I'll tell you what pisses me off!
- Thread starter The Pucks
- Start date
- Status
You know what makes me laugh?
That people always get pissed at the player, players and players whenever there's a lockout in any sport in the US.
Without really any intelligent thought behind it. I guess that players are just the easiest and most accessible target, apparently the fact that someone can make millions playing a sport still stings in people's eyes.
Seriously, people, shades of grey, not black or white. Can't we see someone at least talk crap about the other side, since they deserve at least half of it. Remember, this is not a strike, it's a lockout. The problems with the NHL isn't all in the players court.
That people always get pissed at the player, players and players whenever there's a lockout in any sport in the US.
Without really any intelligent thought behind it. I guess that players are just the easiest and most accessible target, apparently the fact that someone can make millions playing a sport still stings in people's eyes.
Seriously, people, shades of grey, not black or white. Can't we see someone at least talk crap about the other side, since they deserve at least half of it. Remember, this is not a strike, it's a lockout. The problems with the NHL isn't all in the players court.
Last edited:
The Pucks said:
If you were player X or Y, wouldn't you do the same??
It's not like the owners aren't out dabbling in other business ventures to make money. Sure they arent involved in the NHL right now(which in fact costs most of them more money than they make). The bottom line is when one source of income disappears, people will try to make up for that in other places.
Sure it leaves a bitter taste in your mouth because the players are taking their talent elsewhere. I can't say I blame you, but thats the way it works.
The problem is clear. He stated it very well. Yes the lock-our problem is not only their fault, but we are waiting for some hockey and they go somewhere else to play at 10% of what they could here.
Would you all be happier if they just sat home and did nothing? Then when the lockout is over they all show up fat and untrained?
Beukeboom Fan
Registered User
H/H said:
I think that Pucks point is that the irony of the situation would be hysterical, if it wasn't so much of a crotch punch. It appears that you have the players cutting off their nose to spite their face.
Of course, the players that sign overseas are just doing damage control. It's a relatively small %, and they alone would have the leverage to change the NHLPA stance even if they wanted to.
Beatnik
Registered User
does people really thinks that the owner will lowered their ticket prices if the players accept a salary cut?
The price are in fonction of the maximisation of the income, the CBA have nothing to do with it.
The price are in fonction of the maximisation of the income, the CBA have nothing to do with it.
H/H said:
I've been trying to vindicate the players since this whole thing started. However, due to the general public's perception with regard to this issue, it seems there's a LOT more pressure for the players to concede to the NHL. Maybe the NHLPA is at fault for this though... maybe Goodenow and his lackies simply don't have the spin doctoring and PR integrity to get the public and media to sympathize with the players.
kurt said:
The PA has nothing to gain by spindoctoring anything. If anything, they'll hurt themselves by painting the owners in a negative light. If they paint the owners as the liars and greedy SOB's that they are, the fans will stop giving the owners their business. This reduced revenue will trickle down to player salaries since less revenues will mean less money to pay the players.
The NHL has plenty to gain from spindoctoring. If the public views them as the reason behind the lockout (which they are) they'll lose business. Over the long term, losing fans because of the lockout can cost them millions. That's why they've been spreading their propaganda for years now.
Terrier
Registered User
One of my own hockey teammates said last week he wants the NHL to break the players union, to declare the impasse, open the doors and say "come and get it!". No matter how you slice it, no matter what revenues the Blackhawks may be shadowing here and there, the players' share of the league's total take is excessive. John Saunders said as much on ESPN this past Sunday morning. Just comparing the average NHL salary to that of the NFL makes you shake your head. The gravy train simply cannot go on.
Terrier said:
How does it benefit your teammate to have no NHL hockey?
This fight is about money, nothing more and nothing less. It is not about competitive balance or making franchises viable or lowering ticket prices.
I would be shocked if a single team lowers ticket prices after the lockout. The entire point of having a salary cap is that the NHL teams will say, what salary cap can we have to allow us to break even/make a profit given the current revenue prices. There's no way any NHL team is banking on lower revenues in order to calculate a salary cap. The Leafs did not raise prices for this season for the first time in years, probably because they knew there would be no hockey, so they can just raise prices once this year is lost.
