Rant of the day...

[NJD Jester]

why should you make money if you run your business the like an idiot? anybody with business sense would set a budget and stick to it.

Which is why a hard cap is worth fighting for, even for a bunch of idiots.

 

[Johnnybegood13]

Allow me to pick this rubbish apart:

it's about the owners wanting something for nothing.

You call paying players 1.3m average nothing?

having a business means inheriting risk. there is no certainty in owning your own business.

Ummm,thats why they want to fix the current problems...should the owners just walk away and say,damn, that was a bad investment!

why should you make money if you run your business the like an idiot?

So all owners are idiots? 3-4 Pejorative Slurs changed the structure for the rest and you figure their all idiots

anybody with business sense would set a budget and stick to it.

I'm going to wait around for your idea how this could be done with the former CBA rules,and please email Bettman with your ideas so we can get the season underway :lol

if you set the budget too high, it's your own damn fault.

The system set the budget,do you really think owners wanted to set a budget that loses millions a year?

this whole stance of 'cost certainty' is a joke.

Thats why EVERY other professional sports league has it now days...i won't say what the real joke is here!!!

 

[bhawk24bob]

it almost seems to me like a lot of these owners wanted to put themselves in this situation. it's not like teams all of a sudden make a significant amount less during one season compared to the season before, even if the team tanks; they knew what their parameters were. there's absolutely no excuse to lose money when you know what your budget is. this is all about poor business decisions. i know it sucks when you can't afford something, believe me, i just got done with college, but i never spent money i didnt have- something a majority of the owners did.

 

[PeterSidorkiewicz]

The Players ruin the season because of Greed, but the Owners locked out the season. This argument has been done to death anyway so I dont really care, I just want NHL hockey. Im sick of the blame game between people taking sides. I'll honestly I supported the players a little bit more than the owners but by now im so sick of this mess I dont really care as long as theres hockey. Even us fans take sides of players vs. owners and we all are basically so biased and one sided, imagine what the ACTUAL sides have to go through to get a deal done. If they're anything like us and our side taking, there wont be a deal done for 25 years.

 

[kremlin]

Scrap the season

Scrap the season! I think that's the best outcome of the negotiations. The league should just cancel the remainder of this season right now and stop negotiating, as it's too late to put a quality product on the ice. Let's assume a deal is reached within the next week or so, then you maybe have a 30 game schedule, but it will take a lot of players maybe 15 games to get back into shape and shake some of the rust. In short, the hockey will be terrible and clearly that's not what the league wants, as they want to put out a QUALITY product.

The reasoning behind scrapping the season is simple: nobody wants to see a bunch of out of shape athletes in the spotlights. Let the players rot in Europe for a while and then they will realize that the NHL proposal of cost certainty / salary cap isn't all that bad. However, some NHL-ers will simply not succeed in Europe as they're either too slow for the big rinks or think they can play in Europe, while being out of shape.

The league should postpone talks with the PA till September and then present the PA with a worse offer than the one that's on the table right now. A season without NHL hockey means the pie is getting smaller (less sponsorship opportunities, less fans, less merchandise sales, and loss of other revenues) and thus, the offer the PA gets in September should be much worse than what they can get right now. In fact, a year without NHL hockey means a huge blow to the product of NHL hockey and it's not too far fetched that the league will never overcome the effects of this lockout. NHL hockey has always been a hard sell for a big audience, TV stations, sponsors and it will only get worse. In fact, NHL hockey is damaged goods and nobody wants to be affiliated with damaged goods.

If you want to be stubborn, then go rot in Europe (if you can even cut it over there) and continue talks in September. Things will only get worse for the players as time proceeds and they might get used to the European salaries (exception of players in Russia), as they might end up with similar pay checks if the lockout continues well into 2006.

 

[Vast Ant Dioi]

it almost seems to me like a lot of these owners wanted to put themselves in this situation. it's not like teams all of a sudden make a significant amount less during one season compared to the season before, even if the team tanks; they knew what their parameters were. there's absolutely no excuse to lose money when you know what your budget is. this is all about poor business decisions. i know it sucks when you can't afford something, believe me, i just got done with college, but i never spent money i didnt have- something a majority of the owners did.

You're not getting it.

In sports, financial success often takes a backseat to competitive success. For teams like Detroit, it's more important to add that player to make a push for the cup than it is to see another $5 million in red ink at the end of the season. That is why there must be some control on spending and salaries. It can't be put any simpler than that. There will always be an owner that wants to win more than he wants to have a successful business, and that messes things up for every other owner in the the 30-team business.

You're still looking it as 30 separate businesses when that's a disingenuous way of looking at the situation. It's one business with 30 franchises. McDonald's doesn't place its franchises so they compete with one another, they all "work together" to make McDonald's money even though a single person can only eat at one place. It's "competition" but it's not competition in the usual free-market sense.

