Have You Switched Sides?

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Doctor Zoidberg, Feb 16, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Doctor Zoidberg

    Doctor Zoidberg Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2005
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I sure have. I was 100% pro owner but there is no way I could support this garbage anymore. Bettman got his cap and still decided to torch this league. He could have had a cap of 45 million and knows it, but wouldn't even bother making the offer. Don't anyone give me that crap about 2.5 million x 30 because anyone with a brain knows most teams wouldnt come anywhere close to 45 million, especially how the NHLPA set it up with luxury tax rates of as high as 75% leading up to the max cap.

    I blasted the players for their pathetic 5% rollback, their scam 24% rollback, but to include the 24% AND a HARD CAP! Come on... they gave away everything they possibly could. I've done a complete 180 here and I'm in full support of the union now. I honestly hope the league tries replacement players and finds out nobody will pay to see that and they are forced to come crawling back to the NHLPA and are forced to accept a paltry luxury tax of 10% on salaries over 90 million.
     
  2. mbam99

    mbam99 Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Messages:
    460
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    74
    Location:
    Red Deer
    Home Page:
    Was pro owner before and definitely pro owner after.

    No brainer.
     
  3. RSBPC

    RSBPC Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2005
    Messages:
    2,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Nope. I was pro-hockey before this afternoon, and I am still pro-hockey now. Both sides are screwing this up royally if you ask me.
     
  4. SPARTAKUS*

    SPARTAKUS* Guest

    Me too. I am pro-owners and I haven't change my mind. The NHL must fixe this.
     
  5. SENSible1*

    SENSible1* Guest

    The player's $49 M soft cap offer, which was indexed in such a way as to morph into a much higher cap in the second year and beyond, was a PR stunt.

    Sorry you were taken in by their ploy.
     
  6. CREW99AW

    CREW99AW Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2002
    Messages:
    35,212
    Likes Received:
    514
    Trophy Points:
    214
    I agree the players made a lot of concessions(I expected a cap,but not a cap and a rollback).

    I haven't switched sides.When the lockout started I thought the league needed a cap and today I still think the league needs a cap.I just hope they continue to negotiate,building off the progress they made so next season starts on time.
     
  7. x-bob

    x-bob Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    8,006
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Occupation:
    Engineer
    Location:
    Montreal
    agree
     
  8. richardn

    richardn Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2004
    Messages:
    8,432
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Crane Operator
    Location:
    Sault Ste. Marie
    Its not so much that I am pro players, its more like I am Anti Bettman. His speech today should give him a nomination for an oscar, because that was one heck of an acting job.
     
  9. Habsfan 32

    Habsfan 32 Registered User

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2004
    Messages:
    6,316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Way up north...
    I've always been on the owners side.
     
  10. Birdman

    Birdman Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2002
    Messages:
    91
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    The league needs a cap.

    They need to contract 3 to 5 teams.

    Bettman needs to be fired after this is over and they need to replace him with a marketing guru.

    I could care less what the players do with Goodenow, all he did was lead them to jump off of a cliff. In the end, the owners are going to get a cap, and that's what I wanted.

    Sucks to lose NHL Hockey for a year, but it will be back eventually.

    A year or two is not that long a time to have to wait.
     
  11. This reminds of when Apple came out with their "Switcher" ad campaign. :)
    I've switched on who to blame.. I am now placing full, 100% blame on the Boston Red Sox.
    It's their fault..look at the facts:
    The last time they won the world series was 1918..what happened in 1919?? That's right, a "mysterious" flue bug wiped out the playoffs and there was no Stanley cup awarded. They don;t win again until 2004..and the next year,2005....that's right NO Stanley Cup.....

    Coincidence? I think not!
    :lol
     
  12. Biggest Canuck Fan

    Biggest Canuck Fan BCF

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2002
    Messages:
    10,922
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Document solutions expert
    Location:
    Abbotsford, BC
    Home Page:
    I am mad that bettman didn't come up by 2 million, but by the same token the PA's stances and non communication with their own members just irks me.

    Goddenows confrence was such crap. Owners did this... Blame the owners... It's not my fault...

    Just a sham IMO.

    Not saying I am not ticked at the owners cause they are being asses as well.
     
