I LOVE this post! So bang on! People think that Canadian clubs struggled in the 90's because of the poor dollar. Sure, that didn't help their bottom lines but the fact of the matter is, the Jets left, the Oilers and Flames almost left, and the Canucks struggled because there was no way these teams could compete with the Leafs, the Rangers and the Red Wings of the league in terms of player spending. There was no hope for these teams. They would develop players and then lose them when they couldn't afford them any more.
Lockout III: So close, and yet so far (Moderated: see post #295)
- Thread starter Fugu
- Start date
- Status
I LOVE this post! So bang on! People think that Canadian clubs struggled in the 90's because of the poor dollar. Sure, that didn't help their bottom lines but the fact of the matter is, the Jets left, the Oilers and Flames almost left, and the Canucks struggled because there was no way these teams could compete with the Leafs, the Rangers and the Red Wings of the league in terms of player spending. There was no hope for these teams. They would develop players and then lose them when they couldn't afford them any more.
Steve
Registered User
- Mar 6, 2002
- 3,747
- 402
This doesn't make any sense? I wrote something and you're telling me I don't understand what I wrote or what I meant.
Actual figures can be found on national post or miami herald if I remember correctly.
honestly, I really don't know. They have give hotel rights and agreed to pay some of the contracts they signed. Beyond that, I really don't know. They want the players to take less tomorrow and moving forward, stricter contract lengths, less variability on amounts paid.
Couldn't you simply use this statement with "players" replaced with "owners" here?
The whole thing is stupid, the players are playing a game and the owners are crying foul. Owners want what they want and without that, no one is playing.
No different from the MLB or NFL. We have to stop pretending that this is an NHL problem. It's a sports problem.
Another calculated tactic on Bettman's part, I've seen this happen time and time again now that it's predictable. Make the NHLPA believe that a deal is close and then pull back and cry "we're so far apart". He's operating on a timeline. Any idea how long Bettman wanted this lockout to end? Until the 2013 fall?
Agreed. Fehr got the players an extra 300m. Except that it cost the players something like 500m+ to get that 300m extra. Now I'm not a math major, but getting 50% of total HRR and taking a slight haircut on escrow has to be better than getting 50% of 50-60% HRR and 300m.
If you're trying to say Fehr won because he got the players that 300m, yet cost them 40-50% of the season to do so, the math says he lost... and lost big time. I'm not sure how anyone can say that's a win for Fehr or the players. It would have been a win - had they played 85%+ of the season (where the math still works out in their favor). But trying to say that that 300m represents a win for him or the PA is complete crap.
There isn't much difference between the ahl and nhl in level of play. You would be able to get all the older star ahl players and there would be scabs. I think you would have a decent league. I have been to plenty of ahl games and they are exciting. I have seen plenty of high paid nhlers when they were in the ahl. In a few months the players would take anything the owners offered
I am an Oilers fan and the 90's were dark days. Ex-Oilers on the 93-94 Rangers:
Kevin Lowe, Mark Messier, Adam Graves, Glenn Anderson, Craig McTavish, Esa Tikkanen, Jeff Beukeboom.
I don't have the numbers for you, but it is a way to ease the transition from 57/43 to 50/50.
Essentially given money in excess of 50/50 to cover that value of the contracts that would be over the cap.
Something like 170m in year 1, 100m in year 2, 30m in year 3. Thats not it exactly, but its the general idea.
I find it to be a carrot they were hoping the PA would bite on, and also to be a tool to show the fans how good the NHL is and how hard they are trying. It has worked really well.
But throughout the length of the contract it would be a drop in the bucket. The real contention that I see has nothing to do with money, but everyone thinks money is so important because all parties have so much more of it than we all do. (that's an assumption, chances are someone reading and posting also has a ton of money)
The players want their contracting rights, and this weekend has likely further solidified the PA because unlike the league, they are actually making concessions. Every time the league makes "concessions" they are actually getting more out of the players. The last offer had some real give by the players, but the owners aren't interested in a fair deal, they want it all.
I also think all the huffing by the NHL is posturing, they will be back at the table in a week or two, give some more and by doing so will take more.
Another thing for people to consider while we talk about how much money they are losing over this contract is the fact that the next contract will be negotiated off of this contract, like this one is being negotiated off the last one. So the more they give now, the worse their starting point for the next contract, and anyone who thinks that isn't a big deal doesn't understand union negotiations.
Sydor25
LA Kings
Has the NHLPA released what the escrow limit was in their proposal? If not, how can people say their deal is good and/or close to the league's offer? 
