Why players wont accept a cap?

[Wetcoaster]

Bill Wirtz was spared trial for conspiring with Alan Eagleson due to the expiration of the statute of limitations on the RICO statutes. Jeremy Jacobs changed the name of his company from Emprise to Delaware North after it was convicted of racketeering and a journalist reporting on it was murdered. No reason not to trust these guys.

He avoided the civil RICO case on technical grounds filed by Dave Forbes, Brad Park, Ulf Nilsson, Rick Middleton, and Doug Smail on behalf of former NHL'ers.
http://www.sportslawnews.com/archive/Articles 2001/NHLPlayersLose.htm

In the criminal investigation according to FBI Agent-in-Charge Tim Daly (as reported by Russ Conway), Wirtz and Ziegler were granted immunity in return for providing testimony against Eagleson.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Now I totally whole heartedly agree with this whole post, and the above comment. The problem is if they idiot proof the Owners, the are now in collusion and thus the players are going to sue.

The owners, and the NHL are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

Keeping to a budget is not collusion.

 

[Wetcoaster]

if you dont let idiots into your business, whos going to buy the teams? smart businessmen dont usually invest into an industry that have a long history of losing money. the nhl need these idiots
i also dont see how a cap will limit players earning ability. for example, if crosby comes into the league and score 100G 200A and 300P, he can still demand $15M or $20M, can he not? he can still goto arbitration to get the 'market value' right? or he can still hold out and force the team to either sign him to his demand or trade him?

Maybe you missed it - the owners want to eliminate arbitration as well.

So you take what is offered until you turn 31.

 

[myrocketsgotcracked]

Maybe you missed it - the owners want to eliminate arbitration as well.

So you take what is offered until you turn 31.

the owners wants alot of things, i doubt they'll get every single one of them. to think the owners will get a cap, UFA at 31, no arbitrations for players, and whatever else they demand all under the next cba is wishful thinking.

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

the owners wants alot of things, i doubt they'll get every single one of them. to think the owners will get a cap, UFA at 31, no arbitrations for players, and whatever else they demand all under the next cba is wishful thinking.

What? We haven't heard the owner's best offer? What are they waiting for? Are they operating on a different calendar than we are?

If they have not put their best foot forward at this point, when?

Tom

 

[PecaFan]

Maybe you missed it - the owners want to eliminate arbitration as well.

So you take what is offered until you turn 31.

God, you never give up, do you? All players without arbitration rights have just been blindly accepting their QO's for the past ten years? No negotiation, players just trudge up in their rags and say "Please sir, can I have some more?"

Of course not. If they don't like what is offered, they ask for more. And they get it, if they deserve it.

Hey... this is the second time I've read you quoting Burke.

No kidding. In one thread, WC thinks Burke is the anti-christ, a blowhard who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. In the next thread, he's an astute insider with a valued opinion needed to "prove" his arguments.

 

[quat]

No, I'm Tom Benjamin. Thinking I might be Trevor is one of the nicest things anyone has ever said about me. Thanks.

Tom

Not much to be happy about these days, so I'm glad my faux pas brightened someones day

 

[quat]

God, you never give up, do you? All players without arbitration rights have just been blindly accepting their QO's for the past ten years? No negotiation, players just trudge up in their rags and say "Please sir, can I have some more?"

Of course not. If they don't like what is offered, they ask for more. And they get it, if they deserve it.



No kidding. In one thread, WC thinks Burke is the anti-christ, a blowhard who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. In the next thread, he's an astute insider with a valued opinion needed to "prove" his arguments.

It seems to Wetcoaster, Burke is everything. You know... like his God.

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

No kidding. In one thread, WC thinks Burke is the anti-christ, a blowhard who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. In the next thread, he's an astute insider with a valued opinion needed to "prove" his arguments.

What WC thinks is far less interesting than the substance of what Burke said. I think everyone will agree that he has been a strong supporter of the NHL position.

Until now. What does that say about the NHL position? I wonder if any of the owners are thinking the same things Burke said out loud.

Tom

 

[quat]

What WC thinks is far less interesting than the substance of what Burke said. I think everyone will agree that he has been a strong supporter of the NHL position.

Until now. What does that say about the NHL position? I wonder if any of the owners are thinking the same things Burke said out loud.

Tom

It says that what NHL wants is best for the league, providing a whole season isn't lost. How do you convince players, who made out like bandits during the last negotiation, that this time is different? They have two options. Length of lockout and an "unreasonably" firm (according to Burke), stance on the kind of cost certainty they are after. They PA did too well in the last contract dispute not to trust the guy that got them such a sweet deal. I suppose it is still possible that the Owners will once again cave.

 

[PecaFan]

I think everyone will agree that he has been a strong supporter of the NHL position. Until now.

Hardly. Burke has *always* been a moderate in this. He started out in September or whatever it was by proposing a luxury tax with significant revenue sharing, something the NHL has always said it would never accept.

He was *never* on the owner's "hard cap" side. There's no revelation here, there's no "changing positions" or sides.

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

It says that what NHL wants is best for the league, providing a whole season isn't lost.

Well, it is lost.

