Don, I Don't Think This Cone Of Silence Is Working (CBA & Lockout Discussion) XXIV

[the_fan]

Like i said before, there will be no season. This whole thing is a publicity stunt. They are fooling people into believing that this so called long hour meetings might lead to a deal. But in fact they aren't bringing anything new to the table, it's all the same BS.

The saddest part is, many fans are still willing to be at the games and support this dumb league called the NHL. You people who say you'll be the first to be at the games when lockout ends, you made your bed now lie in it.

If the NHL knew that fans would stop supporting the league, this whole thing would never happen, but they know they are playing most of the fans for a fool who will continue buying tickets and NHL merchandise.

Such a shame.

 

[Dalton]

Again, most people realize this is not the case.....

Again you make empty claims with no evidence whatsoever to back them up.

It's ok to admit you blindly support the league. I support the union this time. But at least make some effort to present an argument.

 

[Tra La La]

Clearly this not true. They offered to maybe cover the next two years of existing contracts. That is not the same as honouring existing contracts in full.

So you are saying every cent? 82 games worth of pay? Or do you except the league only has to make whole the transition from 57-50%.(not missed games) Where specifically is the league shorting the players on make whole? If it is after year 3 onward? Clearly enough contracts will have expired to where it shouldn't be an issue. It will just be salary cap hockey as usual.

 

[Freudian]

you got to wonder if Grange chose to make such a mistaken report or he just wasn't paying attention to Fehr's press and put blatantly false statements in his article by accident.

Also, i wonder why people choose to take everything in there for granted and go crazy off it instead of just hearing Fehr's conference themselves.

Fehr made it abundantly clear that he's not proposed a 5% increase over yrs, and that the additional % is not 1,75 of HRR either; rather less than 1% of HRR.

More importantly, Fehr made it abundantly clear that his proposal would have to be then pro-rated when factoring in the lockout, which was obvious (not to Grange apparently, not even once he was told so).


Being said of Mr. Grange BS, Friedman's reports and contents have instead been definitely worth reading along this Pejorative Slured lockout.


All in all, i see this past day as just another unpleasant step towards NHL games getting back at some point in December.

Where did Fehr claim that? Quote please.

What the players will get paid for this season is something Fehr wants to negotiate on once everything else is in place, if I understand correctly.

 

[Dalton]

Do you have an explanation how the league can fully cover the transition from 57-50% on make whole. But is 600 million short supposedly on make whole? What is it the league isn't paying back? I'm open to logical, reasonable, transparent, ideas.

Does bolding your reply give it more import? It looks like tea-party stuff to me. Particularly when your response doesn't really nake sence as a response to my post. You're just ignoring me and regurgitating some argument that you obviously fell in love with.

 

[Milan90]

One thing that struck me about Fehr's memo to players is that he takes a stance. I don't remember the quote but he says something like "this is unacceptable for players" or another negative sentiment towards the owners' offer.

He has no business assessing what is fair and what isn't for players. He's hired to be a delegate and the voice for what players want.

His job should be to just give bare bone facts about the proposals and to let players decide what is fair, he shouldn't be doing it for them.

 

[Dalton]

So you are saying every cent? 82 games worth of pay? Or do you except the league only has to make whole the transition from 57-50%.(not missed games) Where specifically is the league shorting the players on make whole? If it is after year 3 onward? Clearly enough contracts will have expired to where it shouldn't be an issue. It will just be salary cap hockey as usual.

Again with the bolding. Your response makes no sense whatsoever. This particular point that I bolded (unbolded), italicized and underlined is a blatent, obnoxious misrepresentation of the unions position.

 

[Dalton]

One thing that struck me about Fehr's memo to players is that he takes a stance. I don't remember the quote but he says something like "this is unacceptable for players" or another negative sentiment towards the owners' offer.

He has no business assessing what is fair and what isn't for players. He's hired to be a delegate and the voice for what players want.

His job should be to just give bare bone facts about the proposals and to let players decide what is fair, he shouldn't be doing it for them.

I think the union pays him for this?

Aside from that obvious, hilarious mistatement its also clear that any player can join any meeting at the union expence and they have conference calls to discuss thing sthat they can't discuss with memos.

 

[W75]

Hate this crap.

