the players and their Hypocrisy!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Crazy Lunatic

Guest
GregStack said:
It's like talking to a rock GKJ, it's impossible to get through to people when they refuse to look at facts, as many around here are doing far too much of. There are still people saying they rejected their own proposal, which is ridiculous, as anyone whose watched TSN, or picked up a paper, already should know is untrue. Brian Burke said it himself last night that it would be stupid of the players to accept that offer...BRIAN FREAKIN BURKE. That's how bad those triggers are, a guy who has been 150% on the owners side even says it's a bad offer.

Here's an idea... ummmmm... lemme think really hard here.... this will take a lot of brain power.... ummmmmm... still thinking.... this is starting to hurt.... ummmmmmm.... NEGOTIATE THE TRIGGERS, CHIEF!
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,647
37,442
Greg, you are 100% right.


Crazy Lunatic said:
I agree this offer was a joke, but only because it included the DEc.9 NHLPA slop offer. The NHL accepted that slop on a trial basis. If it works as the PA said it would, then great! No need to ever have another labour dispute again. The only problem is that the PA knows full well that their offer is completely and utterly meaningless and you have next to no impact whatsoever on a league on the brink of total financial obliteration.

And it would last just about as long as you would want slop to work for. About 45 minutes. If the NHLPA's Dec. 9 offer was meaningless, then I don't know what this NHL offer is. Inane?
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,647
37,442
Crazy Lunatic said:
Here's an idea... ummmmm... lemme think really hard here.... this will take a lot of brain power.... ummmmmm... still thinking.... this is starting to hurt.... ummmmmmm.... NEGOTIATE THE TRIGGERS, CHIEF!


I'm sure Bettman made sure those were non-neogeotatable. It would go right along with his double standards and unreasonable neogeotiating tactics.
 

AlexGodynyuk

Registered User
Feb 3, 2005
170
0
Crazy Lunatic said:
Here's an idea... ummmmm... lemme think really hard here.... this will take a lot of brain power.... ummmmmm... still thinking.... this is starting to hurt.... ummmmmmm.... NEGOTIATE THE TRIGGERS, CHIEF!
This whole proposal was ludicrous.
Both sides have refused to negotiate, so the best they could come up with is first we try your offer, then once it fails, we try ours.
What incentive is there for the owners to not make the triggers fail?
They need to come up with one CBA, not two with freakin' triggers in it.
 

Charge_Seven

Registered User
Aug 12, 2003
4,631
0
Crazy Lunatic said:
Here's an idea... ummmmm... lemme think really hard here.... this will take a lot of brain power.... ummmmmm... still thinking.... this is starting to hurt.... ummmmmmm.... NEGOTIATE THE TRIGGERS, CHIEF!

I can clearly see that took alot of effort on your part to be as whitty as possible.

I've also said that they should negotiate the triggers. (oh jeeze...I don't have a link to it...uh-oh...) We all know those triggers were ridiculous, seeing as they were already triggered.

The 24% rollback is something the players offered as a way of not getting a cap/tax/cost certainty originally. Maybe this deal would be possible if the owners agreed to give back the rollback if they discover that the system was not working. As it would be ridiculous to give back all that money, and then have the cap/cost certainty shoved in your face by the same people who made the deal not work.

Yes, they should negotiate, but how much do you really think Bettman is willing to negotiate? Not very much, as we've seen throughout the entire procedure.
 

CGG

Registered User
Jan 6, 2005
4,136
55
416
Crazy Lunatic said:
The triggers are all likely negotiable, why is it you don't understand this???

Please find me a quote where Bettman says "Here's our proposal, but don't worry about the triggers, we're perfectly willing to negotiate all of them into your favor."

There is no reason to believe he will negotiate or get rid of any of the triggers. They're set up to match his dreamworld salary cap of 55% of revenues, a payroll range of $32-$42 million, and average salary of $36 million.
 

X0ssbar

Guest
go kim johnsson said:
The triggers kick in almost immedetaly. What did the PA have to gain from getting to use their proposal for about 45 minutes before letting the NHL use their totalitarian way for 9 years.

Look, this isn't rocket science. Everyone knows that the triggers the NHL offered were extreme (no matter what font you want to print it in) but they are designed to be negotiated off of.

"But the offer did open the door, for the first time, to move past the "philosophical differences" chasm which has divided the two sides. This offer could get the two sides past the "cap-no cap" stalemate.

The NHLPA is willing to live with their 9/12 offer, otherwise they never would have made it, right?

The NHL is saying it's willing to live with it for two years.

