Fan590- Linden will address the media from the NHLPA at 2pm et

[CarlRacki]

The owners are willing to compromise on every issue but one...the same issue that Linden is not willing to compromise on.

Bingo. That's why this ultimately will become a war of attrition, and that's a war the players cannot win.

 

[Greschner4]

It is Bettman's fault for expanding the league into markets that can't afford to exist. Now he is trying to create a system where no matter where a team is located, what kind of cable deal they have, how many seats the sell per year, they'll still make a profit. He's making owning an NHL team a risk-free venture for these Billionaire owners who view owning a sports team as a hobby. I understand that he works for the owners, but I don't like where the NHL is going if the owners have their way. I believed all along that Bettman had no interest in salvating the season. He knew he could declare an impasse and create a new cba under his own terms, and restart the league with guaranteed profits. At the same time, a hard cap will do a lot to prevent the days of the Edmonton and Montreal dynasties, and that keeping players on the same team for the duration of their careers will almost be non-existant. Call me a traditionalist.

... I agree that the Sunbelt markets are lame and that Bettman is a tool for moving teams there.

 

[tritone]

Is anybody else getting dizzy?

I honestly can't even tell which side some of you guys are on when I read the posts

Only thing I know is that there doesn't seem to be any reason for optimism short of the players having a glorious epiphany and realizing the Owners will win no matter how long this goes.

The longer it goes the less the players will make.

 

[AM]

Yup

The players arguements dont hold much water:

[Toronto or New York is pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue, players want the opportunity for a piece of that pie. Players are of the opinion that if a team has the money to spend, they should be allowed to spend it. They don't want to be the ones penalized for certain teams' spending habits. If anyone, those teams should be penalized. That's where luxury taxes come into play. It's only fair, right?] Quote

If the league has more money, the players get more as a negotiated percentage.

[Secondly, a cap based on a % of average revenues dampens their earning potential because new teams have been brought into poor markets, which generate little revenue. These revenues pull the league-wide revenues down, and hurt all the players. The league is making a pile in franchise fees, at the players' expense.]quote

No, the players whose jobs would be lost without those teams stand to lose alot if those jobs arnt there. Also, generally a larger market helps produce interest and thus league profits.... which I'll remind you, the players get their percentage of.

[Third, in order to effectively tie salaries to revenues, the players would have to rely upon the quoting of revenues stated by the owners. How can the players trust the owners in such a situation? These owners don't open their books to anybody, and stand to lose nothing and gain everything if they understate their revenues. Look at the glaring differences between the Leavitt report, and Forbes' report. The owners simply cannot be trusted to accurately disclose revenues.[/QUOTE]

The idea that money can be hidden is laughable, as long as they negotaiate the revenues which are hockey related there wont be a problem with the accounting. Of course this is the sticking point, but I dont see how the players, as employees, can argue in court they deserve a share of the franchise value increase, so they may as well stop dreaming about it.

 

[Greschner4]

The players arguements dont hold much water:

[Toronto or New York is pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars in revenue, players want the opportunity for a piece of that pie. Players are of the opinion that if a team has the money to spend, they should be allowed to spend it. They don't want to be the ones penalized for certain teams' spending habits. If anyone, those teams should be penalized. That's where luxury taxes come into play. It's only fair, right?] Quote

If the league has more money, the players get more as a negotiated percentage.

[Secondly, a cap based on a % of average revenues dampens their earning potential because new teams have been brought into poor markets, which generate little revenue. These revenues pull the league-wide revenues down, and hurt all the players. The league is making a pile in franchise fees, at the players' expense.]quote

No, the players whose jobs would be lost without those teams stand to lose alot if those jobs arnt there. Also, generally a larger market helps produce interest and thus league profits.... which I'll remind you, the players get their percentage of.

[Third, in order to effectively tie salaries to revenues, the players would have to rely upon the quoting of revenues stated by the owners. How can the players trust the owners in such a situation? These owners don't open their books to anybody, and stand to lose nothing and gain everything if they understate their revenues. Look at the glaring differences between the Leavitt report, and Forbes' report. The owners simply cannot be trusted to accurately disclose revenues.

The idea that money can be hidden is laughable, as long as they negotaiate the revenues which are hockey related there wont be a problem with the accounting. Of course this is the sticking point, but I dont see how the players, as employees, can argue in court they deserve a share of the franchise value increase, so they may as well stop dreaming about it.[/QUOTE]

Not to mention that the whole thing about hidden money was way overstated. All you have to do is look at the number of owners who are willing to not operate this year. If they were making profits, they'd want to operate, pure and simple.

 

[Hobey Baker]

I've read just about every thread on the topic, and all I can say is: the players are completely out of line. No need for some long-winded response....