Neither side is going to win public opinion. Neither side is going to come out of this looking good. Both lose. Both look like jackasses. The only reason people bring that garbage up is when they want to say "oh the side I support in this lockout is getting a raw deal"

********. Both sides are clowns. Both sides are ruining the sport.

This. They both have failed. Negotiatiors can't do their job. Their job was to make a deal so that business could be running. Details (like accusations, excuses, PR-crap.. ) are irrelevant. They couldn't execute in given time. Failure.

 

[Marc the Habs Fan]

Allan Walsh ‏@walsha
Don Fehr on charge by NHL that he did not relay offer to players. "It's laughable really that they (NHL) would resort to tactics like this."

**** just hit the fan.

 

[JAX]

Judging by the clear misinformation being posted on this board I'd think that the attack on Fehr was just a distraction in the continued efforts by the league to win popular opinion. Perhaps its multi-tasking

I suspect Bettman and his law firm have no intention whatsoever of negotiating with the union. I think this goes on into next season if the sponsors share the union busting ideals of this law firm and its former employees.

Again, most people realize this is not the case.....

Care to explain? But of course you can't or you would have.

Because everybody knows the league was trying to get the PA to the table a year ago and during the summer and various times leading up to sept 15. The PA did nothing but stall and come up with excuses not to negotiate so they could use the PR stance that "this is a lockout, not a stike" and try to gain public support from those that don't know any better.

 

[Powdered Toast Man]

The players tell Fehr, "We don't like ____, ______ and _____. While we want _____, _____ and ____. Get us a deal that has as much ______ as possible, and as little _____ as it will take. Please keep us informed."

Fehr is qualified to speak on behalf of the players as long as he is fighting for the issues the players deemed pertinent.

 

[Dalton]

Where did Fehr claim that? Quote please.

What the players will get paid for this season is something Fehr wants to negotiate on once everything else is in place, if I understand correctly.

I posted a link to an article in the Globe and Mail that quoted Fehr saying this.

Apparently the article about the negotiations that leaves this out was from the New York Post.

"There was also controversy over what the players are said to be asking in the first year of a new agreement. The New York Post reported the union demanded the $1.883-million in salaries the players received in the 2011-12 season when they received 57 per cent of HRR, plus five per cent more to account for revenue growth. There were reports this was demanded even if the league is unable to play a full 82-game schedule this season.

Fehr said the players are seeking $1.883-billion but only an additional 1.75 per cent per year, which would be compounded over the length of the agreement. He said the union was not actually looking for this amount this season, it just wanted to establish it as part of a new economic system. Once that was done, the player salaries would be pro-rated for this season to account for any lost revenue because of a lockout-shortened schedule."

 

[Milan90]

I think the union pays him for this?

Aside from that obvious, hilarious mistatement its also clear that any player can join any meeting at the union expence and they have conference calls to discuss thing sthat they can't discuss with memos.

His job is to negotiate, go to players, say "the NHL offered this deal, is it fair? Do we accept? If not, what would you like changed?" Not "the NHL offered this, it's not fair, you shouldn't accept, do we accept?" The players know what they want, and it's their finances. Fehr has absolutely no business assessing the fairness of the offers. It should be:

"the owners offered:

-50/50
-this type of make whole
-etc

With no opinion attached.

 

[Kegsey]

It is absolutely true. Gary Bettman announced a lockout and killed hockey. What BS are you selling? Take it elsewhere.

Because Gary ignored all of Fehrs calls to negotiate prior to September right?

 

[Butch 19]

Hate this crap.

Neither side is going to win public opinion. Neither side is going to come out of this looking good. Both lose. Both look like jackasses. The only reason people bring that garbage up is when they want to say "oh the side I support in this lockout is getting a raw deal"

********. Both sides are clowns. Both sides are ruining the sport.

One side will definitely lose in public opinion. (well, has already lost)

 

[Powdered Toast Man]

His job is to negotiate, go to players, say "the NHL offered this deal, is it fair? Do we accept? If not, what would you like changed?" Not "the NHL offered this, it's not fair, you shouldn't accept, do we accept?" The players know what they want, and it's their finances. Fehr has absolutely no business assessing the fairness of the offers. It should be:

"the owners offered:

-50/50
-this type of make whole
-etc

With no opinion attached.

The players pay him for his opinion. He just has to base said opinion on what the players have relayed to him previously as to their interests.

If the players tell him they want the full value of their contracts, Fehr is plenty able to tell them that "so and so offer" doesn't actually address that.

