Jagr shows true colours!

Status
Not open for further replies.

shakes

Pep City
Aug 20, 2003
8,632
239
Visit site

Probably, but then again I can say with confidence that 99.9% of the people on this board have not made $75M so far in their lives! http://www.hockeyzoneplus.com

Money is not everything in life. There are other considerations. And yes, if you have not walked in Jagr's shoes, you can't possibly know what his thought process is, but let me rephrase my earlier point, his actions do not reflect the actions of a principled person.

I never said money was everything in life, but to say that you or anyone else posting on this board would turn down 2 million dollars on principle.. sorry.. i have a hard time believing that. You go through post after post after post about how the bad players are making a lot of money to "play a game" and how normal people would have to work all their lives and not make what the players make.. etc etc and now you are going to say that these same people would say no to 2 million dollars?

You are right in that Jagr has a lot of money, but as someone else stated (maybe you) that no one even knows if that was the reason he left. It could very well have been the competition, but in these player hating threads, it doesn't matter.. it's all about the money anyway.
 

AgentOrange*

Guest
Some people are just ignorant and ASSUME its always about money when it comes to decisions players make.

:shakehead
 

Petey21

Registered User
Dec 19, 2003
1,377
2
Sweden
www.geocities.com
shakes said:
However, my point in this thread is that don't condem a man because he was offered 2million dollars and he took it. Every single person on this board would do the exact same thing as Jagr if they could and I say that with the utmost confidence.

How can you assume that? Just because you would do so doesn't mean everyone would. Sure, if going from a regular job/school/unemployment into getting 2 million dollars a year is what you meant, then I believe that most people on here would do so. But I can tell you that if I already had the money that Jagr has made through his career so far, then I wouldn't do this just to make MORE money.

Heck, if I had that much money I would probably spend the rest of my life in a hammock in Hawaii or something. :lol At least I wouldn't be so greedy I had to make sure I get even MORE money cause there's no way I can use it all anyway. But that's just me.
 

Kickabrat

WHAT - ME WORRY?
Jul 4, 2004
3,959
0
Ottawa
shakes said:
I never said money was everything in life, but to say that you or anyone else posting on this board would turn down 2 million dollars on principle.. sorry.. i have a hard time believing that. You go through post after post after post about how the bad players are making a lot of money to "play a game" and how normal people would have to work all their lives and not make what the players make.. etc etc and now you are going to say that these same people would say no to 2 million dollars?
What I responded to your comment that everyone would take the money was:

[QUOTE=Kickabrat] Probably[/QUOTE]

I am not the one who wears #68 as a protest against the Soviets. I am not the one who has spent a lifetime playing hockey and spent years on a practise rink. I am not the one who has lived through what Jagr has lived through so I have no idea what his motivations are. All I said was, and I stand by what I said: "his actions do not seem to be the actions of a principled man." Only Jagr can answer for what he does and why.
 

NFITO

hockeyinsanity*****
Jun 19, 2002
28,022
0
www.hockeyinsanity.com
I thought I read prior to the official lockout starting, that Jagr had already decided at that point to play in the RSL, saying that it was the most competitive league he could join, and that's why he wanted to.

not saying that is true, or that he really believed that to be the reason for joining (and not money)... but it seems to me that he had made up his mind to join that league prior to playing any games in the Czech rep....

as far as pointing fingers at Jagr not giving back to his country and going to Russia, why not say the same thing about all those NHL stars right now that are playing in Europe - whether Sweden or Switzerland or whereever, instead of those many Canadians and Americans not playing in *their* own country??

why point to Jagr going there, and not to Thornton or Nash, or Heatley or Morrison ... shouldn't these guys also feel some sense of commitment and give back to their country and play in some lesser league here, rather than make more money playing in an elite league in Europe??