But both sides know there's no way the NHL owners are going to be able to restrain themselves and prevent one of the four triggers from tripping, which would activate the NHL's offer of Feb. 5 (a salary cap tied to league revenues) for the last four years of the NHL's proposed deal.

But, rather than the cap-no cap dead end, could the bargaining battleground now shift to finding four triggers upon which both sides are willing to gamble?

For sure, the NHL is going to lowball the players with their first offer of the four triggers, but everything is open to negotiation."

Link
 

CGG

Registered User
Jan 6, 2005
4,136
55
416
The league says it's premature to try and determine if those triggers would be attained right away. In the end, it's another battle on numbers, something the two sides have been doing for over two years.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=114287&hubName=nhl

For anyone who still doesn't get it, let's look at committed payroll for this year, after the 24% rollback:

(1) Toronto $46.6 million (+ 4 more players)
(2) New Jersey $46.3 million
(3) Detroit $43.4 million (+ 2 more players)

(28) Florida $14.3 million (+ 5 more players)
(29) Washington $13.9 million (+9 more players)
(30) Pittsburgh $11.1 million (+7 more players)

Now, ignoring the obvious that 3 teams are already over $42 million, show of hands, who here thinks Florida, Washington and Pittsburgh are going to spend enough to get within 33% of the three highest paying teams?

And the league says it's premature to tell if the triggers would be reached. This is nothing short of the league re-proposing their already-rejected proposal from last week. How can anyone not see that??
 

SENSible1*

Guest
Top Shelf said:
Look, this isn't rocket science. Everyone knows that the triggers the NHL offered were extreme (no matter what font you want to print it in) but they are designed to be negotiated off of.

"But the offer did open the door, for the first time, to move past the "philosophical differences" chasm which has divided the two sides. This offer could get the two sides past the "cap-no cap" stalemate.

The NHLPA is willing to live with their 9/12 offer, otherwise they never would have made it, right?

The NHL is saying it's willing to live with it for two years.

But both sides know there's no way the NHL owners are going to be able to restrain themselves and prevent one of the four triggers from tripping, which would activate the NHL's offer of Feb. 5 (a salary cap tied to league revenues) for the last four years of the NHL's proposed deal.

But, rather than the cap-no cap dead end, could the bargaining battleground now shift to finding four triggers upon which both sides are willing to gamble?

For sure, the NHL is going to lowball the players with their first offer of the four triggers, but everything is open to negotiation."

Link

Stop making so much sense.

Don't you know that Bettman is the devil?
 

Crazy Lunatic

Guest
gc2005 said:
Please find me a quote where Bettman says "Here's our proposal, but don't worry about the triggers, we're perfectly willing to negotiate all of them into your favor."

It's called common sense. Unless it is a "final proposal" everything in it is negotiable. That is just understood with both parties.

gc2005 said:
There is no reason to believe he will negotiate or get rid of any of the triggers. They're set up to match his dreamworld salary cap of 55% of revenues, a payroll range of $32-$42 million, and average salary of $36 million.

Dreamworld??? Imagine such a dreamworld where the money you spend on your employees doesn't exceed what you can afford. The only dreamworld is the NHLPA dreamword where bush league hockey players make 11 million dollars and 75% of revenues. Hockey is minor league and hockey players bring in less ratings than poker players and arena football players.
 

DropThePuck

Registered User
Jan 20, 2005
34
0
Upland
Neither side is blameless in this matter. But the NHL is winning the PR war. Was their last offer a joke? Sure. Let's implement your proposal for about ten minutes until one of the triggers kick in. But in negotiation you never give your best offer first. The object is to counter with a different proposal. Back and forth. I think the players strategy is terrible. By not offerring counter proposals they set themselves 1) to look terrible in the public eye (look at all the hate for the players on this board) and 2) have a terrible case when the NHL declares an impasse. All the NHL has to do is go to the labor board and show the numerous proposals they have submitted and the one from the players. And whether you believe it or not they will say to the board they even rejected their own proposal without negotiating the triggers. They both suck. They both want their own agenda. Neither cares about the fans. But the NHL is winning the PR battle.
 

eye

Registered User
Feb 17, 2003
1,607
0
around the 49th para
Visit site
go kim johnsson said:
I'm sure Bettman made sure those were non-neogeotatable. It would go right along with his double standards and unreasonable neogeotiating tactics.

