Deal On Table: NHL, NHLPA pondering 6-year CBA

Status
Not open for further replies.

Charge_Seven

Registered User
Aug 12, 2003
4,631
0
Epsilon said:
Bottom line is the NHL only care about getting cost certaintly. Plenty of fans here have been brainwashed into thinking this is about fairness, when it is and always has been strictly about money.

Hurray--another good post!
 

Sam I Am

Registered User
Jul 23, 2003
1,909
186
Visit site
John Flyers Fan said:
Was it unfair when the Habs, Isles, Oilers, Flyers and Bruins dominated the years 1970-90. And their domination was a helluva lot more than what we've seen from the Stars, Avs, Wings, and Devils over the past decade ???

I never suggested that all teams should be equally strong, only that they should have an equal chance at being strong.

In the old days, dynasties were built, partly by luck but largely through shrewd management. Nowadays, it (usually) suffices to be rich as it ensures a team can keep its homegrown talent base through its best years and supplement it with whatever else may be required to build a winner through free agent signings and the acquisition of salary-dumped players.

This is not how the great Oiler, Bruins, Flyers and Habs teams of yesteryear were built. It is, however, precisely how Colorado, Detroit, Dallas and--yes--the Flyers currently maintain winning teams year-in-and-year-out without the benefit of top-ten draft picks.

Doesn't take much canny, Sam Pollockian manoevering. Just cash. And yes, it's unfair.
 

barnburner

Registered User
Apr 23, 2004
567
0
Epsilon said:
Bottom line is the NHL only care about getting cost certaintly. Plenty of fans here have been brainwashed into thinking this is about fairness, when it is and always has been strictly about money.

Of course it's been about money. The owners have come to the conclusion that as owners, they should be making more money than the players they are paying.
 

Sammy*

Guest
Epsilon said:
Bottom line is the NHL only care about getting cost certaintly. Plenty of fans here have been brainwashed into thinking this is about fairness, when it is and always has been strictly about money.
Its about money for the owners , fortunatly for the fans (small & medium market anyways), fairness is the by-product of it being about money.
 

mudcrutch79

Registered User
Jul 5, 2003
3,903
0
The Big Smoke
www.mc79hockey.com
Hootchie Cootchie said:
:lol: :lol:

Oh PLEASE!! Your ignorance of the situation in Alberta is staggering.

Respectfully, he's a hell of a lot closer to being correct than you are, particularly about the situation in Ottawa. Do you care to impugn my knowledge/understanding of the situation in Alberta?
 

417

BBQ Chicken Alert!
Feb 20, 2003
51,255
27,464
Ottawa
Epsilon said:
Bottom line is the NHL only care about getting cost certaintly. Plenty of fans here have been brainwashed into thinking this is about fairness, when it is and always has been strictly about money.

And what's wrong with that, players have guaranteed contracts which pays them ridiculous sums of money no matter whether they actually try or not, what guarantee to owners get on their investment?

Yes this is strictly about the money, cause if all the money keeps going into the players pockets and off-shore bank accounts, then no more NHL...I always said it, players don't want to accept a cap, that's fine, then give up your guaranteed contracts
 

AM

Registered User
Nov 22, 2004
8,463
2,512
Edmonton
Actually

mudcrutch79 said:
Respectfully, he's a hell of a lot closer to being correct than you are, particularly about the situation in Ottawa. Do you care to impugn my knowledge/understanding of the situation in Alberta?

his implication about the Ottawa situation is tremendously skewed, as per my answer to his post.

As for your knowledge of Edmonton, allow me to suggest my knowledge of Edmonton is extencive also.

And the bottom line is, no competative balance no hockey in Edmonton.

That is, no NHL hockey.
 

Sammy*

Guest
BlackRedGold said:
There really should be a "Senators Bankruptcy FAQ" here to explain the situation to those who are ignorant about what happened.

The CBA had nothing to do with the bankruptcy. It was due to undercapitalization and a spiralling debt load. A salary cap would not have changed anything.



Once again, it is highly doubtful that the Sens are losing millions every year under Melnyk. If businessmen can recognize poor investments, why did one buy the Senators?



