Boston Globe: Players, Own Up to the Fact You Got Beat

[barnburner]

Fact - the league was in dire straits due to the actions of a dozen or so irresponsible owners.

Fact - You are correct.

Fact - When the owners came to their senses and tried to take corrective
action (cost certainty) - the players played blind and desperately tried to
avoid that happening, inspite of the fact that the game was in jepordy.

People keep saying that the owners created the problem, and they are absolutely correct.
But, somehow they are wrong for trying to fix it?? I.E. - You made the mistake so now you are stuck with it forever, because you cannot expect the players to give up what you gave them.......

 

[Icey]

Because the players we're wrong... duh.

Were they or is that just in your eyes. I think its time the everyone stop blaming someone for this entire mess and try looking to the future and what is going to happen. Everyone is to blame for this but the players do what players do, they stuck to together through the tough times. Maybe their misjudged their union leadership, but that doesn't necessarily make them wrong. If everyone knew what would happen, I guess none of us would ever make a mistakes. No one us would ever date anyone that we don't end up marrying since that is the same thing, a bad judge of character. None of us would ever buy a lottery ticket and not end up winning big, because that is the same thing a gamble. They misjudged their leadership and took a gamble and lost. It doesn't make them wrong. \


Couldn't you blame Bettman and the NHL also. They were paid to get a deal done and they didn't, regardless of the reason, they were wrong and to that end they failed. They also misjudged how strong the union was. They figured the union would crumble under one their threats. They thought they could crush it. Now I am sure many of you will tell me that the union has been crushed, but that just isn't so. The players are still strong and standing by each other. No one is being replaced (although you all wish, just can't figure out why since you hate the players so much).

But instead of doing all that how about everyone just concentrate on the future. Look ahead as to what is to happen. The players will win if the game of hockey wins. Neither the NHL or the players can judge this CBA as a total win or total loss. Both sides got something out of it they wanted, so just stop blaming each side, ripping each other apart and concentrate on the game instead of looking back saying what everyone should have done.

 

[cecilnyr]

Why should I care if they make a profit? They made alot of their money in other businesses and still make their money from those respective businesses. The players can care because its their business to...but I certaintly could care less if Bill Wirtz or Jacobs or Leipold or Jimmy Dolan turn a profit.

This is the problem to many people want to blame one side or the other like DuPont does in this article. Again I'll reiterate for those of you who can't seem to understand, it makes no sense to blame one side or the other for this stupidity, the ONLY people who LOST here were US the FANS and those who LOST their jobs due to the lockout.

But if it makes you all happy to spew your venom at the players or owners go ahead...I am ticked at both of them, but that's not going to help the NHL grow from here.

I'll leave you with a question: How would all of you feel if a franchise or more than 1 franchise had to fold during the span of this CBA?

 

[cecilnyr]

Were they or is that just in your eyes. I think its time the everyone stop blaming someone for this entire mess and try looking to the future and what is going to happen. Everyone is to blame for this but the players do what players do, they stuck to together through the tough times. Maybe their misjudged their union leadership, but that doesn't necessarily make them wrong. If everyone knew what would happen, I guess none of us would ever make a mistakes. No one us would ever date anyone that we don't end up marrying since that is the same thing, a bad judge of character. None of us would ever buy a lottery ticket and not end up winning big, because that is the same thing a gamble. They misjudged their leadership and took a gamble and lost. It doesn't make them wrong. \


Couldn't you blame Bettman and the NHL also. They were paid to get a deal done and they didn't. They also misjudged how strong the union was. They thought they could crush it. Now I am sure many of you will tell me that the union has been crushed, but that just isn't so. The players are still strong and standing by each other. None is being replaced (although you all wish, just can't figure out why since you hate the players so much).

But instead of doing all that how about everyone just concentrate on the future. Look ahead as to what is to happen. The players will win if the game of hockey wins. Neither the NHL or the players can judge this CBA as a total win or total loss. Both sides got something out of it they wanted, so just stop blaming each side, ripping each other apart and concentrate on the game instead of looking back saying what everyone should have done.

