Pronger the Idiot.

Status
Not open for further replies.

joepeps

Registered User
Jan 2, 2004
12,697
674
Toronto
Visit site
Yeah!

A). The Owners will not let a third party look at the books because they will notice that they are not losing the ammount of money that they say they are, and that they would face some insurance fraud.
B). The Owners are complaining that the playesr are overpaid? They started signing people at outragous contracts.... They started it, now they should have to deal with it......They should have thought of this before signing players for multi-million dollar contracts.
C). Owners should not be signing players to contracts thoughout this past months and they have been. "Ohh Yeah. boo hoo were in finacial jeopordy" MY ass... if you were in so much fincial loss, you wouldn't be signing ANYONE, until a new CBA is reached!!!!!!!!!
D). Start talking, who do they expect to make a deal for them????? If they don't wanna talk, break the league, and start a new league with a NEW COMMISH, AND CBA LEADER!!!!! :dunno:

there much more but I have to study for exams..... you guys can add more :teach:
 

txomisc

Registered User
Mar 18, 2002
8,348
62
California
Visit site
to all of those who say they cant understand the hatred for the players, i say this

there is a difference between hatred of players and hatred of the of the players association. sure maybe a few players are behing hated on, but mostly its just the union itself we have a problem with.
 

me2

Go ahead foot
Jun 28, 2002
37,903
5,595
Make my day.
thinkwild said:
It wont tie salaries to revenues. Still want to hear it?


Absolutely. So what is your plan to set average salaries to $1.3m or below, have payrolls averaging $31m or less and stay in tune with the growth in revenue?
 

djhn579

Registered User
Mar 11, 2003
1,747
0
Tonawanda, NY
DementedReality said:
ok, so lets say the players say to the NHL ... "we give up, lets talk about your cap (under the conditions set above by "djhn579")"

now, would your opinion change on this issue if the owners didnt want to give up that much information and lose that much control of their business ?

just imagine, maybe the owners dont really want the players to know this information, because what you are suggesting is a whole lot more invasive than the current URO system the league wants.

dr
If the players came to a reasonable agreement of what is considered hockey revenue, and agreed to link payroll to that revenue, I would find it a lot easier to support the players side. So far though, when I hear players saying things along the lines of "the owners are getting money from other ventures, and that should be counted with hockey income", they are not being reasonable.

The owners have offered repeatedly to have the players hire an auditor to go over the NHL's books, the NHLPA has refused. The NHL hired their own auditor to look over thier books, and the auditor has offered to discuss his findings with the NHLPA, again the NHLPA has refused. From this, it doesn't look like the owners would mind if the NHLPA looked at their books.

I wonder how complicated the owners other operations really are to figure out. If an owner has their own cable network, their will be numbers available for how many people tune in to watch the hockey games, that number can be used to determine how much subscribers contribute to the cable system for hockey. The owners would also be selling commercial time for spots during the games. This should be easy to see and have confirmed through the company paying for those spots. Outside of that, what other income would the owners be getting from the cable network due to the hockey players?

If the owners own the arena, the only things that are hockey revenue are tickets sold for the game, concessions and merchandise sold at the games, a percentage of luxury box revenue based on other events held in the arena, and a percentage of advertising revenue based on the total number of people attending events in the arena vs those attending hockey games. There are different ways to establish what those percentages should be, but a couple of good lawyers should be able to figure that out in a reasonable amount of time.
 

Brent Burns Beard

Powered by Vasiliev Podsloven
Feb 27, 2002
5,575
570
djhn579 said:
There are different ways to establish what those percentages should be, but a couple of good lawyers should be able to figure that out in a reasonable amount of time.

ok, and what if the owners only want the current URO's to be the sole guide to this. I am willing to bet that if the owners had to give up the sort of information and access to it you dreamers think is so "matter of fact", they wouldnt agree to it.

and by the way, the buyers of the "ads" are under no obligation to reveal how much they paid to the cable company, unless they are a public company themselves.

why do you dreamers think its so easy to just "report this", & "declare that".

DR
 

djhn579

Registered User
Mar 11, 2003
1,747
0
Tonawanda, NY
DementedReality said:
ok, and what if the owners only want the current URO's to be the sole guide to this. I am willing to bet that if the owners had to give up the sort of information and access to it you dreamers think is so "matter of fact", they wouldnt agree to it.

and by the way, the buyers of the "ads" are under no obligation to reveal how much they paid to the cable company, unless they are a public company themselves.

why do you dreamers think its so easy to just "report this", & "declare that".

DR


Compared to "It's just too complicated to figure out..." or "The owners have two sets of books, so we won't even look at anything and try to come to an agreement..." or "the owners are hiding hockey revenue, though we couldn't be bothered defining what we think actually should be considered hockey revenue..."

If the owners and players sit down and discuss what is and is not hockey revenue, and put it in a contract complete with ways to accurately verify the information being reported, it is as easy as "report this" and "declare that"

But then, it is a lot less work to sit back and claim that the owners are lying... Why get unnecessarily bogged down in details that may make the relationship between players and owners less adversarial. What good could that possibly be? :dunno:
 

thinkwild

Veni Vidi Toga
Jul 29, 2003
10,813
1,464
Ottawa
The owners dont need to go through this to know what they can afford.

Why do you keep saying the players havent said what they define as revenue? They looked at 4 sets of books, and found $50mil that they determined to be hockey revenue. Or put it this way, now that they arent playing, this alleged non-hockey revenue stream has dried up. Owners themselves have admitted they value their businesses different than the way they presented them on their UROs. Such as Phi or NYR. Or Chicago with the most luxury boxes, allegedly declaring $0 in luxury box revenue.
 