I don't know if Alfredsson would have been resigned if Bryden still had the debt load he carried. But it wouldn't have been because of the CBA if he had left.

To be honest, I would rather the Sens have given Leschyshyn and Smolinski's jobs to young players. I thought signing Smolinski was a mistake but Melnyk felt the need to show that times had changed with him running the club.



Keep what in mind? Your ignorance of the situation in Ottawa? That in Alberta fear sells?
What you fail to appreciate is that Ottawa has a good young team now but without better economics, has zero, zilch , nada chance of keeping the core that they have together.
You are unbeliebvably ignorant of the issues that small market teams have & to suggest that Oiler fans are in the plight that they are in because they "accept mediocrity", notwithstanding supporting the team as good or better than any other fans in the NHL & the team being well managed, is abject stupidity.
Tampa Bay & Ottawa of all the markets in the NHL should be in favor of a cap, they would have a reasonable chance of keeping their players rather than being put in a box & getting less than "fair" value for them because of the very limited market.
 

Hockeyfan02

Registered User
Oct 10, 2002
14,755
0
Pistivity
Visit site
Not trying to argue points here specifically but some people think you should automatically have a return on your investment. Thats not true. When you make an investment, there is risk involved that you will lose money. Good for the owners to try to make money on their investment, but they arent entitled to profit just because they put millions into it.
 

mudcrutch79

Registered User
Jul 5, 2003
3,903
0
The Big Smoke
www.mc79hockey.com
AM said:
his implication about the Ottawa situation is tremendously skewed, as per my answer to his post.

As for your knowledge of Edmonton, allow me to suggest my knowledge of Edmonton is extencive also.

And the bottom line is, no competative balance no hockey in Edmonton.

That is, no NHL hockey.

What do you know about Edmonton? Do you know what their revenues are? Do you understand the cost structure of their business? No one here does. What we do know is that the Oilers were presumably on board with the offer Bettman made on Dec. 14. That offer provided no revenue sharing dollars for the Oilers. There's something suspicious about what's going on there.

About the Ottawa bankruptcy, maybe you should read what the previous owner said. The current owner bought it because he figured a cap was on the way.

Asked if he regretted buying the Senators in the first place, Bryden responded: "If I had been able to see a 162-cent dollar and the rate of escalation of players' salaries that, in fact, occurred in that decade, then I certainly would not have done that."

This is laughable. Of course Bryden is going to blame factors outside of his control. It's a hell of a lot better than saying "I took a bunch of big risks, and got burned." I read that quote, and I believe it was in an article that outlined multiple instances of Bryden being involved with failed businesses.

As for Melnyk buying because he figured a cap was on the way...of course he says that. It's in his interest to say that; it pulls people behind his position, and it supports the NHL position. If the league doesn't get a cap, we'll see if he sells right away. I'd be shocked if he did.
 

djhn579

Registered User
Mar 11, 2003
1,747
0
Tonawanda, NY
Hockeyfan02 said:
Not trying to argue points here specifically but some people think you should automatically have a return on your investment. Thats not true. When you make an investment, there is risk involved that you will lose money. Good for the owners to try to make money on their investment, but they arent entitled to profit just because they put millions into it.


Not trying to argue points here specifically but some people think you should automatically be able to get whatever salary you would like if your a hockey player. Thats not true. When you make a decision to play a game for a living, there is risk involved that you will not get paid everything you think yoou should get paid. Good for the players to try to make as much money as they can in their usually short careers, but they arent entitled to millions just because they play a game.
 

AM

Registered User
Nov 22, 2004
8,463
2,512
Edmonton
thats right

mudcrutch79 said:
What do you know about Edmonton? Do you know what their revenues are? Do you understand the cost structure of their business? No one here does. What we do know is that the Oilers were presumably on board with the offer Bettman made on Dec. 14. That offer provided no revenue sharing dollars for the Oilers. There's something suspicious about what's going on there.



This is laughable. Of course Bryden is going to blame factors outside of his control. It's a hell of a lot better than saying "I took a bunch of big risks, and got burned." I read that quote, and I believe it was in an article that outlined multiple instances of Bryden being involved with failed businesses.

