- Status
Lionel Hutz
Registered User
Ted Hoffman
The other Rick Zombo
- Dec 15, 2002
- 29,132
- 8,536
Realistically, what are they going to talk about? The owners have a list of things they want, the players see "salary cap" implied somewhere in there and refuse to negotiate any further, and the owners aren't about to back off of some kind of salary-control method.
And I was supposed to be going to the home opener Friday night for my 33rd....
And I was supposed to be going to the home opener Friday night for my 33rd....
Onion Boy
Registered User
Irish Blues said:Realistically, what are they going to talk about? The owners have a list of things they want, the players see "salary cap" implied somewhere in there and refuse to negotiate any further, and the owners aren't about to back off of some kind of salary-control method.
The owners haven't even made an effort to negiotiate. The players have shown a willingness to budge a little, its time for the owners to do the same.
Unfortunately as long as public opinion seems to the back the owners, Bettman has no incentive to sit down at the bargaining table.
Onion Boy
Registered User
Seachd said:
The players want to keep the CBA exactly as it is now, BUT they have made concessions in negiotiating. Do I think the NHLPA's proposed solution is the best possible? No, but that's how negotiations begin. That's how the BUSINESS WORLD works. The owners have made no concessions and don't feel the need to because people (presumably like yourself) support the owners' hard line stance.
Seachd
Registered User
- Mar 16, 2002
- 24,938
- 8,947
And the equivalent offer from the NHL would be no cap, but a 98% pay cut. Doesn't exactly help, does it?sjb3599 said:
Why discuss offers that have no validity?
Of course I support the owners. I like seeing the NHL where I live. When my team leaves because the players don't feel they'd have enough to "feed [their] dog", you're damn right I support the owners.
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
Seachd said:
That wouldn't work because you know some owners would go beyond that.
The point of this cap is to protect the owners from themselves.
Chelios
Registered User
sjb3599 said:
The players` offer is like shooting a pellet gun at a freight train. If they had made a decent proposal the two sides would be talking right now.
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
Chelios said:
You dont give it all away at once.
Kinda like selling a car. You may only want $5000 for it, but thats not what you tell people your asking price.
Chelios
Registered User
Lets use that car analagy. Say you were selling a car and you wanted $5000 for it. Some guy comes and offers you $2000 for it. You tell him to come back when he has a real offer. He comes back later and offers you $1750 for it. Don`t you think you would be kinda pissed off? Thats how the owners feel right now.
Unfortunately, there are no discussions right now, there is however the rhetoric of he said, she said stuff going on(Daly and Saskins)
Irish Blues said:
tightening the rookie pay scale, changing the arbitration process, UFA age, RFA requirements/offer match details? Not trying to be a jerk, but I think there are a number of things concerning the league that could be talked about that both sides should be able to not get pissy and storm from the table because of. Instead, neither side is making an attempt at getting anything done...Discussions shouldn't begin and end with the salary cap/luxory tax fight, but they are.
Last edited:
Chelios
Registered User
Winger98 said:
The problem is that all those things you mentioned depend on what type of broader system is put in place. If there is a cap put in place than the rookie cap, UFA age, RFA offers etc will be more in favour of the players, if it is a luxury tax thats put in place those things will be more in favour of the owners.
Chelios said:
Disagree/agree to a varying extent. While how drastically each may change could depend on a cap/tax agreement, the general parameters of each could be sorted out. Take UFA age, for example. The players may refuse to go above 33 in any situation, and the owners below 27. It's a small thing, but it helps define how much wiggle room each side has in bargaining.
And if some concessions are already made in these other areas, either side may find it easier to make a concession on a cap/tax. Strange things like an agreement or mutual understanding can spring from doing something silly like talking for a few hours. This is my major problem with how this labor impasse has went: neither side appears willing to risk finding any middle ground whatsoever.
- Status