How do you convince players, who made out like bandits during the last negotiation, that this time is different?

I think they are convinced it is different. Last time the league negotiated with the players. This time they haven't. Fair enough. The NHLPA isn't going to take something they don't perceive as being fair. They have been unreasonably firm. It has not got the players to move one inch closer to their position.

Now what does the NHL do?

Tom

 

[me2]

What WC thinks is far less interesting than the substance of what Burke said. I think everyone will agree that he has been a strong supporter of the NHL position.

He was still talking about linkage aka cost certainty, which is still the core of the NHLs offers.

 

[wazee]

Now what does the NHL do?

Tom

What does the NHLPA do now?

 

[Winger98]

What does the NHLPA do now?

continue to not play.

off topic btw, I'm hoping I'm right about the baseball thing, too.

 

[Tom_Benjamin]

What does the NHLPA do now?

Nothing. The players will play in the WHA tourney and the World Championships, and sign more European contracts. They've lost a season's salary. They don't lose any more until next October.

At some point, I expect the NHLPA to break off all talks until next September. There's no benefit to the NHLPA to negotiate anything before then.

Tom

 

[richardn]

The problem I have with the cap is this. Say in a few years from now. Owners are starting to make some higher profits and know that they don't have to worry about payroll because it is always at a constant. So they decide to raise their ticket prices to increase their profit even more. How is this fair to the players that the owners profits go sky high and it being absolutley impossible to get a cut of the new revenues.

 

[SENSible1*]

The problem I have with the cap is this. Say in a few years from now. Owners are starting to make some higher profits and know that they don't have to worry about payroll because it is always at a constant. So they decide to raise their ticket prices to increase their profit even more. How is this fair to the players that the owners profits go sky high and it being absolutley impossible to get a cut of the new revenues.

The players are being offered a % of revenues.

If the ticket prices go up, the players would get 54% of the increase.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

The problem I have with the cap is this. Say in a few years from now. Owners are starting to make some higher profits and know that they don't have to worry about payroll because it is always at a constant. So they decide to raise their ticket prices to increase their profit even more. How is this fair to the players that the owners profits go sky high and it being absolutley impossible to get a cut of the new revenues.

wow ... im well known as a non cap supporter, but the answer is pretty obvious.

if the revenue goes up, then the players 54% piece of the revenue pie grows with it.

dr

 

[richardn]

The players are being offered a % of revenues.

If the ticket prices go up, the players would get 54% of the increase.

The problem hear is how many owners show their proper acurate books to their workers. And how is the 54% distributed.

 

[snakepliskin]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6850116/ very nice article--i hope the players read it

 

[CarlRacki]

The problem hear is how many owners show their proper acurate books to their workers. And how is the 54% distributed.

The books would be audited annually by accountants of the PA's choosing. I'd imagine that if an owner was caught holding back there would be sanctions (i.e. fines, loss of draft picks, etc.) In the NFL, for example, any team caught trying to cheat the system can be fined upwards of $2 million.

 

[wazee]

Nothing. The players will play in the WHA tourney and the World Championships, and sign more European contracts. They've lost a season's salary. They don't lose any more until next October.

At some point, I expect the NHLPA to break off all talks until next September. There's no benefit to the NHLPA to negotiate anything before then.

Tom

Perhaps by that time some of them will realize that it is unwise to kill the goose that laid the golden egg.

 

[quat]

Well, it is lost.



I think they are convinced it is different. Last time the league negotiated with the players. This time they haven't. Fair enough. The NHLPA isn't going to take something they don't perceive as being fair. They have been unreasonably firm. It has not got the players to move one inch closer to their position.

Now what does the NHL do?

Tom

No offence, but up till the 24% roll back, the PA had done nothing. Even then, they intentionally avoided what the NHL had been asking to focus on all along. The PA is on record saying they think they were giving up quite a bit just keeping the status que.

If you don't think the Owners hard stance is what got the players to move, then you what exactly was it that moved them to decide on a 24% give back? You may not like the Owners, and find their position to be disagreeable, but I think you should at least be realistic about where the two sides are coming from. It seems to me, at least from this post, that the PA is willing to make all sorts of concessions for no particular reason. Frankly, I just don't see it.

The NHL will eventually get what they are after, because what they will settle for isn't unreasonable.

 

[myrocketsgotcracked]

Nothing. The players will play in the WHA tourney and the World Championships, and sign more European contracts. They've lost a season's salary. They don't lose any more until next October.

At some point, I expect the NHLPA to break off all talks until next September. There's no benefit to the NHLPA to negotiate anything before then.

Tom

what is this WHA tourney you keep talking about? when does it start? is there a team in vancouver by any chance? what are the teams, GMs, players and arenas they are playing in?
i dont think world championship pays anything of significant to the players, so that wouldnt allow the players to last longer in this lockout.
im not sure european teams will be signing too much more nhl players because they already hit their import limit or hit max payroll budget. hack, some players already left (or kicked off by) their european teams before the season is over.
i do agree that, at some point, both the nhl and nhlpa will break off all talk till next september. theres no point for them to negotiate from april to august since theres no pressure and no gain for each side to rush into a deal.