haha, crosby clarifies his position. who'd have thought??

[Hockeyfan02]

I agree that the NHLPA is trying to protect the big salary players, but how are young guys being thrown under the bus? Because of the capped entry level contracts proposed? If so, then the NHL is trying to do the same thing. Or I'm misinterpreting what you wrote.

 

[mooseOAK*]

In the first place, why is a 17 year old being asked a question on a complicated issue he knows little about. Secondly, why are people taking his answers so seriously?

 

[Slats432]

In the first place, why is a 17 year old being asked a question on a complicated issue he knows little about. Secondly, why are people taking his answers so seriously?

This thread is about the ongoing strongarm tactics of the NHLPA and its members.

Another reason I support the owners.

People like NGO and JFF...everytime I see an owner or someone pro-owner do or say something stupid, I recognize it as such.

Why is it that you try to justify everything the PA says and does because of your support?

People in and within the NHLPA contact their players whenever they say anything against the union or it's stance. They make their players retract statesments that they make under good concience. They threaten their own brethren if they even consider to cross the lockout line.

Just so you know..overall I am pro union, those that protect employees in good faith. I was part of a union and would have no problem being a part of one again....

I just don't understand how people can defend stupid things carte blanche.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

I strongly disagree with that. The majority of the players are NOT making the big dollars and have very little potential to cash in. They are the silent majority and are taking it in the kiester for the superstars. The young players have been pushed under the bus by the NHLPA and are being sold-out in comparison to the vets, even the 4th line scrubs. If this lockout were anything but something about the top 100 players continuing to be paid huge amounts of money I would agree with you. But when the NHLPA sells out the young players, those not yet drafted, and the second, third and fourth line players just to hold the top salaries in place, well that tells me they are not interested in what is good for the union. A union looks after the majority of the membership, not the minority. The NHL put an offer on the table that insured the majority were looked after and that the minority took the hit. If I were a player I would be some upset that MY union was willing to sacrafice the majority of my brothers, and put our careers at risk, in favor of those in the upper eschelon that have already made more money in a year than I will make in my career. You're delusional if you think that the run of the mill players see things much differently than that. They are showing solidarity at the moment, but when the cold reality of what the NHLPA is doing to them hits home they will abandon it. They are sacraficing their careers for Bill Guerin. How noble? No, how stupid.

Do you not realize why the union is trying to protect the top end salaries ???

The top end salaries raise the bar for everyone else. Salaries have always been set from the top down. It's good for everyone in the union if the top player is making $8 million as opposed to $5 million.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Crosby through his agent Pat Brisson said in mid-November he had no interest in being a replacement player.
http://slam.canoe.ca/Slam/Hockey/Junior/2004/11/13/713298.html

 

[John Flyers Fan]

This thread is about the ongoing strongarm tactics of the NHLPA and its members.

Another reason I support the owners.

People like NGO and JFF...everytime I see an owner or someone pro-owner do or say something stupid, I recognize it as such.

Why is it that you try to justify everything the PA says and does because of your support?

I'm certainly not 100% behind everything the union is doing.

Why do I defend the union ??? There are multiple sides to all the arguments regarding this upcoming CBA, and IMO neither the players nor the owners are wrong in their beliefs. It gets tiring reading 90% pre-owner posts, written by people that don't look at both sides.

Far too many people just look at this entire CBA-deal and say "hell I'd play in the NHL for $50,000" ... so if the players won't they must be greedy bastards.

Nobody seems to look at the Leafs/Flyers/Bruins ownership and say "hell this new deal is going to make them an extra $30 million a year' .... what a bunch of greedy bastards.

Both sides are being greedy, apparenty that's okay for owners, but not the players.


================================================

In regards to strong-arm tactics that both sides are using: I'd prefer it not happen, but if one side is going to do it, it pretty much forces the other side to resort to those tactics as well.

================================================

BTW I'm looking at the situation after having:

Been a member of two unions
Been a non-union employee
Worked in management with union employees
Worked in management with non-union employees
Owner of a small business with non-union employees

Long-time hockey player
Current season ticket holder

 

[thinkwild]

This thread is about the ongoing strongarm tactics of the NHLPA and its members.

Another reason I support the owners.

People like NGO and JFF...everytime I see an owner or someone pro-owner do or say something stupid, I recognize it as such.

Why is it that you try to justify everything the PA says and does because of your support?

People in and within the NHLPA contact their players whenever they say anything against the union or it's stance. They make their players retract statesments that they make under good concience. They threaten their own brethren if they even consider to cross the lockout line.

