After the crap pulled by the NHLPA would you pay $50 to see a NHLPA league game?
Better Question might be ..Chayos1 said:After the crap pulled by the NHLPA would you pay $50 to see a NHLPA league game?
The Messenger said: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)
or
The NHLPA league game with all the Stars of the game .. Sakic, Brodeur, Yzerman etc .??
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.Chayos1 said: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!
Simple question: Where would they play?The Messenger said: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 ..
Even though I'm pro-owner, if I could play devil's advocate for a second:Splatman Phanutier said:Simple question: Where would they play?
Another question: Do you really think CBC would go behind the NHL's back and broadcast these guys?
I agree you have AHL Arena's and CHL Arena's and in lots of US cities Seattle , Portland ..Cloned said: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.
The Messenger said:I agree you have AHL Arena's and CHL Arena's and in lots of US cities Seattle , Portland ..
Here is another Good read on the subject :Chayos1 said: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!"
The Messenger said:Here is another Good read on the subject :
Impasse an Option
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature.asp?fid=9941
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 ..
The decertification and lawsuit route sounds enticing, but the longer this stalemate continues the less players are under contract.The Messenger said:...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 ..
1. These arena's would be much smaller, wouldn't it?Cloned said: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.
First time I've seen a well argued pro-PA stance. Well done.The Messenger said:Here is another Good read on the subject :
Impasse an Option
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature.asp?fid=9941
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 ..
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.Splatman Phanutier said: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.
You mean the same principal that Derian Hatcher and Chris Chelios have in the salary-capped UHL?Cloned said: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.
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 ..Splatman Phanutier said: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.
The same one, yep.Splatman Phanutier said:You mean the same principal that Derian Hatcher and Chris Chelios have in the salary-capped UHL?
Chayos1 said: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!