Archived

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

-Vintage Canuck-

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread

6,228 posts in this topic

Look at other leagues that almoat had lockouts last year. Isn't it some like players in the NBA are getting something like 47% and in the NFL they are getting somewhere around 49-51%

If the NHL players actually cared about the game, they will sign for 47% or for 49% This goes to show that the NBA and NFL players actually wanted to play the sport they love and signed contracts which benefit the owners more than themselves.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"it, and somehow convincing every undrafted player to play in this new "for the fans" league is even close enough to reality to bother talking about? '

The new league could draft who ever they want,wether they had been drafted in the nhl or not.

There was a competitor league before and there could be again.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is no NHL this year. Then why not turn the AHL into the NHL.

I don't mean as if have our AHL team play in Rogers Arena or anything, but get more focus on the AHL for this season.

Televise the games on Sportsnet, TSN, and CBC. We have an AHL team in the lower mainland who we could go and watch, we could watch games on television, even them show the AHL playoffs on TV.

We could substitute a whole NHL season with the AHL season, just a random thought which could possibly work.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't really like Gary Bettman, but I have to say that he made a very good point today. When he said that the league had been operating with 43% before, which is true.

Latest tweet from BizNasty2point0 kind of ticked me off...

"Fans. The players understand your frustration. But at the end of the day we are fighting for our futures, not yours. That's the reality."

Really Paul Bissonette, I mean the fans are the ones who pretty much pay their salaries and we are the ones who go out and support them, and yet the players say they are doing this for the FANS and themselves.

The players are going to get paid regardless (lockout won't last forever), but what about the people who are provided jobs from there being a season like the ice makers, the ticket scanners, the concession workers, the zamboni drivers, etc...

A lot of those people are usually older people who are working to save up for their pensions or for their families and for a player to say something like this, it just really ticked me off.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone posted something about how the NHLP offer doesn't make sense under the circumstance and I agree but the post got locked. When negotiating I'm not into posturing or inching or going back and forth twenty times, after 2-3 times back and forth the deal should be done. Both parties know what is fair..it doesn't take rocket science to know 50/50 is fair so they should start with that then work out the details. I agree with Don Fehr on two points that the players are asked less money and less rights, and no one is going to agree to that considering the offer does not offer anything back to the players for the concessions and that's where the players then chime in and negotiate for other revenue sharing possibilities and rights. And as previousely discussed after the last lock out and lost wages they ended up with the same deal from the get-go which was a waste of lost wages for the players and revenue for the league. I don't believe most of the players want a lock nor the owners so the negotiators need to get real and come to a fair deal and git r done so we can get this show on the road.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't see how anyone can really support the players here.

They've got nothing but huge raises in the last 7 years. Contracts have only grown in value and that's NOT because of the owners, it's because of how market value has risen along with the cap to match revenue growth. The owners really have no choice but to pay that player's "market value" or risk losing him.

The present CBA is flawed in the sense that it doesn't really take into account the rising costs of operating a franchise or economic impact when calculating player salaries. The increase in NHL revenue helps owners with the rising operating costs but that only gets them to offset it, while the players simply gain higher salaries with no rising costs whatsoever. The players are getting free raises (in a fragile economy), while all the expenses are on the owners.

The NHL clearly lowballed with their 43% with the aim of reaching 50/50. The players flat-out refusing to take any kind of paycut and do a "gradual" equalization is ridiculous. They continue to fall-back to the argument of how NHL revenue has grown by more than 50%, so why do they have to make less, but completely ignore the fact that said revenue is going towards increased operating costs. Only the players are benefiting from the current revenue model. 50/50 is not at all unreasonable.

Think of it this way. The owners represent the people way more than the players do. Think of the THOUSANDS of average joe people working in the various hockey operation departments both at the NHL offices and the arenas; they have to get paid by the owner as well, and they aren't making millions like the greedy players. If the owners were to get a little bit more of a share, that money can get funneled down into the entire organization and maybe that "nobody" marketing assistant or IT tech or accountant can make a little better of a living.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Fans. The players understand your frustration. But at the end of the day we are fighting for our futures, not yours. That's the reality."

Of course they are. Jeez. At least he's being honest. I know there is no comparable industry but if you worked for a company and were asking for a raise, or in this case the company wanted a deduction in your wages, even though they were making record profits AND you had already offered to reduce your wages for them somewhat but they wanted even MORE of a deduction........would you send out emails to all the companies clients to say that you were fighting because actually it was all for those clients? No, you are fighting for you and your families good fortune.

They will all be ok in the end obviously so its silly to root for either, but if you HAD to why would anyone side with the billionaires over the millionaires?