  13. nyr7andcounting

    nyr7andcounting Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm anti-NHL and today didn't change that. Bettman didn't give me any good reasons why a $45 or $49 million cap wouldn't work. The x times 30 thing is just the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

    The worst was his example of the NFL, and how their cap acts as a magnet. There are 2 things he didn't say about that though. First off the NFL's revenues are so high right now that owners are dying to spend past the cap, therefor no team has any doubt they should spend up to the cap. That would not be the case in the NHL. And secondly, if anything, the only "magnet" in the PA's proposal would be the $36 million where the luxury tax starts. I would imagine that most teams would spend up to 36-40 million without going past that because the luxury tax might be too much for some teams after that...and that's fine. But the idea that every NHL team would consider the cap a magnet and spend around $48 million? Not a chance.

    Anyway, I just can't support the NHL because it is their lockout, it's their responsibility to come up with a solution, and when it came down to this morning, despite any damage to anyone's ego it may have caused, it was the NHL's responsibility to make one last offer. Bettman pretty much told us during his PC that they would accept a cap of 44 or 45 million, well than he should have proposed it. It is Bettman's job to protect the sport and the league, not Goodenow's, so I can't blame the PA for the cancelling of the season.
     
  14. nyr7andcounting

    nyr7andcounting Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2004
    Messages:
    1,919
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Blame the Yanks then for that.
     
  15. eye

    eye Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    around the 49th para
    Home Page:

    The players are now victim to their own success. Players had it far too good for the past dozen years and a major correction is what is needed for the good of all concerned.
     
  16. NomadManderson

    NomadManderson Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    5,041
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I agree. The NHL and the players are digging their own graves. The players should have put the cap on the table earlier, Bettman should have set a deadline earlier so the players would have caved earlier. This season getting cancelled represents a massive failure of their duties by both Bettman and Goodenow and if there was justice they would both be barred from even watching a hockey game for the rest of their lives. Frankly I think Bettman and some of the owners have been conspiring to cancel the season so they could get the CBA of their dreams via impasse.
     
  17. FlyersFan10*

    FlyersFan10* Guest

    I'm pro union, but I have to admit, Bettman made several good arguments today. I don't like the man at all, but he came across as being sincere, armed with facts, and backed up his statements. Bettman did give legitimate reasons why a 45 or 49 million cap wouldn't work. There are still teams that would never be able to reach that number simply because they don't generate that kind of revenue and that revenue sharing wouldn't even help.

    And you just answered your own question. The reason why the NFL can have the large salary caps is because they generate 2.5 times the revenue the NHL does. The NFL has salaries proportionate to the revenue they generate. That's the problem with the NHL. The salaries aren't proportionate to the revenue they generate. That's the reality of it all. The NHL extended themselves when they went to the $42.5 million offer.

    Yet another point where I disagree. It's both Bettman's and Goodenow's job to ensure that there is a healthy league. Goodenow has done nothing for the lower end players. It's been the higher end players who have benefitted the most from him. And when you consider that the higher end players make up the MINORITY of the union, then something is incredibly wrong. When you have Iginla, Roenick, Recchi, Tkachuk and Esche all working behind the scenes to get a deal done, you know that there is something wrong with the union. We've witnessed over the past week the official split of the union. It would not surprise me if within the next few months that we see a full blowout between the players and several players break ranks with the union.

    As well, to see Goodenow act the way he did today at the press conference was nothing short of childish and immature. I'm also not sure if you saw it today, but there was a clip where Gord Miller from TSN interviewed Goodenow. For anyone who doesn't know Gord Miller, Gord is probably one of the more respected journalists and one of the more player friendly guys there is. Goodenow ripped a new one into Gord over his questioning about the lockout and the salary cap. There was no need for Bob to act the way he did. At that point, I changed my mind about Bob Goodenow being a good leader. Today, he showed his true colours and showed what kind of imbecile he's been. He's probably several players their careers and ruined a good relationship most players had with their respective owners. Being a union person, I can honestly say that if my leader acted like that, I'd probably break ranks as well or start an uprise to get him replaced. Bob screwed several people in the NHLPA with his circus act and for that, he must pay. However, the Executive Council also has to be held accountable for their actions. When you consider that it was the actions of Roenick, Esche, Pronger, Tkachuk, Recchi and Iginla who got things going, it would'nt surprise me if a new executive council is voted into place after the current numbnuts get the toe.
     