 

[GirardIsStupid]

This whole lockout is the fault of the owners (something many people here are ignorant of because they're jealous of the players and think a hard cap of 40 mill will provide competitive balance, which is false to a great degree). They're asking the players to fix a car crash the owners intentionally caused. If the season is cancelled, the Avalanche, Canucks, Sharks, NJ, Wild etc...can all kiss my contribution to their ticket revenues good-bye for the rest of my life. It doesn't mean much that I alone am doing this. Yet, I have spent lots of money travelling through various cities watching NHL games. Thus I am very angry. Also, I do think there are many other people like me who are just as angry (http://tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=112100). If the NHL kisses this season good-bye, then I will say good-bye to them.

And I end this post with a quote from an executive of the Detroit Redwings (who are greatly in favouf of a cap and are one of the hardliners IMO):

Devellano, the alternate governor for the Red Wings and their former general manager, said saving the season is far from a priority for the owners.

"We want the right deal," he told the Free Press. "The hockey's not important."

"My hope and wish is (these talks) start us toward a deal for next season."

http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/3342332

 

[Sanderson]

Um no, the owners don't want the players to fix anything.
They spent the money, it was their decision. Now they decided they need cost certainty, again, their decision.

Why do the players say that the owners decided to give them the money, saying it was their decision, but then can't accept the fact that the owners made a different decision now?

 

[GirardIsStupid]

Um no, the owners don't want the players to fix anything.
They spent the money, it was their decision. Now they decided they need cost certainty, again, their decision.

Why do the players say that the owners decided to give them the money, saying it was their decision, but then can't accept the fact that the owners made a different decision now?

What are you talking about? They want the players to give up billions of dollars for the next 5 or more years. The rich owners want to put all of that money in their back pocket. Guess what...it's going to be Colorado, Detroit, Toronto, and Dallas living happily off the 40 mill cap while Calgary, Nashville, and Carolina will barely be able to keep up with paying their on-ice product.

 

[Winger98]

I understand...

The 1 question i'd like to ask anyone here, or any NHLPA member is, what's the reason why you don't want a cap? what's so wrong about having a salary cap?

The owners have outlined the reason why not having a cap and continuing down the road we've been on could do to the game, but what about the players, what effect will this have on them that they can't just accept it?

My guess is that the players have no trust in the NHL providing accurate numbers to any third party to determine what revenues are exactly, and if they don't have the trust in the NHL to provide an accurate revenue number, they have to fear that the cap level can be distorted to heavily favor the owners/oppress salaries.

I have a feeling this is also why the players are often pushing for more revenue sharing among the clubs. If Nashville has more of an interest in NYR providing accurate accounting numbers, they're more likely to monitor/blow the whistle if they feel they are getting slighted. With the vague revenue sharing ideas the NHL have put forth (from what I've seen, largely having to do with sharing only playoff revenue), there is less pressure from within the league to monitor the accounting numbers each team presents and each team would actually have more interest in maintaining possibly inaccurately low revenue numbers.

Now I know everyone will mention the NHL "giving the books" to someone, but who put "the books" together? Who would give any third party any of the information they would ask for? who would collect it? In the end, each individual club would very likely remain in control of presenting their own numbers to a third party, since it would be incredibly difficult to bring in a third party for each team to keep track of the financial numbers for a whole season.

this is a problem that I don't think Bettman understands because he wasn't involved with the sport during things like the Eagleson mess. I'm sure he knows about it, and can appreciate it the same way a history major can appreciate a good book about the battle of gettysburg, but I don't think he grasps how personal it likely remains to the NHLPA and the deep rooted mistrust they may still harbor towards the owners. While the NHL has done a fantastic job with the PR battle, they've failed at the more important job of making the players believe the owners are bargaining in good faith.

Just my guess, though, why the NHLPA has seemed so defiant to the owner's offers and to the cap in particular.

 

[copperandblue]

What are you talking about? They want the players to give up billions of dollars for the next 5 or more years.

You say that as if the money is already theirs....

 

[mooseOAK*]

This whole lockout is the fault of the owners (something many people here are ignorant of because they're jealous of the players and think a hard cap of 40 mill will provide competitive balance, which is false to a great degree). They're asking the players to fix a car crash the owners intentionally caused.

The owners didn't intentionally cause anything. They agreed under pressure to an imperfect CBA with loopholes last time that the NHLPA and the agents exploited with great glee and abandon. To the point that it is almost like they were trying to put the league out of business.

All they are doing is making sure that doesn't happen again while the NHLPA is lying down on the tracks trying to keep the gravy train from leaving.

 

[AM]

The owners didn't intentionally cause anything. They agreed under pressure to an imperfect CBA with loopholes last time that the NHLPA and the agents exploited with great glee and abandon. To the point that it is almost like they were trying to put the league out of business.

