Not the Little Big Horn, but almost

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by egger66, Jul 21, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. egger66

    egger66 Guest

    You really have to laugh at the players who rationalize that the deal wasn’t that bad or that they couldn’t have gotten this deal a year ago. The NHL’s position from day 1 was that they wanted a salary cap based on 54% of league revenue. They wanted a rookie salary cap of $850K for years. Amazingly, that is hat’s exactly what they got. They gave up exactly zip from their original bargaining position on major issues.

    They did bend on 2 issues. They wanted 75% for qualifying offers and the players wanted to keep it at 110%. The new deal comprises at 100%, somewhat in the players favor. The NHL also wanted to drastically changer arbitration or do away with it altogether. The new deal has a relatively small change in arbitration, so the players fought this off fairly well.

    The only tangible thing the players got was a lower free agent age.

    To sum up, the NHL got exactly what they wanted on all the key issues. Every single one. In return that bent a bit on qualifying offers and a lot on arbitration.

    What did the players get? Lowered free agency age. That’s it

    This was the biggest massacre since the Little Big Horn. Any yet their a people, including players, who don’t think that it’s that bad. Amazing, simply amazing.
     
  2. Tico

    Tico Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2003
    Messages:
    708
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    By all means, let's keep up the animosity. Forget the fact that the lockout's over; let's play 'nanny nanny boo boo' instead.

    There's something to be said for letting someone save face, but clearly, rubbing it in is the way to go.
     
  3. and because of this mentality, in 4 years they're going to do it all over again, perhaps even sooner. And it'll be even more uglier if you can imagine that.
     
  4. Brent Burns Beard

    Brent Burns Beard DontTouchMyDonskoi!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,110
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Home Page:
    i also find it laughable the players and commentators who say "but if revenue goes UP, we could all be making more"... well duh, Im fairly certain this was obvious right from the start to a chimp.

    anyhow, lets wait until the CBA is out to determine how much the players lost. from what i hear, their pensions have been tripled as well as some nice changes to their benefits and travel/moving budgets.

    lets see ...

    dr
     
  5. iagreewithidiots

    iagreewithidiots Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2002
    Messages:
    1,524
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    I further find it laughable that all the anti cap poster are still here. They will still go. They will still watch. Nothing has changed for them. They arent even screaming their heads off about the cap the way they were last september.

    Just like I said. Install the cap. Bring in the casual fans. Sell hockey to the masses. The so called "real fans" will still be there watching.
     
  6. Brent Burns Beard

    Brent Burns Beard DontTouchMyDonskoi!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,110
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Home Page:
    i think you are referring to me ?

    when did i say i would leave if the league had a cap ? in fact, i changed my stance on the cap back in February. i dont even understand the reference, is this board only for those who believe one opinion ? i dont believe so ...

    and for the record, i have been a member long enough, longer than just about all of you.

    dr
     
  7. Rails

    Rails Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2003
    Messages:
    2,333
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    LBurg and FBurg, VA
    Home Page:
    Pointing out that you have been a member longer has nothing to do with this...

    But anyway, fans are fans, whether they were Pro-Cap or Anti-Cap...

    and, the PA and Owners compromised, I think that the fans should shut the **** up and get along again, since hockey is back...

    EDIT: By get along I mean create an argument for why their team will beat their rival
     
  8. I give you credit DR, you stuck it ut and did change your position once it became very evident that you were dead wrong on so many aspects of the negotiation and saw the brilliance of the system proposed. I'm not sure what took so long, but you did make the jump. You also did tough it out and didn't runaway and hide. Not like Wetcoaster, Vanlady, and a few others who shall rmeain nameless. Good on you.

    :handclap:
     
  9. Epsilon

    Epsilon #TeamHolland

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2002
    Messages:
    67,753
    Likes Received:
    14,861
    Trophy Points:
    231
    Location:
    South Cackalacky
    You make it sound like the rookie salary cap was something the players association was actually going to fight over. To consider that a win for the NHL is one thing (it is), but to view that as some some of win over the players association is laughable. It's a total win-win proposition. The only losers on that aspect are the agents.

    I'd say an objective view of the CBA would be that the NHLPA got soundly beaten on the core issue but did reasonably well for themselves on the side issues and perks.
     
  10. Chayos

    Chayos Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2003
    Messages:
    3,102
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Saskatchewan
    Home Page:
    Or they could have a solid product with great growth and good money for all. The players have set them selves up nicely for round 2 of this agrrement where they push up the percentage as the revenues start to grow.
     
  11. Street Hawk

    Street Hawk Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Messages:
    5,310
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    actually

    The increased percentage is already included in the deal. If Revenues hit 2.X billion, the maximum % to the players increases, up to 57% if the NHL hits like 2.5 billion in revenue.

    My only hope is that everyone on both sides has learned from this. Forget this us against them nonsense. For too long, it's don't trust the owners cause they screwed the players back in the 50 - 70's.

    Look around, how many owners today owned a team back then? The bulk of the owners in the NHL today came in during the past 10 - 15 years.

    Entire Northwest Division, Pacific Divsion, Southeast Division.
    Chicago and maybe Detroit in the Central were pre 90's. Blues, Preds, Jackets are new.
    Bruins and I'm not sure on the Leafs. Not sure when the Teachers Pension fund took over. But the Habs, Sabres, and Sens ownership is post 80's.
    I think only Philly is left in the Atlantic. Maybe New York Rangers. Devils, Pens, and Isles have new owners.

    So, we're talking 6/30 teams, only 20%. Hopefully, the players and owners can start working together to improve the game.

    I'd love to see the 2 sides work together to increase the Safety and Sportsmanship of the game. Let's find ways to keep the sticks and elbows down, cut down on slashes, blows to the head, hits from behind, etc.

    Sportsmanship, I'd like the NHL to be a bit more like Football, when if a Receiver is crushed by a clean hit by the Safety a big brawl isn't going to break out. Most of the time, after a tackle is made the defender helps the offensive player back up. Make the agitator role less significant. Fans don't come out to see Esa Tikkanen clones, they come to see Nash, Kovy, Naslund, Sakic, etc. Eliminate face washes, etc.
     
  12. SENSible1*

    SENSible1* Guest

    I'm with you Iconoclast, DR deserves credit for sticking it out and bringing a distinctive perspective to the discussion.
     
  13. Snap Wilson

    Snap Wilson Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Messages:
    5,838
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    This isn't the biggest massacre since Little Big Horn. It isn't even the biggest massacre in collective bargaining for a sports league. In 1987, the NFL absolutely *destroyed* their union. They gave their proposal, the players said no, the union said that they were imposing it anyway, the players went on strike, the league used scabs, the fans still came, and the owner's plan was instituted without any concessions whatsoever. NFL player contracts aren't even guaranteed.
     
  14. Strazzobosco

    Strazzobosco Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2004
    Messages:
    343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    64
    Location:
    Fairfax, VA
    one thing that is not mentioned much is that their retirement package increased dramatically. I don't know by how much, and I've only heard in one TSN interview with Don Meeham, but I remember it being quadrupled. If that's the case, the players didn't lose that much. We'll see soon how much the pensions increased. I'm very curious to see that little tidbit... it could mean the difference between which side won.
     
  15. GSC2k2*

    GSC2k2* Guest

    Tripled, I heard. However, that has no impact on win/loss. The way pension contributions work, pension contribution increases from the league are not dollar for dollar with the increase in the pensions, due to the compounding effect of investments. In other words, you can crease your pension contribution by a dollar and it has the effect of increasing your pension by $2 (a broad example, but you get the idea).

    It is still dwarfed by the pay concessions given and pay lost by the players.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"