  18. Nash

    Nash Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2004
    Messages:
    3,070
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    54
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Pro PA

    The NHL has done a really good PR job of placing the blame on the greedy players. It is easy for the average working man or woman to see the average $1.3 million salary and buy into this propaganda, but the facts are that the NHL and the owners created this fiasco. They like to say, "it's not about pointing fingers, it's about creating a system that will keep the league healthy in the long term", but who is to say that their cap system will even work.

    The facts are that in the previous CBA, the owners were declared the winner at the time and were even successful in getting a "hard" cap for the entry level system. However, the owners and agents worked around the wording of the deal and added bonus clauses. Wow ... that hard cap Bettman is selling now is sure going to work. Considering that the league has to ratify all contracts, Bettman could have not given aproval to this type of precendent and rejected the deal. Other commissioners do it in the other pro leagues.

    Why did Bettman extend the last CBA if it was so bad? (by the way, I'm not saying that the last CBA was great ...had it been used properly by the GM's and owners in the league, it was in their favor)

    Right from the start of these "negotiations", Bettman has stated that the league will stand firm on linkage and a ridiculously low $31 million dollar cap. When you consider that there were several teams over $40 million already and some in the $50-60 million dollar range, how is that even reasonable? The NHL took the concessions from the PA's December 9th proposal and slapped a hard cap and linkage on the deal. How is that negotiating? From that point forward, the player concessions were considered a given, yet the NHL still hadn't conceded anything from their hard line stance. Then two days before he is scheduled to cancel the season, he finally concedes linkage and the PA counters with a further concession to install a cap with their luxury tax system. Granted there were some differences in the luxury tax of each proposal and Goodenow's "indexing", this deal should have been able to be completed based on how much the NHL had gained over the last CBA. Most people on these boards talk about how the NHL had to give up linkage and increase the cap, but those weren't even in the last CBA. Essentially, the NHL has given up nothing and the players have given in to almost everything.

    As for the league looking after small market clubs, how come the PA's proposals have stiffer penalties for their luxury taxes and floor on team salaries as well so the Jacobs of the league are forced to actually try to ice a competitive team?

    I really don't like the direction the league has gone in since Bettman has been at the helm. I realize that it coincides with Goodenow being the head of the PA, but Goodenow doesn't have the power to influence the on ice product and how it is marketed.
     
  19. ti-vite

    ti-vite Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2004
    Messages:
    3,086
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    94
    That was a deal killer, Goodenow knew it. It was a PR stunt that majorly backfired. Goodenow looked like a boob.

    A reporter had to remind him to apologise to the fans....

    Pathetic.
     
  20. Jester

    Jester Registered User

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2004
    Messages:
    34,075
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    St. Andrews
    i'm pro the owners concept... and was pro their approach until today. a deal they could have lived with and would have helped the league was there to be had. they should have put the drop-dead date a month ago...

    so yeah... hate them both.
     
  21. Licentia

    Licentia Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2004
    Messages:
    919
    Likes Received:
    57
    Trophy Points:
    81
    Any prior labour despute: NHLPA. Because they really got screwed for a long time. This time: The game is in trouble, it's time to be the good guys and do what is best for hockey, which is some sort of cost certainty.
     
  22. Regency

    Regency Registered User

    Joined:
    May 17, 2004
    Messages:
    261
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Toronto
    I was pro-nobody to begin with and nothing has changed after today. Both sides are to blame for this mess.
     
  23. FLYLine27*

    FLYLine27* BUCH

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2004
    Messages:
    42,410
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    PO
    Location:
    NY
    A soft cap? BARLEY. In 6 years the GM could go up a whole 4 MILLION Bucks to times. Yes 4 MILLION. THINK before you type. It was still a hard cap much more then a soft cap. A Soft cap is what the NBA uses.

    :joker: :joker:
     
  24. SENSible1*

    SENSible1* Guest

    So let me see if I can get your position straight.

    The cap won't work and hold salaries down.

    The PA is smart for not agreeing to a cap at $42.5, even though it wouldn't work.

    Gotcha!
     
  25. SENSible1*

    SENSible1* Guest

    Please familiarize yourself with the PA's proposal, then get back to me.

    In particular, pay attention to article 7.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"