Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

-Vintage Canuck-

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread

Recommended Posts

You are contradicting yourself. If half the teams are losing money, then the CEO isn't doing a very fine job. Teams that are not doing so well financially should be relocated. You don't simply cut everyone else's wages to accomodate bad owners with their bad business decision. In fact, I don't see Bettman taking a pay cut.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really bad if Crosby goes plays in the KHL, the NHL's biggest rival. Imagine how much money he would make though, being paid by the penguins and a KHL team in the same year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Btw, 50 mil cap works 4 years ago, doesn't mean it works nowadays. Inflation is a very real thing, and the growth and spending power of leagues outside of NA is also something that you didn't account for at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not at all, Numbers don't lie, $400 milliom to $3.3 Billion. $2 Billion NBC deal that kicks in next year. He's doing a great job.

As far as relocating all the money losing teams, this is the stupidest thing I've heard. You think its better to move 10 + franchises rather then trying to get a deal with the players that doesn't' bankrupt the teams. What happens in the new city? Will they be able to afford to pay players any more than the current cities are. C'mon man.

It's not even possible to move all these teams because of arena lease agreements and so forth. Even if it was possible this is dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put some numbers together and I'll rebuttal. Tell me about inflation numbers, KHL stability and spending power. You may want to include living standards in NA as compared to Russia and where players and their wives prefer to live, particularly the stars.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's really bad if Crosby goes plays in the KHL, the NHL's biggest rival. Imagine how much money he would make though, being paid by the penguins and a KHL team in the same year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sir, have zero idea of how to run a business. If certain teams are not profitable due to smaller market and not enough interest, you don't stay there for many years durdling around hoping something magically will happen and save the franchise. As for all businesses, location is one the most, if not the most important factor. If there are teams out there who can stay profitable despite the current salary cap, that means there are ways for other teams to do so as well. If the current salary is too high, that means there are a lot of demands out there for the good players, and simply not enough supply of them. When you have 30 teams, the demand is bound to be high, and instead of shutting down or relocating some of the non-profitable teams, you are asking the players to accomodate them, because Mr. Gary Bettman refuse to let certain team move to Hamilton due to his own personal agenda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this the best rebuttal you could come up with? I have simply stated a lot of valid points through out this debate, and you have dodged all of them with random comments. Get your head out of your ass, cause I have a hard time hearing you from here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having spent substantial time in Russia, I do not see a mass exodus of NHLers to their league. For a year maybe, but outside of that Russia has nothing on most of the NHL cities.

I believe this is all going to boil down to the revenue sharing and the owners will want the players not getting more than 48%... dig your heels in...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh so on top of relocating 10+ teams you are in favour of contraction or how you would say "shutting down". Are you sure you are on the players side?

Instead of asking the players to sign an agreement that reduces their share of revenue by a few percentage points you would rather many players to lose their jobs? Because that's what happens when you "shut down" teams. I'd love to know what players think of this idea.

You still haven't said how you would go about relocating 10+ teams. Do you have a plan for this or are you randomly throwing out ideas?

What would you do about Arena lease agreements that lock in franchises to multiple years. Just answer this one question and the rest we will worry about later.

Edit: prospective market sizes, availabilty of suitable venues (18,000 + seat Arenas) and so on can be talked about later.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And my point is, the owners are not one person but a group. And it takes only one rich owner to decide he wants to spend more than the cap for the system to be tested, and the exisiting CBA failed to contain smart GMs. So the owners as a group wanted to control spending, yes, but within that group there are some that can and want to spend more, and if they find a way, the others that have the means and want to stay comptetitive HAVE TO follow. If you can find any stupidity in that, it's in that they could not come up with a bullet-proof CBA- but that is very hard to perfectly limit the human ingenuity. The true stupidity is to talk of `the owners`as one homogeneous and perfectly united group. If you can`t understand that owners are both one group yet competitive within that group, you totally misunderstand the situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To all the folks that are saying we need more Canadian teams, in the long run we actually do not. Yeah in the present if a team relocated to Canada it would be great but there is a lot more potential in the States to make a lot more money. The NHL will make the most amount of money in the long run in the United States due to better TV contracts, a higher population in the States/etc. I am as a Canadian as anyone but the last thing I want is another franchise to be relocated to Canada. Economically, it makes 0 sense in the long run. Especially when the US dollar gets stronger and the Canadian dollar dips.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who's threatening to shut down the league with a lockout? Owners.

