Guest Dasein Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 just a quick correction Dassein. All the players you mentioned like Crosby, Weber, OV, Luongo, Kovy re-signed with their previous teams. If they signed during the new CBA they would get up to 7 year deals. If they chose to leave their teams as UFA to go play for different team then they would get max 5 years, ie Ehrhoff. I love this idea. For small market teams it will be a bit easier to keep their home grown talent by being able to offer longer term. This is good for EDM, WOG, OTT. Creates more parity in the league. I like this idea. And this won't affect existing contracts. Crosby's contract won't be cut down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Oh really, that's interesting. And yeah I definitely like that too since there's extra incentive for players to stay with their home teams like you said. I don't see why players wouldn't go for it then - since current contracts are honoured, there's the option of 7 years if you re-sign with the current team, and I don't think there's that "trickle-down effect" that Botchford is talking about when they implement a contract term limit ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 I think Mr Fehr has royally screwed up. He knew damn well that even the moderate owners were royally pissed off and when he comes out and leads all the fans to believe he thinks the owners are likely going to accept the PA's counter proposal he was outright bullchitting and playing on the fans emotions. I think Fehr has now galvanized the moderates to the hawk owners side and the owners are now daring the PA to take decertification to their members. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shift-4 Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 So yeah...what was I saying about the 'O' word? at all the drama here Well said Jah....very interesting analysis...intrigued to see how that angle plays out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 We are 2 years apart on CBA length, and 3 Years apart on Max contract lengths. Gary over dramatized everything, they just need to step back and cool down. We are really not that far apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dasein Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 And the more I read, it really sounds like Fehr royally screwed up this whole process ... This was the deal ... This was the best that they were going to get ... and he didn't even vote on it. I mean, the league agrees to move make-whole up to $300mil which was exactly half way from NHL and NHLPA's differences, agreed not to touch UFA eligibility, but decided to stay hard on the contract limits and CBA length ... That's 2 out of 4 on the major rifts, man (and considering what WHL Rocks said, I would say the NHL's proposal was reasonable on the contract limits) ... Most would call that good bargaining and compromising at the middle ... He overplayed his hand and went for the win, hoping for the ace, when he could have broken even with the push at 20. Busted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 The PA has already proposed to come down to max 8 year contracts. I think the owners have made huge gains in contracting rights already. When you see what's been going on with contracts like Weber's this is a huge improvement. Weber gets $26 million guaranteed over the first year of 14 year contract. With owners sticking to 5% variance and PA already coming to 25% form highest year to lowest this is already good gain. Owners are going to get a big win on this if there is more movement in the owners direction. From what it looks like i don't see there not being more movement. Especially when Daly goes on TV and says this is the hill we die on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xbox Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Fehr is an idiot...... Bettman is just pissed because his job is on the line. Daly looked a lot more calm and relaxed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 yes they would have the revenue, they would also have the incurred cost, and then the MASSIVE backlash that MLB got from its fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarthMelvin Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Settle down...lol with the stunt Fehr pulled today in the PR its funny that you are still siding with him...so bold to say things are great take a voice mail come back and dump on the NHL. What kind of negiator is such a player of head games. He's no negotiator he's a manipulator. Give your head a shake. lol http://ca.sports.yah...35567--nhl.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frazzY Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 MLB has had almost 20 years of labour peace and booming revenues and salaries under the system Fehr fought for. The idea that he screwed up MLB is just categorically wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nowhereman Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 You sir are brilliant. These are things the common people look past, the fact that NHL has backed off demands, rather than actually giving anything. The pure simple fact of this lockout, is that by the end of it the Owner's will have given nothing, and the players will have made massive concessions, both moneywise and otherwise. more so than they already have it seems. That's the fact behind all of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The-Impersonator Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Botchford should spend some time finding out the details of the offer first. It's not 5 years it's 7 years that Weber would have signed for if he chose to remain with Preds. Same for Garrison. If they both decided to leave as UFA then Garrison would still have gotten 5 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 The old CBA has come and gone. How much are the players really giving, when they're asking to be made whole for the phasing in of the 50/50 "agreement"? They keep talking about the contracting rights they've "earned" and their dislike of the the "5% variance rule". Negotiations start off proposals, not old colllective bargaining agreements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Botchford is too dumb to even tie his own shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Settle down...lol with the stunt Fehr pulled today in the PR its funny that you are still siding with him...so bold to say things are great take a voice mail come back and dump on the NHL. What kind of negiator is such a player of head games. He's no negotiator he's a manipulator. Give your head a shake. lol http://ca.sports.yah...35567--nhl.