I'm no Jagr fan... and certainly no backer of the NHLPA's fight... and IMO it's wrong what many NHL players are doing by complaining about replacement players coming to the NHL, while they take away jobs - real jobs that feed the families of players that make a fraction of what these NHLers do - overseas... most of these guys can take a year or two or more off and not feel any financial burden by it, while many players lost their jobs in Europe and are struggling to keep their family out of financial trouble.

but I keep reading these threads about a player's true colors, while ignoring all the other players that are doing the same... and am also reading all these threads about how selfish all NHLPA members are because one millionaire makes a decision to play overseas - without any of us knowing anything about the situation.

bottom line is, for me, I can't blame Jagr for what he did, and ignore what all the other canadian and american players doing the same thing leaving their country to play overseas for a bigger cheque.... and I can't blame a *person* for going after the bigger cheque in the end, regardless of how much money he's made... it's easy for us to sit here and be all righteous about the "right" thing to do in life, and "giving back to" whatever you feel you should, but reality doesn't work like that...

if the truth is that Jagr simply wants to go play in Russia (as he's said prior to the lockout happening) because of the level of play there, while making a couple million to do so, then that's his right... he was never painted as a saint before for what he's done in his career, so why burn him like a devil now for his actions?
 

SwisshockeyAcademy

Registered User
Dec 11, 2002
3,094
1
Visit site
Bicycle Repairman said:
Why? I mean, what's it to you? It's none of your business how they choose to represent themselves. You've got something against democracy, pal?

It's not like fans have to pay dues. They have no say in the matter.
Do not like doing it but i have to agree with the guy who repairs bicycles.
 

Steve L*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2003
11,548
0
Southampton, England
Visit site
shakes said:
too funny.. i should have known from your previous posts that there was no real argument there. Maybe when you grow up and get out of high school and out of your parents house, you will know something about responsibility.

Hey cool, I can flame and make assumptive remarks just like you can!

Oh, since you brought up Forsberg and what he has done, I'm sure you can cite what Jagr hasn't done for charity or his hometown.
So you havent really got an arguement or comeback then? I and it seems some others in this thread wouldnt do anything for the $$, its just a shame that you think other people would stoop as low as you.

How can you cite what people havent done? It would be an endless list, I really dont get it.
 

SENSible1*

Guest
Bicycle Repairman said:
Why? I mean, what's it to you? It's none of your business how they choose to represent themselves. You've got something against democracy, pal?

It's not like fans have to pay dues. They have no say in the matter.

1) I want the players to really experience the "marketplace" they claim to desire. What is wrong with me wanting to give them their hearts desires? Why does this offend you?

2) If the PA is really a democracy, have the owners and PA both present their case to the membership, have a debate and then let the players vote to see if they still refuse to negotiate "cost certainty". Instead of lying to the players and telling them a cap means an end to garuanteed contracts, present both sides honestly and let democracy prevail.

3) The fans have a very big say when they vote with their wallets on replacement hockey.

4) I'm not your pal. Maybe someday, but not likely unless you change your tone.
 

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
15,411
1,197
Chicago, IL
Visit site
Bicycle Repairman said:
The owners cannot "decertify" the union. Only members can. Get your facts straight.

Sorry, I am not a union specialist.

However, it was my understanding from the media that the owners can (after a year) declare an impasse and (insert proper phrase here) that "breaks" the union so they can implement their CBA proposal. The players can then decide what they want to do. Is that not true?

And not that it's going to matter, but you don't have to act like a jerk to get your point accross.


I also would like to say that I don't blame Jagr for following the $'s. It should be noted however that no poster can state what "everyone" would do. If I had earned $75,000,000 over the last ten years, and I felt that I could make a difference in the community, I can GUARANTEE you that I wouldn't leave the country to make an extra $1-1.5M USD (and I think there are a lot of others that wouldn't either). Like someone else said earlier, Jagr might be going to the RSL because it's the highest level of competion outside the NHL, which is an entirely different story. That could very well be the case and an overzealous reporter "skewed" the article making Jagr appear more mercenary.
 
Last edited:

Bicycle Repairman

Registered User
Jul 1, 2003
1,687
1
Visit site
Beukeboom Fan said:
Sorry, I am not a union specialist.

However, it was my understanding from the media that the owners can (after a year) declare an impasse and (insert proper phrase here) that "breaks" the union so they can implement their CBA proposal. The players can then decide what they want to do. Is that not true?

Incorrect again. Owners cannot legally "declare" an impasse. The National Labor Relations Board does.

Please specify your "(insert proper phrase here)." I'm not sure what you're implying here.

