Is Anybody else Hearing the RUMOR?

[CorneliusBennet]

Average Salary of about 1.3 or something million...OMG such crappy working conditions, i think i deserve such crappy working conditions.

amazing. Are you one of the most skilled 600 people in the world at your incredibly demanding, physically brutal job? No, you're not. That's why you don't get paid that much money.

 

[crossxcheck]

amazing. Are you one of the most skilled 600 people in the world at your incredibly demanding, physically brutal job? No, you're not. That's why you don't get paid that much money.

I'm not but a couple years ago I finished college near top of my class and I sure don't make "rookie" or even AHL salary.

 

[Steve L*]

amazing. Are you one of the most skilled 600 people in the world at your incredibly demanding, physically brutal job? No, you're not. That's why you don't get paid that much money.

But its still not horrible working conditions, is it?

 

[MarkZackKarl]

do you help generate billions?

Try and help generate a couple billion dollars along with 600 others and then we'll talk.

Is your skill so unique that less than 700 others could do your job?

 

[CorneliusBennet]

I'm not but a couple years ago I finished college near top of my class and I sure don't make "rookie" or even AHL salary.

big deal. You got an undergraduate degree. So what? A lot of people have them. I do. What did you study? do people pay you 50 bucks a pop per night to watch you work (hey, you could be a stripper... )
It's supply and demand, folks. It's a free market economy. Why do you guys hate it so much? I mean, why is it that on one hand you ostensibly support it and yet when the players try to maximize their pay by applying the very same free market, capitalism, profit-driven logic, they're villains?
The hypocrisy really knows no end...
Here's an idea: quit your job, start a company. That's how most people who get rich on their own actually get wealthy. When you have achieved in an area to the degree of a guy like Marty Turco, for an example, and are one of the very best at what you do (and there are very few people on this planet that can effectively replace you) then guess what, my friend, you'll be loaded. Until a governing body comes along and tells you that because of the disparity in the wage laws across state lines or something like that, you have to now limit your ability to pay workers what you think they'd be worth to join your company, then you might sing a different tune.
Basically what this amounts to is everybody wants the government off their back until they need the government. Then all of a sudden, unfettered capitalism (when it benefits the workers) is a 'bad' thing. What a mess of contradictions and hypocrisy. Case in point, Tom Hicks, owner of the Dallas Stars (responsible for some of the WORST contracts in recent memory, like Turgeon and Young and Guerin all in one summer) is a major contributor to the Republican Party, the basis of which is a belief in unfettered capitalism. But now, when it suits Hicks' purpose, all of a sudden the 'unfettered market' isn't a good thing anymore, but it must be regulated by a governing body. But apparently that is only the case when it helps out guys like Mr. Hicks.
Hypocrisy of the highest order. Nothing else.

 

[Steve L*]

big deal. You got an undergraduate degree. So what? A lot of people have them. I do. What did you study? do people pay you 50 bucks a pop per night to watch you work (hey, you could be a stripper... )
It's supply and demand, folks. It's a free market economy. Why do you guys hate it so much? I mean, why is it that on one hand you ostensibly support it and yet when the players try to maximize their pay by applying the very same free market, capitalism, profit-driven logic, they're villains?
The hypocrisy really knows no end...
Here's an idea: quit your job, start a company. That's how most people who get rich on their own actually get wealthy. When you have achieved in an area to the degree of a guy like Marty Turco, for an example, and are one of the very best at what you do (and there are very few people on this planet that can effectively replace you) then guess what, my friend, you'll be loaded. Until a governing body comes along and tells you that because of the disparity in the wage laws across state lines or something like that, you have to now limit your ability to pay workers what you think they'd be worth to join your company, then you might sing a different tune.
Basically what this amounts to is everybody wants the government off their back until they need the government. Then all of a sudden, unfettered capitalism (when it benefits the workers) is a 'bad' thing. What a mess of contradictions and hypocrisy. Case in point, Tom Hicks, owner of the Dallas Stars (responsible for some of the WORST contracts in recent memory, like Turgeon and Young and Guerin all in one summer) is a major contributor to the Republican Party, the basis of which is a belief in unfettered capitalism. But now, when it suits Hicks' purpose, all of a sudden the 'unfettered market' isn't a good thing anymore, but it must be regulated by a governing body. But apparently that is only the case when it helps out guys like Mr. Hicks.
Hypocrisy of the highest order. Nothing else.