 

[Steve]

The players knew what they were getting into when they signed on. If they didn't, they got bad advice. And let's be honest, the biggest new contracts subscribe to the Richards model, which means they'd get most of their money in the first 3 years or so (and in some cases have already been paid roughly 10% of their deal for nothing), and really aren't effected badly by "make whole". If anything the loophole left open protected them, and they can sit at home through this with a good portion, or in some cases, the great majority of their 2012... and 2013 pay, for doing nothing.

I think the league went soft on the Richards contract after the Kovalchuk debacle, to avoid labor problems in the last year of the deal, and it's coming back to bite them. There was very little activity in 2004, there was a ton in 2012. This was something else that led me to believe this was going to be a relatively painless negotiation. Yet here we are. We're about a week/10 days from this being pretty painful for all involved.

Without a doubt, but there are 2 sides that negotiated though. I imagine some of the owners (no idea how many) but some gave those deals with the promise or knowledge they wouldn't have to pay it. I sit on the fence with this part of the deal if it's in the writing so be it. I just think a cut to 50% is a pretty good concession by the players and the leagues concessions are really only moving off their first 43% proposal. "Make Whole" is a good concession IMO (probably equal to that of the 7% players drop in HHR) I just think the league should be doing SOMETHING to make this work.

I find most people are looking for the players to just take cuts here and there to make this work. IMO this needs to be shared.

I wonder if we start seeing future deals with the whole "accordance to the CBA" part removed. ie. Elite players signing deals that cannot affected by a CBA.

 

[JAX]

Because Gary ignored all of Fehrs calls to negotiate prior to September right?

What is truly amazing is that Fehr's stunt has actually fooled people......not that it really matters in the grand scheme of things however.

 

[Gberg]

I posted a link to an article in the Globe and Mail that quoted Fehr saying this.

Apparently the article about the negotiations that leaves this out was from the New York Post.

"There was also controversy over what the players are said to be asking in the first year of a new agreement. The New York Post reported the union demanded the $1.883-million in salaries the players received in the 2011-12 season when they received 57 per cent of HRR, plus five per cent more to account for revenue growth. There were reports this was demanded even if the league is unable to play a full 82-game schedule this season.

Fehr said the players are seeking $1.883-billion but only an additional 1.75 per cent per year, which would be compounded over the length of the agreement. He said the union was not actually looking for this amount this season, it just wanted to establish it as part of a new economic system. Once that was done, the player salaries would be pro-rated for this season to account for any lost revenue because of a lockout-shortened schedule."

Thanks for the sane, rational update from Fehr. Some people really do go crazy and get carried away.

 

[Dalton]

His job is to negotiate, go to players, say "the NHL offered this deal, is it fair? Do we accept? If not, what would you like changed?" Not "the NHL offered this, it's not fair, you shouldn't accept, do we accept?" The players know what they want, and it's their finances. Fehr has absolutely no business assessing the fairness of the offers. It should be:

"the owners offered:

-50/50
-this type of make whole
-etc

With no opinion attached.

Tell it to the players who hired him. Perhaps you could give a link to his contract to verify that your description of Fehr's job description is not just some fantasy you concocted to further your support of the union busters.

 

[Dalton]

Because Gary ignored all of Fehrs calls to negotiate prior to September right?

What has that got to do with Bettman locking out the players and being solely responsible for no hockey being played?

 

[Dalton]

What is truly amazing is that Fehr's stunt has actually fooled people......not that it really matters in the grand scheme of things however.

I refuse to believe that you do not get paid for your posts. But then again you do see seem to be an advocate for profits as opposed to wages so ...

 

[JAX]

What has that got to do with Bettman locking out the players and being solely responsible for no hockey being played?

WOW, BECAUSE the league was trying to get the PA to negotiate before sept 15 so they would have a deal done......but FEHR refused to negotiate......thus leading to the lockout!!!

 

[unifiedtheory]

Allan Walsh ‏@walsha
Don Fehr on charge by NHL that he did not relay offer to players. "It's laughable really that they (NHL) would resort to tactics like this."

**** just hit the fan.

That ends it.

Both sides can not shut up long enough to negotiate. The silence, which was bringing positive vibes and hope for the fans gets shattered after 4 days of talks.

They are TOTALLY hopeless. Get a ****ing mediator.