All they are doing is making sure that doesn't happen again while the NHLPA is lying down on the tracks trying to keep the gravy train from leaving.

Nice one.

 

[BLONG7]

The owners didn't intentionally cause anything. They agreed under pressure to an imperfect CBA with loopholes last time that the NHLPA and the agents exploited with great glee and abandon. To the point that it is almost like they were trying to put the league out of business.

All they are doing is making sure that doesn't happen again while the NHLPA is lying down on the tracks trying to keep the gravy train from leaving.

To the point of almost putting the league out of business, is a very good way of looking at it, and if the truth be told I hope that about 4-6 teams don't make it and the so called union will have shot (around 150 jobs)themselves in the leg...

 

[PecaFan]

Based on that, it's pretty obvious why a $1.3 million-per-player cap is such an insult.

It still amazes me that so many refer to this mythical $1.3 million number. That's eons ago.

The NHL proposed a $38.6 million dollar cap. That's $1.75 million per player.

And of course, that was a starting point, the PA could easily negotiate that higher if they want.

 

[BLONG7]

It still amazes me that so many refer to this mythical $1.3 million number. That's eons ago.

The NHL proposed a $38.6 million dollar cap. That's $1.75 million per player.

And of course, that was a starting point, the PA could easily negotiate that higher if they want.

Not sure if it's 1.3 or 1.75 but it has something to do with salaries vs players costs? Not sure, anyhow it's not enough according to the brainthrusts at NHLPA headquarters...sad, very sad...

 

[Lobstertainment]

sometimes I think the PA would reject a 60 million dollar hard cap simply because it's a cap.

 

[old kummelweck]

This is rhetorical nonsense. It took 8-9 hours over wednesday and thursday to discuss nothing? Please... This is the NHLPA tightening the screws.

I believe all is lost when THEY DON'T have that next meeting.

 

[rwilson99]

Basically the players are saying there is no reason for a cap. Pay us what the market determines we are worth and what you can afford.

I hope the NHLPA members enjoy life in Europe and Russia where the "free market" system pays them 100-300K a year.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

sometimes I think the PA would reject a 60 million dollar hard cap simply because it's a cap.

Genius Robert Esche said they wouldn't accept a 100 million dollar cap.

 

[Lady Rhian]

Genius Robert Esche said they wouldn't accept a 100 million dollar cap.

I literally LMAO at that quote. I believe he also said 200 million. Kid needs a course thought processing.

 

[monster_bertuzzi]

I literally LMAO at that quote. I believe he also said 200 million. Kid needs a course thought processing.

They're just so brain-washed by the likes of Goodenow, Linden, etc. it makes me sick. When will they realize that they're not as good of entertainers as Baseball players (in the USA) and come to grips that they're indeed overpaid. They had a nice 10 year run of sky-rocketing salaries - to the point where Holik makes 9 million a season and Martin Lapointe makes 5 million, but as Rob De Niro said, all good thing come to an end.

 

[Lady Rhian]

They're just so brain-washed by the likes of Goodenow, Linden, etc. it makes me sick. When will they realize that they're not as good of entertainers as Baseball players (in the USA) and come to grips that they're indeed overpaid. They had a nice 10 year run of sky-rocketing salaries - to the point where Holik makes 9 million a season and Martin Lapointe makes 5 million, but as Rob De Niro said, all good thing come to an end.

Yes, I mentioned Marty Lapointe in another thread. So true. It has gotten to a point where a cap is necessary to ground some of these kids back to reality. They've had it TOO good, and many times, they don't give back what they get in monetary value.

Some people go as far as to blame the expansion- mentioned several times, was the talent pool was diluted over the years. I don't feel it is, there are many great players out there still, but if the incentive to work hard has already been given to them in their younger rookie years, then what is left for them to strive for? They are given money and glory too early in their careers, time to make these kids EARN their way up the monetary ladder, as the players of years before them did.

 

[pacde]

Im sorry Trevor, the players are not the product.

The game is the product, the players are the workers that create the product, but the players are not the product. I pay my money to watch the game. No player is bigger than the game. As a fan Im willing to watch all the current players sit on the sidelines into obscurity as long as when hockey comes back, it comes back healthy and whatever players are playing then, I hope they produce a good competitive product - no matter who they are.

pacde

 

[Hockey_Nut99]

What the heck is this blame game about? That's why the players remind me of little kids. "Oh it's their fault!!"...When a company messes up and the employees get laid off or get a reduced wage, do they cry like babies and yell at the owners saying it's their fault?

By saying it's their fault, the players aknowledge that there are problems, yet they say they won't help fix them. What a bunch of clowns!!