Sportsnet: Daly frustrated

[Motown Beatdown]

Totally agree. Then why has the Union pulled it off the table. Perhaps cause their only interested in making as much money for their members as is possible, with zero regard to the overall health of the league?

Well the rollback (at whatever percentage) is now a bargaining chip for the PA, why give it away for free if they can get something for it. Maybe they'll use it for a higher salary floor or younger free agency it will benefit them.

 

[CGG]

Totally agree. Then why has the Union pulled it off the table. Perhaps cause their only interested in making as much money for their members as is possible, with zero regard to the overall health of the league?

The rollback was pulled off the table, just like the owners pulled everything off the table and started over. No big deal. It might come back, who knows. It will be interesting to see if the deal (assuming they reach one some day) will include a 24% rollback, no rollback at all, or something in between.

 

[Morbo]

Do I take it then you think it would have been reasonable for the season not to have been cancelled, with the requsite billion dollar loss & the owners in a worse position today but the players suffering no ill effects.
That would be good. Remind me to retain you as my negotiater when my business is losing hundreds of millions.

It's very simple. The poster said the players were continuing to damage the game RIGHT NOW. I merely reiterated that the owners called the lockout.

 

[AH]

And the owners proposed to sit down with the PA and develop a partnership back in 1999 (5 YEARS before the Armageddon was going to happen), but Goodenow flat out refused ...

Now that Bettman is out to bust them, they have a problem with it?

 

[Gary]

Think about what you are say. Is 24% rollback not enough? Is it up to the NHLPA to protect the self centered owners from each other? In my industry, if the union offered a roll back of 24%, the owner would crap his pants. What do the owners really want, they can'[t even agree among themselves what they want, let alone try to get a CBA done. What more do you want from the players. A salary cap is still not going to fix teams whom are being run like a w"hore da vours house next door to a Naval base.

A 24% rollback is a total joke. Almost 1/2 the players in the league are'nt under contract, and all the sudden teams with huge coin would have $20+ million with which to get into bidding wars and drive up salaries once again...It was a smokescreen, plain and simple. 2 or 3 years later the league would be in the exact same position again IMO.

 

[me2]

I'm sorry, so the league is better without a 24% rollback?

Every RFA with an expired contract would now be getting qualifying offers based on 76% of their salary and compared to other players, who would be making 76% of their salary.

Here's the amount the owners could have saved, call this a whooooooopeeeee if you want. Keep in mind in their head the difference between a $42.5 million cap and a $45 million cap is catastrophic:

2005-06: $158,485,000
2006-07: $80,688,000
2007-08: $25,390,259
2008-09: $9,655,118
2009-10: $3,216,000
2010-11: $2,736,000
2011-12: $1,200,000

Teams are capped. If a $10m/y contract isn't rolled back 24% then that just means a team will have to save $2.4m somewhere else, because a cap is a cap. Basically blows away your above numbers.

 

[mr gib]

If the PA continues to inflict damage on the league do they expect to get paid in "magic beans" once they actually sign?

The pressure on the PA to get a deal done in time to generate enough money to pay them what they want is huge. The only difference now it that the pressure is on both sides.

don't agree - its all on the owners - remember the players make no $$$ till oct - same old story

 

[mr gib]

If the PA continues to inflict damage? Who cancelled the season?

thanks for the backup

 

[Crazy_Ike]

don't agree - its all on the owners - remember the players make no $$$ till oct - same old story

And then the players have pissed away their only lever. Once they are losing money, that power is back in the owners' court, and if they've been held for ransom over a summer once again, I doubt they'll be in the mood to negotiate.

It is in the PLAYERS interest to get the deal done now, *before* they lose their only lever. You need to learn that.

 

[mr gib]

And then the players have pissed away their only lever. Once they are losing money, that power is back in the owners' court, and if they've been held for ransom over a summer once again, I doubt they'll be in the mood to negotiate.

It is in the PLAYERS interest to get the deal done now, *before* they lose their only lever. You need to learn that.

they've lost so much already might as well just wait it out - however seems things may be on track for a deal - although i saw bob on the tv and he's still as crusty as ever -

 

[Crazy_Ike]

they've lost so much already might as well just wait it out

And flush a few more careers down the drain while flailing wildly about principles they've already caved on anyways.

Yep, that sounds like a Goodenow/Linden/Damphousse/Guerin plan to me. They're getting pretty good at screwing over the people they're supposedly "representing" for no point.

 

[mr gib]

And flush a few more careers down the drain while flailing wildly about principles they've already caved on anyways.

Yep, that sounds like a Goodenow/Linden/Damphousse/Guerin plan to me. They're getting pretty good at screwing over the people they're supposedly "representing" for no point.

i guess we know where you stand

 

[SENSible1*]

don't agree - its all on the owners - remember the players make no $$$ till oct - same old story

1) If the league isn't able to market the product over the summer, where do you envision them getting sufficient revenue to support the 1.3 M average salary the players previously rejected?

2) What level of support do you think "crusty" Bob will have once the paychecks aren't showing up in Oct and the players are staring down the barrel of another wasted year in their brief carreers?

 

[CGG]

1) If the league isn't able to market the product over the summer, where do you envision them getting sufficient revenue to support the 1.3 M average salary the players previously rejected?

2) What level of support do you think "crusty" Bob will have once the paychecks aren't showing up in Oct and the players are staring down the barrel of another wasted year in their brief carreers?

Like it or not, ill-advised or not, the players can simply sit and wait and don't seem to be under any pressure to make a deal they don't like since they won't get paid for another 6 months anyway. Sure, there's gonna be less money to pay them if this gets to September or October. Fact is though, if you're an owner, what would you prefer:

(a) 42% of $2 billion in a relatively healthy league that actually has TV exposure, corporate sponsorship and season ticket holders

OR

(b) 46% of $1 billion in a crappy league that is an absolute joke after sitting out for 2 seasons, with zero TV contracts, season tickets cut in half, zero sponsorships and a horrendous time trying to get advertisers

Gary needs to get a deal done and soon, so the impact of the lockout on the league is only bad, not catastrophic. Giving in a bit to the players demands is a heck of a good way of getting a deal done that is one small notch below the owner's ideal CBA, and a great way to avoid the oblivion the NHL is heading towards if they delay / cancel a 2nd season.

 

[chiavsfan]

I wish my job worked like you are proposing...in radio a few select people make millions of dollars while 97% of us get crap. Meanwhile the owners and General Managers get most of the money...why is that? Because they own the freaking company.

It is this way in almost every company worldwide...Maybe I should sit out because I'm not getting paid enough...what would happen, they would replace me with someone who wanted my job. The NHL could easily do the same thing, replace the people who don't want to play for what they are given...and it IS still a possibility