Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Chayos, Feb 24, 2005.
After the crap pulled by the NHLPA would you pay $50 to see a NHLPA league game?
Better Question might be ..
IF you were going to spend $50 bucks ..
Would you go support the Former NHL teams using replacement players (Ahl & ECHL)
The NHLPA league game with all the Stars of the game .. Sakic, Brodeur, Yzerman etc .??
No this is more of a blame poll than anything else. This board is full of knowlegable caring fans of the game and i guarentee you that b will have more than a 60% vote. This poll is here to show the players what a mistake they are making in all of this!
I actually hope they do start a league because then the players can start saying they don't trust the books of their own PA and that they want a better deal! When they start losing their own money on their own league then maybe they will understand a little better! When the Players go out of their way to embarass Gretzky and Lemieux liek they did it just goes to show you how fast they will turn on their own.
Since you mentioned it .. The NHLPA could have a lot of fun Marketing their product .. They could make the players available for autographs, hockey Card Signings, they could have fun skates with the players in a public skating a few hours before the game.
Think about TV .. If you are tunning into HNIC on CBC Saturday night they were showing these games the NHLPA could generate a lot of Revenue that way ..
Simple question: Where would they play?
Another question: Do you really think CBC would go behind the NHL's back and broadcast these guys?
Even though I'm pro-owner, if I could play devil's advocate for a second:
First question: In alternate arenas in non-NHL cities or in other arenas in existing NHL cities. Another point of interest is that the players may seek legal provision to stop the NHL owners (those who own their arenas, anyway) from preventing "PA-league" games to be played in those arenas. I honestly don't know whether any of that has merit, but it's what I've heard.
Second question: CBC probably won't, but how about ESPN? NBC? I'm not sure how much loyalty they would have to the NHL brand.
I agree you have AHL Arena's and CHL Arena's and in lots of US cities Seattle , Portland ..
Those may get some support, but would it be enough to be profitable? I doubt it. The funny thing is all the extra work you listed that the players would have to do to get less money than what teh owners are offering them now. Man that would make me laugh.
The new union motto for the NHLPA " work harder for less or no money!"
Here is another Good read on the subject :
Impasse an Option
From that article look at this card the NHLPA can an likely will play ..
At the other end, the NHL Players' Association could potentially pull some good trump cards of its own - strike or decertification.
Under a strike scenario, the union simply won't accept the new work rules and walk out. They would gamble that fans wouldn't flock back into arenas to watch non-regulars dressed in NHL uniforms.
The other option is for NHLPA members voting to decertify the NHLPA as their representative body. That way, the new framework of the CBA would not be applicable to them. Simply put, you can't have new labour practices applying to members of a union if that union doesn't exist anymore.
This specific process will essentially fragment the union's former membership. Decertified players who think they can make better money under a new CBA could head back to work, while players who take a financial hit from the new CBA could sue the league under anti-trust laws. If 'Hockey Player X' made $9 million US under the old deal, and only $6 million US because of restrictions - whether it be a salary cap, luxury tax, or re-vamped salary arbitration - under a new deal, he could seek damages for as much as three times the difference.
So put into example :
So take a player like Mats Sundin .. as his numbers that fit the example .. He has 4 years remaining on his deal ..
If he can legally sue for 3 Times the difference ..that make 9 mil(Old CBA) - 6 mil(New CBA) = $3 mil Difference
Multiply X 3 times Difference = $ 9 mil per year award
$ 9 mil X 4 remaining years = $ 36 million dollar payout by the league for one Star player alone ..
Sundin likely may not do it but $ 36 mil is a lot of money to take and then go home and play for Free even in the SEL ..
but Jagr and Yashin and Holik will guarantee take this option and play overseas.. That nearly 100 mil in fines to the NHL for those three based on the above rules ..
I bet those players are hoping like heck that the NHL plays the IMPASSE card and everyone thinks the NHL wins then the NHLPA will de-certify and make its former stars millions and they will get back every cent they lost due to lockout
This could generate a lot of money for an NHLPA league .. If the NHLPA are awarded their settlements they could virtually play for free ..