Link to confirm your statement on Bettman not being willing to negotiate the triggers or be a good MOD and delete yourself for fabricating untrue information.
:handclap: :handclap:
 

shnagle

Registered User
Apr 27, 2003
131
70
NYC
Visit site
DropThePuck said:
Neither side is blameless in this matter. But the NHL is winning the PR war. Was their last offer a joke? Sure. Let's implement your proposal for about ten minutes until one of the triggers kick in. But in negotiation you never give your best offer first. The object is to counter with a different proposal. Back and forth. I think the players strategy is terrible. By not offerring counter proposals they set themselves 1) to look terrible in the public eye (look at all the hate for the players on this board) and 2) have a terrible case when the NHL declares an impasse. All the NHL has to do is go to the labor board and show the numerous proposals they have submitted and the one from the players. And whether you believe it or not they will say to the board they even rejected their own proposal without negotiating the triggers. They both suck. They both want their own agenda. Neither cares about the fans. But the NHL is winning the PR battle.
Great post. It's a shame that Bettman's only succesful PR campaign has been the lockout. If only he could have been as successful or determined in marketing the NHL.
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
Crazy Lunatic said:
Doesn't it tell you something when the union rejected to negotiate any of the triggers and instead (just as they always do) rejected the offer flat out with no counter proposals or concepts? They have shown zero interest in negotiating. Its that joke of a 24% *temporary* cutback or nothing from this union. Can't say I'm going to shed any tears when the replacements are brought in and the union crumbles.
Same result .. The NHLPA still has to reject the NHL offer and then come back with a counter proposal with higher or different triggers ..

I guess you are new to the business world .. If you where selling your house and you got and offer of X dollars .. but you want 500 dollars more then the offer then you would reject the offer and offer your counter proposal to the buyers .. That is how business works in real life ..
 

Charge_Seven

Registered User
Aug 12, 2003
4,631
0
eye said:
Link to confirm your statement on Bettman not being willing to negotiate the triggers or be a good MOD and delete yourself for fabricating untrue information.
:handclap: :handclap:

Bettman has set a precedent of being unwilling to negotiate by never doing so the entire lockout. With that precedent in mind, it is not a stretch to say Bettman would not have opened to negotiation on his triggers, and therefor there is no need for GKJ post to provide a link, nor any need for it to be deleted. It's become common knowledge that neither side has ever been truly willing to negotiate from their offers, they've all been take it or leave it.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,647
37,442
Simple: Why is the onus on the players to control the owners spending?
 

habfan4

Registered User
Jul 16, 2002
8,423
0
Deus Amat Pretzel
Visit site
The Messenger said:
...The NHLPA still has to reject the NHL offer and then come back with a counter proposal with higher or different triggers ..

Is that really the case, do you honestly believe that the PA will come back with a counter proposal which could potentially trigger a cost certainty system. Why wouldn't Goodenow have said as much during his press conference?
 

Ar-too

Zealous Scrub
Jan 8, 2004
11,108
15
Columbus, OH
go kim johnsson said:
Simple: Why is the onus on the players to control the owners spending?

The onus is on both the players and the owners to ensure that the league is healthy. It's good for both the players and the owners when the league is healthy. The players, beyond their 24% rollback, have yet to recognize that the league is not healthy and ought to be willing to negotiate reasonable cost certainty (salary cap of some sort - luxury cap with real teeth). They've shown no willingness to do so.
 

eye

Registered User
Feb 17, 2003
1,607
0
around the 49th para
Visit site
go kim johnsson said:
Simple: Why is the onus on the players to control the owners spending?

Simple = owner spending control would be viewed as collusion and if the owners showed restraint on spending the players and Goodenow would be the first to accuse them of collaborating to control their spending. Name one sport where all owners have shown the ability to control their spending. You won't be able to name one and that's why the CBA has to include cost certainty language.

It's not hard to figure out or understand.
 

Mess

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
86,912
11,862
Leafs Home Board
habfan4 said:
Is that really the case, do you honestly believe that the PA will come back with a counter proposal which could potentially trigger a cost certainty system. Why wouldn't Goodenow have said as much during his press conference?
NO I do not .. but the reason for that is two part ..

1) The NHL would have to give the NHLPA proposal a certain amount of time to settle in .. You can't make triggers in a system that go off immediately .. If the NHL said we will try your system for 2 straight full seasons and then re-evaluate the results and if your system does not work lets go to our suggestion .. The posters here would have a solid beef at least , well to a point and that brings up point #2 ..