I don't think I could've said it any better!

 

[Icey]

I'll leave you with a question: How would all of you feel if a franchise or more than 1 franchise had to fold during the span of this CBA?

That would also be the players fault, because around here, its their fault for everything that doesn't go their way.

 

[nedved93]

Exactly why wasn't it? I believe its always been about players salaries and how they were too high and that is under the payroll part of the expenses. So that'd be the only way they could lose money no? So exactly what then if not the payroll was the problem that caused this lockout snake?

cecil - don't waste your time here.

reasoned debate isn't the status quo - it is merely an outlet for these resident pundits to hurl invective at "greedy" players. it is abudantly clear that members who dare to be of an anti-owner persuasion (read: not pro-player) are not only unwelcome here, but are in fact vilified as PA shills. the environment isn't conducive to constructive debate - it never has been throughout this entire lockout debacle. unfortunately, none of the pro-draconian salary cap members understand that in defending this poorly conceived policy, they are arguing against the inviolable laws of economics and for institutionalized socialism - and as with all things that reak of socialism, the long-run effects will be both un-anticipated and disastrous.

a solution to the NHL's flawed economic system was possible - an original solution that would have rewarded forward-looking owners for careful, patient and prudent construction of their clubs via the player development route and would have sharply penalized those owners who always went for the "quick" fix (i'm looking right at my fellow ranger fans). instead, the glorious and just owners went with the "profit-certainty" route - a decision that will ultimately spell doom for the NHL. i sure an glad that little jimmy dolan and his cadre of buffoons will not only be able to add to their bottom lines thanks to this poorly-conceived CBA, but will also be able to continue keeping clubs like anaheim, nashville, and atlanta (among others) on life support!

 

[cecilnyr]

cecil - don't waste your time here.

reasoned debate isn't the status quo - it is merely an outlet for these resident pundits to hurl invective at "greedy" players. it is abudantly clear that members who dare to be of an anti-owner persuasion (read: not pro-player) are not only unwelcome here, but are in fact vilified as PA shills. the environment isn't conducive to constructive debate - it never has been throughout this entire lockout debacle. unfortunately, none of the pro-draconian salary cap members understand that in defending this poorly conceived policy, they are arguing against the inviolable laws of economics and for institutionalized socialism - and as with all things that reak of socialism, the long-run effects will be both un-anticipated and disastrous.

a solution to the NHL's flawed economic system was possible - an original solution that would have rewarded forward-looking owners for careful, patient and prudent construction of their clubs via the player development route and would have sharply penalized those owners who always went for the "quick" fix (i'm looking right at my fellow ranger fans). instead, the glorious and just owners went with the "profit-certainty" route - a decision that will ultimately spell doom for the NHL. i sure an glad that little jimmy dolan and his cadre of buffoons will not only be able to add to their bottom lines thanks to this poorly-conceived CBA, but will also be able to continue keeping clubs like anaheim, nashville, and atlanta (among others) on life support!

Notice Nedved with that question I posed to him he didn't answer it, he instead chose to attack me again.

 

[barnburner]

I'll leave you with a question: How would all of you feel if a franchise or more than 1 franchise had to fold during the span of this CBA?

The loss of a few franchises would probably be a good thing for the league as a whole, raising the talent level of the rest of the league.

 

[Gee Wally]

The loss of a few franchises would probably be a good thing for the league as a whole, raising the talent level of the rest of the league.

The other way to skin that cat..which I like a lot better. Is to cut each roster by 2 to 3 players.

 

[cecilnyr]

The other way to skin that cat..which I like a lot better. Is to cut each roster by 2 to 3 players.

Wally I like the idea....Perhaps we have issue #1 the next time the CBA expires?

 

[London Knights]

The other way to skin that cat..which I like a lot better. Is to cut each roster by 2 to 3 players.

