the players and their Hypocrisy!

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Chayos, Feb 10, 2005.

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

    Chayos Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2003
    Messages:
    3,105
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Location:
    Saskatchewan
    Home Page:
    This goes to show you the NHLPA's supposed answer to this mess does not work. You know how we know this. They rejected it today. They rejected their own offer becasue they knew it would not put a drag on salaries.

    If they felt it would have worked why wouldn't they negotiate the terms it took to kick into the owners system. The player haven't been negotiating at any point in this process and today was just another example of it. Why does the nhl have to put forward proposal after proposal with nothing coming from the other side? Are these players that stupid to not see that this will bite them on the ass so bad at the NLRB hearings.

    Geez wake up the owners have come up from 53 to 53.2 to 54 to 55 % of revenue and at no point did the player come down from teh "guarenteed 56% they said their system would have the league's cost at. Teh owners even offered profit sharing. Geez how can you not see the train coming down the train track that will end your careers.

    If this lockout stretches into next year you have not only lost the 1.3 million the owners were offering but the 1.3 you would had if you had just tried to make the best deal.

    Look at is using the NHL average salaries.

    Lost 2004/2005 1.3 million
    lost 2005/2006 1.3 million
    -----------
    geez thats $2.6 million dollars for each and every player times that by 700+players it is a whopping 1.8 BILLION dollars. Just to try save a couple of hundred thousand per player. The players would NEVER, NEVER, NEVER EVER hope to recover this money and all because they wanted to continue to be teh only team with out any form of salary drags in place. Given that the NBA and NFL are both more sucessful leagues and they have a Salary cap system in place i fail to understand how they players would give up $1.8 billion on an ideology that is flawed.

    You know why they won't accept a hybrid sytem where linkage comes in because they would risk actually having to provide enough entertainment to keep their salaries within the ranges they are now. They know they have pissed the fans off bad and they want to do everything in their power to make sure the backlash that is coming not affect their revenues. I guess tehy figure this is 100% the owners problem right? As Gary Bettman stated to day that the offer will only get worse in the future as owners revenues are hurt because of a continued lockout. The players have to be prepared to eat their portion of the cost to revenue that fan backlash will surely bring. If they are supposed the reason the hockey team smake money they have to understand that they are also the reason that owners will be losing money after this!

    I say trash the season and let the batages crawl back on their belly's. Make them beg to be employed to play a fricking game. I hope the average wage drops below a million in the end because these arrogant pigs don't deserve anywhere near that amount of money in the first place let alone anywhere near what they have been making.

    I hope you players are reading this and take note of the TSN poll where over 40% of people want the season cancelled. This is a Canadian poll you idiots! We are your bread basket of support and over 40% of us want you to rot in hell. Kinda puts you in your place doesn't it. To take it a step furhter the ESPN poll shows that over 75% of the American fans polled don't care what happens with hockey anymore.

    Geez you guys are really winning over the people here!
     
  2. Crosbyfan

    Crosbyfan Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2003
    Messages:
    10,502
    Likes Received:
    97
    Trophy Points:
    131
    I'll give you $10,000!

    All you have to agree to is that if I mismanage my finances you will give me my $10,000 back and then you give me $10,000 of your money every year to support my stupidity.

    Fair? :dunno:
     
  3. BrickRed

    BrickRed Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2003
    Messages:
    219
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Phoenix
    Home Page:
    That's not what this is about and what caused the problem. People, be it owners, players, agents or you and me,will always make mistakes -- were human and can't read the future. What the NHLPA failed to provide in 1994, by rejecting the owner's proposed cap back then, is a uniform system with plenty of money on the table for the players, in what was then a growing game, but that also removed the owner's burden of having to serve two masters.

    I grew up in Detroit so I've never liked the New York Yankees and their checkbook team. On one level I never liked the Wings following the same approach. I did however love those Stanley Cups -- but not at the expense of shifting the economics of the league so that very few teams had a real chance to win the cup and then follow-up year after year. I wish the lock-out would have happened next year cuz we all would have seen that the Lighting would not have been able to keep that team together as a small market team under the old CBA. What better proof that the system needs an overhaul and a way of avoiding the super six payroll teams using the rest of the league as its own farm system (again, look at the way the NYY have conducted themselves and how the Oakland A's have lost some many of its young player's to the "have" teams).