Just so you know..overall I am pro union, those that protect employees in good faith. I was part of a union and would have no problem being a part of one again....

I just don't understand how people can defend stupid things carte blanche.

What stupid things? Crosby made a statement on camera about a tough issue. All he said was he wanted to play but could see the players position and if he knew more about it he might agree with them. Then he learned more about it and made a considered opinion.

What strongarm leverage do you think they exerted? That they wouldnt let him play unless he shut up? How is you find it likely the players could be so easily muzzled if they didnt agree? It seems much more reasonable to me to conclude that their 2nd thought was more considered than reaction to threats.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Nobody seems to look at the Leafs/Flyers/Bruins ownership and say "hell this new deal is going to make them an extra $30 million a year' .... what a bunch of greedy bastards.

If this is how the players feel then I suggest they belly up to the bar and buy a team. There's lots of them available. I'm sure they could even make an offer to the Leafs/Flyers/Bruins that they would be inclined to sell. They supposedly have this huge war chest of money, so buck up for a chunk of the puck!

Wait, players don't want to do this. They don't want to assume any risk and only want the guaranteed money that come with being an employee. When are they going to get that part of the equation through their thick skulls? They're employees that make more in a season than many of the people who own the teams do. They have it pretty good and should be so lucky to have this job. Most of them wouldn't be qualified to work at Home Depot for crying out loud.

BTW... something you also ignore is the fact that a lot of the teams are corporate or community owned now. They are not making money for any one individual for the most part. That is why cost controls are coming into play. The shareholder or partner want their fair cut of profits when they happen. That's business and that's the way the NHL has gone. Accept it. The players are going to have to in the near future.

 

[Slats432]

What stupid things? Crosby made a statement on camera about a tough issue. All he said was he wanted to play but could see the players position and if he knew more about it he might agree with them. Then he learned more about it and made a considered opinion.

What strongarm leverage do you think they exerted? That they wouldnt let him play unless he shut up? How is you find it likely the players could be so easily muzzled if they didnt agree? It seems much more reasonable to me to conclude that their 2nd thought was more considered than reaction to threats.

If you think that Steve Thomas, John Madden, Sidney Crosby and everyone else who's name I forget, just woke up with some epiphany that they made a mistake in their comments and figured they were worth retracting, then you are oblivious to the truth.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Do you not realize why the union is trying to protect the top end salaries ???

The top end salaries raise the bar for everyone else. Salaries have always been set from the top down. It's good for everyone in the union if the top player is making $8 million as opposed to $5 million.

If the owners are willing to guarantee a basement the union is much better off. Which is better? 400 players getting a bump of $300K, or 40 players getting a bump of $3M? The top 100 players are happy, and the other 650 are squeezed. I know this is a complex issue, but the idea of a union is to share the wealth while NOT killing the golden goose. The NHLPA's idea is to keep the wealth for the top 10% AND the serve the golden goose as the entree at their next union meeting.

 

[Slats432]

I'm certainly not 100% behind everything the union is doing.

Why do I defend the union ??? There are multiple sides to all the arguments regarding this upcoming CBA, and IMO neither the players nor the owners are wrong in their beliefs. It gets tiring reading 90% pre-owner posts, written by people that don't look at both sides.

Sorry John, I suppose I might have misread your comments.

But the point is that when someone points at a deficiency in what the NHLPA was doing, your first inclination was to throw a shot at the NHL and their fine policy.

I just think that it is a bit ridiculous and mafioso for the NHLPA have players contacted to retract their statements within 24 hours, even if they don't believe it.

Now, some 17 year old kid that has no business being a part of the problem has people leaning on him because he said that this argument wasn't his argument and he would play if the NHL opened camp next September with replacement players.

And either he was lying before, or he is lying now. Actually, not exactly correct, the NHLPA changed his mind for him. And I don't agree with it.

They not only are going after their union members, but non union members....

Who are these fricken guys? The Teamsters?

One other thing...I would have no problem with the NHLPA making a policy of fining/making members forfeit lockout pay if they made public statements against the union.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

If the owners are willing to guarantee a basement the union is much better off. Which is better? 400 players getting a bump of $300K, or 40 players getting a bump of $3M? The top 100 players are happy, and the other 650 are squeezed. I know this is a complex issue, but the idea of a union is to share the wealth while NOT killing the golden goose. The NHLPA's idea is to keep the wealth for the top 10% AND the serve the golden goose as the entree at their next union meeting.

