These Are My Terms. If You Don't Like Them...Well, I Have Others (CBA & Lockout) XIII
- Thread starter mouser
- Start date
- Status
Falconone
Registered User
Are you sure?
Iggy, B-Boy and Erik E,
I find it interesting that your posts appear to assume that either the players aren't getting info from the NHLPA, or that the owners would not have tried to negotiate with players directly. None of that is a fact in evidence. There's no facts to even support the contention from Daly that the players were initiating contact and that the ownership was not responding to the initial inquiries.
What is a fact is that if any of the owners used any opportunity to discuss the proposed CBA and or any of its provisions in such a way that it could be construed as evidence of an attempt to influence a player, that would be a violation of law. It would also appear from the language quoted in this thread attributed to Daly's memo that it would also be a violation of the NHL's rules governing ownerships interaction with players and players rights.
What I find most interesting in reading all the posts in threads like this is that people are so willing to place blame. It seems that what we have is group of wealthy people attempting to dictate terms of employment to a group of prospective employees that have a particularly strong set of skills that uniquely qulaifies them for the business the wealthy people want to operate.
The employees formed a union to represent them and the welathy people hired their own representative.
That they disagree on what the payment offered and recieved is just that. A disagreement. The law and their own rules proscribe how these discussions are to proceed.
We , as fans of the wealthy owners product don't have to like it. We can have opinions as to what may be a good resolution of the disagreement. But it isn't helpful to take sides. Either side. It just embolden's whichever side thinks we, the fans, are supporting. What is more likely is that we don't have all the facts of anything that goes on between ownership and the NHLPA.
Frankly, both sides are probably counting on the fan base having a short memory and to fill arenas after this is settled, one way or the other.
Look, if I feel the players have a right to negotiate a clause that requires that ownership honor contracts signed before the old CBA ended and which would be modified by the newly proposed CBA, then it's something I can believe is their right. You can believe differently. That's your right. Frankly you'd have to go a long way to get me to believe that any GM, in negotiating with a player/agent for a new or extended contract, likely did so knowing that they'd never have to pay the full value of the contract they were offering. They knew in advance that those contracts would be reduced in a new CBA. So the question is, were they bargaining in good faith?
If you believe they didn't know what was planned, there's someone in Brooklyn that has a bridge for sale and they can give you a really good deal.
But hey, this is just my opinion, everyone has one.
Iggy, B-Boy and Erik E,
I find it interesting that your posts appear to assume that either the players aren't getting info from the NHLPA, or that the owners would not have tried to negotiate with players directly. None of that is a fact in evidence. There's no facts to even support the contention from Daly that the players were initiating contact and that the ownership was not responding to the initial inquiries.
What is a fact is that if any of the owners used any opportunity to discuss the proposed CBA and or any of its provisions in such a way that it could be construed as evidence of an attempt to influence a player, that would be a violation of law. It would also appear from the language quoted in this thread attributed to Daly's memo that it would also be a violation of the NHL's rules governing ownerships interaction with players and players rights.
What I find most interesting in reading all the posts in threads like this is that people are so willing to place blame. It seems that what we have is group of wealthy people attempting to dictate terms of employment to a group of prospective employees that have a particularly strong set of skills that uniquely qulaifies them for the business the wealthy people want to operate.
The employees formed a union to represent them and the welathy people hired their own representative.
That they disagree on what the payment offered and recieved is just that. A disagreement. The law and their own rules proscribe how these discussions are to proceed.
We , as fans of the wealthy owners product don't have to like it. We can have opinions as to what may be a good resolution of the disagreement. But it isn't helpful to take sides. Either side. It just embolden's whichever side thinks we, the fans, are supporting. What is more likely is that we don't have all the facts of anything that goes on between ownership and the NHLPA.
Frankly, both sides are probably counting on the fan base having a short memory and to fill arenas after this is settled, one way or the other.
Look, if I feel the players have a right to negotiate a clause that requires that ownership honor contracts signed before the old CBA ended and which would be modified by the newly proposed CBA, then it's something I can believe is their right. You can believe differently. That's your right. Frankly you'd have to go a long way to get me to believe that any GM, in negotiating with a player/agent for a new or extended contract, likely did so knowing that they'd never have to pay the full value of the contract they were offering. They knew in advance that those contracts would be reduced in a new CBA. So the question is, were they bargaining in good faith?
If you believe they didn't know what was planned, there's someone in Brooklyn that has a bridge for sale and they can give you a really good deal.
But hey, this is just my opinion, everyone has one.
Kovalchuk got baited by the media and he just said what's on his mind.. When the lockout started he told the NJ media that if he went over to Russia, he would come back as soon as the lockout is over, not to worry, and he would not miss one Devils game.