30 teams X 23 active player rosters= 690

30 teams X 50 contracted players= 1500

So 1500 players, or even 690 if you only count the active ones because I'm not sure how they calculate that into the CBA, who worked hard putting in years to get those contracts currently divy up 57% in a deal FORCED on them by the owners

30 pampered billionaires (maybe a few more as some are partnerships) divy up 43% and now want to change the playing field because they just can't get enough...yes there are arena workers and operating costs, but they still make off with a nice chunk of change.

And Bettman is the perfect sleazeball to front them.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

let's be clear here, you do realize the life style change Shea Weber is going to have to make if his salary goes from 100M to 90M right?

How in the world will he be able to make his car payment or even put food on the table making 10M less.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's too bad all of us fans can't stick together and boycott the first NHL game when the lockout is over, just to show our disgust.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If there is no NHL this year. Then why not turn the AHL into the NHL.

I don't mean as if have our AHL team play in Rogers Arena or anything, but get more focus on the AHL for this season.

Televise the games on Sportsnet, TSN, and CBC. We have an AHL team in the lower mainland who we could go and watch, we could watch games on television, even them show the AHL playoffs on TV.

We could substitute a whole NHL season with the AHL season, just a random thought which could possibly work.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

supposedly there is a deal in place with nbc to show ahl games in place of the nhl games if there is a lockout i think more station should be doing this tsn could be making money by showing the ahl games even chl games people will watch hockey

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched the Sfu team play last year and it was surprisingly good, fast, skilled and an entertaining game granted I believe they are one of the top teams in their league...I highly recommend it and I believe tix are $10 and in some occasions can get them for free. I've gone for free twice. My nephew's team was receiving some coaching from the Sfu coach and he had offered free tix to the team, and I believe if the kids wear their hockey jerseys to the game they get in for free. They should offer the same incentive to Canucks fans. If they wear their Canucks jerseys they get 10% off on concession food. Inject some team spirit in the arena and get people to buy and wear jerseys.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly I don't see how anyone can really support the players here.

They've got nothing but huge raises in the last 7 years. Contracts have only grown in value and that's NOT because of the owners, it's because of how market value has risen along with the cap to match revenue growth. The owners really have no choice but to pay that player's "market value" or risk losing him.

The present CBA is flawed in the sense that it doesn't really take into account the rising costs of operating a franchise or economic impact when calculating player salaries. The increase in NHL revenue helps owners with the rising operating costs but that only gets them to offset it, while the players simply gain higher salaries with no rising costs whatsoever. The players are getting free raises (in a fragile economy), while all the expenses are on the owners.

The NHL clearly lowballed with their 43% with the aim of reaching 50/50. The players flat-out refusing to take any kind of paycut and do a "gradual" equalization is ridiculous. They continue to fall-back to the argument of how NHL revenue has grown by more than 50%, so why do they have to make less, but completely ignore the fact that said revenue is going towards increased operating costs. Only the players are benefiting from the current revenue model. 50/50 is not at all unreasonable.

Think of it this way. The owners represent the people way more than the players do. Think of the THOUSANDS of average joe people working in the various hockey operation departments both at the NHL offices and the arenas; they have to get paid by the owner as well, and they aren't making millions like the greedy players. If the owners were to get a little bit more of a share, that money can get funneled down into the entire organization and maybe that "nobody" marketing assistant or IT tech or accountant can make a little better of a living.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to disagree on what you deem"fair market value" The owners dictate what they will pay players. If owners are concerned about rising player saleries all they have to do..is band together, and decide salery ceilings and length of contracts. To commit to $96 million contracts is a recipe for financial disaster. They set the paramters by doing this and saleries soar !!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Short season will be good for the Canucks. I'm just slightly worried Bettman might foul this up and lose another season. I mean sure if that's what it takes for him to finally get the axe alright, but this uncertainty is killing me.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Latest tweet from BizNasty2point0 kind of ticked me off...

"Fans. The players understand your frustration. But at the end of the day we are fighting for our futures, not yours. That's the reality."

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to disagree on what you deem"fair market value" The owners dictate what they will pay players. If owners are concerned about rising player saleries all they have to do..is band together, and decide salery ceilings and length of contracts. To commit to $96 million contracts is a recipe for financial disaster. They set the paramters by doing this and saleries soar !!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NHL says no bargaining with union will occur Saturday:

NEW YORK -- The NHL says there will be no bargaining with the union Saturday.

And with only hours until a threatened NHL lockout, it appears likely a new deal won't be struck.

For nearly a year, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman has vowed to lock out players for the second time in eight years if a new collective bargaining agreement isn't reached by the time the current one expires at midnight EDT Saturday.