Oh, and "it almost seems like the owners wanted to be in this mess"? That's completely bogus. You're saying that the system worked, but the owners didn't want the system to work so that they could blow it up and get a system that works? Huh?

 

[PredsFan77*]

Go jump off a bridge.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Set a Deadline Already

The NHL needs to put everyone out of their misery already. It is evident that the owners are taking a hard line stance, and that is what the NHL must do if they plan to go along with this hard cap.
Set a deadline to negotiate a deal to save the season for the end of the first week of February. If nothing is worked out by that deadline, the NHL should put one FINAL offer on the table. Even if the NHLPA rejects the offer, the NHL should announce that we will leave this offer open, on the table, and if the players want it or not, vote on it. When the NHLPA decides to change its mind, give them a call.

Bob Goodenow and the NHLPA scored one over the NHL from the CBA signed in 1995. I do not forsee the NHL to rush to make a deal once again to salvage a season. The players have far more to lose than the owners. One side is going to blink, and it isn't going to be the billionaire owners. They are well off financially and have other sources of income. It is Gary Bettman giving Bob Goodenow a taste of his own medicine, and that is by not budging from what he is set to get, a salary cap.

Whether you agree with me or not, or tend to side with the owners or the players, understand that aside from the fans losing out on this lockout, the players will start to realize they just threw away a years worth of pay that they won't see again. The owners may not have gained anything either, but they also didn't have to pay for player contracts, staff, equipment, travel expenses, hotels, meals, medical bills, operating costs, etc, etc.

The NHL says that an offer without a salary cap is nonnegotiable. The NHLPA says that an offer with a salary cap is nonnegotiable. The person with the big pockets who signs the checks is going to get his way in the end. It's a matter of fact. Just ask Bob Goodenow when he forced union workers out of 11 months of pay.

This excerpt was taken from a Star Tribune article, dated September 30, 2004:

Caputo, of Carnegie, Pa., is now 76. Back in 1984 he was a union representative for about two dozen members of the Teamsters Local 249. All were employees of the Firefighter Sales and Service Co. in Sharpsburg, Pa. Goodenow was the boss of that company.The time came to negotiate a new contact. Goodenow and Caputo met but accomplished little else.

"Bob was an obstructionist on every sentence," Caputo recalled. "He made me livid because I could see immediately that his sole purpose was to make sure no contract was enacted. He was successful [11 months later] because those guys couldn't hold out for long."

Caputo is livid once again, this time because Goodenow sits on the opposite side of a labor showdown.

"I look at the guy as an opportunist," Caputo said.

Told of Caputo's comments, Goodenow, in a phone interview last week, said: "He can say that. I was hired to do a job fairly. I still am. In that way I'm totally focused."

Goodenow won that battle, then joined the hockey agent business. By 1990, he had assembled a stable of about 20 clients, including Bob Mason, now the Wild goalie coach. Goodenow, then as now, was always about getting the best deal, a lesson Mason learned in the 1987 offseason.

Goodenow had Mason fly in to Detroit on the eve of the 1987 draft. Mason was a free agent, and Goodenow wanted to mediate any contact between teams and Mason. The goalie arrived, and Goodenow led him to a hotel room.

"He just said, 'Stay here, buy some beer,' " Mason said.

Goodenow came back intermittently holding a napkin with an offer scrawled on it. Four teams made bids, including Mason's most recent team, the Washington Capitals, Mason said. Mason instead signed with the Chicago Blackhawks.

The following day, to Mason's dismay, the Blackhawks signed college goalie Ed Belfour and picked goaltender Jimmy Waite eighth overall. Belfour's agent was none other than Goodenow.

"Goodenow kept that from me," Mason said. "He should have let me know. ... Knowing that, I might have stayed [with Washington]."

 

[Padawan]

I don't think the NHL starts in this season. All the players (finnish NHL players or NHL players playing in Finland) have said there is not going to be NHL this season. Olli Jokinen said in an interview that if the NHL regular season would start it would only be about two months. What's the point, he added. According to Jokinen the talks now are to save the next season as a whole. The story is from todays Iltalehti, the other one (there's two in Finland, only two) yellow press.

But then again, people are now to be wrong... From time to time.

 

[chiavsfan]

Sick to my stomach...

Now, before I start, I am totally aware that this is an OWNER LOCKOUT and not a PLAYER STRIKE...with that in mind...

I am sick to my stomach at the NHL players in this entire "bargaining" process. I used to think the NHL players were different from those in other sports...but I think after this mess they are worse. At least those in MLB, the NFL, and NBA know they are greedy, but the players in the NHL put on this fake disguise that they care about the game. They don't...they only care about the pay day.