It's possible, but it doesn't mean the product improves. What it does force is having players out on the ice longer which will most likely lead to more fatigue as the season wears on. If you cut the roster size, a cut also needs to be made in the length of the season.

Cutting 2-3 players means the loss of an entire line of hockey.

Either the 3rd pairing on the defense is gone and you go with a 5 man rotation where the "#1" player plays with the #2 and the #5 guy or you lose the "#4" line and you go with an extra forward and three lines.

While it could mean as little as an extra 5 minutes spread over three lines, some teams use their "4th" line as much as 10 minutes in a game. That's probably going to translate into another 5+ minutes for your top line which usually logs around 20+ minutes to begin with.

 

[danaluvsthekings]

we should all care that the owners make a profit but most of all the players should care because the owners write their checks.

Why should I care that the owners make a profit? There's nothing that guarantees a business will make a profit. If you make bad business decisions, you're going to lose money. No business is guaranteed that they will make a profit. Several NHL owners have made horrible business decisions over the last few years and none of that is the players fault. If I opened a small business and paid my employees more than I could afford, picked a bad location for my store, and ended up losing a ton of money and had to close my business, no one would feel sorry for me or care that I didn't make a profit and I had to close. And I don't feel too sorry for NHL owners that have made horrible business decisions since the last CBA was signed in 95.

Most of these owners own these teams as toys anyways, not to make large sums of money. The Bruins and Hawks are toys to Jacobs and Wirtz and wouldn't sell if someone offered them well over the value of the team. Other owners own teams because they can profit from other ventures besides the hockey team. Someone like Anschutz bought the Kings not because he likes hockey but because he knew they would be a tenant in the new arena he wanted to build, that he could convince the Lakers to move into the arena as well. And Staples Center has been a cash cow since the moment its doors opened. Plus they're planning a huge development on the land he owns around Staples Center. The Kings might lose $5 mil a season however Staples Center could make Anschutz a profit of 5 or 10 times that if not more a year. The Leafs and the Coyotes are also planning major developments around their arenas. The Kings not losing that $5 mil a year is nice to Anschutz but it's not something that's going to make or break him or something he can't put up with because of the money he's making in other areas associated with Staples Center.

 

[Kritter471]

It's possible, but it doesn't mean the product improves. What it does force is having players out on the ice longer which will most likely lead to more fatigue as the season wears on. If you cut the roster size, a cut also needs to be made in the length of the season.

Cutting 2-3 players means the loss of an entire line of hockey.

Either the 3rd pairing on the defense is gone and you go with a 5 man rotation where the "#1" player plays with the #2 and the #5 guy or you lose the "#4" line and you go with an extra forward and three lines.

While it could mean as little as an extra 5 minutes spread over three lines, some teams use their "4th" line as much as 10 minutes in a game. That's probably going to translate into another 5+ minutes for your top line which usually logs around 20+ minutes to begin with.

While your logic is correct, it assumes at 20 man roster. NHL rosters right now stand at 23, I believe (might be 24). The "active game" roster is 20.

I wouldn't support changing the active-game roster, because of the reasons you mention (4 forward-lines, 3 d-pairs and two goalies). But I would support making a 21 or 22 man roster, expanding it in the playoffs to 24-26 (for the injuries that creep up and you only want a guy to miss one game).

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

But when anything is posted that is pro-player/anti-owner gets slammed by a majority of the people on this board...Why is that? Yes the players were wrong but so were the owners...the lockout boils down to this...they both wanted to stuff their pockets (the owners wanted more money the players wanted to keep getting paid how they were)while holding US the fans hostage.

Can you see the difference between loosing your arse and "stuffing their pockets"? The previous economic system was fundementally flawed. Is linkage the only way to fix the problem? I don't think so, but I don't count. The owners, who were collectively better off not playing than playing, held all of the cards here. Because the PA had their head in the sand, it stretched out this long.

