Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo
* * - - - 3 votes

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
6226 replies to this topic

#121 Prngr44

Prngr44

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,488 posts
  • Joined: 26-March 03

Posted 10 August 2012 - 12:26 PM

Just to throw more fuel on the fire, the NHL's board of governors pays Bettman almost $8M per year to represent them.
  • 0
I hate the Canucks so much they're my second favorite team.
Posted Image

#122 butters

butters

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 10 August 2012 - 12:27 PM

I remember back when the canadian dollar sucked that Canadian fans felt VERY different about revenue sharing. Just saying. I don't understand how people can, for example, say that weaker teams shoudl be folded, and then complain about the original Jets franchise leaving. It was the smallest market when it left.
  • 1

#123 Neufy161

Neufy161

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 616 posts
  • Joined: 01-August 11

Posted 10 August 2012 - 12:45 PM

Just to throw more fuel on the fire, the NHL's board of governors pays Bettman almost $8M per year to represent them.


Wow, I just want to swear all over the place. The fact that Bettman and the owners actually think that changing contracts they agreed to pay is within there rights, is completely obscene.
  • 0

Oh hello Alain Vigneault, I see what you did there... good one.

Posted Image

Signature by (>'-')>


#124 chisoxin12

chisoxin12

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,610 posts
  • Joined: 28-July 09

Posted 10 August 2012 - 12:55 PM

I remember back when the canadian dollar sucked that Canadian fans felt VERY different about revenue sharing. Just saying. I don't understand how people can, for example, say that weaker teams shoudl be folded, and then complain about the original Jets franchise leaving. It was the smallest market when it left.

The difference was and always will be, is that Winnipeg is a HOCKEY MARKET. Phoenix isn't, hasn't, and never will be one of those. Could you imagine the NHL without the 7 teams? Revenue sharing was a necessity because it wasn't just Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa that needed it, all the Canadian teams did.
  • 0

#125 StevenStamkos

StevenStamkos

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 628 posts
  • Joined: 18-June 12

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:01 PM

#FireBettman
  • 0

Follow me on twitter! @RealStamkos91


#126 butters

butters

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:07 PM

The difference was and always will be, is that Winnipeg is a HOCKEY MARKET. Phoenix isn't, hasn't, and never will be one of those. Could you imagine the NHL without the 7 teams? Revenue sharing was a necessity because it wasn't just Winnipeg, Calgary, Edmonton, and Ottawa that needed it, all the Canadian teams did.


exactly, but now that the canadian teams don't need it people are against it. I wish people would jsut be honest about their positions rather than pretend its about economics. Its really just about national pride (ugly candians).
  • 0

#127 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 70,000 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:11 PM

@JSportsnet
Sounds like the NHLPA is in talks to have all-star games for union members in Russia and Canada if they are locked out.
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#128 coastal1

coastal1

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 718 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 12

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:21 PM

IT IS NOT THE PLAYERS DECISION TO BE LOCKED OUT!!! GET THAT THROUGH YOUR THICK SKULL.

Think of it this way the owners have the keys to the arenas and therefore are the ones who get to fricken lock the doors on the players. Thereby Locking out the players who want to come in and play hockey. The players could all stand up and say lock us out but if the owners don't do it there is no lockout. What is so hard to understand about that?

IF THERE IS A LOCKOUT THE MONEY THE PLAYERS WILL EARN COMES FROM THE NHLPA ESCROW HOLDINGS SO IT HAS EVERYTHING TO DO WITH A LOCKOUT!!!!

If you can't understand this then I see you have zero understanding of the situation and a very limited intellgence to be able to grasp very simple concepts and I wish you luck in your life.

The owners have said the doors are open if you agree to our proposal. If you (the players) don't agree to our offer or something close to it, we lock you out. Whose decision is it? It's up to the players to decide, the owners have made their offer. The palyers will decide if there is a lock out or not, how hard is this to understand (of course the owners are the ones who will lock the doors but they have set it up so that the players will decide if they have to lock those doors).
The escrow is NOT controlled by the NHLPA. The escrow is divided between players and owners at the end of each season when the final revenue numbers are in. The escrow for last year has been dealt with. The union might have a strike or lock-out fund, that I do not know but it has zero to do with the CBA escrow.
  • 0

#129 coastal1

coastal1

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 718 posts
  • Joined: 27-June 12

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:35 PM

Wow, I just want to swear all over the place. The fact that Bettman and the owners actually think that changing contracts they agreed to pay is within there rights, is completely obscene.

