Shocking! NHL formally rejects NHLPA offer

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by GKJ, Sep 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    142,258
    Likes Received:
    3,022
    Trophy Points:
    232
  2. Hire Sather

    Hire Sather Don't punt seasons

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2002
    Messages:
    28,468
    Likes Received:
    803
    Trophy Points:
    214
    Location:
    Connecticut
    As far as im concerned, EVERYONE is wrong, EVERYONE is at fault until something is signed

    I am on the side of the fan. The fan wants hockey, no matter which side "wins"

    Screw the Owners, screw Bettman, screw the players.
     
  3. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    142,258
    Likes Received:
    3,022
    Trophy Points:
    232
    "Nothing more clearly demonstrates the union's unwillingness to acknowledge or meaningfully address this league's problems than this recycled proposal." -Bill Daly


    So instead of neogeotiating, you left the meeting? I find that clearly demonstrating that the NHL's unwillingness to acknowledge or meaningfully address the NHL's own self-centeredness, whining and crying that they're not getting what the want is a personal problem.


    The players shouldn't have to bail the owners out of their own mistakes...
     
  4. Verbal Kint*

    Verbal Kint* Guest

    Wow, oh so surprising. :rolleyes:
     
  5. degroat*

    degroat* Guest

    As a fan the only thing you should care about is the long term viability of the league. It's better for you as a fan for the owners to lock the players out for 6 months and get a CBA that makes the teams healthier than it would be to accept whatever crap proposal they offered just so we get to see hockey now.
     
  6. Jets4Life

    Jets4Life Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Messages:
    4,634
    Likes Received:
    629
    Trophy Points:
    149
    Occupation:
    occupied
    Location:
    Hellebuyck County
    I agree 100% with the Owners on this one. The union's offer was a complete joke. Of course, we all have one man to thank for this: Alan Eagleson(ex-NHLPA boss), the man who screwed some of the greatest players in history. What he did to Bobby Orr is just mind boggling. All of the bad blood can be traced back to that criminal.
     
  7. djhn579

    djhn579 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tonawanda, NY
    If the CBA does not change and 1 team goes out of business, 23+ players pay for the owners mistakes. If 10 teams go out of business, 230+ players pay for the owners mistakes.

    If the owners miraclously decide to be financially responsible and control their spending, salaries come down ==> players pay for the owners mistakes

    If a luxury tax system is put in place, salaries come down ==> players pay for the owners mistakes

    If a hard cap is put in place, salaries come down ==> players pay for the owners mistakes.

    It doesn't really matter whether the CBA changes or not, the players are going to lose jobs or salary, So this argument doesn't really hold up.

    The players don't want a cap system of any kind because they know that the teams need to be competetive to keep their fans, so they can play owners against each other to drive up salaries. And that is more important to them than if fans can afford tickets, or if hockey survives in all the current NHL cities.
     
  8. JWhelan

    JWhelan Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2004
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Programmer/Analyst
    Location:
    Newfoundland
    Why should the NHLPA pay for the mistakes of the owners and Bettman? The NHL wanted teams in areas that never even heard of hockey. Which creates more "fringe" players, which in turn drive up salaries as a whole.

    The owners are the ones offering and paying the large salaries.
    You can not blame the players for accepting them....

    If I was a player, and I was offered $5,000,000/Year, I would accept it in a heartbeat even though I was only worth $1,000,000/Year.

    Can anyone really blame the current NHL financial situation on the players? Obviously Bobby Holik is going to accept the $8,850,000 he made last year, even though he is worth no more than $2,000,000/Year.

    I really needed to vent, I am furious that there might be no hockey this year. The only thing good that could come out of it, is some of the teams folding. Nashville? Atlantia? Florida? Tampa Bay? etc. Correct me if I am wrong, but Tampa Bay had around 8000 fans show up for the Stanley Cup Parade??? Get rid of the teams that exist in places where Bowling is more popular than hockey.

    If what I have said does not make sense, it is because I get pretty upset thinking about this CBA stuff.... :mad:

    Just my opinion and 2Cents worth.
     
  9. Since i am a hockey fan it is hard for me just to sit back and pick a side. Overall i think that the players are at fault here. The players make way to much money for what they do. The average NHL fan can not afford to go out and go to a game.
    People might say that it si the owners fault for paying all that money but it was the players and the players agents who demanded the money to begin with. Just look around the league to see which players held out for MORE MONEY and we are not talking a 25 cent raise at the end of the year that the average guy would get!
    What do the players have to fear from a cap? it is not like they are not going to get paid alot of money! From what i undersatand the union works for the players and the players work for the owners and the players also work for us! The fans are the ones who "pay the bills", we are the ones who buy the papers, play the video games. Who is in charge , us not likely !!
     