Whooooosh!

 

[crossxcheck]

actually I have a masters in environmental engineering from one of the top engineering schools in the southern US, but that is beside the point. I'm actually quite happy with what I make. I was mostly being a smart arse.

I understand and agree with most of what you're saying. I just don't think that being the best at a sport that provides no true meaningful service to the community (aside from entertainment) warrants contracts such as jagr's $11m, etc. Now, the fault lies with both owners and players. If someone offered me more money of course I'd take it. I'm not dumb.

I'm not offering any solutions, though. Actually, I'm just pissy and want to see hockey.

big deal. You got an undergraduate degree. So what? A lot of people have them. I do. What did you study? do people pay you 50 bucks a pop per night to watch you work (hey, you could be a stripper... )
It's supply and demand, folks. It's a free market economy. Why do you guys hate it so much? I mean, why is it that on one hand you ostensibly support it and yet when the players try to maximize their pay by applying the very same free market, capitalism, profit-driven logic, they're villains?
The hypocrisy really knows no end...
Here's an idea: quit your job, start a company. That's how most people who get rich on their own actually get wealthy. When you have achieved in an area to the degree of a guy like Marty Turco, for an example, and are one of the very best at what you do (and there are very few people on this planet that can effectively replace you) then guess what, my friend, you'll be loaded. Until a governing body comes along and tells you that because of the disparity in the wage laws across state lines or something like that, you have to now limit your ability to pay workers what you think they'd be worth to join your company, then you might sing a different tune.
Basically what this amounts to is everybody wants the government off their back until they need the government. Then all of a sudden, unfettered capitalism (when it benefits the workers) is a 'bad' thing. What a mess of contradictions and hypocrisy. Case in point, Tom Hicks, owner of the Dallas Stars (responsible for some of the WORST contracts in recent memory, like Turgeon and Young and Guerin all in one summer) is a major contributor to the Republican Party, the basis of which is a belief in unfettered capitalism. But now, when it suits Hicks' purpose, all of a sudden the 'unfettered market' isn't a good thing anymore, but it must be regulated by a governing body. But apparently that is only the case when it helps out guys like Mr. Hicks.
Hypocrisy of the highest order. Nothing else.

 

[Orange]

[Blablabla ...]
It's supply and demand, folks. It's a free market economy. Why do you guys hate it so much? I mean, why is it that on one hand you ostensibly support it and yet when the players try to maximize their pay by applying the very same free market, capitalism, profit-driven logic, they're villains?
[... more blablabla.]

Nope, "free market" is without a CBA. Rules of the CBA makes it a regulated market. Current rules are creating major inflation in salaries. Inflation is problematic in any economic system. System needs more regulations to attain equilibrium. Owners are implementing just that.

 

[CorneliusBennet]

"I understand and agree with most of what you're saying. I just don't think that being the best at a sport that provides no true meaningful service to the community (aside from entertainment) warrants contracts such as jagr's $11m, etc."

that is not what we were discussing though, is it? We are not debating the merits of each profession in accordance to it's relative pay scales. I agree that if we look at 'contributions to society' (and everyone has different ideas as to what they are anyway) then actors, models and athletes probably wouldn't be compensated at such a high rate.
But we DO NOT MANDATE what people can or cannot make based on their profession. Or at least we don't in most circumstances. I suppose this leads us right back to where we were...

 

[chriss_co]

amazing. Are you one of the most skilled 600 people in the world at your incredibly demanding, physically brutal job? No, you're not. That's why you don't get paid that much money.

He is... cuz he's canadian.

I am too... cuz I'm canadian.

 

[me2]

amazing. Are you one of the most skilled 600 people in the world at your incredibly demanding, physically brutal job? No, you're not. That's why you don't get paid that much money.

Ahh, so the 600 best shovel swinging ditch diggers in the world should be getting $1.3m/y each? Tough, physically demanding job digging ditches. What about the 600 best axe wielding lumberjacks? Being in the top 600 anything gives you no right to earn any particular amount of money.