Owners are in this business to make money...and many of them aren't, so they put forth proposals that would make sure they make money on the INVESTMENT that they made.

A proposal that would make the average salary of an NHL player 1.2-1.8 million dollars a year isn't enough? These guys use this "feed my family" excuse...it's a load of bull s&*$ and they know it.

I am the father of two young children, and between my wife and I we make less that 40 thousand dollars (American) a year. We have NO problem "feeding" our family. I have no problem PAYING to be in a men's hockey league...while these guys are PAYED to play a freaking game.

This just shows me that the love of the game is a distant second to the pay, and that's what pisses me off. After last night I had my wife take all my NHL jerseys (except for the one that's part of my men's league uniform) and she will put them in storage. All the people that say their fan's will be back? I am not one of them...and I am not just saying that.

The players and the NHL will have to kiss my big white behind a TON to get me back to a game.

 

[Reilly311]

The players and the NHL will have to kiss my big white behind a TON to get me back to a game.

liar. Once hockey comes back you'll be watching.

 

[chiavsfan]

No, I can honestly say I won't be back. First of all, I am in Chicago, and not a fan of the way the Hawks are run so I don't go to those games anyway. And secondly, I still haven't gone to a MLB game since the strike. So I think I can hold my own on this one.

 

[The Legend]

The player salaries could stay low if the owners could curb the spending. Why should the players accept a hard cap that can help police the owners?

The owners should be able to police themselves.

1.2 million to 1.8 million seems like a lot, sure. But what happens if you sign that contract, the team goes over the hard cap, and then your contract is voided? You don't get paid. The players want job security for not just themselves, but the future of the game. That's not greed, it's smarts.

 

[The Legend]

Allow me to pick this rubbish apart:


You call paying players 1.3m average nothing?


Ummm,thats why they want to fix the current problems...should the owners just walk away and say,damn, that was a bad investment!


So all owners are idiots? 3-4 Pejorative Slurs changed the structure for the rest and you figure their all idiots


I'm going to wait around for your idea how this could be done with the former CBA rules,and please email Bettman with your ideas so we can get the season underway :lol


The system set the budget,do you really think owners wanted to set a budget that loses millions a year?


Thats why EVERY other professional sports league has it now days...i won't say what the real joke is here!!!

You say that the 3-4 owners that drove the prices up are idiots. That is a damn lie. It's the other 25-26 owners that stood by as their teams weren't successful. Again I ask this question: If the owners are so united, why not just let the big market teams know that it is unfair, and according to the pro-owner philosophy, the would stop their spending.

These so called small-market teams can exist, they just need to be run much better, not just relying on the miracle runs to exist. The marketing is awful, and so is the on-ice product. It is the owners fault it got this way, and the players should not have to pay.


In other sports, there is a luxury tax. The only one with the hard cap is the NFL, but they have their issues and differences also. Firstly, they have TV contracts in the billions, something the NHL doesn't have. And they can just cut their players at will

 

[SENSible1*]

You're not getting it.

In sports, financial success often takes a backseat to competitive success. For teams like Detroit, it's more important to add that player to make a push for the cup than it is to see another $5 million in red ink at the end of the season. That is why there must be some control on spending and salaries. It can't be put any simpler than that. There will always be an owner that wants to win more than he wants to have a successful business, and that messes things up for every other owner in the the 30-team business.

You're still looking it as 30 separate businesses when that's a disingenuous way of looking at the situation. It's one business with 30 franchises. McDonald's doesn't place its franchises so they compete with one another, they all "work together" to make McDonald's money even though a single person can only eat at one place. It's "competition" but it's not competition in the usual free-market sense.

Oh, and "it almost seems like the owners wanted to be in this mess"? That's completely bogus. You're saying that the system worked, but the owners didn't want the system to work so that they could blow it up and get a system that works? Huh?

He gets it, he just won't admit it.

The budget arguement allows the PA to play the owners off against each other and inflate salaries. It is totally unrealistic solution for a sports league, where teams are not allowed to consult each other and set the same budget for fear of collusion lawsuits.

The irony is that the COLLECTIVE setting of a buget by all teams in the league in a COLLECTIVE Bargaining Agreement is legal and EXACTLY what the owners are attempting to do.

Continue to bash away at the owners for doing exactly what you say they should do, it looks good on you.

 

[Grave77digger]

These so called small-market teams can exist, they just need to be run much better, not just relying on the miracle runs to exist. The marketing is awful, and so is the on-ice product. It is the owners fault it got this way, and the players should not have to pay.

spoken like a true leafs fan

 

[Sanderson]

The owners can't police themselves, they are in totally different positions.
That's basically like saying it's Minardi's own fault that they don't win, because they don't spend enough. Well guess what, every time they have someone who is talented, pilot or engineer, Ferrari, McLaren or some other big team comes in and buys them.