I see no reason why the players going to other teams is such a problem. When you lose money, you have to replace that income. In fact, in our legal system, if you sue somebody for lost income, you have a legal obligation to mitigate your losses. If anything, what the players are doing is entirely reasonable. Am I happy that they're going overseas to play? No. But I bet none of them, except maybe Peter Forsberg and Niklas Lidstrom, are too thrilled to be playing outside the NHL either.
I see no reason why the players going to other teams is such a problem. When you lose money, you have to replace that income. In fact, in our legal system, if you sue somebody for lost income, you have a legal obligation to mitigate your losses. If anything, what the players are doing is entirely reasonable. Am I happy that they're going overseas to play? No. But I bet none of them, except maybe Peter Forsberg and Niklas Lidstrom, are too thrilled to be playing outside the NHL either.
H/H said:
I think its hilarious that a so called union (read: NHLPA) would allow their people to go play for an alternative league. I don't recall the UPS union allowing their people to take temporay jobs at FedEX during their strike/lockout.
Last edited by a moderator:
me2
Go ahead foot
The Pucks said:
After working for $130K/year maybe the NHLs offer of $1.3m avg won't look so bad. A bit of perspective might help the players.
Top Shelf said:
This is a good point. I don't see how it is fair for players to go play on other teams, but owners cannot just fill their rosters with junior players.
They would have low payroll, an actual season (although it maybe a pathetic one), and the possibility of making a little money.
So, basically I wonder why it is that the players can choose to be employed elsewhere, but the owners cannot choose to employ new players?
I think neither should happen really, the players should have to sit on their butts until this is worked out. Just as the owners cannot have any games.
bling
Registered User
- Jun 23, 2004
- 2,934
- 0
Jack Canuck said:This is a good point. I don't see how it is fair for players to go play on other teams, but owners cannot just fill their rosters with junior players.
They would have low payroll, an actual season (although it maybe a pathetic one), and the possibility of making a little money.
So, basically I wonder why it is that the players can choose to be employed elsewhere, but the owners cannot choose to employ new players?
You are forgetting one simple fact here. The reason the players are able to play in other leagues is because this is a lockout, not a strike like your Fed/Ex example.
The Owners can have hockey games anytime they want..just unlock the doors and bring back the players, continue working under the old contract until the two parties can quite pissing on each others legs and get something negotiated.
What you see going on now is just posturing for the media. The Owners group have accomplished their one and only goal thus far, to turn the media and general public against the players. The hope is to put pressure on the players to cave to the combined demands of the media, public and NHL Owners group.
So suckers, how does it feel to be Gary Bettman's little pawns?
bling said:
First thing is that was not my example.
However, you do have a point that they did lock the players out. Yet, I don't see how this supports your view. If the owners are in such a profitable position why would they even consider locking the players out? It just doesn't make sense you would think they would stick to the old CBA and rake in the money.
Now you believe this is all posturing! does this mean that the lockout has nothing to do with the fact that players are earning more than double (almost triple) what they were 10 years ago? and that the entire system is way out of wack with rich teams having huge payrolls, and others struggling to survive.
Surely, it is not only the players fault here, but they are not inocent bystanders caught up in a wave of greed by the owners.
And your bright idea of the owners giving in to go back to the old CBA is not going to solve any problems. Perhaps the reality of the situation has not quite sunk in for you, because you seem to be off in a bit of a fantasy.
Jack Canuck said:
I'm not asking you to have a sudden heart for the players but just for that sentence look at everything
1994-2004
Revenues 600M$ to 1,8G
Avg Salaries 700K to 1,8M$
Is it possible that it's just normal that salaries increase because revenues triple in the last 10 years ?
Just want you to take a look at it.
Statement like Players salaries double/triple without saying anything is like saying everything like the NHLCBANews.com. Big NUMBERS to impress with no substance. Just sensationalism.
bling
Registered User
- Jun 23, 2004
- 2,934
- 0
Jack Canuck said:
You are off base here. I did not say thet the Owners should open the doors and work under the old contract while negotiating...I am answering your snivel about "How come the players get to play and make money and the Owners can't have hockey games played and make money". I am telling you that they can and they choose not to.
The lockout has everything to do with idiot Owners throwing good money after bad, fighting and clawing at each other to overpay for players. That is the reason for the higher payrolls. You are just spewing the league and Bettman's Company line....keep kissing Bettman ass little pawn.. :lol
- Status