Its almost a ludicrous as the argument that says because their choosen careers are short they should have the right to make their lifes wages in 10 years. Bollocks. They are entitled to work after retiring from hockey like everyone else is entitled to change jobs when their first one becomes too demanding. Their hockey careers might be over but their working lives still have time to run. What next, paying ditch diggers $300,000 a year so they can retire aged 32 when their back is getting sore?

 

[struckmatch]

HOCKEY! HOCKEY! HOCKEY!

 

[Hire Sather]

Another insider tells us, “I’d be shocked if there isn’t at least the nucleus of an NHL-NHLPA deal by next weekend.â€

http://msgnetwork.com/content_news....ticle&sports=ice-hockey&team=other&league=nhl

 

[Psycho Papa Joe]

That the NHL and NHLPA have agreed on something and the season could possibly start up on Jan 28th?

I heard it from another board...saying something about Devils Mangment was told that season could be starting on that day...I ignored it..then i heard TSN (TV Channel) was starting to hint that there might be an agreement that is close or done...and last I heard that on Sportnets (channel) that they were talking about this as well..but nobody has anything but small details and nothing concrete enought to post an article about yet.

Of course this is just a rumor but I was just wondering if anybody has been hearing of it...I spoke to a some people and they said they heard it also but just small details. If anybody knows anything more please post.

Keep your fingers crossed everyone...let us pray for an NHL Season.

Read this on another site

Apparantly a poster had inside sources he couldn't name that stated the NHL would start up again on January 15. I've met the guy personally earlier this year and he doesn't come off as somebody who would post BS. Another poster followed with this tidbit:

"That's a rumor going around, not a scoop. It was announced on the french radio CKTF (Radio Energie chain in Quebec) this morning stating unnamed sources. It will supposedly be announced Thursday, but we'll have to see."

 

[xander]

It is impossible to crush a union that has the option to decertify at any time. You really think the players would stay under horrible working conditions ? How dumb are you. If the NHL even TRIED to win an impasse agaisnt them next season they could threaten decertification. Then the NHL could not impose a CBA and never get a cap.


Keep on with your illogical position!

1.3 million is still more than the average player would make in europe or any other league. If the union where to decertify the players would be doing so only out of principle and would be shooting themselves in the foot financially if they did so.

 

[Son of Steinbrenner]

Another insider tells us, “I’d be shocked if there isn’t at least the nucleus of an NHL-NHLPA deal by next weekend.â€

http://msgnetwork.com/content_news....ticle&sports=ice-hockey&team=other&league=nhl

stan fischler

i was hoping when i clicked the link it was john davidson.

 

[xander]

Another insider tells us, “I’d be shocked if there isn’t at least the nucleus of an NHL-NHLPA deal by next weekend.â€

http://msgnetwork.com/content_news....ticle&sports=ice-hockey&team=other&league=nhl

if it's going to take a tax above 30 million and $1.50 on the dollar then it won't happen. Goodenow has said he'll never accept a tax that acts as a cap, and that tax most likely wold.

 

[MmmBacon]

stan fischler

i was hoping when i clicked the link it was john davidson.

That article is the worst.

Take random facts. Shake. Pour. There's a synopsis of Fischler's writing style.

 

[me2]

if it's going to take a tax above 30 million and $1.50 on the dollar then it won't happen. Goodenow has said he'll never accept a tax that acts as a cap, and that tax most likely wold.

The 75% tax Goodenow is supposedly proposing will act like a cap for many of the teams. Even the rich teams will massively curb payroll.

 

[me2]

It is impossible to crush a union that has the option to decertify at any time.

If the union decertifies then its been crushed because decertification is the last desperate action it can take.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

If the union decertifies then its been crushed because decertification is the last desperate action it can take.

Not necessarily. The union could continue to exist and just find another employer.

 

[mudcrutch79]

Not necessarily. The union could continue to exist and just find another employer.

Union certification is tied to the employer. They can't transfer as a union.

 

[Loki]

Not necessarily. The union could continue to exist and just find another employer.

Haha. That will happen. I am sure there is a long list of organizations that would like to employ this fine group of employees led by a saint and a genius in Bob Goodenow.

</sarcasm>

 

[me2]

Not necessarily. The union could continue to exist and just find another employer.

Are they decertifying or not? And this other employer would be the AHL? The ECHL? Some beer league?

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Union certification is tied to the employer. They can't transfer as a union.

Union locals are tied to the employer. They can start another local with another employer.