Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by Bicycle Repairman, Dec 15, 2004.
Bettman Deserves Ax
Exposes the duplicity of the Gary Bettman agenda!
brooks is so blatantly pro player - i dont see how this exposes anything other than whose side he's on. add this to the list of articles he's written in the last 6 months - same article, different date.
How about the fact that Bettman is clearly overestimating salary inflation and underestimating league revenue growth?
Regardless of the writer, you really can't argue with these facts.
Seems like Bettman would predict 12% salary growth regardless of what the PA proposed.
What is triumphant about it? Is it his last? Did someone die?
Bettman should be fired. Wow. Never saw that coming from Larry.
Triumphant? Hardly. Filled with the same rhetoric and errors.
He still doesn't get the math, the NHL is not assuming all contracts will increase by 12%. Just the average. It was higher than that in the first part of the old CBA, a little less than that recently, but overall, the number is accurate.
Year Avg. Salary
There are the numbers. Figure out the percentage increases.
Someone should change the title of this thread to "Triumph The Insulting Comic Brooks Journo"
Nobody's taking Brooks seriously, never has been and never will. He's a joke of tragic proportions, spinning his NHLPA PR-propaganda further and further.
Everyone remember during the last CBA, when contracts expired every summer, and there was 12% growth in salaries annually? Oh, that's right, it happened without having every contract expire ever year.
There's an obvious argument to made here suggesting that salaries won't grow 12% annually-NHL revenues likely won't continue to expand at the rate that they did in the '90s. Simple as that. The money won't be there to fund the increase. Instead, this moron has gone down a path to nowhere, relying on a false premise.
Boy, those strawmen tip over real nice and easy, eh Larry?
That seemed a little low to me as well, but again, in fairness to Bettman, the system he's proposing will pay the players a percentage regardless of revenue. If he was really dishonest, he'd have projected 15% revenue growth, and said "Look, we're offering more money than you guys will make if you go Goodenow's way."
every article he writes, he finds a flaw (i dont actually think he finds it - i assume someone who knows tells him about it) and writes about it like he found the sea scrolls. you could easily do the same thing with the players. thats why its a "negotiation". none of these volumes of numbers are final offers - they arent even negotiating yet, of course theres a bunch of crap mixed in with the good points. ive been reading the post for years - brooks doesnt know anything. he will write anything he hears from the bathroom stall - always has, always will. i dont think he has ever printed ideas that werent spoonfed to him from someone else.
In all fairness, Bettmann's 3% projection of revenues isn't too bad.
In fact, it's probably way too high. After the moron is done diluting the game in the name of parity (read, $$$$), he'll be lucky if revenues aren't falling in the double digits.
But wait! The shootout will save everything!
Dude if you had crabs you'd blame Bettman.
The NHL salaries increased by an average of 12% over the last decade, but let's take a look at the last 5 seasons.
Salary growth over the last 5 years
NHL revenue's have grown an average of just under 9% a year over the last 5 seasons.
Actually, Bettman is doing exactly what the owners want him to do.
Actually given the plethora of quality free agents available, the big markets (as well as every other NHL team) having money back they are obviously willing to spend and with a toothless luxury tax, it is quite likely that the 12% figure would be on the low side for the first two years under the PA's proposal.
In fact, Goodenow was counting on it or he'd have no problem settling for a cap that fixed salaries at that level.
Can we fire you?
I swear, your Bob Goodenow's mistress aren't you.
As much as i dislike Bettman, i'm glad he is standing his ground, sticking it to the NHLPA. I love it, if they could get Bettman and Goodenow into a boardroom and make it no holds barred for language and keep it on commercial free...it'd be entertaining as hell as Bettman is well spoken while Goodenow just barfs out comments.
Goodenow is pathetic, he has pretty much rejected the NHL's offer just out of spite, soo childish. You don't like my offer well i don't like yours..nana nana boo boo.
Fine, then let the owners tie salaries to revenues. If revenues continue to grow 9 percent each year, then so will salaries. Problem is, players want salaries to grow regardless of revenues. Can you think of another private enterprise in which that exists?
Players aren't asking for their salaries to grow regardless of revenues. They're telling owners, "pay us what you can afford" It's up to the owners to decide what they can afford.
All private enterprises that want to stay in business owners set a budget and stick to it.
I own a business and somehow I manage to pay my employees what I think they're worth to me, and more importantly, I pay them what I can afford to pay them. It's really not all that hard to do.
And what does BURKE do?
The problem is that the NHL is basing its assumptions on what salaries will do on what happened during the previous CBA while not doing the same for its revenues. If, as the NHLPA believes and rightfully so, that as revenues rise so do salaries then Bettman's projections are either incompetent or dishonest.
It is laughable how anyone who doesn't write the same stupid column that regurgitates Bettman's half-truths and lies, is someone an NHLPA lackey. If that were the case, I wonder why all the Bettman apple-polishers have to attack the author instead of his argument.
Brooks makes a well reasoned argument in his column, something 90% of hockey writers are unable to do.
The PA is counting on the salaries inflation outstripping revenue inflation or they'd have no problem negotiating the 2% difference inherent in each's intial offer and setting a link between both. Quibble over the numbers until your heart is content, but the simple fact remains, the PA is counting on the inflationary pressures inherent in their flawed system to carve out an unfair peice of the pie.
What is truly laughable is that anyone could be proud of having Brooks, Stachan, Healy and Kyperos as the spokespeople. Especially on a day when Brooks and Strachan both write petulant, "I'm not getting what I want so fire that meany Bettman" rants.
Brooks makes no worhtwhile argument in his rant. He simply stamps his feet and pouts. In doing so, he is a perfect spokesperson for the PA.
its beyond lackey. have you ever read brooks before? no one who has followed what this guy writes would put their name next to an endorsement of him. ive read the post every day for years, and as far as a lockout article its "second verse, same as the first". im not for bettman, im not even sure im for the owners....but reading the propaganda this guy dishes out actually bothers to me the point i almost feel obligated to be opposed to him. this is the guy who for two years had the rangers mere minutes away from acquiring any top player available.....for petr nedved. tkachuk available? we here at the post hear from "good sources" a nedved for tkachuk swap is imminent. primeau available? we here at the post.....
So he's got bad sources for trade rumours, how does this take away from the fact that he's pretty accurate on what's going on with the lockout.
People seem to have no problem bringing up Brooks' past when it comes to assessing his current statements. How come they don't do the same when it comes to the owners? They've been lying for a lot longer then Brooks has been reporting bad trade rumours.
What do the players always say? After trying to squeeze every nickel out of the GM's during their careers and askng for more and more, the players pretty much call the owners/gm's fiscally irresponsible and stupid. They keep saying the owners should be more responsible and stick to a budget and not overspend. They say the owners should just say NO and not pay the player.
Newsflash! What do you think the owners are now doing? They are saying no. They realize now that because of their competitive nature, they cannot continue on this way and outbid eachother everytime it comes to player salaries. They know the salaries are going right back up.So now the owners side is taking a stand and saying the system doesn' work for them. They are telling the player "No we cannot pay you anymore this way"...And what are the players doing?..Crying foul of course
Except that the teams only bid on a very small percentage of NHL players at one time.
Almost every player under 31 does not get teams to bid on his services. He can negotiate with one team and one team only. Teams will always try to get the player as cheap as possible while the player will try to get as much as possible.
Separate names with a comma.