    The old CBA, without a cap, boils down to the owners having to serve two masters (1) the interests of their team/city/own competive drive and (2) that which is best for the league in some vaugue, undefined, ever-moving way. That is too much to ask of anyone. A cap system will preverve the integrity of the NHL and some semblance of balance between the teams. This is not intended to be a six team league. A cap is the only why to ensure that the owners need only focus their attention on what is best for their team under the uniform rules.

    As to the hybred plan -- its time for the player's to live up to their word of December 9th that its 24% roll back will guarantee the health of the league. As with any negotiation, the owner's are obviously waiting for the players to counter -- especially as to the triggers. They need to counter with reasonable triggers. It they fail to do so, then the only offer they have made in over two months will be exposed as a a fraud and one they would not and could not in fact guaranty.
     
  4. John Flyers Fan

    John Flyers Fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    22,416
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    It was rejected because it would be triggered immediately. More than 3 teams would be over the $42 million payroll threshold even with the 24% rollback.
     
  5. Doesn't it tell you something when the union rejected to negotiate any of the triggers and instead (just as they always do) rejected the offer flat out with no counter proposals or concepts? They have shown zero interest in negotiating. Its that joke of a 24% *temporary* cutback or nothing from this union. Can't say I'm going to shed any tears when the replacements are brought in and the union crumbles.
     
  6. littleD

    littleD Registered User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2003
    Messages:
    6,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Ottawa, Ontario
    Home Page:
    There's nothing to negotiate.

    Owners: cap or nothing.
    Union: no chance at a cap

    It's been the same stance since September. What exactly is there to negotiate?

    Goodenow: We don't like these triggers.

    Bettman: Okay, forget the triggers. Let's just go with our offer from last week.

    Goodenow: Umm, no.
     
  7. You should apply for a job with the NHLPA. Hope they have fun trying to explaine that stance in front of the Geroge W. Bush NLRB. This is going to be funny. Bring on the scabs.
     
  8. CGG

    CGG Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2005
    Messages:
    4,119
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    96
    Location:
    416
     
  9. Actually by refusing to even negotiate the triggers the NHLPA rejected their own offer. It's pretty straight forward. When given an opportunity to prove that their proposal would work the NHLPA balked. In fact Goodenow even stated that he he would not negotiate on the frame (the NHLPA's) put forward and demanded a new framework to work with. The NHLPA rejected their own framework and demanded a new one, hence they rejected their own December 9th offer, outright. Them's the breaks. Live with it.

    :amazed:
     
  10. eye

    eye Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Messages:
    1,607
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    around the 49th para
    Home Page:
    A reasonable Executive Director would have done just that.

    Bob to Gary. That's a reasonable offer Gary but the only way it can work for us is if we can negotiate the triggers to at least give our offer a chance through next season. Gary to Bob. That seems fair === let's get this thing done before we lose every single ticket buying fan out there.


    Gary just called Goodenow's bluff and insincere 24% rollback offer. Brilliant and creative move by Bettman to show the PA members just how full of **** Goodenow really is.

    The only other explanation is that Goodenow asked Bettman to make this announcement last night so that he could cave in gently this weekend and have a softer landing after painting himself and his players into a corner.
     
  11. krandor

    krandor Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If the triggers are the issue then negotiate the triggers. The NHLPA refuses to negotiate on any proposal and is just rejecting them until they get one they like.

    The financial health of the NHL Has to be addressed in the CBA and a CBA needs to be put in place that improves the financial health of the league. If the players really think their proposal will do that, then come up with appropriate tests to determine if it is working or not and guarantee it or it reverts to a cap.

    The owners are moving a lot here and are willing to accept a proposal without a hard cap as long as it helps the financial state of the league. I do think the triggers could be improved so the NHL and NHLPA should use those as a starting point in negotiations if the NHLPA really belives their proposal will do what they say it will do.
     
  12. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    138,165
    Likes Received:
    1,627
    Trophy Points:
    215
    I'll tell you all whats hypocrisy: people who support the owners and thought this was a legitimate proposal. Now we all get to see who on this board has a blind agenda and who actually supports the owners with reason.


    I can say there are a few people in this thread alone who have no idea who they support they just know they hate the players.

    I hear the Slam boards are good for ranting and raving about mindless jabber.


    The NHLPA did not reject their own offer. Whoever doesn't get this through their heads should keep all of their thoughts in the rant thread because they have no sembelance of meaning and would in essence be just mindless jabber, and God knows we have enough of that on this board.


    Fact. Not opinion. This is a true statement.
     
