Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by Kevin Forbes, Oct 20, 2004.
Countdown for NHLPA party whip response
I love it.
Perhaps that 45 day announcement was a little jarring to some?
Did I miss anyone?
He makes a good point,...so he will be punished!
He made a general comment about both sides needing to get back to the table.
He shouldn't be punished but...the NHLPA are apparantly a bunch of very sensitive thugs and will force him to retract his statements or else his head will be on a stake...The NHLPA conducting themselves in a professional manner is asking for way too much....
I was kidding that he "needs" punished. I was making fun of the NHLPA, and their reaction to comments by players.
I agree with your comments on the NHLPA.
IN todays Chrinicle Herald here in Halifax there is an interview with Belak. WHile he is still supportive of the union he is clearly frustrated with both sides at not negotiating. He also mentioned something that I found peculiar....the union hasn't contacted him or others since BEFORE the lockout began. Doesn't seem a thing a union concerned about it's membership would do. Perhaps they don't want to hear what the players low on the totem pole have to say?
So we have 3 Union members speaking somewhat negatively about the NHLPA, sorry kids, Ference comments are not negative in regards to the NHLPA they are just general comments made by a frustrated player.
How many NHLPA members are there, Over 700? So that is 3 out of aprox. 700 for a percentage of, .42 %. Keep in mind that there is no "gag" order on the NHLPA members.
Those of you who are ownership pawns are jumping on this tiny insignificant number in order to bolster your arguments against the NHLPA. That seems pretty desperate to me.
I would like to hear what the owners of teams that will be most adversely affected by Gary's salary cap really think about this, too bad they are not allowed to express themselves......yet.
Rest assured boys and girls, the longer this goes on the more likely we will see disgruntled owners breaking ranks to call BS on the hard line stance taken by the League.
Its nice to see a superstar of Andrew Ference stature to come out like this and blast the union for being greedy, and unworkable with. The NHL should file a lawsuit this is getting to be too much, the unions unwillingness to accept a cap, and work out a right deal, not a fair deal for the players but he right deal.
Andrew should worry because, he will soon be out of a job, because when the NHL realuanches as a whole new league, hes out of a job.
Since obviously many of you do not know how to read or click on a link here is the full text of the article on Ference...where, pray tell is the statements calling the union greedy and unworkable?
Calgary Flames defenceman Andrew Ference is the latest frustrated player to speak his mind on the NHL lockout.
Ference told the Calgary Sun that he was upset with the lack of communication between the league and the players' union.
"It's asinine and it's both sides," Ference told the Sun. "How are you going to solve a conflict without communication? I don't understand the motivation behind sitting around.
"Even if you're not going to talk to the other guy, why not put forward some ideas you have so the public can see them and can say, 'These guys are putting forward an effort.'
"I understand there's an art to negotiation but right now, they're pretty s----- artists."
Earlier this week, Florida Panthers forward Juraj Kolnik expressed his frustration with the lockout, saying he just wanted to play in the NHL. He also had some harsh words for the union, but Kolnik later back-tracked on those comments and backed the NHLPA's stance.
NJ Devil Pascal Rheaume.
Actually, I think bringing up a simple percentage is rather a moot point. Public perception is what matters, and what the public sees is a player every 2nd or 3rd day making comments that aren't in lockstep with their union stance and hardly shows 'solidarity'. This is only to get worse as we hit November and December. If the masses see a large ratio of NHLPA disgruntlement in the media vs. NHL ownership complaints about Bettman, it only gives popular opinion to the NHL that much more.
I know when it comes to feedback questionairres in my own business, my general rule of thumb is that if one person goes public with a complaint, there's ten others that are thinking the same thing. I'm not saying there's rampant conflict in the NHLPA (yet), but if you think these sentiments are only shared amongst 3 or 4 players...
We'll probably begin to see more dissent now as paycheques are being missed. Up until Friday no money had been lost by the players. Yesterday with the announcement of the 45 day cancellation policy they lost another paycheque.
Yes players are missing paycheck, but remember the owners are missing out on a ton of revenue too. Instead of voicing their opinion in the press maybe they are calling Bettman. We dont know since the owners have a gag order. Remember for some teams like Detroit every missed home game costs them around a million dollars worth of revenue per game.
I read an article a while back with Kruk talking about the basebal strike. He said he remembered at the time the union stating they've talked to the players and they're all 100% behind the union in their fight. When he did a poll after they started playing again, not one of his teammates had been contacted by the union to give their thoughts!!
The frustration has started here and it's only going to increase as the paycheques get lopped off ... esp. for these younger and or mid-bottom type players. It's amazing how quickly one can get used to the lifestyle afforded to a million dollar per year salary ... and forget to adjust when it's disrupted!!!
I'd venture to guess if it's 1,000,000 in revenue per game and their payroll for 03/04 was listed at over 70 mill, their owner isn't losing too much sleep over cancelled games...... he's probably taking the wife out for dinner every night of the week & giving a little thanks to each and every member of the Wings for not playing!!!
Here's the thing...in the time leading up to where we are now, the NHLPA and its reps were telling everyone within shouting distance that the players knew this was going to be a long haul, and that they should be saving up their money. I believe Goodenow himself told them to expect no hockey for up to 2 years.
Considering human nature, how many of them actually DID save their money? I guess we'll find out.
You have to read between the lines in this case. Ference is no moron. He clearly is against the union's stance, but is intelligent enough to be careful on his wording. I'm sure there are many others who want to speak out, but are waiting until the walls cave in for the NHLPA.
I've heard Detroit was one of the big money losers last season.
I dont know if they were a big money losers, the media talk here has always been the team needs to make it to the conference finals to break ever or even make some money and the Cup finals was all profit.
Sorry you are very mistaken. Yes, they are missing out on revenue. However, they are missing out on expenses, and in this case, the expenses are far greater than the revenue that the owners collect. So as weird as it may sound, the owners are actually losing less by not having a 2004-05 season. The ball is clearly in the NHLPA's end.
That revenue i would say is only ticket prices. Not counting his share of concessions, parkings, merchidise, local TV and Radio Deal, etc.
In a press release, Andrew Ference said that his comments were taken out of context in regards to CBA negotiations.
"I meant that both sides were shifty artists, not ****ty," said Ference. "But that the league is painting with their fingers and the union is... ah, screw it, Linden told me to backpedal."
Four minutes later...
In a press release, Andrew Ference said that his comments were taken out of context in regards to Trevor Linden.
"I meant that Mr. Linden told me backpedalling would help my skating," said Ference. "The union is life, and life is union. Xenu and kabbalah."
Reading between the lines means creating an entirely different meaning than what is written?
How do you get that he "clearly" is against the unions stance?
Separate names with a comma.