Bettman has repeatedly said that the NHL won't operate under the CBA that ended the previous lockout in July 2005. Under that scenario, it would appear unlikely that training camps will open next week as scheduled. The regular season, to begin Oct. 11, also would be in peril.

Once the lockout was imposed in September 2004, the sides didn't get back together again until December.

Players absorbed a salary-cap system and took an immediate 24 percent rollback of existing contracts in 2005 in exchange for 57 percent of hockey-related revenues. The NHL now says that figure is too high, and is willing to have another league shutdown to reduce that share to 49 percent to 47 percent.

Its original offer was to cut it to 43 percent, and an updated proposal raised it to 46 before another new offer pushed it a little higher Wednesday, the last time the sides met at the negotiating table.

The most recent proposal from the league -- with a six-year term -- came in direct response to one put forth by the union earlier Wednesday that was rejected as being similar to the players' two previous offers.

Instead of making a percentage-based offer, the union is seeking a deal that would guarantee players annually at least the $1.8 billion in salaries paid out last season

Bettman said the league's latest offer would be pulled off the table once the current CBA expired because immediate damage caused by a lockout would force the NHL to reassess what it could then offer.

In the previous lockout, both sides dug in over the salary cap. Owners wouldn't make a deal without it, and players sacrificed a full season before finally agreeing to a cost-certainty system for teams.

Without such a philosophical difference this time, the sides merely have to figure out a way to divide hockey revenues that grew from $2.1 billion to $3.3 billion under the expiring deal.

It remains unclear whether the sides will settle in time for the NHL to hold its marquee New Year's Day outdoor Winter Classic at 115,000-seat Michigan Stadium between the host Detroit Red Wings and the Toronto Maple Leafs.

The All-Star Game is Jan. 27 and is to be hosted by the Columbus Blue Jackets, one of the league's struggling small-market teams.

On Friday, the Quebec labor relations board rejected a request from the players' association for a temporary injunction against a potential lockout in Quebec. But the board also ruled that more hearings are needed to make a final decision on a request by 16 members of the Montreal Canadiens and the players' association to declare a lockout illegal in the province. No date was set for further hearings.

With the ruling, Canadiens players will be locked out with their colleagues if a work stoppage goes ahead on schedule.

Daly said in a statement the league was "extremely appreciative" of the decision.

"We are hopeful that this ruling will cause the players' association to cease pursuing these needless distractions and instead focus all of its efforts and energies on making progress at the bargaining table," he said.

Likewise, the union was "pleased" with the ruling because it rejected the NHL's request to dismiss the case.

"The ruling acknowledges that the players have raised issues about the legality of the NHL's planned lockout that require a full hearing on the merits," players' association general counsel Don Zavelo said in a statement.

"We remain confident that the lockout is prohibited by the Quebec labor code and look forward to presenting our case to the commission in the near future. Should the NHL carry out its threat to lock out the players in Quebec, it will do so at its own risk."

A similar request was filed late Thursday with the Alberta labor relations board. NHLPA director of operations Alexandra Dagg said the aim was to prevent players from the Canadiens, Edmonton Oilers and Calgary Flames from being locked out.

The NHLPA argued that because it isn't certified as a union with the province, its members can't locked out under Quebec labor law. In Alberta, the union will argue that proper procedure wasn't followed, including using a mediator.

Following lockouts last year by basketball and football owners, Bettman says hockey management is determined to come away with economic gains, even if it forces another work stoppage.

Damage from another lockout will occur almost immediately, and there is no telling how jilted fans and sponsors will react to another shutdown, especially if it lasts through the fall and into the winter.

Players are concerned management hasn't addressed the league's financial problems by re-examining the teams' revenue-sharing formula. Having made several big concessions to reach a deal in 2005, the union doesn't think it should have to make more this time after record financial growth.

The current contract was agreed to in 2005, and Bob Goodenow resigned as union head two weeks later. After stints by Ted Saskin and Paul Kelly, the union in 2010 turned to Fehr, who led baseball players through three work stoppages in the 1980s and '90s.

Players struck in April 1992, causing 30 games to be postponed. This would be the third lockout under Bettman. The 1994-95 lockout ended after 103 days and the cancellation of 468 games.

The most recent lockout was finally settled in July 2005 -- 301 days into the work stoppage and a month after the league would usually have awarded the Stanley Cup. It marked the first time a North American professional sports league lost an entire season because of a labor dispute, and the first time the Stanley Cup wasn't handed out since 1919, when a flu epidemic caused no champion to be crowned.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/8380669/nhl-says-no-bargaining-union-occur-saturday

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope this ends like the NBA lockout

0

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.