  13. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    138,165
    Likes Received:
    1,627
    Trophy Points:
    215

    How do you know that didn't happen. Bettman could have said the triggers were non-neogeotiable.
     
  14. krandor

    krandor Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If the last NHLPA proposal was legitimate and will fix the problems in the league, what is the problem with accepting it as long as it does what it says it is going to do? If the issue is how they are determining if the plan is working or not, negotiate those.
     
  15. krandor

    krandor Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2005
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If that happened, then I lose lost a lot of respect for Bettman. I think what are proposed was a good framework IF the numbers and conditions are negotiated a bit.

    If either side doesn't want to negotiate numbers within the framework, they are the ones who will be responsible for the ending of the season.
     
  16. It was every bit as legitimate as the players Dec.9 proposal. Don't like the triggers? Negotiate new triggers. Don't like the arbitration changes? Negotiate the arbitration changes. Don't like linkage? Negotiate a cap without linkage. Don't like how low the cap is? Negotiate a higher cap level. Would rather a stiff tax than a cap? Negotiate a serious luxury tax and not that vile and sickening offer of 20% over 50 million.

    The NHL has just put an offer on the table without linkage or a salary cap (if the triggers are negotiated) and extended a GIANT olive branch to the union (agreeing to try their proposal). But I guess its the Dec.9 proposal or nothing for the NHLPA. Just try and defend that.
     
  17. ceber

    ceber Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,500
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Wyoming, MN
    Where does it say the NHLPA isn't considering negotiating the triggers? I'm mostly on the side of cost-certainty in this, but I wouldn't have taken that deal. I would have turned it down, gone back to my office, and started thinking about triggers I'd be willing to live with. Once you figure out what triggers would be acceptable, then you need to come up with what your counter offer will include (and it's got to push more more than what you'd accept.. otherwise you're not doing your job). It's not like Goodenow can see the proposal and in 15 minutes decide how he wants to counter.
     
  18. Brent Burns Beard

    Brent Burns Beard DontTouchMyDonskoi!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,115
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Home Page:
    maybe you missed the part where the PA has said they will not accept a cap ?

    this means, that they will not accept triggers (negotiated or not) that could lead to a cap. they are excersizing their human right to not work in an enviroment they are opposed to. unlike most people, they have the leverage to hold out their services until the NHL capitulates.

    dr
     
  19. Steve L*

    Steve L* Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2003
    Messages:
    11,548
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Southampton, England
    Home Page:
    What they did yesterday was admit their own offer wouldnt work for the NHL. Bettman called their bluff and they folded.

    The NHL owners will exercise their human rights to bring in replacement players until the union caves.
     
  20. Brent Burns Beard

    Brent Burns Beard DontTouchMyDonskoi!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,115
    Likes Received:
    24
    Trophy Points:
    141
    Home Page:
    actually, its not the owners human right to bring in replacement players. they have legal obligations, both in labour and immigration to deal with.

    dr
     
  21. AlexGodynyuk

    AlexGodynyuk Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2005
    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Does nobody realize that the triggers ARE a cap under a different name.
    The owners essentially put a cap on the players offer but called it something slightly different.
    I think this was a bad idea, both sides see this as so black and white (we try your proposal, then we try our proposal). They need to negotiate (something neither side has done) and come up with something both sides can live with (yeah, a lot easier said then done).
    If the players were to accept this offer we'd be right back where we are now in 2 years time, this time with the players striking after the cap kicks in.
     
  22. Thats not up to you to decide, chief. The owners *do* have the legal right to use replacement players if an impass is reached. And according to your own statements, the players refuse to negotiate and voila... impass, implementation and replacements!
     
  23. Do you not remember good ol' Bobbie telling the NHL and the media that their Dec.9 proposal gives the NHL what it needed (the 54-56% of league wide revenue going towards player costs)? That 24% wasn't a number picked out of thin air, you know. Essentially what the players have admitted is that they know full well that their system will fall flat on its ugly face in the real world. If nothing else, Bettman has just proved how pointless the Dec.9 offer was.
     
  24. Thank you for your "fact based" drivel as well. I notice how your "rant" was backed up with a plethora of links and analysis. I would suggest you take your own advice.
     
  25. SENSible1*

    SENSible1* Guest

    It remains to be seen how much leverage the PA really has.

    Egil's post was the best examination of the offer. The PA was right to reject it, but it is now firmly in their court to counter and the owners have clearly laid out their options in terms of the two paths they can choose.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"