Who rolled back salaries last lockout, and won last time? Owners.

Who has been signing off on GM's offering long term contracts to circumvent the cap? Owners.

Who's approved Bettman putting teams in markets that don't support hockey? Owners.

Who keeps raising the salary cap? Owners.

Who keeps raising ticket prices? Owners.

Who won't give a true account of revenues for the league on all sources of revenue? Owners.

The players have said they will play even without an agreement. I have no problem with the owners trying to get the players to a 50/50 split of revenue. I'm sure they can even work out the contract lengths. But it's the owners and GM's that have been shafting each other. Not the players. We the fans are the ones that "pay the freight" and our reward? Yet another work stoppage.

Get an arbitrator, get a 2 year deal, and next time start negotiations right away instead of waiting for the last minute to get a deal.

Fire Bettman because the NHL won't have fans the way he runs the league into the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I was wondering this.

Does a year still tick off a player's contract even if they entire season is locked out?

Therefore, if the season is locked out, did the Stars sign Jagr for nothing? Was is a complete waste of time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NHLPA to respond Friday:

The NHL Players' Association will take another day before responding to the league's latest labor proposal.

The union is expected to issue a response to the NHL's second offer when the two sides reconvene for labor talks Friday in Manhattan.

Although NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr said Wednesday he was "optimistic" the sides would meet Thursday, the union asked for an additional day before countering the league's proposal, submitted Tuesday.

"We're hopeful that it's a meaningful proposal that we can continue to make progress from," NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly said. "We feel like we made a good step in that direction earlier this week and we hope that they would take a step forward as well."

The NHL's latest offer featured concessions from its initial proposal -- made July 13 -- although the two sides don't seem to agree on how significantly it deviates from the original one.

NHL commissioner Gary Bettman called the new proposal a "meaningful" move, although the NHLPA insisted that the suggested financial concessions, albeit different from the original requests, still require the players to undertake too hefty of a burden.

By the NHL's calculations, the latest offer represents a concession of $460 million from the league, although the sides still have not agreed on a definition of hockey-related revenue, among other things.

The league's original proposal asked for a decreased players' share of revenue from 57 percent (where it currently stands) to 43 percent. According to the NHLPA's calculations, the latest proposal features a cut to 46 percent.

The league's second proposal also didn't ask for any salary rollbacks. However, it likely would result in a significant increase in escrow. The union projects that escrow would rise to 15-20 percent; the NHL projects it would rise to 12-13 percent. The players paid 8.5 percent in escrow in 2011-12.

Daly did not know whether the NHLPA's proposal will be based on the league's latest proposal -- the NHL based its on the union's last submission -- but said format wasn't an issue.

"We're not married to the structure," Daly said. "If it's a good proposal and it takes a different route, we're open to that."

With a little more than two weeks until the collective bargaining agreement expires, the core economic issues still present the most significant philosophical and practical road blocks to a new deal being reached. The league already has stated its intent to lock out the players if a deal isn't reached by Sept. 15.

"Obviously, the clock is ticking," Daly said. "We're almost into September now. I would say the positive thing is that both parties are committed if there are reasons to meet, to continue to move forward, to meet as often as it takes to get it done.

"But obviously every day that goes by, it's less and less likely that we'll be able to come to closure on all the issues we need to come to closure on."

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/8318370/nhl-players-association-mulling-nhl-latest-labor-proposal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate that the latest proposal gives me hope. I'm stuck at 50% hopeful, 50% pessimistic now. I keep fantasizing that they will come to some last minute deal and the season will start as scheduled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate that the latest proposal gives me hope. I'm stuck at 50% hopeful, 50% pessimistic now. I keep fantasizing that they will come to some last minute deal and the season will start as scheduled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.