Today's Meeting: Any News???

Status
Not open for further replies.

crossxcheck

Registered User
Nov 17, 2003
2,762
0
Nashvegas
waffledave said:
Sportsnet says the counter offer included a soft cap of 54% of revenues to go to player salaries.

that's sounds about right. not their best offer, though. still plenty more negotiations left.
 

X8oD

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,619
138
612 Warf Ave.
Son of Steinbrenner said:
if somebody offered you the money the players make you would take it.

not if they told me, the result would be in a year you wont have a job, and will be back making $100 a game if your lucky.

that seems to be the issue i have with the players stance. Everything they say and do ends up boiling down to 1 idea... We dont care how screwed up the NHL is, as long as we get paid.
 

Son of Steinbrenner

Registered User
Jul 9, 2003
10,055
0
X8oD said:
not if they told me, the result would be in a year you wont have a job, and will be back making $100 a game if your lucky.

that seems to be the issue i have with the players stance. Everything they say and do ends up boiling down to 1 idea... We dont care how screwed up the NHL is, as long as we get paid.
who screwed the game up. the players?????????

the owners are the guys that gave these guys the contracts
 

chaachie12

Registered User
Mar 13, 2002
723
0
Minneapolis, MN
Visit site
Son of Steinbrenner said:
there doesn't have to be a linkage between revenues and player costs. name a business in this world that has cost certanity.

You can throw out all other businesses in the world when it comes to professional sports. What other business does the entry level position pay 1.3 mil per year? Not the mail room clerks at my office, I will tell you that.

Some of the other pro sports have cost certainty...so shouldn't that be the better comparison? I don't know, I am just speculating.
 

Benji Frank

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
1,811
24
Visit site
X8oD said:
not if they told me, the result would be in a year you wont have a job, and will be back making $100 a game if your lucky.

that seems to be the issue i have with the players stance. Everything they say and do ends up boiling down to 1 idea... We dont care how screwed up the NHL is, as long as we get paid.

So someone offers you the winning 6/49 ticket and tells you a year form now instead of getting another winning 6/49 you're going to only get a scratch and win with 3 different coloured 7's on it, you're goin to turn it down and settle for 5 out of 6 plus the bonus for 4 or 5 years instead???

Sure you are....
 

i am dave

Registered User
Mar 9, 2004
2,182
1
Corner of 1st & 1st
Owners are not the sole proprioters of excessive contracts. Arbitration and agents deal into the mix too. Don't act as if a guy like Bobby Holik just happened to stumble upon a $9 million deal.

This would all be a non-issue if the revenue actually existed to justify why the players shouldn't be capped.
 

waffledave

waffledave, from hf
Aug 22, 2004
33,438
15,780
Montreal
He's basically saying why the NHLPA's proposal doesn't work, and he's explaining the NHL's porposal.

The rollback gets higher and higher as salaries increase. For someone with low salary, it's a 10% rollback, but for players with salaries of $5 mill+ have to take a 35% rollback.
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
Son of Steinbrenner said:
there doesn't have to be a linkage between revenues and player costs. name a business in this world that has cost certanity.

Almost all of them, if cost certainty is what you call a linkage between revenues and salaries.

The NHL should stop using the terms "cost certainty". They are inaccurate and tend to confuse the more simple minded individuals, as evidenced here.
 

Slats432

Registered User
Jun 2, 2002
14,860
2,900
hockeypedia.com
Son of Steinbrenner said:
there doesn't have to be a linkage between revenues and player costs. name a business in this world that has cost certanity.
Name a business in this world that depends on the strength of all competitors to be successful.
 

Vlad The Impaler

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
12,315
644
Montreal
Son of Steinbrenner said:
the owners are the guys that gave these guys the contracts

That is a lie.

Contracts are negotiated by both parties. The players and their cockroache-agents work very hard to get these contracts.
 

dw2927

Registered User
Feb 13, 2004
68
0
Paavola, Mich.
slats432 said:
Name a business in this world that depends on the strength of all competitors to be successful.

Exactly, exactly, exactly...its not a free market, it is supposed to be a mini-socialist model..
 

FLYLine27*

BUCH
Nov 9, 2004
42,410
14
NY
I think Gary just said they want a cap 38 million and they have to spend at leas 32. But im getting the conference in unclear.
 

X8oD

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
7,619
138
612 Warf Ave.
Benji Frank said:
So someone offers you the winning 6/49 ticket and tells you a year form now instead of getting another winning 6/49 you're going to only get a scratch and win with 3 different coloured 7's on it, you're goin to turn it down and settle for 5 out of 6 plus the bonus for 4 or 5 years instead???

Sure you are....

the mere fact you are comparing the NHL Salary structure to winning the Lottery pretty much sums up why most people view the Owners in the right and the players in the wrong.
 

Digger12

Gold Fever
Feb 27, 2002
18,313
990
Back o' beyond
-Same 24% rollback, but lower percentages for low salary guys and higher percentages for high salary guys

-Get rid of bonuses altogether for rookie contracts

-Totally shot down luxury tax proposal

-NOT seeking the elimination of guaranteed contracts

-Offered a structure where median salary would be the same as last year

-Raise min salary to 300k

-Liberalizing UFA status (possibility of lowering age)

-Team player costs from 38.6 to 44.6 million/yr, negotiable (may have heard the 44.6 number wrong)
 

FLYLine27*

BUCH
Nov 9, 2004
42,410
14
NY
Digger12 said:
-Same 24% rollback, but lower percentages for low salary guys and higher percentages for high salary guys

-Get rid of bonuses altogether for rookie contracts

-Totally shot down luxury tax proposal

-NOT seeking the elimination of guaranteed contracts

-Agreed a structure where median salary remains unchanged

-Raise min salary to 300k

-Liberalizing UFA status (possibility of lowering age)

-Team player costs from 38.6 to 44.6 million/yr, negotiable (may have heard the 44.6 number wrong)


I think he said 34 Million. But i might have heard it wrong also.
 

Seachd

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
24,938
8,947
Vlad The Impaler said:
That is a lie.

Contracts are negotiated by both parties. The players and their cockroache-agents work very hard to get these contracts.
And let's not forget: All this was uncharted territory for everyone. Salaries have never been so high. Who knew it would grow so fast, and who knew at what point the system would fall apart? It's been a test run of sorts.

Now we know where it starts to stop working. It should be fixed as such.
 

Seachd

Registered User
Mar 16, 2002
24,938
8,947
FLYLine4LIFE said:
The media is RIPPING GARY APART!
Huh? I'm not sure what you're watching, but back here on Planet Earth, Bettman's doing very well for himself, after making a very fair proposal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad