Owners should include this clause:

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Rakiet*, Jul 1, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rakiet*

    Rakiet* Guest

    Here I go again:

    I think the owners who've got the biggest stake in the next deal should step in and demand the following: The bargaining committees for both side must begin negociations no later than 2.5 years before teh current is set to expire, should a deal not be reached by the mid-way point of the last season in the offer, all who are involved in negociations will be banned from playing, banned from being involved in hockey operations period, cutting off their pay to put financial pressure on the negociaters. They would be obliged to work 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, until an agreement has been reached.

    Personal financial pressure, nobody wants to lose their own money. Hit them where it really hurts.
     
  2. Scoogs

    Scoogs Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    18,309
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    I honestly think somethink like this was already in the previous CBA. I remember reading it..

    Correct me if I'm wrong though..
     
  3. Jacob

    Jacob Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    42,589
    Likes Received:
    3,808
    Trophy Points:
    235
    Home Page:
    What constitutes "negotiating"? They can be in the same room together, but I don't know how you police, or define, negotiating.
     
  4. DeleteThisAccount

    DeleteThisAccount Registered User

    Joined:
    May 3, 2004
    Messages:
    1,242
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    And eating brains
    Home Page:
    Mutually forced negotiations would be fruitless, anyway, in my opinion.
     
  5. bcrt2000

    bcrt2000 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2005
    Messages:
    3,496
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    what they should have is maybe a CBA conference between the 2 sides after every year or every 2 years so that players/owners can voice their concerns
     
  6. Mess

    Mess Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    75,061
    Likes Received:
    808
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Home Page:
    Sportsnet Hockey Central Panel suggest the CBA should include something in it that negotiations need to begin by a certain date and if no new CBA is reached with in 1 month of the new season then it is sent to an arbitrator for his ruling .. Binding Arbitration is their suggestion ..
     
  7. Tawnos

    Tawnos A guy with a bass

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2004
    Messages:
    20,748
    Likes Received:
    1,689
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    I sincerely doubt this is going to be necessary. When the next CBA negotiation begins, there isn't going to be nearly as large of a philosophical divide as there was this time and they'll probably have a deal within a few weeks like the NBA once negotiations start.
     
  8. NYR469

    NYR469 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,785
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    forcing them to start negotiations won't make 1 ounce of difference because no one budges in these type of talks until the 11th hour (or the 1100th hour in this case)...

    if the 2 sides had been forced to start talks 2 1/2 years before the cba had expire the result would have been 3 years worth of cap/no cap rhetoric instead of 6 months of it before real talks started.
     
  9. nyrmessier011

    nyrmessier011 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2005
    Messages:
    3,354
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Charlotte/NYC

    In pro sports people need to miss games to be hurt financially. It's always a waiting game, who can afford to lose money and games played etc. That's why I think pro-sports disputes last so long. It's because players only get paid during the 6 months of a season. It's kind of like teachers unions. They wait it out until one side loses a class day. Negotiating early does nothing in pro sports. One side needs to be hurt financially for the other side to give in more. That's why I don't think ending the CBA on June 30 is any different then September 15. Maybe from now on it could be a good idea to end the CBA a little early though, because hopefully there won't be much to change in the next CBA. But my point is when you have huge differences in opinion, you need to miss games and have the other side fold. Negotiating this CBA in 2003 wouldn't have done the NHL any more good then negotiating on Dec 9 of this year.
     
  10. GSC2k2*

    GSC2k2* Guest

    With the greatest respect, this is a silly idea.

    Binding arbitration is even worse.
     
  11. HckyFght*

    HckyFght* Guest

    I love this idea! Make it so numbah one!
    -HckyFght!
     
  12. HckyFght*

    HckyFght* Guest

    Don't you think that the NBA got down to business BECAUSE they were terrified by what happened to the NHL?
    -H
     
  13. Haj

    Haj #CatsAreComing

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2003
    Messages:
    3,276
    Likes Received:
    273
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Location:
    Arlington, VA

    The fans hire extremely aggressive ex-mossad agents to provide "incentive" for both parties to negotiate.
     
  14. Tawnos

    Tawnos A guy with a bass

    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2004
    Messages:
    20,748
    Likes Received:
    1,689
    Trophy Points:
    169
    Location:
    Charlotte, NC
    Don't you think that the NHL will be terrified of it happening again?
     
  15. Scoogs

    Scoogs Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    18,309
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    126
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario
    That definately was a factor, but the main reason was that their system was already built, agreed upon and working. While the NHL had to tear it down, and remake theirs starting from nothing.
     
  16. Rakiet*

    Rakiet* Guest

    Well something should be done to prevent this from happening again.
    Personally, if I'm Trevor Linden, and if this was in place in the last CBA, I would work my ass off to get something done and so would the people I'd be negociating with. If they can't do the job then they should get punished for it. I don't know of a better insurance policy to avoid this from ever happening again
     
  17. SJeasy

    SJeasy Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    12,538
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    disabled
    Location:
    San Jose
    A good suggestion that they probably would never accept would be to hold all revenues in escrow until a new deal is reached. No strike/no lockout/no income until they figure it out. (They could have a clause to release funds for concessions, maintenance people etc.) But the games get played.
     
  18. Rakiet*

    Rakiet* Guest

    That seems a little complicated, but it would probably work wonders in negociations. The approach I would take would be to punish the actual negociators, their supposed to be the ones who have talent at it so they should meet standards.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"