Another Article on League vs. Union

[bling]

Here is an article that I found interesting. It brings up a couple questions I have been curious about, such as why the league would not even look at the unions offer....

http://msn.foxsports.com/story/3127264

In the weeks following their imposition of a lockout, the National Hockey League has been continually criticizing the NHL Players' Association for their supposed unwillingness to bargain sensibly.

The league has continually slammed the two proposals from the union, which featured a luxury tax system, a five-percent salary give back, tightening bonus loopholes in entry-level contracts, leveling the playing field in salary arbitration and a willingness to discuss revenue sharing...........

Click to read more...

 

[thinkwild]

Good questions.

This is like that Star Trek TNG episode, excuse my nerdiness, where Picard gets captured and interrogated and the interrogator wants no information other than to make him think he sees 5 lights when there are only 4. To break him. Once he is broken, the rest of it comes easy. He flashes 4 lights and says how many lights do you see. Although there are only 4, he punishes him until he says there are 5.

Bettman: How many lights do you see?
Goodenow: There are 4 lights.
(Goodenow gets zapped)
Bettman: There are 5 lights. How many lights do you see?
Goodenow: Look Gary, luxury taxes, salary rollbacks, revenue sharing, lowered rookie contracts, bonus restrictions, 2 way arbitration, lets talk about some concrete deals we can work out a solution..
(Goodenow gets zapped)
Bettman: No concrete deals. You re not ready to talk yet. How many lights do you see?
Goodenow. There are 4 lights
ZZZaaappp
Bettman: Until you are willing to say that you see 5 lights, there is nothing to discuss. No ling salaries to revenues - no discussions. How many lights do you see?


They really want this. Whether they need it and only it, we'll see. Seems impossible to believe they cant work out a deal that meets their needs enough without getting it. Getting the one thing the players dont want to give up, but will negotiate many other ways to do it. Do they want a solution, or a union breaking solution?

 

[struckmatch]

Here is an article that I found interesting. It brings up a couple questions I have been curious about, such as why the league would not even look at the unions offer....

http://msn.foxsports.com/story/3127264

In the weeks following their imposition of a lockout, the National Hockey League has been continually criticizing the NHL Players' Association for their supposed unwillingness to bargain sensibly.

The league has continually slammed the two proposals from the union, which featured a luxury tax system, a five-percent salary give back, tightening bonus loopholes in entry-level contracts, leveling the playing field in salary arbitration and a willingness to discuss revenue sharing...........

A 5% salary rollback provides minimal attention to solving the financial struggles of this league. The Luxury tax they proposed was a joke, it wasn't dollar for dollar, and the threshold was far too high. The NHLPA made an offer for PR's sake, not to actually solve any fiscal problems.

The reason the NHL ignored it was because it showed that the NHLPA still believed that there is no need to tie their earnings to league revenues, and until they accept that, and make a substantial concession, they will continue to be ignored.

 

[shveik]

The reason the NHL ignored it was because it showed that the NHLPA still believed that there is no need to tie their earnings to league revenues, and until they accept that, and make a substantial concession, they will continue to be ignored.

I think post #2 summed that up pretty well?

 

[struckmatch]

I think post #2 summed that up pretty well?

Yup.

 

[chara]

Good questions.

This is like that Star Trek TNG episode, excuse my nerdiness, where Picard gets captured and interrogated and the interrogator wants no information other than to make him think he sees 5 lights when there are only 4. To break him. Once he is broken, the rest of it comes easy. He flashes 4 lights and says how many lights do you see. Although there are only 4, he punishes him until he says there are 5.

Bettman: How many lights do you see?
Goodenow: There are 4 lights.
(Goodenow gets zapped)
Bettman: There are 5 lights. How many lights do you see?
Goodenow: Look Gary, luxury taxes, salary rollbacks, revenue sharing, lowered rookie contracts, bonus restrictions, 2 way arbitration, lets talk about some concrete deals we can work out a solution..
(Goodenow gets zapped)
Bettman: No concrete deals. You re not ready to talk yet. How many lights do you see?
Goodenow. There are 4 lights
ZZZaaappp
Bettman: Until you are willing to say that you see 5 lights, there is nothing to discuss. No ling salaries to revenues - no discussions. How many lights do you see?


They really want this. Whether they need it and only it, we'll see. Seems impossible to believe they cant work out a deal that meets their needs enough without getting it. Getting the one thing the players dont want to give up, but will negotiate many other ways to do it. Do they want a solution, or a union breaking solution?

Sorry guy but there really are 5 lights.

Example: Guys like Bill Guerin are out to lunch. He makes like $9M/season. Last time I checked he didn't put up Wayne Gretzky like numbers.

Guys are making too much. It's not too much to ask to take a 25% paycut from 1.8M to 1.4M