This is not a matter of Bettman and the owners 'thinking' they can change contracts, it is a FACT that they can NEGOTIATE a rollback. Players wil have to agree. Now, it does not look like the players are thrilled by a 24% rollback so we have a conflict. If you think the gap can be bridged in the next month you are dreaming. The NHL is a business, and overall, a very profitable business. People keep talking about team like Forida. The Florida panthers were purchased in 2009 for over $200 million by Jeff Vinick, which was more than double what the franchise sold for in 2001. Bettman is a golden boy for the owners, that is why he is paid $8 million a year. And he is a hard nosed negotiator, he won't back off much their initial offer, that was not a throw away offer to get things moving.
  • 0

#130 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,312 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 10 August 2012 - 01:42 PM

The owners have said the doors are open if you agree to our proposal. If you (the players) don't agree to our offer or something close to it, we lock you out. Whose decision is it? It's up to the players to decide, the owners have made their offer. The palyers will decide if there is a lock out or not, how hard is this to understand (of course the owners are the ones who will lock the doors but they have set it up so that the players will decide if they have to lock those doors).
The escrow is NOT controlled by the NHLPA. The escrow is divided between players and owners at the end of each season when the final revenue numbers are in. The escrow for last year has been dealt with. The union might have a strike or lock-out fund, that I do not know but it has zero to do with the CBA escrow.

OMG you so deserve :picard: and I DO NOT throw those around lightly.

Definition of 'Escrow'

A financial instrument held by a third party on behalf of the other two parties in a transaction. The funds are held by the escrow service until it receives the appropriate written or oral instructions or until obligations have been fulfilled. Securities, funds and other assets can be held in escrow.


THE NHLPA holds in ESCROW emergency money in the event of a lockout or a work stoppage so the players STILL HAVE MONEY FOR THE YEAR THEY ARE NOT PLAYING HOCKEY IN THE NHL.

The players not agreeing to the initial NHL offer does under no circumstances mean they WANT a Lockout, it means they feel that the legal contracts that the owners have signed should be upheld (Imagine that how messed up is that?)

The Team owners and Gary Bettman knew damn well when they gave their offer that the players would never accept the 24% rollback since it is technically against the law for the owners to demand such. They are using it along with the threat of a lockout for leaverage in other areas.

I will reiterate at one final attempt (most likely in vain) to help you to understand that the players not signing off on the ridiculous first propsal of the NHL in NO WAY MEANS THEY WANT A LOCKOUT. It means they feel that contracts signed by the owners should be legally binding just as if you or signed a legal contract or anyone else for that matter.

It is called CBA negotiations because both sides must be willing to comprimise on certain issues. If it is as you say the NHL's stance is basically accept our propsal or lockout that is not negotiation that is called BLACKMAIL and that is on the owners and NHL at that point, not the players who were there to NEGOTIATE.

Again I am not on the players or owners side all I am saying is there must be give and take and if the owners have zero room for comprimise and they are they ones who have the power to lockout it really has nothing to do with the players it is all the owners. But that's not the case as the NHL has only given the one propsal and are waiting for the counter propsal, then they will give a counter propsal to the NHLPAs and so on as it moves closer to the inevitable agreement.
  • 0
Posted Image

#131 butters

butters

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:09 PM

It is called CBA negotiations because both sides must be willing to comprimise on certain issues. If it is as you say the NHL's stance is basically accept our propsal or lockout that is not negotiation that is called BLACKMAIL and that is on the owners and NHL at that point, not the players who were there to NEGOTIATE.


Not that I think you are wrong necessarily, but the league needs to think about logistical things like booking arenas, while the players do not.
  • 0

#132 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,312 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:30 PM

Not that I think you are wrong necessarily, but the league needs to think about logistical things like booking arenas, while the players do not.

I agree, the owners have a lot more to do, they have to payout lots from the revenue they do recieve. Revenue does not equal profit.

However the fact at hand is that the owners signed legal binding contracts. How would you feel if I signed a contract that I would give you a million dollars a year for the next 5 years to labor for me in my coal mine but then decided due to circumstances I feel are unfair I want to reduce it to half that amount but you still have to do the same amount of work. Still great money for working the coal mine but the problem with that is you have planned your life for at least the next five years with the thought that you were going to get that full 1 million dollars.

Then I said if you don't take the 500k offer I will lock up my coal mine and you get paid nothing. So agree to the rollback or get nothing.

In essence that is the FIRST propsal of the NHL. The NHL realizes they are shooting for the moon (as they should) but they also know that they WILL have to comprimise because there was never a chance the NHLPA would agree to those demands (as they shouldn't). This makes it so when they finally meet somewhere in the middle the NHL ends up being better off than where they are now.
  • 0
Posted Image

#133 canucks3322

canucks3322

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,204 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 11

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:34 PM

is there anyway Bettman can get fired?
  • 0

#134 butters

butters

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:36 PM

is there anyway Bettman can get fired?


even if that happened, everyone would hate the new guy after a year or so.
  • 0

#135 canucks3322

canucks3322

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,204 posts
  • Joined: 20-February 11

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:52 PM

even if that happened, everyone would hate the new guy after a year or so.