  10. degroat*

    degroat* Guest

    Who is at fault is irrelevent. Completely irrelevent.

    What matters is how we fix the problems in the game today to make the league healthy. This is a league that generates $2 BILLION in revenue annually. There is plenty of money to make everyone happy. It just needs to be distributed in a way where the owners don't have to go deep into the playoffs to make money. It needs to be distributed in a way where a team with a $35M payroll can by more for their money than it could 2 years ago.
     
  11. ceber

    ceber Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Wyoming, MN
    http://msn.foxsports.com/story/3000694

    If that is accurate, those six teams should be shut down. Problem almost solved. I don't see why every team in the league should be guaranteed a profit, which is what the NHL seems to be going after. Where's the impetus to improve your team if you know you'll make money no matter what?

    On the other hand, I don't think it's at all unreasonable for the league as a whole to expect to make a nice profit when attendance is good. The NHLPA doesn't appear to agree with that, though. In my opinion, their stance seems very short-sighted.
     
  12. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    142,258
    Likes Received:
    3,022
    Trophy Points:
    232

    The problem with shutting those teams down is that it is lost jobs for the union. Some of those 6 probably aren't the 6 we think they are (I would think one of them is the Rangers, another is Washington)

    I remember hearing during the Calgary/San Jose series in the playoffs that if the Sharks were to win the Cup (or make it just as far as they did, I forget) that they would have lost money on the year. With such a low payroll, I find that very hard to beleive since they had 9 extra home games.
     
  13. Toonces

    Toonces The beer kitty

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2003
    Messages:
    3,685
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    131
    Occupation:
    Production
    Location:
    New Jersey
    Perhaps it's time for the NHL to sell out those six teams.

    Alough I'm sure the NHLPA would be opposed to having 138 (23x6) players losing their jobs.
     
  14. ceber

    ceber Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Wyoming, MN
    Not only would the NHLPA be opposed to losing those teams, the league would probably be opposed, as well the ownership groups and the fans of those teams.

    So, what can you do about those six teams? Is solving the problems with those six teams going to do enough to fix the problems with the league as a whole? Seems like both sides are ignoring the big problem and trying to "win" these negotiations. Maybe if they started by trying to come up with a solution that helps to fix problems with just those six teams and then worked from there, we'd see more progress.

    This doesn't have to be a zero-sum game, but the NHLPA and the NHL sure seem to be treating it that way.
     
  15. GKJ

    GKJ Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    142,258
    Likes Received:
    3,022
    Trophy Points:
    232

    This is what the NHLPA is trying to tell everyone. The NHL's solution to this is to force an absurdly-low salary cap.
     
  16. nomorekids

    nomorekids The original, baby

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2003
    Messages:
    33,375
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    186
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Nashville, TN
    Home Page:
    sure,t hose teams might fold...but so would...

    ottawa, edmonton, calgary...and every other team on NHL life support. I wouldn't hope for the "lockout solution," if I were you...because even healthy teams would take a beating, and you'd see 3 teams in Canada...if that.
     
  17. PecaFan

    PecaFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2002
    Messages:
    8,959
    Likes Received:
    31
    Trophy Points:
    146
    Location:
    Ottawa (Go 'Nucks)
    Hardly. First of all, take them away, and you're still left with a business that's losing somewhere from $60 to $100 million a year, and increasing each year. The easy revenue streams have been tapped, you can't just add new stadiums, more skyboxes, third uniforms like they could during the past eight years.

    Further, these aren't independent franchises, where you can just shut down one without affecting the others. Tossing away six franchises is going to massively hurt the league, not help it.
     
  18. ceber

    ceber Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Wyoming, MN
    Maybe. Let's try it and see. ;)

    Devil's advocate:
    We'd get a nice influx of players who've been making a pile of money (I'm assuming the teams losing the most are the teams paying the most in salary.. that may be faulty). Suddenly the market supply of FAs jumps up quite a bit, driving down salaries, possibly considerably. The talent level on the remaining teams goes up, which some people argue would improve the quality of the game, driving more ticket sales and increasing revenue.

    While the losses may continue for a while, there's a chance the trend will start to correct itself. No doubt there would be pain, but I'm not conviced it would massively hurt the league.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"