Why I Hate the NHLPA

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by hunter1909*, Oct 14, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
View Users: View Users
  1. hunter1909*

    hunter1909* Guest

    why do i hate the nhlpa?...

    i went to their website, and could see instantly where they were at...selfish, arrogant, and pretty well not exactly trying to win friends or influence people...

    and as a union, i think theyre a joke...country club maybe...not a union...

    please feel free to add to this list of reasons to hate the NHLPA
     
  2. SPARTAKUS*

    SPARTAKUS* Guest

    You are right my man! :handclap: The NHLPA make me sick they don't care about the game, they don't care about the fans and they don't even care about half of their members. The union must realize that they have until January to negociate a cap other wise the cap will force down their throat next summer. The owners will win this war they have to. Enough is enough :yo:
     
  3. djhn579

    djhn579 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2003
    Messages:
    1,747
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Tonawanda, NY
    I'd love to see the NHL offer to bump up the league minimum salary a bit and maybe do something like guarantee players their full NHL level salary for the season if they play at least 10 or 20 games in the NHL. Any offer that will benefit the 3rd and 4th line players. That will give those guys a lot to think about and some incentive to push for a resolution.
     
  4. Brent Burns Beard

    Brent Burns Beard DontTouchMyDonskoi!

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    5,150
    Likes Received:
    81
    Trophy Points:
    146
    the owners already have won ... the players have conceded a few hundred million dollars. the owners wants to annihalate the players union, period.

    dr
     
  5. dawgbone

    dawgbone Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :lol

    They conceded a one times savings of about $70mil with the rollback, and another possible $50 mil with their talk of reducing the entry level system.

    Ah yes, then their $40 mil luxury tax, with the paltry 10% penalty, and 20% penalty at $55mil.

    The only analogy I can come up with is holding Mt. St. Helen together with band-aids and scotch tape.
     
    Last edited: Oct 15, 2004
  6. Papadice

    Papadice Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    Messages:
    815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Customer Service Leader
    Location:
    Moncton, NB, Canada
    Home Page:
    ya know, that's not a bad idea... i don't necessarily like the idea of guaranteeing full NHL level salary for playing 10 or 20 games, but raising the minumum wage and making a proposal that peeks the interest of the lower end NHLers might cause them to make a push to get Goodenough to follow through on starting negotiations again... and if he doesn't, it'll prove to the lower end guys that the NHLPA could care less about them... all they care about is the higher paid players... this would alienate the lower paid players and get them to probably cross the picket lines if replacements are brought in...
     
  7. rafal majka

    rafal majka Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2004
    Messages:
    1,292
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    86
    I thought holding Mt. St. Helen together with band-aids and scotch tape is an analogy but it is true that your analogy is hyperbole.

    The NHLPA has offered to play while negotiating, has offered a framework for negotiations while the owners have done nothing but repeat their vile mantra: cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap, cap...
     
  8. Papadice

    Papadice Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    Messages:
    815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Customer Service Leader
    Location:
    Moncton, NB, Canada
    Home Page:
    conceding a few hundred million is not even close to solving the problem though... if it were close, why would it be that the NHLPA refuses to give the NHL any guarantees that the system they've proposed will work as they've outlined... Why? Because they know it won't... a 5% rollback is a joke and the benefits of it would be gone as soon as each player is up for a new contract... then we're back to the same problems... the luxury tax system they proposed is ridiculous... teams like the Leafs, Wings and the Rangers would simply laugh it off and continue what they have always been doing... if a luxury tax is the answer, it needs some wicked bite... not a insy binsy little slap on the wrist... and the entry level restrictions the players are proposing are just plain stupid... it's simple wrong for a guy like Marc-Andre Fleury in his first year in the NHL to make around $4 million... and that's what he would have made last year if he would have met his bonuses... the proposal from the NHLPA does nothing to address those ridiculous bonuses...

    the owners aren't looking to "annihalate" the NHLPA... they are looking at getting a system that works... it just so happens that the system now is SOOOOOO far out of wack that the only way to get it to a working system is for the players to give up A LOT more than they are proposing... so sure, it may somewhat seam like annihalating the NHLPA, but that's not the goal..
     
