Jacques Rogge slams NHL players

[GKJ]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=113450



Perhaps he should know his facts?


I think the NHLPA might not be so keen into giving the Olympics their support anymore.

Click to read more...

 

[SuperUnknown]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=113450



Perhaps he should know his facts?


I think the NHLPA might not be so keen into giving the Olympics their support anymore.

I think he's just using common sense, something the players seem to have forgotten.

You got on one hand owners who are losing money yearly, asking the players to link salaries to revenues, so that all the teams get a chance at making profit. There have been offers on the table that would diminish the average salaries a bit but that would still make hockey players very rich, millionnaires, but the players ain't budging, they don't want to come down from paradise where they cannibalize their own sports for a few more dollars.

The players aren't being reasonnable and that's why there is no hockey yet. That is how most hockey fans see it. Thanks to Mr Goodenow for giving the players a black eye.

 

[Jobu]

I think he's just using common sense, something the players seem to have forgotten.

You got on one hand owners who are losing money yearly, asking the players to link salaries to revenues, so that all the teams get a chance at making profit. There have been offers on the table that would diminish the average salaries a bit but that would still make hockey players very rich, millionnaires, but the players ain't budging, they don't want to come down from paradise where they cannibalize their own sports for a few more dollars.

The players aren't being reasonnable and that's why there is no hockey yet. That is how most hockey fans see it. Thanks to Mr Goodenow for giving the players a black eye.

Most hockey fans are as ignorant as Rogge, hence the pupular support for the owners. The informed among us are far more able to see the owners' lockout for what it is and that it's not at all about the players "refusing to play for $6m."

Rogge is pathetic.

 

[X0ssbar]

Most hockey fans are as ignorant as Rogge, hence the pupular support for the owners. The informed among us are far more able to see the owners' lockout for what it is and that it's not at all about the players "refusing to play for $6m."

Rogge is pathetic.

Then go head and enlighten us all - tell us what its about then "insider".

 

[Jobu]

Then go head and enlighten us all - tell us what its about then "insider".

Ask 100 people about the "NHL players' strike," and I guarantee you less than 10, probably less than 5, will correct you that it is a "lockout." Anyone prefacing their opinions on this lockout by mischaracterizing it as a strike clearly has no understanding of the particular dynamics and issues and ought to be afforded little, if any, respect.

And even those who do realize it's a "lockout" and not a "strike" are generally unable to see the distinction for what it is in a practical sense.

The point is, this is not about the players' asking for more of anything; they have offered to concede in nearly every major area of the CBA, a document, by the way, that was agreed to and extended twice by the other side.

 

[Greschner4]

Ask 100 people about the "NHL players' strike," and I guarantee you less than 10, probably less than 5, will correct you that it is a "lockout." Anyone prefacing their opinions on this lockout by mischaracterizing it as a strike clearly has no understanding of the particular dynamics and issues and ought to be afforded little, if any, respect.

And even those who do realize it's a "lockout" and not a "strike" are generally unable to see the distinction for what it is in a practical sense.

The point is, this is not about the players' asking for more of anything; they have offered to concede in nearly every major area of the CBA, a document, by the way, that was agreed to and extended twice by the other side.

It's really neither a strike nor a lockout. Since the old CBA expired, there's no agreement in place to govern the terms and conditions of employment.

No one's really hung up on whether it's a strike or a lockout anyway.

 

[Jobu]

It's really neither a strike nor a lockout. Since the old CBA expired, there's no agreement in place to govern the terms and conditions of employment.

No one's really hung up on whether it's a strike or a lockout anyway.

Yes, it is a lockout. In Canada by law, and as specified in the CBA, there cannot be a (legal) strike or lockout during a CBA; this can only happen upon an agreement's expiry. Terms and conditions of employment are governed by labour laws and recently expired CBA's depending on the circumstance; there is no clean slate or abandonment of these.

In other words, a lockout by law and definition cannot happen UNTIL the old CBA has expired.

And you, my friend, are Exhibit B (with Mr. Rogge Exhibit A) illustrating why public opinion ought to matter not in this dispute.

 

[ryz]

Ask 100 people about the "NHL players' strike," and I guarantee you less than 10, probably less than 5, will correct you that it is a "lockout." Anyone prefacing their opinions on this lockout by mischaracterizing it as a strike clearly has no understanding of the particular dynamics and issues and ought to be afforded little, if any, respect.

And even those who do realize it's a "lockout" and not a "strike" are generally unable to see the distinction for what it is in a practical sense.

