split if they owners forced them to.... but would never concede on contract rights issues. Got it.

Edited by RedWingsDad, 13 November 2012 - 09:27 AM.

[haroldsnepsts]

So basically, the NHLPA's position from the start is that they would ultimately agree to the 50/50 split if they owners forced them to.... but would never concede on contract rights issues. Got it.

link?

[roboginger]

The Comments on the TSN Articles are crazy one sided I can't even read them.

Every party involved in this is being dumb, just get it done before Ice hockey drops below field hockey in ratings.

[hillbillywingsfan]

The Comments on the TSN Articles are crazy one sided I can't even read them.

Every party involved in this is being dumb, just get it done before Ice hockey drops below field hockey in ratings.

Sort of like some of the comments on here by some. hahaha field hockey..oh man that would be awful.

[rrasco]

So I was about to order a new Wings hat, mine are getting mangy, but instead, I ordered a Tigers hat. Take that NHL!

[Rick D]

So I was about to order a new Wings hat, mine are getting mangy, but instead, I ordered a Tigers hat. Take that NHL!

Yeah!!

Take that Mike Ilitch!!!

Wait...

[sleepwalker]

So I was about to order a new Wings hat, mine are getting mangy, but instead, I ordered a Tigers hat. Take that NHL!

Me too. Well, except the part about the Tigers hat, lol. I ordered a new Wings hat.

[Johnz96]

The Comments on the TSN Articles are crazy one sided I can't even read them.

Every party involved in this is being dumb, just get it done before Ice hockey drops below field hockey in ratings.

I'm pretty sure Bettman and/or the owners(7 of them?) hired a PR team to work the internet. On that nolockout youtube video, I have seen comments against Bettman or the owners with 20 likes and by the time I finished watching the video those comments would have no likes

[RedWingsDad]

link?

My brain, using the information I have observed up until this point to make a deduction - kind of like Sherlock Holmes.

[haroldsnepsts]

My brain, using the information I have observed up until this point to make a deduction - kind of like Sherlock Holmes.

Well, Sherlock Holmes mostly used abductive reasoning. That might be your problem.

If anything, the articles from the Times and the Post quoted one page back make it sound like the NHL are the ones who won't concede on contract issues. I'm hoping they're not true.

If both sides get to 50/50 and can agree on make whole, the NHL needs to give up most of their ridiculous contract demands except for the one eliminating cap circumvention (the 5% restriction).

[RedWingsDad]

I speculate that both the NHL and NHLPA had terms in mind right from the start that they would be willing to settle on, if forced. It would seem that the 50/50 revenue split was one area that both sides could settle for.... I wonder where that settle point is for the rest of the topics.

It would seem at this point that the NHLPA's mindset from the start was "If we concede the 50/50 revenue split, we will NOT move much at all on contract right's issues.".

Just mindless speculation because I’m bored...

Well, Sherlock Holmes mostly used abductive reasoning. That might be your problem.

If anything, the articles from the Times and the Post quoted one page back make it sound like the NHL are the ones who won't concede on contract issues. I'm hoping they're not true.

If both sides get to 50/50 and can agree on make whole, the NHL needs to give up most of their ridiculous contract demands except for the one eliminating cap circumvention.

I don't have a "problem", thanks. Back off.

[Nightfall]

Just mindless speculation because I’m bored...

Thats the problem. 75 pages and the lockout is still ongoing. I really can't wait until this is done so I can start engaging others on how Dats scored in the shootout and how Franzen is lazy and he sucks (well, I don't believe that, but I digress.....)

I am pretty jaded towards the whole lockout now. I was emotionally involved, but now I just don't care anymore if the NHL comes back.

[haroldsnepsts]

I speculate that both the NHL and NHLPA had terms in mind right from the start that they would be willing to settle on, if forced. It would seem that the 50/50 revenue split was one area that both sides could settle for.... I wonder where that settle point is for the rest of the topics.

It would seem at this point that the NHLPA's mindset from the start was "If we concede the 50/50 revenue split, we will NOT move much at all on contract right's issues.".

Just mindless speculation because I’m bored...

I just don't see why the NHL cares so strongly about most of these issues. The ones that prevent cap circumvention I totally understand. But why not settle on the others?

I don't have a "problem", thanks. Back off.

lighten up francis.

I was talking about the one sidedness in your reasoning. You made it sound like only the union had this all picked from the beginning. I'm sure both sides had some sense of what they might settle for, but that's pretty much par for the course in any negotiation.

Honestly with your second post on the issue we both basically feel the same way about them arriving at 50/50. I guess I just didn't get that from your first one.

Edited by haroldsnepsts, 13 November 2012 - 03:24 PM.

[frankgrimes]

So if the PA is moving from 57 to 50 which is still a big paycut, the NHL has to give something too so how about leaving all other things alone and get a damn deal done?

The problem is not based on RS, CBA or salary floor the problem is simple that some teams don't have a funbase and shouldn't be forced to spend more than they can afford, period.

[chances14]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409406

"But look what happened, the players always get their money. They're always going to get paid, no matter what. Look at that last deal. We ended up with the cap and everyone thought it was a bad deal. But it ended up great, right? No matter what the system is, or has been, the players get their money. No matter what the contract, the owners always find a way to pay them more. That's why I say, get a deal and get back in there...the money's always there."

Recchi also expressed his shock regarding the news three years ago that the players fired then-executive director Paul Kelly.

"A dark time," Recchi told The Globe. "And it has been frustrating to see how it's played out, obviously. If Paul had stayed on the job, I don't think you would have seen this happen. The two sides would have started talking long before, maybe a year sooner (in 2011), and not with two or three months to go before (the CBA) expired. There would have been something in place, absolutely. And now here they are, trying to get to 50 per cent and also trying to make everyone whole. Well, you know, with the escrow we paid, I know I wasn't made whole over the last few years I played. That's just the way it was and we accepted it."

[cusimano_brothers]

Until this very moment, I had totally forgotten about Mark Recchi.

[Euro_Twins]

I just like the fact that some of the owners are coming out (anonymously of course), and saying that they are not all that concerned about contract issues, and just want a deal signed. I don't see why owners care so much much about the contract issues, if you want to sign a guy for only 5 years, then do that. Give a little bit and make it 8-10 year max signings with either 10% max variance, or 5 year with no variance. Not many teams would sign a guy for 10 million for 3 years then 2 million for 2 years... seems ridiculous what the owners are asking, if you ask me. (we seriously need a banging head off a wall smiley, just sayin...)