The basement the NHL owners agreed to was $300K.

Go take a look and see how many current NHL players make less than $300K.

The is one player in the entire Eastern Conference currently under contract that makes less than $400K. Chrs Taylor of the Buffalo Sabres makes $350K.

In a hard salary capped world the bottom players will be the ones that get squeezed. Th etop playrs will still make the big money, and the bottom rung players will be playing for the league minimum. The bottom tiered players will be the ones that get smoked under a hard cap.

 

[chriss_co]

I think it was moreso his agent phoning to tell him to clarify his statement than the PA... the PA doesn't really care nor do they have jurisdiction over a non-member of the association

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Sorry John, I suppose I might have misread your comments.

But the point is that when someone points at a deficiency in what the NHLPA was doing, your first inclination was to throw a shot at the NHL and their fine policy.

I just think that it is a bit ridiculous and mafioso for the NHLPA have players contacted to retract their statements within 24 hours, even if they don't believe it.

Now, some 17 year old kid that has no business being a part of the problem has people leaning on him because he said that this argument wasn't his argument and he would play if the NHL opened camp next September with replacement players.

And either he was lying before, or he is lying now. Actually, not exactly correct, the NHLPA changed his mind for him. And I don't agree with it.

They not only are going after their union members, but non union members....

Who are these fricken guys? The Teamsters?

It really a dumb question to even be asked to Crosby, who hasn't even been drafted yet. It would make much more sense asking a player already drafted like a Phaneuf, Carter, or Ovechkin.

Yes, my first inclination was to point out that the NHLPA is just doing the same thing that the NHL is doing to the owners and front office staff. Boths sides are at fault.

Do you honestly believe that guys like Clarke, Quinn, Illitch, Sather, etc. etc. have no opinion on any of these issues ??? Of course they do, but they're banned from saying anything.

Obviously both sides don't want to hear any dissension come from their ranks, because it will make their side look "weak" to the other side. Perhaps if the players started to look "weak" it would only cause the owners to dig in harder, thinking the players will crack .... or vice versa.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

I think it was moreso his agent phoning to tell him to clarify his statement than the PA... the PA doesn't really care nor do they have jurisdiction over a non-member of the association

The NHLPA may not have any jursidiction over Crosby, but you bet that they certainly care what he says/thinks.

 

[GKJ]

Who's been fined $1 million? Who's been threatened with a $1 million fine? Back up your statement, please.

Tim Lieweike, president of the LA Kings was fined $1M and I think someone in the Atlanta organization was fined as well.



We don't make **** up.

 

[thinkwild]

If the owners are willing to guarantee a basement the union is much better off. Which is better? 400 players getting a bump of $300K, or 40 players getting a bump of $3M? The top 100 players are happy, and the other 650 are squeezed. I know this is a complex issue, but the idea of a union is to share the wealth while NOT killing the golden goose. The NHLPA's idea is to keep the wealth for the top 10% AND the serve the golden goose as the entree at their next union meeting.

It seems rather unlikely the PAs idea is only to keep the wealth for the top 10%. Unlikely they would have such unanimity and conviction amongst their membership if they did. If 40 players get a bump of $3mil and there is a salary cap, the bottom 650 will really suffer. If there isnt a cap, they will all see an opportunity to earn their worth and would rather have that ability than a lower minimum wage that no one actually thinks they are only worth.

Unlike most of the fans, the players can see clearly right through the owners stick poking union busting offer. And its not weakening them but strengthening them.

 

[GKJ]

I'm certainly not 100% behind everything the union is doing.

Why do I defend the union ??? There are multiple sides to all the arguments regarding this upcoming CBA, and IMO neither the players nor the owners are wrong in their beliefs. It gets tiring reading 90% pre-owner posts, written by people that don't look at both sides.

Far too many people just look at this entire CBA-deal and say "hell I'd play in the NHL for $50,000" ... so if the players won't they must be greedy bastards.

Nobody seems to look at the Leafs/Flyers/Bruins ownership and say "hell this new deal is going to make them an extra $30 million a year' .... what a bunch of greedy bastards.

Both sides are being greedy, apparenty that's okay for owners, but not the players.


================================================

In regards to strong-arm tactics that both sides are using: I'd prefer it not happen, but if one side is going to do it, it pretty much forces the other side to resort to those tactics as well.