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Get real canuck fans Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Yes, they would have gotten the cost and the revenue. Now, they have almost none of the revenue but still have some of the costs (i.e. injured players, all other employees, arena costs, etc.) Still sound smart to you? I don't get people saying the players are being shortsighted for fighting for their right to control their own careers as it significantly impacts their lives and families because they will lose more money than they will ever make up, but these same people don't see owners losing billions just so they can make demands even they've admitted don't have a direct effect on the bottom line. They're cutting off their noses to spite their own faces. And do you have any proof that the backlash would have been any more, much less significantly more, than what they will face now? If not, that's not an argument. It's mere speculation based on a theoretical idea that the PA may have done something and that may have resulted in a situation worse than the damage the owners are actually causing by what they are actually doing. It's silly to get mad at the PA for something they might have but never actually did. That's a marriage fight and it has no place in sports. From a business perspective, it's better to piss off some of your customers rather than all of them. Now: All hockey fans are pissed off and denied the game they love. A playoff strike: Some hockey fans are royally pissed off and denied the game they love. But in reality, the NHL doesn't care. They've already told us point blank they don't think we're going anywhere. They can do anything they want and not face any real consequences. So, keep lying to yourself that the NHL had your feelings in mind when they decided to lockout players if it helps you sleep at night. Ignorance is bliss. In the morning, though, the facts will remain as they are: The NHL locked out players so they wouldn't get paid, hoping to put the screws on them as they started missing paydays. That makes their tactic at least as bad as a player playoff strike. The big difference? Players don't get paid for the playoffs, but owners make big profits from them. So, if the players went on strike during the playoffs they would be giving up playing for the Cup, their ultimate career goal, while the owners would be denied their huge playoff profits. With the owners' lockout, as you pointed out, owners are giving up revenue but also avoiding costs. But, with a playoff strike they wouldn't get to miss any costs, just profits. So, they don't care if you or I would be devastated our team didn't get to go for the Cup. They made the selfish choice to lockout players now because they would be devastated if their pure lockout profit were to be taken away later. Not true! It was actually one owners' lockout and one players' strike. In addition to helping the union win 3 lawsuits against the MLB owners for collusion, Source: http://mlbplayers.ml...nfo/history.jsp So, let's review. Fehr helped strengthen the union, helped create a strong, largely harmonious league, and helped promote the sport in general. Yeah, it would be really terrible if he were allowed to do anything like that to the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Get real canuck fans Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Yes, they would have gotten the cost and the revenue. Now, they have almost none of the revenue but still have some of the costs (i.e. injured players, all other employees, arena costs, etc.) Still sound smart to you? I don't get people saying the players are being shortsighted for fighting for their right to control their own careers as it significantly impacts their lives and families because they will lose more money than they will ever make up, but these same people don't see owners losing billions just so they can make demands even they've admitted don't have a direct effect on the bottom line. They're cutting off their noses to spite their own faces. And do you have any proof that the backlash would have been any more, much less significantly more, than what they will face now? If not, that's not an argument. It's mere speculation based on a theoretical idea that the PA may have done something and that may have resulted in a situation worse than the damage the owners are actually causing by what they are actually doing. It's silly to get mad at the PA for something they might have but never actually did. That's a marriage fight and it has no place in sports. From a business perspective, it's better to piss off some of your customers rather than all of them. Now: All hockey fans are pissed off and denied the game they love. A playoff strike: Some hockey fans are royally pissed off and denied the game they love. But in reality, the NHL doesn't care. They've already told us point blank they don't think we're going anywhere. They can do anything they want and not face any real consequences. So, keep lying to yourself that the NHL had your feelings in mind when they decided to lockout players if it helps you sleep at night. Ignorance is bliss. In the morning, though, the facts will remain as they are: The NHL locked out players so they wouldn't get paid, hoping to put the screws on them as they started missing paydays. That makes their tactic at least as bad as a player playoff strike. The big difference? Players don't get paid for the playoffs, but owners make big profits from them. So, if the players went on strike during the playoffs they would be giving up playing for the Cup, their ultimate career goal, while the owners would be denied their huge playoff profits. With the owners' lockout, as you pointed out, owners are giving up revenue but also avoiding costs. But, with a playoff strike they wouldn't get to miss any costs, just profits. So, they don't care if you or I would be devastated our team didn't get to go for the Cup. They made the selfish choice to lockout players now because they would be devastated if their pure lockout profit were to be taken away later. Not true! It was actually one owners' lockout and one players' strike. In addition to helping the union win 3 lawsuits against the MLB owners for collusion, Source: http://mlbplayers.ml...nfo/history.jsp So, let's review. Fehr helped strengthen the union, helped create a strong, largely harmonious league, and helped promote the sport in general. Yeah, it would be really terrible if he were allowed to do anything like that to the NHL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Botchford is too dumb to even tie his own shoes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 7, 2012 Share Posted December 7, 2012 Listening to Dan Russell Sports Talk. Been listening to him for a couple of decades now. Most callers to his show are mature/older hockey fans. Perhaps 30 or 35 yrs to seniors. Anyways, most callers are clearly pro owners now. Fehr is taking heat. Russell is siding with Fehr but clearly his listeners including me are not on the same page. Great show btw. Haven't listened to him as much lately but for about 20 years it was my bed time radio. Longest running sports show in the country. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.