SamJamIam Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Essentially what they have said is they will take less of future profit increases (that's what they call a rollback) but that in fact actually involves salary increases just less of the presumed growing profits, they have also said that they would do this if the money was used for a system to stabilize the league. They want what they are supposed to be paid and then some, but what they are giving up is a percent of future revenue increases. Sounds good in some ways but it's all based on 'ifs' and 'future projections'. It is not a concrete rollback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samurai Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Basically the players said "If you're going to ask for more allowance, you need to spend it on school supplies" and the owners said "No! I'm gonna buy chocolate!" When do these billionaires not act like 5 year olds? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ballisticsports. Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Yes, I believe the richer Teams are tired of supporting the weaker teams with payments There are far more NHLPA players than Owners of weaker teams. I believe the Owners are saying, If you wanna keep this many of Your members employed, We are going to need Your help You can help support them finacially as we do,by lowering the revenue sharing The weaker teams saying, No unrestricted free agency as early as it is now As it is now,the weaker teams cannot afford to retain these stars after developing them as they turn into stars,the fans of those teams dont get rewarded with their entertainment.with them now as true stars, and feel if the Player is not loyal,and the team is not loyal to keeping them,then they as fans are not either,- and stay away The stars will always make the big money,and have already left to take jobs from other players who need/ want that lower paying job and Ironically will now play for far less than they ever will in the NHL,while the majority in the NHLPA lose that short window of opportunity by not playing at all I would bet that the average NHL player does Not want this, and it is the richer players willing to prolong this, much like it is the richer teams saying enough is enough and the weaker teams saying we cannot compete. The average NHL player does not have the longevity as the stars to reap in money, and being they are the majority of the NHLPA they will be the ones hit the hardest, No matter what, they wont be getting a raise,this year or next,and will not recoup their losses They need each other to make money, to start acting like Business partners,instead of people seeking a divorce and settle at 50/50 The players (especially the lower paid ones) will never come out of this ahead They are far from needing food stamps etc whatever they finally agree too After getting the concessions from the Players and the richer teams finally getting the NHLPA to help themselves keep the weaker teams operating they should lower the Tickets in good faith somewhat (even though demand will price the tickets) The weaker markets have been practically giving tickets away compared to the successful teams. As much as fans hate Bettman and have seen there game deteriorate and be watered down There is No reason for the average NHL Player to hate him It is because of what he has done,by allowing these Teams to operate, that has given them the chance to play in the Big League, for the Big money The largest detractors of Bettman in theory should be the Fans,richer owners,richer players Not the majority of the NHLPA one of the unrestricted free agency problems was regarding how a collage player starting at age 24 woud have to wait 10 yrs,(like a player out of junior) and would actualy not achieve unrestricted Free agency. Why not just change free agency to 30 yrs of age or something,instead of 10 yrs NHL service? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 In recent CBA news: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remy Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Yea, if they want to make a fraction of the amount they make in the NHL and play at a lower level. If they were willing to take less to play in the KHL or SEL, why not just take less and play in the NHL? I thought they all say that it's a privelege to play in the NHL. Apparently that's only true if they're making ridiculous salaries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_fo_life Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 adater @adater NHLPA (54.3) and NHL (49) are 5.3 percent apart on their offers for first year of new CBA. Meet in the damn middle and drop the puck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 adater @adater NHLPA (54.3) and NHL (49) are 5.3 percent apart on their offers for first year of new CBA. Meet in the damn middle and drop the puck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jovocop55 Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 get rid of a few teams first if they want the league to be healthy.. many owners are piss that they keep sharing their revenue with teams that will never make any $$$$ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SamJamIam Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Why aren't you in charge. Oh i guess you would be fired because the players have said zero salary decrease, not negotiable. They only want to negotiate a reduction in the rate of increase in the salaries. So your 'solution' would be responded to by the players with a big fat NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Canucks_fo_life Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Why aren't you in charge. Oh i guess you would be fired because the players have said zero salary decrease, not negotiable. They only want to negotiate a reduction in the rate of increase in the salaries. So your 'solution' would be responded to by the players with a big fat NO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I can't believe the likes of Bob Mckenzie, Pierre McGuire and Darren Dreger still appear every day to report on nothing. Is TSN really going to run That's Hockey all lockout? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drive-By Body Pierce Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I can't believe the likes of Bob Mckenzie, Pierre McGuire and Darren Dreger still appear every day to report on nothing. Is TSN really going to run That's Hockey all lockout? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drive-By Body Pierce Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 TSN might have contracts that they actually fulfill? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckelhead70 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 I can't believe the likes of Bob Mckenzie, Pierre McGuire and Darren Dreger still appear every day to report on nothing. Is TSN really going to run That's Hockey all lockout? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Regular season games have now been cancelled through to October 24th. Source: http://canucks.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=642784 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandlakthehouse Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 The problem here is that there is too big of a discrepancy between the profitable teams (Vancouver, Maple Leafs, Rangers etc.) and the big money losers (Florida, Phoenix, Dallas, etc.) I realize there are many issues in dispute but the real kick in the gonads here is that they know that us Canuck fans will surrender our cash for NHL hockey whenever it comes back and the money losers are simply losing less money than they normally would. Then they will present to the Stanley Cup to one of those lousy franchises like Tampa Bay, Carolina or whatever and the fans of those teams get to celebrate a victory that they don't even care about so its like we're suffering just so that fans in those markets can have a hockey team they don't really care for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theminister Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Dear Canucks Fans, Today, the National Hockey League announced the cancellation of the 2012.13 regular season schedule through October 24th. We understand the disappointment this news causes all of us who share a passion for hockey; however, we’re hopeful that a resolution will bring the season underway as soon as possible. We understand the concerns of our passionate and loyal fans, especially at this time. Our commitment to deliver exceptional experiences and reciprocate your unwavering support is stronger than ever. Giving back to our community is also of the greatest importance to us. Recently we had the opportunity to participate in a number of community programs including our annual Jake Milford Charity Golf Tournament, the Raise-a-Reader campaign and a rejuvenation project at Kensington Park Arena. On October 11th, our staff will volunteer with a number of local charities continuing an annual tradition called Live-to-Give Day. We will continue to focus the efforts and talent of our entire staff on supporting the values we hold dear: grassroots hockey, children’s health and wellness, literacy and the ongoing initiatives and outreach that help provide opportunities and assistance in the community in which we live. We truly appreciate your patience and loyalty and we look forward to playing in front of you at Rogers Arena once again. Sincerely, Mike Gillis President & General Manager Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Does anyone know if bonuses get paid regardless of lockout? If not, then Weber's gigantic 26 million in 13 months gets nullified. I call that karma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Does anyone know if bonuses get paid regardless of lockout? If not, then Weber's gigantic 26 million in 13 months gets nullified. I call that karma. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Yes, they are still paid. A signing bonus is used just like salary to calculate cap hit, but is actually paid immediately rather than in instalments like salary is. So, a signing bonus is paid on July 1st (or as soon as the contract is signed), as that's the first day after the old year has ended. Salary is only paid during the season (a portion every few weeks like a regular paycheck) based on the portion of the season they'd played during that time. For example, Weber effectively got his $13M signing bonus for this year once Nashville matched the Philly offer sheet, but his $1M in salary is only paid out every few weeks during the season and is currently withheld until there are games. Come July 1st next year he gets another payment of $13M (year two's signing bonus), and the remaining $1M in salary would again be paid out during the season as games are played. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.