================================================

BTW I'm looking at the situation after having:

Been a member of two unions
Been a non-union employee
Worked in management with union employees
Worked in management with non-union employees
Owner of a small business with non-union employees

Long-time hockey player
Current season ticket holder

 

[John Flyers Fan]

If this is how the players feel then I suggest they belly up to the bar and buy a team. There's lots of them available. I'm sure they could even make an offer to the Leafs/Flyers/Bruins that they would be inclined to sell. They supposedly have this huge war chest of money, so buck up for a chunk of the puck!

Wait, players don't want to do this. They don't want to assume any risk and only want the guaranteed money that come with being an employee. When are they going to get that part of the equation through their thick skulls? They're employees that make more in a season than many of the people who own the teams do. They have it pretty good and should be so lucky to have this job. Most of them wouldn't be qualified to work at Home Depot for crying out loud.

BTW... something you also ignore is the fact that a lot of the teams are corporate or community owned now. They are not making money for any one individual for the most part. That is why cost controls are coming into play. The shareholder or partner want their fair cut of profits when they happen. That's business and that's the way the NHL has gone. Accept it. The players are going to have to in the near future.

Yes, and now owners want guarunteed profits, seomthint that doesn't happen in any other industry.

I'm a business owner, and I'd love to have guarunteed profits, but it doesn't work that way in the real world.

In the real world a company like Comcast (owner of the Flyers) sets a budget. The Roberts family, that runs Comcast, tell Ed Snider, you have $XXXXX for the Flyers this season.

Snider then looks at that figure, and tell Bob Clarke that he has $XXX of dollars to spend on payroll for the Flyers.

If that doesn't work, then the comapny has to find away to either:

Generate more revenue or cut expenses. If that can't be done, then you look to cut your losses and sell the company.

 

[Slats432]

It really a dumb question to even be asked to Crosby, who hasn't even been drafted yet. It would make much more sense asking a player already drafted like a Phaneuf, Carter, or Ovechkin.

Yes, my first inclination was to point out that the NHLPA is just doing the same thing that the NHL is doing to the owners and front office staff. Boths sides are at fault.

Do you honestly believe that guys like Clarke, Quinn, Illitch, Sather, etc. etc. have no opinion on any of these issues ??? Of course they do, but they're banned from saying anything.

Obviously both sides don't want to hear any dissension come from their ranks, because it will make their side look "weak" to the other side. Perhaps if the players started to look "weak" it would only cause the owners to dig in harder, thinking the players will crack .... or vice versa.

Like I said, if the NHLPA were to put a penalty of the same to their membership..take away lockout pay etc....then I am all for that...

And I know why they do it, but to have people make some calls to get players to "retract" a statement, use their bullshevik lines like "Duh, I misunderstood the question.", is pathetic. The owners at least know that they can speak their mind, but at a cost. The players are just influenced after the fact like some common shakedown, and are made liars out of because they may not believe what they are coerced into saying.

 

[thinkwild]

If this is how the players feel then I suggest they belly up to the bar and buy a team. There's lots of them available. I'm sure they could even make an offer to the Leafs/Flyers/Bruins that they would be inclined to sell. They supposedly have this huge war chest of money, so buck up for a chunk of the puck!

Wait, players don't want to do this. They don't want to assume any risk and only want the guaranteed money that come with being an employee. When are they going to get that part of the equation through their thick skulls? They're employees that make more in a season than many of the people who own the teams do.

I believe the players did make an offer to share this risk. As partners, 50-50 in the franchise value. And they would share the proceeds of the sale, or assume the risks of its downgrading in value. Juts like partners. Needless to say, the owners were not enamoured of the idea.

BTW... something you also ignore is the fact that a lot of the teams are corporate or community owned now. They are not making money for any one individual for the most part. That is why cost controls are coming into play. The shareholder or partner want their fair cut of profits when they happen. That's business and that's the way the NHL has gone. Accept it. The players are going to have to in the near future.

It is an interesting irony. What makes the franhises so valuable is their integration with other corporate interests. Interests that have a value based on risk. But the "community owned" adjective is hard to apply to any team. I guess Calgarys Oil barons are part of the community. I guess seeing how much these lucrative businesses businesses run by the worlds richest billionaires bilk their communities for subsidies, i guess they are community owned. But you almost make these sharks sound like helpless little mom and pop organizations just trying to get along with PTA funds.

 

[thinkwild]

If you think that Steve Thomas, John Madden, Sidney Crosby and everyone else who's name I forget, just woke up with some epiphany that they made a mistake in their comments and figured they were worth retracting, then you are oblivious to the truth.