The point is, this is not about the players' asking for more of anything; they have offered to concede in nearly every major area of the CBA, a document, by the way, that was agreed to and extended twice by the other side.

What does it matter to the common fan if it is a strike or a lockout?? All the fan knows is that the players aren't playing right now over $$$ issues. The common fan cannot fathom sitting out on playing a game because you are asked to take 1 mil or 850,000 instead of 1.8 mil while they are making 40,000 and paying the players salaries with their ticket money. I am sure I am just as informed as you are and I think it comes across as pure greed.

 

[pacde]

Ask 100 people about the "NHL players' strike," and I guarantee you less than 10, probably less than 5, will correct you that it is a "lockout." Anyone prefacing their opinions on this lockout by mischaracterizing it as a strike clearly has no understanding of the particular dynamics and issues and ought to be afforded little, if any, respect.

And even those who do realize it's a "lockout" and not a "strike" are generally unable to see the distinction for what it is in a practical sense.

The point is, this is not about the players' asking for more of anything; they have offered to concede in nearly every major area of the CBA, a document, by the way, that was agreed to and extended twice by the other side.

I guess that depends on where you are when you ask, but for the general population, its probably true.
There is only one major point the players havent conceded on and that is the only point that matters. All the other concessions dont amount to fly scat - just window dressing. They knew it, we knew it, and most of the hockey world knew it. As a matter of fact, I could say exactly the same thing about the NHL - major concessions in nearly every major area of the CBA. They clearly said everything is negotiable except this one thing.
And that document was agreed to under unique circumstances in both cases - Just look it up.
I think the key point is that under the present CBA some well-managed teams were losing money even though their building was near capacity and their star players were playing elsewhere. That means for a league to be healthy - it either has to rid itself of these teams (because even though you might think you want your team to have an advantage - its still less fun than everyone playing on a level ice surface) or find a way to deal with the teams that are losing money. Clearly there is a financial discrepency. What makes matters worse is the fact that salaries are determined by comparison on a league wide level while decisions that make sense in Toronto or New York just dont make any kind of economic sense in Calgary and Vancouver. Not only that, but there are laws that prevent the manager of Calgary picking up the phone and calling New York and telling him he cant be doing that. Anybody can see that there is a problem with this system and I think the PA must see it too.

 

[mooseOAK*]

Ask 100 people about the "NHL players' strike," and I guarantee you less than 10, probably less than 5, will correct you that it is a "lockout." Anyone prefacing their opinions on this lockout by mischaracterizing it as a strike clearly has no understanding of the particular dynamics and issues and ought to be afforded little, if any, respect.

And even those who do realize it's a "lockout" and not a "strike" are generally unable to see the distinction for what it is in a practical sense.

The point is, this is not about the players' asking for more of anything; they have offered to concede in nearly every major area of the CBA, a document, by the way, that was agreed to and extended twice by the other side.

The previous CBA was extended because the NHL conceded at that time, not the NHLPA. The union used agreement to participate in the Olympics as a hammer to get that done.

If you are going to position yourself as smarter than everyone else then do what smart people do, see both sides of the situation.

 

[Jobu]

What does it matter to the common fan if it is a strike or a lockout?? All the fan knows is that the players aren't playing right now over $$$ issues. The common fan cannot fathom sitting out on playing a game because you are asked to take 1 mil or 850,000 instead of 1.8 mil while they are making 40,000 and paying the players salaries with their ticket money. I am sure I am just as informed as you are and I think it comes across as pure greed.

The players aren't sitting out, that's the point. They would love to play under not only the terms and conditions agreed to and extended by the owners over the last decade, but have even offered significant concessions to achieve this end.

Ticket prices have nothing to do with player salaries. If you think that ticket prices will go down because salaries do, you are sadly mistaken and brainwashed. The only chance that prices will go down will be a temporary goodwill gesture. Then, supply and demand will rightfully kick in.

It's clear that there are more people like you in this world than those who can see things objectively without blindly making misinformed opinions. It's just a sad fact that people are unable to see through all the rhetoric and think for themselves.

 

[Icey]

What does it matter to the common fan if it is a strike or a lockout?? All the fan knows is that the players aren't playing right now over $$$ issues. The common fan cannot fathom sitting out on playing a game because you are asked to take 1 mil or 850,000 instead of 1.8 mil while they are making 40,000 and paying the players salaries with their ticket money. I am sure I am just as informed as you are and I think it comes across as pure greed.

You are worse than the common fan if you think this lockout if over $$$. The $$$ are the last issue in this lockout.

So when you were given the opportunity to choose a career, why did you choose a career that only pays you $40,000 when you could have choosen to be a NHL hockey player making $1.8M? Could be because you don't have the talent?