I rather have a new guy then Bettman
  • 0

#136 OrrFour

OrrFour

    Comets Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 383 posts
  • Joined: 09-July 06

Posted 10 August 2012 - 02:58 PM

"Myth No. 1: That Gary Bettman promised ticket prices would fall when the owners got the deal they wanted back in 2005."
I remember people that were on the owners' side in the last labour dispute making the argument that ticket prices would fall with a hard salary cap.
I didn't believe it then, and it has certainly not happened.
The canucks, for example, are a high revenue team that makes a good profit every year..
It'd be nice if they lowered ticket prices, but they consistently sell out Rogers, so why bother?
They've made a huge investment in the team so they have the right to make a profit.
  • 0

#137 Dragonfruits

Dragonfruits

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,496 posts
  • Joined: 05-January 08

Posted 10 August 2012 - 03:02 PM

if there is a lockout the only good thing out of it would be bettman losing his job 3 lockouts since he as been commisoner would have no clue how he stays commisoner after that
  • 0

#138 Aladeen

Aladeen

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,312 posts
  • Joined: 22-September 07

Posted 10 August 2012 - 03:37 PM

I rather have a new guy then Bettman

Yup I think a former hockey player/lawyer kind of like Mike Gillis would make for a better Commish and representative of the NHL
  • 0
Posted Image

#139 canucks.bradley

canucks.bradley

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,440 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 07

Posted 10 August 2012 - 03:50 PM

eliminate the damn loophole that allows for these dumb 15 year contracts. max it at 5 go on playing
  • 0
Posted Image
3000th post - September, 2010

K guys I nd hlp fast. Im @ a girls I rly like & txtng from my iphone. I did a #2 in the bathroom and it plugged, water is almost overflowing toilet. Srsly I dunno wut 2 do somebody help!


Watch Bowness somehow mess up Tampa Bay's already amazing 2 powerplay units...he'll probably tell Stamkos to do drop passes from centre ice, take him out from the faceoff dot, and place him infront of the goalie :lol:


#140 butters

butters

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 10 August 2012 - 05:18 PM

There will be no season this year. I'll eat my jersey if there is.


please hold him to account on this. PLEASE.
  • 0

#141 ccc44

ccc44

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,423 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 09

Posted 10 August 2012 - 08:05 PM

The owners got the deal they wanted after the last lockout and have increased 31 million because of increased revenue since the previous lockout and now they claim there is no way they can operate under the agreement they wanted ?

Maybe its time we started trimming the fat and eliminate a few of the franchises that the 7 Canadian teams have kept going through the shared revenue.

The owners cant seem to stop themselves from approving these stupid contracts there GMs are handing out and now need to create a work stoppage because of it
  • 0
Posted Image
SHOTS ! SHOTS ! SHOTS !

#142 butters

butters

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,373 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 10 August 2012 - 08:41 PM

Maybe its time we started trimming the fat and eliminate a few of the franchises that the 7 Canadian teams have kept going through the shared revenue.


By the same token then they should have 'trimmed' calgary, edmonton and ottawa in the late 90s
  • 0

#143 Kamero89

Kamero89

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • Joined: 14-February 12

Posted 10 August 2012 - 08:53 PM

This is SOOO selfish on both sides. I understand the players have to stand up for themselves, but they get paid 7-figures to play hockey for a living!

The average person makes 40-60k/year, it takes less than a month for an average NHL player to make that.
  • 0

#144 Fanuck

Fanuck

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,690 posts
  • Joined: 09-September 04

Posted 10 August 2012 - 09:10 PM

Bettman is NO puppet. Saying that is ignorant.


Please tell one important decision that Bettman can make completely independently that would significantly impact labor negotiations without going to the owners to get their majority approval first, then try to tell me he isn't a puppet figure.
  • 0

#145 vancanfan

vancanfan

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,516 posts
  • Joined: 31-January 06

Posted 10 August 2012 - 09:24 PM

Howard Stern for new NHL commissioner.
  • 0

#146 TimberWolf

TimberWolf

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,375 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 04

Posted 10 August 2012 - 09:58 PM

Would've read that if it wasn't written by Spector.


Well at least he managed to write an article that didn't have some kind of snide unrelated comment about Vancouver.
  • 0

I was saying Lu-Urns...

star-wars-hockey-goal.gif?w=284

#147 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 70,000 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 10 August 2012 - 11:18 PM

NHL Lockout + 2012 = End of the World

Edited by -Vintage Canuck-, 10 August 2012 - 11:18 PM.

  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#148 canucksgirl1234

canucksgirl1234

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 894 posts
  • Joined: 29-April 07

Posted 11 August 2012 - 12:06 AM

How does the schedule work if the lockout happens but they reach a deal early (like in mid October - December)?
  • 0

#149 Tortorella's Rant

Tortorella's Rant

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,191 posts
  • Joined: 11-April 12

Posted 11 August 2012 - 12:08 AM

Whatever happened to playing for the love of the game? Almost everyone is a money hungry prick nowadays.

Edited by Tortorella's Rant, 11 August 2012 - 12:08 AM.

  • 0
Posted Image

#150 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,504 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 11 August 2012 - 06:16 AM

Please tell one important decision that Bettman can make completely independently that would significantly impact labor negotiations without going to the owners to get their majority approval first, then try to tell me he isn't a puppet figure.

He has the power to veto anything the players want or the majority of owners want if he has the backing of 8 owners, he also has the power to fine heavily anyone in the NHL (owner, player, coach) for saying anything detrimental to the league, and guess who singlehandedly decides if the comment made is detrimental?
  • 0
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.