The owners cannot implement their own CBA. By definition, a Collective Bargaining Agreement requires two parties. In fact they cannot mpose many of restrictions they seek, as that would violate anti-trust law.
 

Hunter Gathers

The Crown
Feb 27, 2002
106,577
11,645
parts unknown
Steve L said:
So you havent really got an arguement or comeback then? I and it seems some others in this thread wouldnt do anything for the $$, its just a shame that you think other people would stoop as low as you.

How can you cite what people havent done? It would be an endless list, I really dont get it.


Okay, Mother Theresa.
 

Steve L*

Registered User
Jan 13, 2003
11,548
0
Southampton, England
Visit site
Reveille said:
Okay, Mother Theresa.
Well excuse me for having some self respect.
Bicycle Repairman said:
The owners cannot implement their own CBA. By definition, a Collective Bargaining Agreement requires two parties. In fact they cannot mpose many of restrictions they seek, as that would violate anti-trust law.
Maybe it wont be a CBA by name but theyve said they will impliment their system next year without the NHLPA.
 

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
15,411
1,197
Chicago, IL
Visit site
Bicycle Repairman said:
Incorrect again. Owners cannot legally "declare" an impasse. The National Labor Relations Board does.

Please specify your "(insert proper phrase here)." I'm not sure what you're implying here.

The owners cannot implement their own CBA. By definition, a Collective Bargaining Agreement requires two parties. In fact they cannot mpose many of restrictions they seek, as that would violate anti-trust law.

OK, how about I try a different tact.

From the owner's POV, what is their plan to have an impasse declared by the NLRB and how will this allow them to use replacement players? Or are the (along with Bettman) just blindly ignorant and running blindfolded off a massive cliff?
 

Poochie_D

Registered User
Oct 31, 2004
2,805
4
Montreal, Quebec
Bicycle Repairman said:
Why? I mean, what's it to you? It's none of your business how they choose to represent themselves. You've got something against democracy, pal?

It's not like fans have to pay dues. They have no say in the matter.


ya ur right... its not like were paying there salaries or anything... :shakehead
 

djhn579

Registered User
Mar 11, 2003
1,747
0
Tonawanda, NY
Bicycle Repairman said:
Incorrect again. Owners cannot legally "declare" an impasse. The National Labor Relations Board does.

...

The owners cannot implement their own CBA. By definition, a Collective Bargaining Agreement requires two parties. In fact they cannot mpose many of restrictions they seek, as that would violate anti-trust law.

"...issuing yet another warning to the union that if the final offer was not approved by August 31st, an impasse would exist, and the employer would exercise its right to implement that offer..."

http://www.fishmangroup.com/pub_art/pdf/bti.pdf

From this article it seems as if the owners are declaring an impasse. When the owners do this, the union files an unfair labor practice suit.

The owners can implement their last best offer when they declare that an impasse exists, however, if they bargained in bad faith to reach that impasse, they can be severly penalized for doing so...

(just my opinion from the attached article and several others I have read recently...)
 

Bicycle Repairman

Registered User
Jul 1, 2003
1,687
1
Visit site
djhn579 said:
From this article it seems as if the owners are declaring an impasse. When the owners do this, the union files an unfair labor practice suit.
Which is why I prefaced it with the term "legally." The original post dealt with a unilateral imposement.

Thanks for the pdf file, BTW. This clarifies things greatly.
 

tom_servo

Registered User
Sep 27, 2002
17,141
5,988
Pittsburgh
shakes said:
And you are the type of person to turn down millions I guess? I honestly don't know how many of you can pretend to know what it would be like to be offered and turn down millions of dollars. People leave jobs all the time for more money.. professional hockey players just do it on a larger scale.

When a couple million dollars represent a relatively small percentage of my net worth, then yes, it would be easier to turn it down.
 

Reilly311

Guest
I think we'd all leave for more money. It's called greed and everyone has it.
 

roadrunner

Registered User
Jul 25, 2003
1,090
0
U Can'tTake Me Alive
Visit site
Reilly311 said:
I think we'd all leave for more money. It's called greed and everyone has it.