That is the big difference between you and the average NHL player. You can be replaced by anyone walking down the street, the NHL player can't. And if you resent their income so much when the games resume, stop attending games, stop paying their salaries, stop buying merchandise otherwise just stop complaining.

 

[Jobu]

I guess that depends on where you are when you ask, but for the general population, its probably true.
There is only one major point the players havent conceded on and that is the only point that matters. All the other concessions dont amount to fly scat - just window dressing. They knew it, we knew it, and most of the hockey world knew it. As a matter of fact, I could say exactly the same thing about the NHL - major concessions in nearly every major area of the CBA. They clearly said everything is negotiable except this one thing.
And that document was agreed to under unique circumstances in both cases - Just look it up.
I think the key point is that under the present CBA some well-managed teams were losing money even though their building was near capacity and their star players were playing elsewhere. That means for a league to be healthy - it either has to rid itself of these teams (because even though you might think you want your team to have an advantage - its still less fun than everyone playing on a level ice surface) or find a way to deal with the teams that are losing money. Clearly there is a financial discrepency. What makes matters worse is the fact that salaries are determined by comparison on a league wide level while decisions that make sense in Toronto or New York just dont make any kind of economic sense in Calgary and Vancouver. Not only that, but there are laws that prevent the manager of Calgary picking up the phone and calling New York and telling him he cant be doing that. Anybody can see that there is a problem with this system and I think the PA must see it too.

This is the funniest post I have read in a long time.

The NHL has conceded? Where? They want a cap, a cap on bonuses, cost certainty, no or meaningless revenue sharing, no luxury tax, a stricter cap on rookie salaries, less QOs, less salary arbitration rights, etc. In only one case have the owners conceded - a whopping one year reduction in UFA age.

This is a system the NHL negotiatied and has twice confirmed, and now it's trying to revamp it all at once in bad faith and without flexibility.

 

[Jobu]

The previous CBA was extended because the NHL conceded at that time, not the NHLPA. The union used agreement to participate in the Olympics as a hammer to get that done.

If you are going to position yourself as smarter than everyone else then do what smart people do, see both sides of the situation.

I'm not sure the relevance of anything you said here.

 

[DuklaNation]

Jobu, your argument is based on the use of strike vs lockout.

Ask any economist about the status of these negotiations. Price ceilngs are required to maintain competitive environment in many industries.

They should spend more time arguing how to slice the pie instead of this no cap or else stance.

When Jason Smith feels the Edmonton owners traded away high priced talent to make more money, you know there is a problem with the players. Out of touch with reality.

 

[Jobu]

You are worse than the common fan if you think this lockout if over $$$. The $$$ are the last issue in this lockout.

So when you were given the opportunity to choose a career, why did you choose a career that only pays you $40,000 when you could have choosen to be a NHL hockey player making $1.8M? Could be because you don't have the talent?

That is the big difference between you and the average NHL player. You can be replaced by anyone walking down the street, the NHL player can't. And if you resent their income so much when the games resume, stop attending games, stop paying their salaries, stop buying merchandise otherwise just stop complaining.

And also start complaining about the income of movie stars, musicians, politicians, CEOs, and everyone else you and the common man is jealous of.

 

[Jobu]

Jobu, your argument is based on the use of strike vs lockout.

Ask any economist about the status of these negotiations. Price ceilngs are required to maintain competitive environment in many industries.

They should spend more time arguing how to slice the pie instead of this no cap or else stance.

When Jason Smith feels the Edmonton owners traded away high priced talent to make more money, you know there is a problem with the players. Out of touch with reality.

I think we have a new funniest post winner.

Oh really, an economist will tell me that artificial controls on price are the way to make markets efficient? Funny, I always thought there was this thing about "free markets" that permeated the science of economics.

What a joke. Adam Smith is rolling in his grave.

 

[quat]

The players aren't sitting out, that's the point. They would love to play under not only the terms and conditions agreed to and extended by the owners over the last decade, but have even offered significant concessions to achieve this end.

Ticket prices have nothing to do with player salaries. If you think that ticket prices will go down because salaries do, you are sadly mistaken and brainwashed. The only chance that prices will go down will be a temporary goodwill gesture. Then, supply and demand will rightfully kick in.

It's clear that there are more people like you in this world than those who can see things objectively without blindly making misinformed opinions. It's just a sad fact that people are unable to see through all the rhetoric and think for themselves.

