Blinkage, Linkage & Stinkage (CBA & Lockout Discussion) XVII

[Iggy77]

That's just gibberish, has the PA or Fehr even countered a proposal using the proposal yet? So far I can only recall them offering their own version of a CBA that seems unrelated to the league's offer. Whether this is all Fehr or not, I have no clue what the PA is attempting to achieve.

Hoping that the owners cave in and remove linkage from this (and future CBAs) ?

 

[JMT21]

With salaries linked to revenue...... what happens when revenue goes down over the course of season?

Is that where escrow comes in?

 

[Ice-Tray]

See I thought that deadline was last week. That's why I'm surprised it didn't come up. I really did think they would get there...



Relocation/expansion fees, if not part of HRR, are not going to anything other than the owners. Which is perfectly fine with me if that is how it is defined.

Kelly's "proposal" would bring in $300-500M in fees and split between the players and owners and then soft step down to 50%, then BELOW 50%, then back up to 50%.

In essence, he's saying "we'll go to 50% right away if you give us $150-250M". Which is just about verbatim from the NHLPA's non-proposal proposal.

And it would get shot down right away because it would set precedent for the NHL to give relocation/expansion fees in the future. Never would happen.



They were open to negotiating only if the PA agreed to everything else.

But the PA's three proposals were completely bogus, I'll agree with you on that. WAY too late in the game to start de-linking.

I agree that it's along shot, but my point is that creativity is needed to get a deal done soon, but it has to be creative with linkage or it will be a non-starter with the NHL. The other option is simply a battle of attrition while we all wait on the sidelines.

 

[Freudian]

No, the ONLY thing the NHL was willing to consider was the Make Whole tweak. It was a take the package as is, or don't call us proposal.

You're going flat earth on us here. Listen to what Daly says. He states what NHLs position is in a very clear manner. Bettman has done the same thing. It is meaningless for the NHL to meet with the NHLPA until they accept linkage. The second Fehr accepts this, negotiations about all things you falsely claim is of a take it or leave it nature can continue.

 

[marcel snapshot]

So what?

Well, he's the Commissioner of the National Hockey League, not the National Lawyering League. He's not an effective steward of the game. He's not, and never has been, a hockey guy -- he's a management-side labor lawyer who now happens to run the NHL. The only tool in his toolbox for ensuring the health of the collective enterprise that is the National Hockey League is to foster a work stoppage every 6-8 years. So, he really seems to excel at all the wrong things -- that is, if you are a fan of hockey, rather than a fan of labor lawyering.

 

[Fugu]

Fugu is a better source than Daly.

The Luntz selected spokesman for the NHL?


Why is he more credible in framing the negotiations than Fehr, for example? Do you always listen to one source and exclude everyone else.


I'm listening to the link now..... thanks for an audio, Freudian......

All I've heard so far is him saying 'oh, it wasn't really a take it or leave it'.......

Mentions the travel, training camp, comfort issues.

Economically: proposal to keep the league healthy and stable, avg player salary has increased by $1 MM. (Neglects to mention league revenues that yielded that result.)



Okay, Freudian....give me a time stamp where he actually refutes Jarick's claims.

 

[Fugu]

You're going flat earth on us here. Listen to what Daly says. He states what NHLs position is in a very clear manner. Bettman has done the same thing. It is meaningless for the NHL to meet with the NHLPA until they accept linkage. The second Fehr accepts this, negotiations about all things you falsely claim is of a take it or leave it nature can continue.

Time stamp and your summary to what you're claiming (which I'm not sure I know what you ARE claiming.)

 

[Ice-Tray]

Balderdash. They weren't even willing to negotiate Make Whole, just "tweak" it.

Jarick has portrayed the NHL position accurately.

No he has not. You're simply making a factual statement bend to suit you pro player bias. There is no factual basis to your statement, which usually you are pretty vocal against when others do it.

You think the NHL is bad and therefore everything they say is bad, even if the meaning has to be taking in direct opposition to what the words say... Too funny...

Some of your arguments make good sense, this one is just reactionary gibberish.

 

[Butch 19]

Well, he's the Commissioner of the National Hockey League, not the National Lawyering League. He's not an effective steward of the game. He's not, and never has been, a hockey guy -- he's a management-side labor lawyer who now happens to run the NHL. The only tool in his toolbox for ensuring the health of the collective enterprise that is the National Hockey League is to foster a work stoppage every 6-8 years. So, he really seems to excel at all the wrong things -- that is, if you are a fan of hockey, rather than a fan of labor lawyering.

this again??

He's had the job for 20 years. You seriously don't think that ANY hockey smarts has rubbed off on him in 20 years?

If not, how long does one have to be exposed to the NHL to be considered a "hockey guy?" seriously, how many years?

And, being a hockey guy is still no guarantee that you'll know how handle the business end of a professional hockey league. In fact, it will likely hurt your performance.

 

[Artz19]

The Luntz selected spokesman for the NHL?


Why is he more credible in framing the negotiations than Fehr, for example? Do you always listen to one source and exclude everyone else.