As for Melnyk buying because he figured a cap was on the way...of course he says that. It's in his interest to say that; it pulls people behind his position, and it supports the NHL position. If the league doesn't get a cap, we'll see if he sells right away. I'd be shocked if he did.

Everybody is out to get you!

Listen, when Bryden said what he said, he was already clear! Your presumption of his rational for lieing is, well, humerous to me.

As for Melnyk, I guarantee he had talks with the league about this very point before he bought the franchise. Anything else, and hed be doing business like a PA supporter thinks its done.
 

Sammy*

Guest
mudcrutch79 said:
What do you know about Edmonton? Do you know what their revenues are? Do you understand the cost structure of their business? No one here does. What we do know is that the Oilers were presumably on board with the offer Bettman made on Dec. 14. That offer provided no revenue sharing dollars for the Oilers. There's something suspicious about what's going on there.



This is laughable. Of course Bryden is going to blame factors outside of his control. It's a hell of a lot better than saying "I took a bunch of big risks, and got burned." I read that quote, and I believe it was in an article that outlined multiple instances of Bryden being involved with failed businesses.

As for Melnyk buying because he figured a cap was on the way...of course he says that. It's in his interest to say that; it pulls people behind his position, and it supports the NHL position. If the league doesn't get a cap, we'll see if he sells right away. I'd be shocked if he did.

Where do you get the Oiler owners were on board with the Dec 14 offer? You dont have a clue.

As for Melnyk saying that what he said about bailing out should no cap be in place, do I take it you call everybody a liar who's statements dont fit in with your views. And by the way, Melnyks statements are exactly the same statements that the Oiler owners have said. Are they also liars?
 

PeterSidorkiewicz

HFWF Tourney Undisputed Champion
Apr 30, 2004
32,442
9,701
Lansing, MI
Just to let you know on TSN.ca they have an article reporting how Yotes management said that stuff about telling the players to get ready was a false report. Take what you want out of that.
 

Poochie_D

Registered User
Oct 31, 2004
2,805
4
Montreal, Quebec
PeterSidorkiewicz said:
Just to let you know on TSN.ca they have an article reporting how Yotes management said that stuff about telling the players to get ready was a false report. Take what you want out of that.

well what were they going to say? " yes... we called our players and a new deal is almost finalized?" i wont believe a word anyone says in the next couple days unless gary bettman himself annonces they have a deal done
 

futurcorerock

Registered User
Nov 15, 2003
6,831
0
Columbus, OH
PeterSidorkiewicz said:
Just to let you know on TSN.ca they have an article reporting how Yotes management said that stuff about telling the players to get ready was a false report. Take what you want out of that.

Why would a specific team's GM not know where his players are? Sounds shady to me


"That's completely erroneous," he said. "I have not spoken to any members of our roster in two months. I don't even know where one-third of our roster is. Some of them are spread all over the globe. No one in our management group has contacted our players since November."

Who says they didnt report it as false because the NHL wants this hush-hush?

Keep in mind all the mainstream media had the talks written off as 'no hope' before they scheduled the thursday meetings.
 

mudcrutch79

Registered User
Jul 5, 2003
3,903
0
The Big Smoke
www.mc79hockey.com
Sammy said:
Where do you get the Oiler owners were on board with the Dec 14 offer? You dont have a clue.

I don't know for sure that they're on board, but surely Bettman is putting forward offers that satisfy his bosses. The Oilers owners are one of them. Logically, they were on board with it until there is evidence to the contrary.

As for Melnyk saying that what he said about bailing out should no cap be in place, do I take it you call everybody a liar who's statements dont fit in with your views. And by the way, Melnyks statements are exactly the same statements that the Oiler owners have said. Are they also liars?

I don't exactly consider it lying. These guys are in a public business, every move gets covered. If you own a tire factory, no one cares about your business. You don't have to deal with these types of questions about your private business matters. If those guys did, I'm sure that they'd be less than honest as well. My point is that Melnyk (just like Bryden) has interests in giving a certain response.

The same holds true for the Oilers owners. They've strongly implied for years that Edmonton has problems in generating revenue, and now we find out that the Oilers are a mid market in terms of revenue generating capacity. What else are they being untruthful about? I don't blame them for it, but when their public utterances don't square with facts, I'm inclined to believe that they aren't giving full and frank disclosure.
 