I think Trevor Linden and members of the executive committee gave them a call, explained the ramifications of their statements, what their positions were, and these players saw the issues in a more enlightened manner. I certainly dont think you could successfully threaten everyone of them. What leverage do you suppose they had that gave them 100% success in persuading these guys? Logic and facts seems the only one that would work to me.

Wouldnt Steve Thomas be more likely to get a contract if he sided with the owners right now?

Which union do you know does or is well advised to encourage their members to be scabs. Why would any action they take in this light be surprising or worthy of the nonsense being posted about it by many fans here.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

I believe the players did make an offer to share this risk. As partners, 50-50 in the franchise value. And they would share the proceeds of the sale, or assume the risks of its downgrading in value. Juts like partners. Needless to say, the owners were not enamoured of the idea.

Gee, you think the owners would not like that idea? How about you go and put out $250 million of your money to start a business and then have an employee come to you and say that they want a chunk of it when you sell it. What are you going to tell them?

I think you pro-NHLPA guys are off your rockers. You have the balls to sit there and say the NHL did not table a realistic offer and then you defend this garbage. And that's exactly what it is, garbage. The NHL offered 55% of revenues to the players. How many businesses will guarantee employees 55% of revenues without having a massive revenue guaranteed stream? None. The players were guaranteed more than the owners' share for crying out loud. How much more do they want? Oh yeah, I forgot, they want a chunk of the team when its sold. And they wonder why so many people are so against them?

It is an interesting irony. What makes the franhises so valuable is their integration with other corporate interests. Interests that have a value based on risk. But the "community owned" adjective is hard to apply to any team. I guess Calgarys Oil barons are part of the community. I guess seeing how much these lucrative businesses businesses run by the worlds richest billionaires bilk their communities for subsidies, i guess they are community owned. But you almost make these sharks sound like helpless little mom and pop organizations just trying to get along with PTA funds.

And you almost make these leeches sound like they are providing an important service to the league. These "superstars" are only superstars because the community they play in recognizes them. They are nothing without the team that allows them to show case their overblown talents. They are nothing without the fans being there. Frankly, they are nothing on their own and every little one of these rediculous tours the players put on proves just that. They are nothing but parasites who suck as much life out of the team they can for as long as they can. You may scoff at the idea of community ownership, but when you have multiple people or a corporation owning the team, it becomes a community ownership. The team is there as a service to the community and a hope that it will turn a profit to be shared amongst the investors. Most of all the team is there for the community and a chamce to bolster the economics of the community.

May I remind you that the NHL has been around a lot longer than any of these primadonnas. The league survived when Richard retired. The league survived when Howe and Hull went to the WHA. The league survived when Orr retired. The league survived when Gretzky packed it in. The league is bigger than any one player. The teams are more important than the players, proved by how quickly fans will turn on a player once traded.

As I've said numerous times, the minute these parasites want to buy a troubled team and show the owners how to properly run it I'll cut them some slack. Until then they are nothing but a bunch of two faced thieves looking to bilk the team and the public out of as much money as they can. I hope the owners crush the players like the cockroaches they have become.

 

[Hockeyfan02]

They're employees that make more in a season than many of the people who own the teams do.

Yeah cause the owners have NO other income besides the teams they own. They dont own any buisnesses like Comcast, Little Ceasers, or Disney that give them income.....

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Yeah cause the owners have NO other income besides the teams they own. They dont own any buisnesses like Comcast, Little Ceasers, or Disney that give them income.....

So what's your point? The players don't have other sources of income? They don't own other businesses themselves or have investments made for them by their agents? You want to argue apples and apples, please do so. Look at the guys that are whining and crying the most and what they have on their side of the balance sheet? A lot of these players throw their money around frivolously and are glorified for it. How many of these guys blow their money on fast cars and easy women? How many of them blow the money down the crapper on poor investments like restaurants? How about one brain sugeon who built a golf course in Sweden where you get play for three to four months of the year?

Conversely, the NHL owners BUILD something and are crucified. They make solid investments that put them into a position where they can buy a hockey franchise. They have companies that employ hundreds or thousands of people and they get beat up for it. Yes, the owners make a very good living, and by doing so they employ people and give them a chance to make a living. What do the players do? How many people do the players employ? What makes the players such upstanding citizens other than being able to slap a puck around and be arrogant jerks?

The players are nothing. They are blips on the radar screen that fade to nothing once their playing days are over. Until these players can do something that provides valie to the community they live in (beyond lending their name or writing a check) they are not worth the money they are paid.