I agree that many writers (and posters here) are getting up on the pulpit and preaching, which is annoying. I would suggest that you stop reading articles, because their are going to be a TON of people dog-piling on this topic.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Why should I care that the owners make a profit? There's nothing that guarantees a business will make a profit. If you make bad business decisions, you're going to lose money. No business is guaranteed that they will make a profit. Several NHL owners have made horrible business decisions over the last few years and none of that is the players fault. If I opened a small business and paid my employees more than I could afford, picked a bad location for my store, and ended up losing a ton of money and had to close my business, no one would feel sorry for me or care that I didn't make a profit and I had to close. And I don't feel too sorry for NHL owners that have made horrible business decisions since the last CBA was signed in 95.

Big difference in your analogy though - if you were paying your employees 3-5 TIMES as much as they could make anywhere else in the world - do you think it would be in their best interest to agree to 2-4 TIMES as much to keep you business? I sure do.

 

[Bruwinz37]

You forgot to mention, " Paid for by Jeremy Jacobs, Owner of the Boston Bruins", whose team will take up permanent residence in the NHL basement. The only free agents who sign with this team are the players who are passed over by every other team in the NHL, and just ahead of him by a point will be Bill Wirtz's Chicago Black Hawks.

Wow, its really funny that you actually believe something like this could happen.

 

[London Knights]

While your logic is correct, it assumes at 20 man roster. NHL rosters right now stand at 23, I believe (might be 24). The "active game" roster is 20.

I wouldn't support changing the active-game roster, because of the reasons you mention (4 forward-lines, 3 d-pairs and two goalies). But I would support making a 21 or 22 man roster, expanding it in the playoffs to 24-26 (for the injuries that creep up and you only want a guy to miss one game).

My apologies, I posted without thinking and addressed something contrary to what was being argued.

To address this I would like to point out that cutting the roster in this situation likely means you are just sending the "odd man out" in the lineup down to the AHL instead of holding them on your roster.

So we won't see the likes of the Josh Holden's, Kyle Wanvig's, Karl Dykhouse's, Todd Reirden's, etc. You wouldn't improve the game very much by taking these players off the 24 man roster.

 

[danaluvsthekings]

Big difference in your analogy though - if you were paying your employees 3-5 TIMES as much as they could make anywhere else in the world - do you think it would be in their best interest to agree to 2-4 TIMES as much to keep you business? I sure do.

It depends. Some businesses decide to pay their employees well to keep them happy and loyal, even though they could still find employees at a lower salary. There's a fast food hamburger chain in California, Nevada, and Arizona, called In-n-Out, that starts its employees at like $9.50 or $10 an hour even though they only have to offer minimum wage. Paying someone $3 an hour more than they'd make at McDonald's or Burger King looks stupid and paying kids that much to flip hamburgers cuts into their profit margins, but they still make a profit and they have happy employees which is good for business.

I'm not saying the NHLPA's stance was right in this whole situation. I'm just trying to say that no one that opens a business is going to be guaranteed a profit and the NHL owners shouldn't be different than any other business. Why should they be entitled to know they're going to make a profit every year when every other type of business knows they need to make smart financial decisions to keep themselves from going belly up?

 

[Gee Wally]

It's possible, but it doesn't mean the product improves. What it does force is having players out on the ice longer which will most likely lead to more fatigue as the season wears on. If you cut the roster size, a cut also needs to be made in the length of the season.

Cutting 2-3 players means the loss of an entire line of hockey.

Either the 3rd pairing on the defense is gone and you go with a 5 man rotation where the "#1" player plays with the #2 and the #5 guy or you lose the "#4" line and you go with an extra forward and three lines.