  9. Papadice

    Papadice Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2003
    Messages:
    815
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Customer Service Leader
    Location:
    Moncton, NB, Canada
    Home Page:
    And if you believe that it would be even remotely smart for the owners to accept the players' idea of playing while negotiating then i have some nice swamp land to sell you in the Everglades... don't be an idiot!!!

    If the NHL were to agree to that, the players would be getting their way in the meantime... They'd be getting to continue playing for their insane contracts, raking in tons of money, and the owners would be losing tons of money... If the owners let that happen, what reason do the players have of EVER showing any willingness to negotiate... The owners would have absolutely zero leverage... And the players would have TONS of leverage...
     
  10. ceber

    ceber Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2003
    Messages:
    3,497
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Wyoming, MN
    In my mind, calling all of the NHL's offers caps is the same as saying the NHLPA's offer was worthless.

    The problem isn't cap/no cap. The problem is tying salaries to revenues. NHLPA doesn't want to do it, league does. All this other stuff is just smokescreen.
     
  11. X0ssbar

    X0ssbar Guest

    Well said and that is exactly what this whole mess boils down to. :handclap:
     
  12. dawgbone

    dawgbone Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes I apologize, I was writing a little to quickly for my brain...
     
  13. The players need to be smart and look out for ther brethren. The poor players will get poorer while the richer will get richer including that ****** Goodenow. They need to overthrow him and get to the table and get the cap done, because this way they will still get there multimillion dollar contracts, and the lower scale players will get to play and make there money. Goodenow dosent care about hockey, or the players, he just likes his fat check, and the lower class players will not get him his fat check. They need to get rid of that uneducated idiot Trevor Lindon to, hes a garbage players, and even dumber writer. The cap will make the game better, and the money will come after a while in greater amounts.
     
  14. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    I agree, but this is just another way to say cap. Whether it is done by team or across the league, it is a ceiling on player salaries and the ceiling is a percentage of league defined revenues, rather than the individual team revenues.

    I wonder why the entire employer offer has not been released. We know what the players have put on the table, but we don't know what the owners have offered. They claim there are six different proposals. I couldn't find any of them on their spiffy website. I'd like to have a good laugh over the proposed revenue sharing.

    I've submitted this question to the NHL and also asked them for more information about the "meaningful revenue sharing" they propose. I got money that says I don't get an answer.

    According to Goodenow, "Yes, they gave us six proposals, but they were very, very, very conceptual. Some of them in length were less than 3 or 4 inches of type."

    Why hasn't the NHL laid out a very specific idea of what they want and what they can live with? Tell us how they think revenues should be defined, give us the player percentage, tell us when free agency will occur, explain what changes they expect in the arbitration process, how the cap will work, etcetera. Give us - and the players - their real opening bargaining position.

    The players will never buy into the link between salaries and revenues, but I can imagine a link that I would support. I'd leave the CBA exactly as is but have a portion of every player's salary placed in escrow. At the end of the year count up the revenues and settle up. It provides cost certainty with the same basic structure. That would not change very much from the fan's perspective. The only hesitation from the owner side would be the competitive balance smokescreen they have created would be blown away. Ignorant fans in smaller markets would still see themselves as being screwed. It's moot because the players would not go for it, but I would.

    I can't understand why so many fans are prepared to accept the owner's position without knowing what they are really demanding. What, exactly, do they want? Put a real proposal on the table. "Here is the system that we think will work. This is what we mean by an new economic order."

    Why are so many fans buying a pig in a poke?

    Tom
     
  15. HckyFght*

    HckyFght* Guest

    I get the impression that the NHLPA isn't really a union at all. But a cartel of agents who make a killing on the top 50 highest paid players in the league. I wonder if a link could be proved between players agent/agencies and the NHLPA that could get it disqualified in the eyes of the courts as an actual labor union?
    -HckyFght!
     
  16. Seachd

    Seachd Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2002
    Messages:
    19,700
    Likes Received:
    601
    Trophy Points:
    225
    Location:
    The Fail
    Home Page:
    My problem with the NHLPA is that their priorities are out of whack.