I'm listening to the link now..... thanks for an audio, Freudian......

All I've heard so far is him saying 'oh, it wasn't really a take it or leave it'.......

Mentions the travel, training camp, comfort issues.

Economically: proposal to keep the league healthy and stable, avg player salary has increased by $1 MM. (Neglects to mention league revenues that yielded that result.)



Okay, Freudian....give me a time stamp where he actually refutes Jarick's claims.

•Pierre LeBrun via twitter: Bill Daly: “We withdrew our most recent proposal on Friday, and now we are spending time thinking about our next proposal and how best to get closer to a resolution. We hope the Union is doing the same thing. Given the that the Union refused even to discuss our last proposal, it would appear that we still have a large gulf to bridge.â€


I'm not saying Daly is more credible than Fehr, but you dismiss the claim that the NHL is willing to talk about it's offer because Fehr says so. Daly says they are. The answer is probably somewhere in the middle.

 

[Fugu]

No he has not. You're simply making a factual statement bend to suit you pro player bias. There is no factual basis to your statement, which usually you are pretty vocal against when others do it.

You think the NHL is bad and therefore everything they say is bad, even if the meaning has to be taking in direct opposition to what the words say... Too funny...

Some of your arguments make good sense, this one is just reactionary gibberish.

I don't think the NHL is bad, just incompetent.


That's beside the point.

What did Jarick say that you feel mischaracterized the proposal?

That the league was willing to drop/alter their stance on UFA age, ELC contracts, contract term limits, counting non-NHL contracts in the player share? What exactly?

They wanted an immediate pay cut which was the 50/50 on day one, some BS Luntzian 'Make Whole' crap which has nothing to do with being made whole which could be tweaked.... and that was all.

 

[TruGr1t]

Balderdash. They weren't even willing to negotiate Make Whole, just "tweak" it.

Jarick has portrayed the NHL position accurately.

That's a pretty heavy claim. Is there a source on this because it is something that would seriously change the general face of the negotiation. I haven't heard it stated anywhere really...outside of a few posters claiming it is the case. If the NHL came in with that offer and said nothing was open to negotiation except the 'make whole' agreement then that's on them. But I can't see that being the case. It doesn't make any sense relative to how close the league was to its true goal: 50-50 split with linkage maintained.

 

[Ice-Tray]

The Luntz selected spokesman for the NHL?


Why is he more credible in framing the negotiations than Fehr, for example? Do you always listen to one source and exclude everyone else.


I'm listening to the link now..... thanks for an audio, Freudian......

All I've heard so far is him saying 'oh, it wasn't really a take it or leave it'.......

Mentions the travel, training camp, comfort issues.

Economically: proposal to keep the league healthy and stable, avg player salary has increased by $1 MM. (Neglects to mention league revenues that yielded that result.)



Okay, Freudian....give me a time stamp where he actually refutes Jarick's claims.

This is a pretty silly and biased position to take. Again, both sides have legitimate concerns, but this is just ridiculous.

Are you really asking why a NHL spokesman is a better source for framing his own words that his opposition?

Is Donald Fehr not better served by framing the NHL position as a take-it-or-leave-it proposal? But let me guess, Fehr is man of integrity and would never resort to such PR tactics...

When everything is subject to spin, you're far better off to take the words coming out of the mouth of the source with more veracity than his opponent... This is just logical.

 

[CerebralGenesis]

This is like a bad breakup and they are about to saw the van gogh in half.

 

[Fugu]

•Pierre LeBrun via twitter: Bill Daly: “We withdrew our most recent proposal on Friday, and now we are spending time thinking about our next proposal and how best to get closer to a resolution. We hope the Union is doing the same thing. Given the that the Union refused even to discuss our last proposal, it would appear that we still have a large gulf to bridge.â€


I'm not saying Daly is more credible than Fehr, but you dismiss the claim that the NHL is willing to talk about it's offer because Fehr says so. Daly says they are. The answer is probably somewhere in the middle.

What are we arguing here? They withdrew the "take it or leave it" 82-game proposal.


Moving forward from that point, both sides are back to square one.

 

[Freudian]

The Luntz selected spokesman for the NHL?


Why is he more credible in framing the negotiations than Fehr, for example? Do you always listen to one source and exclude everyone else.


I'm listening to the link now..... thanks for an audio, Freudian......

All I've heard so far is him saying 'oh, it wasn't really a take it or leave it'.......

Mentions the travel, training camp, comfort issues.

Economically: proposal to keep the league healthy and stable, avg player salary has increased by $1 MM. (Neglects to mention league revenues that yielded that result.)



Okay, Freudian....give me a time stamp where he actually refutes Jarick's claims.

So basically he says that a statement such as "the ONLY thing the NHL was willing to consider was the Make Whole tweak. It was a take the package as is, or don't call us proposal" is false?

 

[Fugu]

This is a pretty silly and biased position to take. Again, both sides have legitimate concerns, but this is just ridiculous.