While it could mean as little as an extra 5 minutes spread over three lines, some teams use their "4th" line as much as 10 minutes in a game. That's probably going to translate into another 5+ minutes for your top line which usually logs around 20+ minutes to begin with.

all true..but you would in fact be cutting the bottom of the barrel . players..increasing talent level. Also the cream would come to the top.
Better conditioned athletes would thrive. Those not as dedicated , would not. Also i believe the fatique factor could possibly be a positive and perhaps actually see more scoring later in the game due to once again better players playing more.

Just my opinion.

 

[chiavsfan]

Will the NHL ever see Crosby or Ovechkin?

Considering Crosby already said if there is a season this year he will play NOWHERE else (see any one of 100 threads on that) I would say, yes, there is a really good chance

 

[snakepliskin]

maybe i used the wrong words when i posted the owners should make a profit, i would have been more correct to state that even though they may not be interested in making a big profit from their teams they sure don't own one to contunally losing their arse year after year. the nhl may lose some franchises over the next few years because of this labor war but in no way will that be good for the league as some continually suggest. i am afraid that the diehards on these message boards do not represent the attitudes of the masses that attend hockey games. there seems to be very little concern of how severe the public backlash is going to be on the sport. There has been signifcantly more written lately about fans attitudes toward the players than fans actually supporting the teams. Diehards will wait in line to buy tickets but what percentage of the gate is purchased by less faithful customers who this year found other things to do with their bucks? no matter what happens it could be several years before the league see 2 bill in revenues again.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

The other way to skin that cat..which I like a lot better. Is to cut each roster by 2 to 3 players.

How does that help? Other than to save a million five?

The good players are still spread among 30 teams.
That's the problem.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

Wally I like the idea....Perhaps we have issue #1 the next time the CBA expires?

No. The issue next time is pretty clear to anyone who has even tried to imagine the new NHL.

If the player haters despise the players now, wait until until they see their team sign a big UFA who turns into a cap-hogging bust.

Guaranteed Contracts are next.

And I'm gonna guess, given the petty nature of many fans I've seen, that the owners will have support of about 90 percent of the fans.

 

[GSC2k2*]

No. The issue next time is pretty clear to anyone who has even tried to imagine the new NHL.

If the player haters despise the players now, wait until until they see their team sign a big UFA who turns into a cap-hogging bust.

Guaranteed Contracts are next.

And I'm gonna guess, given the petty nature of many fans I've seen, that the owners will have support of about 90 percent of the fans.

Well, that has not yet come up in the NBA, but you know best, Newsguy.

And I am sure you will be able to come up with a brilliant rationale why eliminating guaranteed contracts is a BAD thing for the NHL ...

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

It depends. Some businesses decide to pay their employees well to keep them happy and loyal, even though they could still find employees at a lower salary. There's a fast food hamburger chain in California, Nevada, and Arizona, called In-n-Out, that starts its employees at like $9.50 or $10 an hour even though they only have to offer minimum wage. Paying someone $3 an hour more than they'd make at McDonald's or Burger King looks stupid and paying kids that much to flip hamburgers cuts into their profit margins, but they still make a profit and they have happy employees which is good for business.

I'm not saying the NHLPA's stance was right in this whole situation. I'm just trying to say that no one that opens a business is going to be guaranteed a profit and the NHL owners shouldn't be different than any other business. Why should they be entitled to know they're going to make a profit every year when every other type of business knows they need to make smart financial decisions to keep themselves from going belly up?

1) In-n-Out frigging rocks!
2) You said they are still making money. That wasn't the case in with the NHL.
3) NHL franchises aren't guaranteed a profit. I really hate when people say that. If CAR lost a HUGE amount of money (I think I remember a $20M figure) last year with a $30M payroll, do you think they are going to make money at the league minimum of $22M? I agree that the big market franchises will make really good money, but the small/developing markets are anything but guranteed a profit.
4) The NHL is a sports league that needs teams to stay in business so the big markets have someone else to play. This isn't In-N-Out burger trying to put Burger King out of business so they have the corner on the fast food business. This CBA was required (IMO) to give the developing markets a chance to compete, which will increase their chances of strong fanbase.