Brent Burns Beard

Powered by Vasiliev Podsloven
Feb 27, 2002
5,575
570
djhn579 said:
Compared to "It's just too complicated to figure out..." or "The owners have two sets of books, so we won't even look at anything and try to come to an agreement..." or "the owners are hiding hockey revenue, though we couldn't be bothered defining what we think actually should be considered hockey revenue..."

If the owners and players sit down and discuss what is and is not hockey revenue, and put it in a contract complete with ways to accurately verify the information being reported, it is as easy as "report this" and "declare that"

But then, it is a lot less work to sit back and claim that the owners are lying... Why get unnecessarily bogged down in details that may make the relationship between players and owners less adversarial. What good could that possibly be? :dunno:
\

i didnt say they were lying, i said it might not be what they want. some of you are all very naive about corporate affairs and think it works (or should work) by logic and fairness.

corporate manouvering is nothing about fairness and all about leverage and timing.

dr
 

Brent Burns Beard

Powered by Vasiliev Podsloven
Feb 27, 2002
5,575
570
djhn579 said:
If the owners and players sit down and discuss what is and is not hockey revenue, and put it in a contract complete with ways to accurately verify the information being reported, it is as easy as "report this" and "declare that"

see, this is where you naivity shows. what makes you think the owners are willing to agree to let the players perform invasive and forensic accounting in their business's ?

for petes sakes, the amount of auditing required is not worth it to provide the level of certainty the players would demand to ever agree means the owners would be better off setting a DAMN BUDGET and forgetting the cap !

dr
 

Digger12

Gold Fever
Feb 27, 2002
18,313
990
Back o' beyond
DementedReality said:
see, this is where you naivity shows. what makes you think the owners are willing to agree to let the players perform invasive and forensic accounting in their business's ?

for petes sakes, the amount of auditing required is not worth it to provide the level of certainty the players would demand to ever agree means the owners would be better off setting a DAMN BUDGET and forgetting the cap !

dr

So how does it work in the NBA and NFL? Do their player unions just take their owners on their word? I can't see NBA or NFL revenue generation being any easier to figure out than the NHL, yet they seem to have no problem defining revenue.

The NHL and NHLPA absolutely HAVE to figure out a way to trust the collective numbers, simply throwing your hands in the air and spouting 'stick to your budget' isn't going to cut it when you have 30 teams competing for 1 cup and fans *****ing in large market cities that if you don't sign that aging, overpaid star that you aren't "committed to winning". This league will be DEAD within 10 years or less if the current atmosphere continues. Then everybody loses, the fans most of all.

As a lifelong Oiler fan, I don't want a system where everyone's dragged to the same level. If the Rangers want to give away money to 3rd liners like they're first liners, I personally could care less. I do want a system though that lessens the Butterfly Effect on the rest of the league that decisions like that cause.
 

quat

Faking Life
Apr 4, 2003
14,966
2,059
Duncan
Tom_Benjamin said:
Don't kid yourself. The players are in charge. Trevor Linden is one of the finest people I've had the pleasure to meet. He is very smart. He knows exactly what is going on. Goodenow and Saskin work for the players. It isn't the other way around.

I think this is very on-topic. The title of the thread is "Pronger the Idiot". On the other hand, there is this Chris Pronger.

Tom

Yeah sure... Linden is a great guy and a caring individual, but he doesn't know his ass from the wind. Everything he says makes sense, until you actually think about the financial reality of the league at this juncture. "We just want to earn what the owners are willing to offer". I'm sure that would have been Lindens line 50 years ago. It strikes me that he doesn't really understand what he's saying.

These players are fighting over who gets access to the best cabins on a ship that is sinking.
 

Brent Burns Beard

Powered by Vasiliev Podsloven
Feb 27, 2002
5,575
570
Digger12 said:
sign that aging, overpaid star that you aren't "committed to winning".

everyone knows this doesnt work so isnt this punishment enough ?

wouldnt you rather the FLyers sign Leclair to a 9m contract and Amonte to a 6m contract rather than have 15 m to sign good players ?

i see no problem with saddling the rich teams with overpriced old players, it gives teams like SJS and OTT a chance to compete against them. by lowering free agency (the natural result of concessions) it means that PHI and DAL are no longer restricted to jsut signing the Leclairs and TUrgeons of this world but can now make runs at Marleau, Hossa, Redden and Bertuzzi types. Ya, this is fair !

DR
 

Brent Burns Beard

Powered by Vasiliev Podsloven
Feb 27, 2002
5,575
570
Digger12 said:
If the Rangers want to give away money to 3rd liners like they're first liners, I personally could care less. I do want a system though that lessens the Butterfly Effect on the rest of the league that decisions like that cause.

fair enough, but the owners arent willing to extend this current CBA.

dr
 

petrobruin

Registered User
Mar 19, 2002
683
28
London Ont.
Visit site
[And anybody who doesn't think that hockey players will do anything that is required to win, doesn't understand what it takes to play the game at the NHL level.

Tom[/QUOTE]


Hey Tom ,have you ever skated in the NHL.

Anyway i can tell you first had about a future hall of famer who still plays today and will not break a sweat in more than half the games he plays and will pout if he doesnt get the right line mates.

I know he doesnt do everything and anything to win.

Sorry to burst your bubble about hockey players but they are just like you and I,Some are inhearently hard working people and others are not.

Petr

p.s. some can spell i cant
 

petrobruin

Registered User
Mar 19, 2002
683
28
London Ont.
Visit site
[
why do you dreamers think its so easy to just "report this", & "declare that".

DR[/QUOTE]

And why do you think its so hard for the players and their lawyers to look at the report and say its been cooked.

Maybe the NHLPA are afraid there accountants and lawyers are stupider than the NHL lawyers and accountants.

try again

Petr
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->