Are you really asking why a NHL spokesman is a better source for framing his own words that his opposition?

Is Donald Fehr not better served by framing the NHL position as a take-it-or-leave-it proposal? But let me guess, Fehr is man of integrity and would never resort to such PR tactics...

When everything is subject to spin, you're far better off to take the words coming out of the mouth of the source with more veracity than his opponent... This is just logical.

I think it would be wiser to take each side's framing with a grain of salt.

Do I have to now go back and find the quotes from Bettman and Jacobs at the meeting where he told Fehr to only call if they were prepared to take the league proposal AS IS, and might discuss the tweaking of the Make Whole portion?

 

[Ice-Tray]

I don't think the NHL is bad, just incompetent.


That's beside the point.

What did Jarick say that you feel mischaracterized the proposal?

That the league was willing to drop/alter their stance on UFA age, ELC contracts, contract term limits, counting non-NHL contracts in the player share? What exactly?

They wanted an immediate pay cut which was the 50/50 on day one, some BS Luntzian 'Make Whole' crap which has nothing to do with being made whole which could be tweaked.... and that was all.

My point is that Daly has said numerous times that the 'make whole' was open for negotiation. He has also said that proposal itself was open to changes. He has also mentioned that the PA proposals haven't addressed peripheral issues at all.

What Fehr is saying is that the league is not willing to negotiate off their linked framework. If Fehr didn't like the 50% split he's had ample time to offer a soft step linked proposal. He has never done so. the reality is that Fehr will not negotiate a linked proposal (has refused to do so) and the league refuses to discuss delinked proposals. Claims of negotiating in bad faith, take it or leave it proposals, etc.. is all PR. The only issue is link or no link, and at this point no one is willing to budge.

My frustration stems from what I view as the obvious. The NHL lost a year of hockey to get that link, they will never give it up. The players have refused to negotiate a linked deal that could be beneficial, and in the end they will continue to lose real dollars holding out for a single issue that they have no hope of winning. Futile.

 

[Jarick]

You have been corrected on this several times and still keep claiming it.

Daly has repeatedly said it is not true. Here is a link.

Ottawa Sun

QMI: Did Gary Bettman tell you the last offer Tuesday was take-it-or-leave-it?

FEHR: "All I can tell you is that my sense in the meeting (Thursday): They reviewed our proposals. It took them 12 or 15 minutes, said they rejected them, said their offer on Tuesday was their very best offer and that outside of what he called 'minor tweaks' that was it. He said this in front of 19 players. When I said, 'So, a tweak means something small and insubstantial' or words to that effect, he said 'Yes.' That's sort of the way it ends. Except Gary said at the end of the meeting if the players were prepared to accept their offer in its entirety, minor tweaks, I could call him about the 'make whole' provision which has players paying players for the reduced salaries in the first two years. I just have to go on the basis of what I heard."

ESPN

"We told them while there was only limited flexibility, the offer was not presented as a 'take it or leave it,'" Daly said. "We are willing to talk about it. But if their position is every other element of our offer is unacceptable -- which they suggested to us at the meeting on Thursday (and I think Don is on the record of stating), -- I'm not sure there is much to talk about currently."

At this point it's he-said she-said so I won't keep repeating it.

 

[Cawz]

I think it would be wiser to take each side's framing with a grain of salt.

It would be wise for you to take your own advice, because when you say absolute things like:

No, the ONLY thing the NHL was willing to consider was the Make Whole tweak. It was a take the package as is, or don't call us proposal.

...it seems like you are taking one side with a grain of salt and the other side as gospel.

 

[Huis Clos*]

He's not an effective steward of the game.

By what measure?

 

[Hanklite*]

Fehr needs to formally propose the new deal of 50/50 and a version of the make whole so that way he can feel he won and they negotiated off his deal...

 

[Ice-Tray]

I think it would be wiser to take each side's framing with a grain of salt.

Do I have to now go back and find the quotes from Bettman and Jacobs at the meeting where he told Fehr to only call if they were prepared to take the league proposal AS IS, and might discuss the tweaking of the Make Whole portion?

I agree with you here for sure, but if I had to choose I would take Daly's framing of his own words, and Fehr's framing of his own words than pundits, fans, players, or the opposing negotiator.

 

[UsernameWasTaken]

Balderdash. They weren't even willing to negotiate Make Whole, just "tweak" it.

Jarick has portrayed the NHL position accurately.

No, Daly said they would discuss "make whole" but the rest of the offer was non-negotiable other than "minor and unsubstantial tweaks".

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/19925/deal-revolves-around-solving-make-whole

 

[Do Make Say Think]

No he has not. You're simply making a factual statement bend to suit you pro player bias. There is no factual basis to your statement, which usually you are pretty vocal against when others do it.

You think the NHL is bad and therefore everything they say is bad, even if the meaning has to be taking in direct opposition to what the words say... Too funny...

Some of your arguments make good sense, this one is just reactionary gibberish.

You better be careful arguing with Fugu, the mods will come down hard on you if you call him out on ignoring facts.