The difference isn't as big in the NHL as in Formula 1, but it still is significant enough to prevent self-control.

Not to forget, the owners are currently trying to do what you say they should, in they only way that is legal for them.

This is about money and nothing else. The owners invest and most of them lost money in the last few years, unlike the players, who can't lose money as they don't invest. Some day the players should realise that the owners making profits is better for them as well. Only someone who doesn't lose money all the time will be prepared to spend over and over again.

Right now, both sides basically offered the same amount of money/percentage of the revenue, so why is it so hard for the players to accept the linkage?
If you proposed the same, simply agree to it, but demand concessions in other parts.


Concerning salary:
Either a player is in the plans of a team or he isn't. If the team wants him on their team they can make space for him, if not, well there are 29 other teams. If none of the 30 teams want him, maybe he isn't good enough for the NHL.
This isn't about job security at all.

 

[Da Game]

This isn't about job security at all.

Exactly. It's about getting a Salary Cap into the NHL, to make the Franchise value per team go up, which puts more money in the Owners pockets.

 

[Chili]

The owners should be able to police themselves.

And if they had a gentleman's agreement and it was followed the players would be crying collusion.

There have to be written rules and remedies in place that are fair to all parties.

Significant revenue sharing should be part of the solution but is it enough to solidy the league? I doubt it.

And I agree with the original post. Why can't the players accept a % of revenue as they have in the NFL and NBA? Please don't say it's about trusting numbers because audit mechanisms could be written into the agreement to ensure fairness. If the game's revenues grew so would the player's salaries, proportionately.

Or maybe they want to play in Europe for another year at much lower salaries? It's not about principles, it's about money. Meanwhile the $2.3 billion industry continues to shrink and will only get smaller as this stalemate goes on.

 

[barnburner]

The player salaries could stay low if the owners could curb the spending. Why should the players accept a hard cap that can help police the owners?

The owners should be able to police themselves.

1.2 million to 1.8 million seems like a lot, sure. But what happens if you sign that contract, the team goes over the hard cap, and then your contract is voided? You don't get paid. The players want job security for not just themselves, but the future of the game. That's not greed, it's smarts.

I'm not sure that a players contract would be voided in that instance, but even if it was, it would just be brought down to cap level with that team, or possibly another - not leaving the player with no income at all. This is not about job security - it's about keeping the salaries inflated security.
I've seen what happens when owners police themselves. I live in the St. Louis area, and we used to have the football Cardinals, owned by Bill Bidwell.
He was the poster boy for owners policing themselves. He stuck to his budget no matter what. As a result, the Cardinals were always behind the 8 ball in competing with the rest of the nfl. To this day, Bidwell is the most hated owner in St. Louis sports history.
When Gussie Busch died, and the Baseball Cardinals were left in control of his son, the budget was clamped down with profit being the essential factor.
Fans watched good players being let go for budget reasons, watched the club pass on really good players that they needed, etc. The papers, talk radio, etc were filled with fans screaming at the ownership for being so cheap, greedy, etc.. etc..., and even with baseball being a religion in this area, attendance lagged.
What the nhl needs, is not "guaranteed profits", but, a cba that allows every club to have the OPPORTUNITY to compete for the Stanley Cup thru good management, without driving themselves into bancruptcy. Clubs that are poorly run will perform badly both on the ice and in terms of profit and loss.

 

[Jani8]

"having a business means inheriting risk."

If a business is losing money they usually lay off their workers. So, Bobby Holik...You're fired. Marty Lapointe...You're fired. Brisebois...Yep, you're fired. And so on.....

 

[SENSible1*]

Translation

"These players suck and couldn't make it to the NFL so they are playing for the CFL". Notice how all the scrubs play for the love of the game LOL.

Scotty Bowman is a man of intelligence, class and intergrity. Please consider changing your username if you are going to continue to behave in this manner.

 

[Da Game]

"having a business means inheriting risk."

If a business is losing money they usually lay off their workers. So, Bobby Holik...You're fired. Marty Lapointe...You're fired. Brisebois...Yep, you're fired. And so on.....

Go ahead and fire them. You'll still have to pay them.

 

[eye]

Scotty Bowman is a man of intelligence, class and intergrity. Please consider changing your username if you are going to continue to behave in this manner.

I 2nd that motion.

 

[futurcorerock]

No, I can honestly say I won't be back. First of all, I am in Chicago, and not a fan of the way the Hawks are run so I don't go to those games anyway. And secondly, I still haven't gone to a MLB game since the strike. So I think I can hold my own on this one.

I don't blame you....

I wouldnt expect you back either since you're from Chitown and a BlackHawks fan