AM

Registered User
Nov 22, 2004
8,463
2,512
Edmonton
Laf

The same holds true for the Oilers owners. They've strongly implied for years that Edmonton has problems in generating revenue, and now we find out that the Oilers are a mid market in terms of revenue generating capacity. What else are they being untruthful about? I don't blame them for it, but when their public utterances don't square with facts, I'm inclined to believe that they aren't giving full and frank disclosure.[/QUOTE]

The Edmonton books are more open then you might imagine.

First, there are alot of owners. If anything untoward were going on it would be found out.

Second, they get money from lottos.... basically from the government(people are watching them).

Thirdly, they cant go in the red, because the ownership group wont allow it.

Thats why they are the poster-franchise for whats wrong with the league.

They run a good ship but cant keep their players!

Thats why your belief they arnt full and frank, dosnt hold much water in my understanding.
 

grego

Registered User
Jan 12, 2005
2,390
97
Saskatchewan
Teams like Edmonton are mid market, but the fans and owners are tired of being a farm team to the NHL. Not all of the fans that love teams like Edmonton will accept losing our stars forever because we can't retain the. What a team like the Oilers are looking for is a deal where it will be possible for them to keep their players when they need to resign them to a contract.

If they don't get a deal that lets them keep most of the players the team will be doomed eventually. As I don't think any fans plan to watch 40 years where their team is unfairly hurt every year by losing a player or 2. It has been tiring as a fan for the last 10 years to see this, and I don't want to have to see it continue into the future.

I am sure many of the owners feel the same about the issue. Maybe the Oilers are middle of the pack in revenue but they barely made a profit last year, that is including a strong dollar in Canada, playing the Heritage Classic game, and having to give up any player when they get so good they can't afford the contract any more.
 

FLYLine27*

BUCH
Nov 9, 2004
42,410
14
NY
Hey guys..just a quick question...what SOURCES have confirmed this? And are they stating they know for a fact there is this deal out there or its only a rumored deal that is out there?

I would look through every page but its taking my comp like 5 reload tries to get a page to load up..guess a lot of people are on.
 

Chayos

Registered User
Mar 6, 2003
4,922
1,152
Winnipeg
BlackRedGold said:
Yup.



The good teams, not the big market teams or the small market teams but the good teams. When players have a choice they choose teams that have a chance to win it all. Why would they want to go to a mediocre team like Edmonton?



Just because Edmonton aspires to and accepts mediocrity, doesn't mean that all small markets do. I'm a fan of a small market team and I was realistically hoping for a championship. Tampa isn't a big market and they didn't just hope for a championship, they won one.



When was the last time NY was expecting a long run? Try replacing NY with Ottawa in your statement. It would make more sense.

Man are u uninformed my friend.

I wonder if you were a Fan of a team like Tampa bay say 5 years ago or so?

Were you hoping for a championship in the Espo years?

Geez and you call the Oil mediochre?

How the oil would be considered medicore when they have been able to be within 3 points of a playoff spot or in the playoffs 7 straight years in today competive nhl.

Sure Tampa won the cup but your team absolutly sucked for so long they drafted a championship team. The oil have tried another route of being competive every year and hoping for a team to round together for a good run one of these years. You also had the luxery of being good in 2004 when cost certainty is coming. If you had been good 5 years ago you would have had to do the the same thing we did and trade stars away to keep teh payroll in line with expenses.
 

Chayos

Registered User
Mar 6, 2003
4,922
1,152
Winnipeg
PeterSidorkiewicz said:
You speak of the NHLs latest deal, which ALSO included NO salary arbitration of any kind and a UFA age at 30. If youre so hellbent on the NFL system, make the UFA age for hockey players at age 24 then, an age where most NFL players become UFA's. Under the NHLs latest offer a player is OWNED by a team from age 18 to age 30 and has no say in the matter at all. If I was a player and looked at that deal I would have turned my back right then and there.

Hmm its really hard to feel pity for a player when he is only making the league average on salary too!:(

12 years of only 1.8 million

DAMN the system and its unfairness!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->