2) All the control is in the owners hands with the triggers .. nothing the players can do .. If for example Boston owner Jacobs wanted the NHL system and wanted the NHLPA system to fail , all he would have to do is stop spending on UFA .. He only has 8 players under contract .. he simply brings up his AHL team to fill out the roster and what are Colorado and Detroit and Toronto going to do so the triggers do not go off, as one of the triggers is Difference with the top 3 teams in Salary and the bottom 3 teams .. Gm and owners could based on UFA manipulate the system so that 100% guarantees that the NHLPA system fails ..

Thats the problem .. not to mention that 3 of the 4 would be triggered in about a week from now already and 1 already is as 4 teams even after the rollback already over the 42 million figure ..
 

AlexGodynyuk

Registered User
Feb 3, 2005
170
0
1 - Only one sport has a hard cap, the NFL. The setup of the NFL is so vastly different (majority of revenue comes from a league-wide TV deal), that teams are all more or less in the same financial position. Not the same as the NHL. Comparing the 2 is absolutely useless.
One of the main things that makes the hard cap work in the NFL is no guaranteed contracts and no arbitration.
2 - The NBA has a hybrid soft cap with penalties (once the cap threshold is crossed you cannot sign other teams FAs except for the league minimum)/dollar for dollar luxury tax system. This is where the direction the owners should be looking.
It allows teams to spend to compete: Dallas Mavericks, NY Knicks (although much like their hockey brethren, front-office incompetence means they are not winning).
It also allows smaller market teams to keep their players together and contend: San Antonio, Phoenix, Utah (before this year).
 
Last edited by a moderator:

habfan4

Registered User
Jul 16, 2002
8,423
0
Deus Amat Pretzel
Visit site
The Messenger said:
NO I do not .. but the reason for that is two part ..

1) The NHL would have to give the NHLPA proposal a certain amount of time to settle in .. You can't make triggers in a system that go off immediately .. If the NHL said we will try your system for 2 straight full seasons and then re-evaluate the results and if your system does not work lets go to our suggestion .. The posters here would have a solid beef at least , well to a point and that brings up point #2

2) All the control is in the owners hands with the triggers .. nothing the players can do .. If for example Boston owner Jacobs wanted the NHL system and wanted the NHLPA system to fail , all he would have to do is stop spending on UFA .. He only has 8 players under contract .. he simply brings up his AHL team to fill out the roster and what are Colorado and Detroit and Toronto going to do so the triggers do not go off, as one of the triggers is Difference with the top 3 teams in Salary and the bottom 3 teams .. Gm and owners could based on UFA manipulate the system so that 100% guarantees that the NHLPA system fails ..

Thats the problem .. not to mention that 3 of the 4 would be triggered in about a week from now already and 1 already is as 4 teams even after the rollback already over the 42 million figure ..

First, your points are predicated on the erroneous premise (at least IMO) that the NHLPA would be willing to negotiate a CBA around the possibility of a cost certainty system being imposed.

In terms of point number 1. The league could have agreed to a longer test period for the PA's proposal. However, it would simply be postponing the inevitable; the PA's approach is based on a short term salary correction, coupled with some entry level salary restrictions. In a year, perhaps two, the league would be right back at square one. Player reps (to their credit) would have certainly been able to recoup all of their client’s losses and then some.

In terms of point 2. Assuming that the triggers were/are negotiable (IMO a false premise as I mentioned earlier) the league and the PA could certainly codify restrictions and/or exceptions with respect to the triggers being set off.
 

Greschner4

Registered User
Jan 21, 2005
871
222
DR said:
ok, why dont you explain how the NHL will get around the immigration laws that will bar most if not all foreigners from being replacements ?

dr

Even assuming that foreigners won't be able to get new visas, foreigners already in the US on an NHL visa will be allowed to have those visas renewed.
 

Greschner4

Registered User
Jan 21, 2005
871
222
go kim johnsson said:
Because the tiggers kick in almost immedetaly. That's why the PA won't agree to it this time around. They get their way for about 45 minutes.

Reporting I've seen have the triggers not kicking in until at the earliest the end of next year.

I agree that this year should be a write-off.

If what you say is the problem was the problem, Goodenow should counter with three years for our system.

Of course he didn't counter at all and won't negotiate at all on the December 9/Trigger format which only shows that the December 9 offer was a total fraud.
 

Greschner4

Registered User
Jan 21, 2005
871
222
go kim johnsson said:
The triggers kick in almost immedetaly. What did the PA have to gain from getting to use their proposal for about 45 minutes before letting the NHL use their totalitarian way for 9 years.

"Totalitarian" is an hysterical word and parallels the hysteria of the PA in this whole thing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->