    The NHL is fighting for the health of the league, to keep my team and others where they are, and to try to keep everyone competitive. The NHL wants cost certainty to try to attain this.

    The NHLPA is fighting for money. The players refuse cost certainty because they don't want it. Not a valid reason, in my opinion.
     
  17. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    That would be awful for the NHL. Can't you understand that the NHL needs the union? Without a union, the NHL is illegal.

    Tom
     
  18. cws

    cws ...in the drink

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    1,653
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    139
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    GA
    It's a two-way street. Both sides have been spewing out so much crap, why you be inclined to believe either one of them? Kinda hypocritical to criticize others for buying into one side's rhetoric when you have bought into the other side's rhetoric.

    When either mouth-piece talks, it's like Charlie Brown's parents to me. Only a few times in the last several months have I heard anything more that "wah, wah, wah". Not surprising really, but not much worth listening to. I feel sorry for those who have fallen into the trap of listening to and/or believing the waste that either side has been cranking out.

    If we knew exactly what one or both sides wanted, we wouldn't be having these discussions. That is unfortunately part of this process. They are not gonna reveal exactly what they want, exactly what they really think, and exactly what they are willing to accept. The PA hasn't done it, the owners haven't done it. Somewhat naive to think that they would, and certainly not a stable platform on which to build an argument.
     
  19. chara

    chara Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2004
    Messages:
    894
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Agree with you Linden, who in 94 said this about the plight of families unable to afford hockey games: "Let them go to the circus".

    The cap or some other tool tying revenues to salaries is inevitable. Its up to Goodenow to ensure that those revenues are calculated correctly. Is it an easy task? Who knows? What we do know is the NHLPA is not interested in doing it.
    Their argument is: The owners know their businesses best and let them make financial decisions based on that premise. Period.

    Perhaps its time for the NHLPA to investigate it, including ordering their own audit of the books. Something Goodenow should have done years ago. If they had, they would have more sympathy among the fans today. The owners did their homework, the players still have do theirs just to get on the same playing field...the clock is ticking Mr.Goodenow and Mr.Saskin and it looks like you can't play 'the owners are bluffing' card for much longer...
     
  20. dawgbone

    dawgbone Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's not based on individual team revenues... it's based on the revenues of the teams that generate the most revenues, which is stupid if you want any kind of an economic balance throughout the league.

    Really... what was the players full offer? What were their exact numbers? I haven't seen them floating around either, just talk of a 5% roll back, a luxury tax and revenue sharing.... no solid numbers anywhere.

    Gee, you think? Take 5 seconds to consider how many hundreds of thousands of other fans have submitted questions to the NHL... :shakehead

    According to Goodenow, "Yes, they gave us six proposals, but they were very, very, very conceptual. Some of them in length were less than 3 or 4 inches of type."

    a). Who is this Us business? You aren't involved in the negotiations are you?

    b). The players haven't done it either. The players haven't laid out a specific idea of what they want yet either.

    c). Neither side has done it for the simple reason that they aren't stupid. You lay out what you can live with, and all of your leverage is gone. You could put the fairest deal in the world down right off the bat, and it would not get accepted, because the second you get an offer, you look to get more. It's basic bargaining, and neither side has been very forth-coming.

    Well that's a lovely idea... ignoring the fact that most of the squabbling has to do with the fact the players don't agree with how the league counts revenues (and has refused the opportunity to check it themselves). And what is a "portion"? 5%, 10%? 60%? And how is it decided what happens with that escrow fund?

    Don't whine that the NHL doesn't give you anything tangible, then come up with a cockeyed proposal that does the same thing.

    Ignorant?... take your cranial cavity out of your anal one. What do you think competetive balance means? Is it all teams being equal, with talent being spread out across the league?

    No.

    Competetive balance means that if you hire a good GM, and a good scouting staff, and have a good coaching staff in place, it means you can build a championship team. Not just a one run to the Cup team, but a legit Championship contending team.

    Competetive balance means you aren't forced to deal your top players each and every year because their salaries are too high. It means that your team isn't a feeder team to the top teams in the NHL year after year.

    That's competetive balance. It's where personel decisions are based on what you think is best for your team, not what's best for your teams bottom line... and it's like that for all the teams... not just 7 or 8.