The PA hasn't offered any concessions so that the season could be played... they offered some concessions in a bargaining agreement for a new CBA, which signed by both sides would allow hockey to begin again. There is no "interm" CBA so there could be hockey, and the Owners have no interest in once again getting hosed for another year by the last CBA

Why not rest that big brain of yours, and just focus on the discussion instead of telling everyone how dumb they are.

 

[quat]

This is the funniest post I have read in a long time.

The NHL has conceded? Where? They want a cap, a cap on bonuses, cost certainty, no or meaningless revenue sharing, no luxury tax, a stricter cap on rookie salaries, less QOs, less salary arbitration rights, etc. In only one case have the owners conceded - a whopping one year reduction in UFA age.

This is a system the NHL negotiatied and has twice confirmed, and now it's trying to revamp it all at once in bad faith and without flexibility.

And all these outrageous demands will do exactly what to the players salaries? It will put them almost exactly where the players offered to put them, and then pretty much keep them from escalating beyond what the league can afford.

The horror ! How dare they!

 

[Leaf Army]

Most hockey fans are as ignorant as Rogge, hence the pupular support for the owners. The informed among us are far more able to see the owners' lockout for what it is and that it's not at all about the players "refusing to play for $6m."

Rogge is pathetic.

This is so true.

I'm tired of hearing about "the greedy players." What do you think the owners are doing? Collecting food stamps and wearing old rain-barrels around their waists?

And for a guy like Rogge to criticize them? What does he know? He's comparing them to amateur athletes. Newsflash- every single player in the NHL right now was an amateur athlete at one time. And many of the amateur hockey players who are "playing for the love of the game" are going to be professionals very soon as well.

I guess when Patrice Bergeron played in the NHL last year, he was one of those big, bad greedy players. But when he plays in the World Juniors, he's a good, old Canadian boy playing for the love of the game.

 

[quat]

I think we have a new funniest post winner.

Oh really, an economist will tell me that artificial controls on price are the way to make markets efficient? Funny, I always thought there was this thing about "free markets" that permeated the science of economics.

What a joke. Adam Smith is rolling in his grave.

It will make Sports markets competitive you condecending so and so

You are obviously smart enough to at least understand where the NHL is coming from, even if you don't agree with them. You're arguing over anything that catches your eye... next up Grammar and spelling lessons

 

[quat]

This is so true.

I'm tired of hearing about "the greedy players." What do you think the owners are doing? Collecting food stamps and wearing old rain-barrels around their waists?

And for a guy like Rogge to criticize them? What does he know? He's comparing them to amateur athletes. Newsflash- every single player in the NHL right now was an amateur athlete at one time. And many of the amateur hockey players who are "playing for the love of the game" are going to be professionals very soon as well.

I guess when Patrice Bergeron played in the NHL last year, he was one of those big, bad greedy players. But when he plays in the World Juniors, he's a good, old Canadian boy playing for the love of the game.

I do agree with you that there is too much hectoring about the greed of players... that said, why should an owner who is wealthy lose millions of dollars (or anything for that matter), simply to support overpaid players?

Posters call the Owners dumb for over paying the players, and say they should learn how to fix things. Well, here they are fixing it, and all you hear is the players complaining.

 

[DuklaNation]

I think we have a new funniest post winner.

Oh really, an economist will tell me that artificial controls on price are the way to make markets efficient? Funny, I always thought there was this thing about "free markets" that permeated the science of economics.

What a joke. Adam Smith is rolling in his grave.

Never said anything about efficient. Do you know what economy means??? Shows me what you know. In an efficient market, at least 5 teams would go bankrupt within 2 years. Follow the steel industry?? Know the aftermath of the revisions of the Telco Act in 1996? Look it up.

Players want the US to compete against China in manufacturing shoes and t-shirts.

 

[The Maltais Falcon]

I got a kick out of Ted Saskin's comment about Rogge: "I cannot understand why Mr. Rogge would comment on the current owners' lockout when he clearly has no information about any of the issues surrounding it."

I'm sure if hypothetically speaking, let's say ... oh, I don't know ... Forbes magazine were to publish a report, based somewhat on hard numbers and somewhat on conjecture, that showed the league's finances to not be in as dire a position as the Levitt report, which was based on data compiled from teams' UROs, made them out to be, Ted Saskin and the PA would tell Forbes to butt out of the matter too and wouldn't use the magazine's findings in the PR wars against the league. Again, this is just hypothetical. I know Saskin or anyone else in the PA wouldn't be that much of a hypocrite.

 

[mooseOAK*]

I'm not sure the relevance of anything you said here.

You aren't doing too much for the average intelligence of NHLPA supporters then.