Yes bu they lose their union and the owners could tehn pay the rest of the players peanuts for the rest of thier careers. The union will not do this unless they abolulty have to and the fact that they will lose pensions, benifits and all the stuff teh union to 50 years to get. Also be aware that Side Show Bob loses his Job as there isn't a PA to boss of any more either. The biggest thing the players would lose over this and the main reason they will negotaite in the end is .... Drum roll please
The owners who were smart all signed most of their team to short contracts to avoid that risk issue if it came to this point. If they decertify most teams have less than 5 players under contract for next season so the payouts would be costly but not versus the gain down the road of being able to cut loose players who are not worth what they are being paid!
Please also bear in mind that the player would be individually suing as there would be no one representing them, so whoever sues an NHL team is likely done working for any NHL team.
The players are strong as whole but take away that unity and they will fall like flys.
it is a short term cost long term reward scenario for the NHL on this one!
The decertification and lawsuit route sounds enticing, but the longer this stalemate continues the less players are under contract.
Your lone vote for yes is looking pretty sad there messenger!
1. These arena's would be much smaller, wouldn't it?
2. With the businessman ESPN, NBC ect would be messing with (and its fellow TV counterparts like Bell) I highly doubt they would hand the PA league a contract.
First time I've seen a well argued pro-PA stance. Well done.
As above, the decertification card is quite risky, losing NHL employment and such. The cases they would base their lawsuit on seem pretty unreliable as well.
1. Some would be much smaller and some would be approximately the same size. I'm not sure how much size would factor into the PA-league's plans if their purpose is to stand on principle. I'm very aware of the irony there in terms of making less money and such, but hey, playing devil's advocate is fun.
2. You're probably right. But the concept of a players league would be enticing IMO for a network to show. It's the same principle why games like NBA Street are popular. Alternate versions of the same sport -- the marketing opportunities would be there I think, and all it would take is one executive from one network to bite.
You mean the same principal that Derian Hatcher and Chris Chelios have in the salary-capped UHL?
They could pay me 50 dollars and I wouldn't go.
Highly risky no doubt .. but if Goodenow feels he is losing or the NHL plans on putting in a very restrictive low Hard Cap CBA in place he might just do it ..
If the talk of this Euro Super league is even a remote possibilty look at the potential reward for some players .. Yashin and Jagr etc would and could make millions and then go home to Europe to finish their careers .. If they never intended to play in the NHL again no matter what the CBA is .. What is the risk for them really to sue .. ??
The same one, yep.
as much as id love to see the best players in the world play, i wouldnt pay them a dime
Question. If the NHLPA were to decertify, does the NHL NOT have opportunity to abandon its forced CBA plans in order to comply with labour laws? I don't know the legalities, but it doesn't seem to make sense that a union can decertify and sue at will without a business even having a chance to comply with labour laws. If the NHL CAN abandon their cap at the moment of decertification, then decertification while still threatening, doesn't seem like quite the trump card anymore.
Like this board isnt full of "blame polls" already
If the NHL's end-game is January 2006, it might be a good idea for the players to organize a World Cup type of invitational tourney this September that could go on for a few months. The players wouldn't make as much money but it would keep them occupied and playing and happy to some degree. If the two parties settle earlier than January 2006, the PA World Cup could stipulate a quick 2 week playoff with the top teams in the standings at the time, to determine a winner. If they have more players interested, the PA could increase teams for countries (Western Canada, Ontario, Quebec; Eastern USA and Western USA; Moscow and Leningrad for Russia).
I don't know the legalities, maybe the PA itself might not want to get involved for legal reasons, but a few star players could organize this instead of the PA.
In Canada, they could play in Halifax, Quebec, Hamilton, Ottawa (Civic Centre), Winnipeg, Saskatoon etc. They could also make a tv deal for a share of the revenues.
I know this thread's author expected a different outcome in his survey, but this might actually be a very good idea.
I wouldnt go because I know full and well those punks won't be putting their all into it out on the ice. It's going to be watered down "paycheck" hockey where they showboat for a bit, lightly push and generally just have a gay old time.
Did i mention they would probably be wearing hose and have purses, too?