    So before you talk about ignorant small market fans, look in the mirror. Ignorance applies to you for not understanding what a lot of us small market fans go through, but continue to make comments like you do.

    Of course they wouldn't go for it... who in their right mind would agree to watch a portion of their fairly negotiated contract go into a fund where they aren't sure how much of it they would get back... added to the fact if the % was small enough, it would take all of one contract for the players to demand that much more, so they still get the money they wanted originally. If I want $1.4mil, and it was 10%, I'd be shooting for $1.54mil. That way, I'm not out any morney.

    And naturally, this solves nothing....

    Why are fans prepared to accept the owners position?

    Because we know what the players position is: "The current system works"... when it's plain as daylight to see it doesn't work, especially not in the 30 team league that is the NHL. We know the players position is definitely not one that works.

    Maybe the players should do the same? They've been just as unwilling as the Owners have. Both sides have their wants...

    NHL: Cost certainty. They don't want player salaries at 75% of league revenues... they want it much closer to 60%

    NHLPA: The free market. We want individual owners to pay what they feel is right for the players, just like it has been for the past 10 years.

    Because with both sides hiding everything, it's the only way to let the cat out of the bag...
     
  21. garry1221

    garry1221 Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2003
    Messages:
    2,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Walled Lake, Mi
    Home Page:
    i've said it before, maybe even in this thread.... if the players want to be treated as employees then give them a time card, put a timeclock up in each lockerroom and let them punch in and out as they come and go, then, as they start making even less than they do now or they would under a cap of any kind, THEN they can truly complain, until then forget it, the league has been far too good and the last cba far too in favor of the players... it's time things were done right, but god forbid the players actually agknowledge it without the PA forcibly changing their thoughts, there's been at least two players come out to say that a cap would be good.... and IMO there's got to be more that think the same way
     
  22. dawgbone

    dawgbone Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Care to explain that?

    If the players dissolved their union (for whatever reason), you are saying it would be illegal for the NHL to continue?

    Funny... other companies have managed to continue to be a legal entity after their union disolved.
     
  23. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    The players put a very specific offer on the table. The owners have not. We do not know what the players will accept - whether they will make even more concessions - but there is an offer. They want exactly the same CBA, but they know they can't get that. So they made four very specific proposals for change. If the player offer had been accepted, we all know what the system would look like.

    I don't expect the owners to have tabled their absolutely final position, but I think the players have a right to expect the owners to declare an opening position that has some specific proposals. The owners even deny that they have tabled a hard cap at $31 million. They have tabled "concepts" and fans haven't even seen their "concepts".

    Tom
     
  24. hunter1909*

    hunter1909* Guest

    i love this thread LOL...

    anyone but a buffoon can see...

    the NHLPA is a greedy, sickening...bunch of pigs who have their fat noses in the trough and now...LOL...have got the temerity to INSIST on maintaining the status quo...

    but LOL...as they own next to nothing...other than fat wallets and fancy cars...no arenas for example...

    theyre going to be DECIMATED by the end of this glorious lockout...

    bwahahahahaha i can hardly wait...until the cowering dogs return, caps in hand, for more nhl action(then again im prepared to wait until theyre all dead) LOl
     
  25. Tom_Benjamin

    Tom_Benjamin Registered User

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2003
    Messages:
    1,152
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Home Page:
    No. The NHL could continue, but they would no longer be able to put any restrictions on the competition for labour. If the season is cancelled in January and the players decided to respond by decertifying, the first beneficiary would be Sidney Crosby.

    Sidney's agent would file an anti-trust lawsuit. The courts would throw out the entry draft as anti-competitive and Crosby's agent would start fielding offers. Ilya Kovalchuk would file an anti-trust lawsuit against the standard NHL contract and the courts would strike down Atlanta's "right" to the employee and Kovalchuk would become a UFA. And so on. A salary cap would be declared illegal.

    At the end of the day, hockey players would be treated like any other employee. Were you drafted by your employer? Can you decide to quit and go work for someone else if your boss was Bill Wirtz? Hockey players would have the same rights as the rest of us.

    Tom
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"