I don't. I'm no Knight, but greed is not one of my issues. I, and many people I know, do things out of principle over dollars. Also, there is a difference between moving on to increase one's salary for a more comfortable living, and what Jagr is doing. I couldn't do what Jaromir is doing, but I'm not him. We all must live...and I refuse to believe that every human is driven by greed. Some are and some are not.
 

quat

Faking Life
Apr 4, 2003
15,056
2,106
Duncan
membleypeg said:
Jaromir Jagr has left his hometown team of Kladno to play hockey in Russia (Avangard Omsk). He has advised his hometown fans not to get mad at him because, he never promised to play the whole year in in native land. Jagr is reported to receive 2.6 million to play in Russia.

This player is the epitome of all that is wrong with the PA position. He has made huge money in his career, and is set for life. I could understand his wanting to play in his home town during the lockout. He could give something back to all the people who helped him to get where he is today.

Instead, Jagr couldn't resist getting a little more cash. Home fans be damned, Jagr decided to get every last buck he could. Don't let the PA tell anyone that this money grubbing group of players isn't out only for himself. They don't give a damned about hockey, and this negotiation isn't about trying to be fair or trying to improve the game. These money grubs are after every last dollar they can squeeze, and at any cost to the fans. Say it as it is Bob Goodenough, at least be honest with the fans.

Well, honestly I'd like to agree with you, but it's not like Jammy has forever to earn these big dollars, and I seem to recall his financial acumen might not be as developed as say... uh... Brad May's.

As for the NHL... the players are refusing to allow that the league is in trouble and needs to be fixed by some rather large changes. Fair enough, it's their decision... but they don't give a ****e for the fans or for hockey and they are going to find out the hard way that they won't win this one.
 

quat

Faking Life
Apr 4, 2003
15,056
2,106
Duncan
shakes said:
Rich people don't get rich or stay rich by passing up on money. When one has a chance to earn 2 million dollars, one takes the 2 million dollars.

But those dam dirty owners... not willing to just keep losing money. sigh. weenies eh?
 

NFITO

hockeyinsanity*****
Jun 19, 2002
28,022
0
www.hockeyinsanity.com
roadrunner said:
I don't. I'm no Knight, but greed is not one of my issues. I, and many people I know, do things out of principle over dollars. Also, there is a difference between moving on to increase one's salary for a more comfortable living, and what Jagr is doing. I couldn't do what Jaromir is doing, but I'm not him. We all must live...and I refuse to believe that every human is driven by greed. Some are and some are not.

everyone seems so certain that the only reason that Jagr is leaving is for more money... how many of you really know Jagr??

he did say before the lockout that he wanted to play in Russia (and does speak Russian as well)... said that it was the highest quality league he could play in outside the NHL... so now that he's actually doing it, why call him greedy??

and seriously, not one person has responded to this - but why call Jagr greedy and selfish for not giving back to his homeland and playing there, and not say the same thing about the many Canadians and Americans that are making a million or more going to Europe and taking jobs there instead of giving back to their homeland and playing for less in North America??????
 

shakes

Pep City
Aug 20, 2003
8,632
239
Visit site
Steve L said:
So you havent really got an arguement or comeback then? I and it seems some others in this thread wouldnt do anything for the $$, its just a shame that you think other people would stoop as low as you.

How can you cite what people havent done? It would be an endless list, I really dont get it.

It appears you don't get a lot of things. Regardless of what you say, I just plain don't believe that you would turn down 2 million dollars on principle. Stoop as low? Geez.. he didn't kill someone for hire. He changed his mind about playing for his home team to play in the Russian League for what may or may not have been about the money. Ain't you a drama queen.
 

Marconius

Registered User
Jan 27, 2003
1,520
0
Visit site
nuckfan in TO said:
but why call Jagr greedy and selfish for not giving back to his homeland and playing there, and not say the same thing about the many Canadians and Americans that are making a million or more going to Europe and taking jobs there instead of giving back to their homeland and playing for less in North America??????

Huge difference. Canadian & American fans get to see their stars on a regular basis. The fans in Europe only get to watch their leagues develop talent before they're shipped off to North America at the earliest opportunity to make the NHL. They don't have the luxury of going to games or the extensive tv coverage we enjoy.
Circumstances are finally such that superstars could go back to their homelands, the countries that made them, cheering them on when they were little and give back. Are you telling me you honestly don't see the difference between this and Sakic going to play for the local Burnaby team? :dunno:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->