CerebralGenesis
Registered User
- Jul 23, 2009
- 24,429
- 2
If you don't think that both parties aren't locked in on the money aspect, you live in a better world than me
You're a hockey fan, and you're OK with the NHL owners threatening to DIE ON THE HILL for the difference of 5 and 8 Year contracts?
Sydor25
LA Kings
What are the escrow limits that the NHLPA put in their proposal? You act like the only difference between the offers are the contract/CBA terms.
trueblue9441
Registered User
less variability helps a great majority of the NHLPA. stricter contract lengths doesn't effect a great majority of the NHLPA.
Sydor25
LA Kings
If the NHLPA is now so worried about the distribution of wealth among their members, why don't they come up with their own revenue sharing program? Have all players on a 1-way contract pay into a fund and split it among their membership. Problem solved.
The players are going to get 50% of the HRR no matter what the contracting rules are in the next CBA. The money they get won't change at all, just who gets it.
This whole Fehr memo saying that the middle class will be destroyed by contract limits is a red herring. The players hurt most by contract limits will be the "superstars" and their signing bonuses. Crosby would still get his $8.7 million per season, just for 5-7 years at a time.
As an example, let's say that the Kings gave Kopitar, Doughty and Quick $2 million more per season each, that would result in only $300,000 less for each of the 20 roster players remaining to arrive at the same payroll. That wouldn't exactly destroy the middle class, but it would get more money into the pockets of the players that get fans in the arenas. I don't think there are any fans that would be upset if Kopitar made more and Stoll/Penner/Gagne made less per season.
Trying to compare the NBA salary structure to the NHL is ridiculous. Most NBA starts play 75% of the game, most star NHL forwards play less than 30% of the game. Defenseman are still less than 50%. NHL rosters are also larger than the NBA rosters. 2nd and 3rd liners play a more significant role than bench players in the NBA.
The players are going to get 50% of the HRR no matter what the contracting rules are in the next CBA. The money they get won't change at all, just who gets it.
This whole Fehr memo saying that the middle class will be destroyed by contract limits is a red herring. The players hurt most by contract limits will be the "superstars" and their signing bonuses. Crosby would still get his $8.7 million per season, just for 5-7 years at a time.
As an example, let's say that the Kings gave Kopitar, Doughty and Quick $2 million more per season each, that would result in only $300,000 less for each of the 20 roster players remaining to arrive at the same payroll. That wouldn't exactly destroy the middle class, but it would get more money into the pockets of the players that get fans in the arenas. I don't think there are any fans that would be upset if Kopitar made more and Stoll/Penner/Gagne made less per season.
Trying to compare the NBA salary structure to the NHL is ridiculous. Most NBA starts play 75% of the game, most star NHL forwards play less than 30% of the game. Defenseman are still less than 50%. NHL rosters are also larger than the NBA rosters. 2nd and 3rd liners play a more significant role than bench players in the NBA.
No, he won't, he'll get 5 x 13m and squeeze everyone else.
I agree, why is the NHL going after their CBA?
Krishna
Registered User
Of the 3 other sports, the NBA is closest to the NHL in revenue and they just had a similar CBA battle
The NBA is a vastly different business, instead of chasing basketball and football, the NHL needs something that will work for them. Unfortunately, they don't have that kind of leadership.
OneMoreAstronaut
Reduce chainsaw size
- May 3, 2003
- 5,495
- 5
Also affected in different years: Curtis Joseph (Tor), Doug Weight (NYR). That's just the Oilers, too. There are a ton of examples out there.
Not sure.
But Bill Daly is ready to die on the hill for 5 years.
Is that worth canceling the season for?
How many hockey fans came into this lockout thinking... We better get 5 year contracts or this league is doomed!!!
Killion
Registered User
- Feb 19, 2010
- 36,763
- 3,219
I think the US Marine's actual saying is "Choose the hill you want to die on", the flipside being "Choose the hill you want to live on". That he would co-opt the former (rather than the latter) & stake his terrain so dramatically is really par for the course, speaking volumes.
haseoke39
Registered User
- Mar 29, 2011
- 13,938
- 2,491
so the owners are saying talks broke down because the PA got hostile, took a $100M concession and then asked for something they never had before, while the PA is now saying talks broke down because of "miscommunication."
Usually whichever side starts blaming miscommunication is the one that wishes they hadn't opened their mouth.
Usually whichever side starts blaming miscommunication is the one that wishes they hadn't opened their mouth.
- Status
Ad
Latest posts
-
Management 1 PM May 22nd - Charlie, Cam, Don and Monty address media - NESN- Latest: BiteThisBurrows
-
-
-