The NHL hasn't anything aside from 2-year ELC's. They've loosened their stance from their original bargaining position, but everything they're asking for, aside from the 2-year ELC provision in their latest offer, would be taking something away from players that they had in the last CBA. If the two sides want to get a deal done, they should BOTH be making concessions to the other side; as it stands, the league's offer is an attempt to lower player salaries by 12%, while at the same time taking other quality-of-life things away from the players, like max contract limits, increased UFA age, etc.
While I realize that the NHLPA is in a worse bargaining position than the NHL, and that Fehr's job is basically just to negotiate the "best bad deal the players can get", if I was a player right now, I'd be insulted by the league's attempt to take more and more from me without giving anything back.
I have believed since day one that the PA will dissolve eventually. You're already starting to see it. I wouldn't be surprised if more guys come out and say it's time to accept their offer or something to that effect. Maybe not flat out say that but hint at it. I also agree that all players should vote, not just the reps.
Butch 19
Go cart Mozart
as I scanned your post all I could read was "I guarantee that these players are probably 3rd and 4th graders..."
waffledave
waffledave, from hf
He's not getting paid at the moment. He isn't taking a salary as long as the players are locked out.
Seems like a big jump to make there.
The man, Mike Ilitch, is getting very old and doesn't look too healthy. Once the Tigers are over, his attention will be on the Red Wings. I would imagine he doesn't want to spend his last years fighting in a board room.
I'm sure Fehr will have important words about the league availability to players that happened over the weekend. I hope Montador isn't stupid enough to say something about that because he would be bringing to light that the union isn't as united as they claim they are. That's to be expected though. Both sides seem to have fractures and it seems the guys that really want to play on both sides are the ones who's voices have been drowned out.
The PA needs to speak up and let known what they want if they'd like any concessions. The only thing the PA has asked for is for current contracts to be paid full value. The NHL tried to meet that request with the make whole provision. Until the PA actually asks for something, the NHL shouldn't offer anything.
Obviously we have opposing views on this subject and there is nothing wrong with that as long as it remains respectful. Just my opinion nothing more nothing less.
Last edited:
mossey3535
Registered User
- Feb 7, 2011
- 13,724
- 10,614
Hilarious. Now Fehr can ask for the public subsidies again. Seriously, you have to give him credit for the epic nature of his spin. He can make a dog look like a pony.
Also, Ilitch stands to lose A LOT if this is not resolved quickly. As soon as the Winter Classic is threatened, Ilitch will panic.
Krishna
Registered User
JAX
Registered User
JAX
Registered User
(1) we don't actually know what communication has happened since the last time the sides met. E-mails have likely went back and forth the entire time.
(2) most importantly I imagine this is not an update conference call as much as it's a take the temperature of the membership type call. The players reps have likely solicited opinions from those they represent and know in general what the mood is. The timing of the call suggests this will be the call where a major decision takes place. The players either commit to an actual paycheque losing lockout or decide to settle (if they settle and salvage an 82 game season no money is lost). I expect the NHL will also have a call or has had a call to determine the same thing.
Everything suggests Thursday is a drop dead type of date for a full schedule. Both sides need to be clear and confident in their actions. Are they prepared to miss out on revenues and damage the game in order to bicker over a percent or two (a much bigger difference to an owner than individual player and why the players have reduced leverage)? Are they prepared to do the damage to remove the cap? etc etc etc.
If there are no meetings scheduled tomorrow we'll know the answer to those questions.
The players need to be vocal and clear in what they want from the PA. ALL OF THEM. They can't simply sit on the sidelines and go with the flow. That has been the problem with the PA for numerous years....the bulk of the membership just doesn't care.
Last edited:
Positive
Enjoy your flight
Fine, make the pool $300 million, but regardless, the player's share has to come down. The entire operating income of the top 10 teams last year was only $248 million. Everyone else near or in the negative.
Unless we're going to move towards some sort of totally socialist system, the top 10 should be able to keep a good chunk of their money.
- Status
Ad
Upcoming events
-
Game 3 WALTER CUP FINAL - Boston @ Minnesota - Series tied 1-1Wagers: 4Staked: $900.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 4 Milwaukee Admirals @ Grand Rapids Griffins - Milwaukee Admirals leads series 2-1Wagers: 4Staked: $300.00Event closes- Updated:
-
-
Game 2 Florida Panthers @ New York Rangers - Florida leads series 1-0Wagers: 10Staked: $10,442.00Event closes- Updated:
-
Game 2 Dallas Mavericks @ Minnesota Timberwolves - Dallas leads series 1-0Wagers: 6Staked: $2,400.00Event closes- Updated: