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

#2011 theminister

theminister

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,177 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 28 October 2012 - 12:02 PM

*
POPULAR

Lets face it. The NHL owns the league and the stanley cup. The players own nothing.


Face it. You have no idea what you are talking about.
  • 8

small.pngNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEsmall.png


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#2012 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,461 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 28 October 2012 - 12:15 PM

Why shouldnt the players pay the Bulk of it?
They are the ones employed by the weaker markets !
What do strong Teams like the Canucks have to gain, continually paying for those Owners and all the players on those Teams?
Also, why should the fans be subject to those Teams as well.
Let them fold then, The Union and the Players will be hurt from it,more than the Owners will be


The NHL choose where to put teams. The owners choose which franchise to buy. In some cases, the players didn't even have a choice to which team they were traded to or drafted by, and yet you think they should be on the hook for paying for the businesses under the control and suffering from the bad decisions of other people?

I'm not sure which opinion, that bad market teams should be propped up at the players' expense or that they should be folded, you ended up talking yourself into, but either way your logic is flawed. Teams like Phoenix and Florida do not exist in a vacuum. They play other teams, and all of those teams make money off tickets, concessions and merchandise every time they play these bad market franchises. And will continue to do so for years, long after individual players have retired. Fewer franchises may mean fewer jobs and that does hurt players, but it also means fewer games and less revenue for all other teams season in and season out. And that fact means losing franchises would hurt the owners more.

I am tired of the whining that Oh the League made money
Only certain teams brought that number up,Not the majority


True. Only 12 teams made profits. Equally true is the fact that many of the teams that reported a loss overspent willingly by more than they reported losing. Teams are only required to spend to the cap floor, not the cap ceiling. Teams like Pittsburgh could have easily chosen to pay $0.2 M less in salary and break even. They could have chosen to spend $1 M less and earned a profit. Making players pay for the bad business decisions of owners is shortsighted and frankly just bad business.

#1 if my Boss did come to me and say Times are tough we need to cut back your wages (Obviously a lot harder on the average Joe who lives pay cheque to pay cheque) I could either say see ya or realize I had nowhere else to go that came close to what I would still earn by staying !


As you said, not all players play for the top revenue teams, but some do. That means some of the players have owners who made tens of millions in profits last year saying they want them to roll back salaries the owner agreed to. So, stop trying to convince us that you'd be okay with your boss coming to you and say, "Hey, we made a huge profit last year thanks to you and we're expecting additional revenue growth next season. Thanks! Now, take this huge pay cut and new restrictions on your job freedoms because some other companies didn't do as well as we did."

The reality is, sports leagues are unlike other businesses because of how they are tied. Players do have to keep in mind the overall health of the league and not just individual teams. However, the point that you seem to miss that owners have to recognize that fact as well. Owners are even more responsible for giving to protect the health of the league than the players are as they have more to gain or lose and they will be owners far longer than the players will be players. Unfortunately, even according to Bettman's own statements, owners aren't currently willing to do that and instead they prefer to put the responsibility on the players to ensure the health of their businesses. And it is that shortsighted attitude that has resulted in more than half the teams in the league continuing to lose money despite record league wide profits and almost every team increasing in value since the last lockout. It's time for the league to finally do what they have always known they needed to do but simply resisted out greed and improve their revenue sharing.

Even with sharing only 6% of league revenue, which is barely above the NHL's projected 5% yearly growth rate and still would barely put the NHL team revenue sharing close to par with the MLB and NBA, almost all teams would be made profitable without any other cost saving methods. Add to that the gradual drop in share the players have already said they would agree to and some responsible business decisions (like spending within a realistic, responsible budget instead of to the max of what's allowed) and the majority of NHL franchises could be decently profitable this time next year. It's not complicated or even hard, just responsible. And that is the kind of forward, responsible thinking that will help ensure the the long term health of the league which is in the best interest of owners, players and fans alike.


Your post makes little sense. The players are continually replaced. The NHL can and will draft new players . If you think fans are going to POUT and go get a subscription to the KHL then you are mistaken.

They will watch with distain at first , but will get used to it and the players will be replaced by the draft . The NHLPA has no leverage here.

Lets face it. The NHL owns the league and the stanley cup. The players own nothing.


I answered your snarky post in response to my blog entry, but in case you don't bother to read it let me stay it again here, the NHL does NOT own the Stanley Cup. And yes, players are replaced OVER time. Simply replacing them all now would mean huge drops in revenue for years to come, the likes of which would make profitable teams unprofitable and force currently unprofitable teams to fold. You need to recognize the direct link between big name and big skill players and big revenue. If the minor league players could generate the revenue as NHL players, they already would.
  • 0
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2013 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,522 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 28 October 2012 - 12:22 PM

Actually no. The players have a contract only if there is a current CBA. So all the contracts are in limbo. And since they dont work for the NHL anymore, the owners can lock them out and refuse them on the property.

So. All the owners have to do is simply IGNORE the NHLPA , refuse to sign a new CBA .

Then sign new players , get them to form a new union, and sign a new deal with them.

Oh yes they can.

The current contracts may be in limbo, but they're still valid. If the NHL doesn't want to negotiate a new CBA, they're the ones defaulting on their end of those contracts so they can't just take their league and go home.

While the NHLPA is trying to get a new CBA to continue their contracts (again, they are still contracts, even in the absence of a current CBA) the CHL players are looking at forming a union. Why would the next generation of players want to move from protecting their rights in juniors straight into playing for a league that would ignore the previous players because the owners couldn't keep from signing ridiculous contracts? Who in their right mind would want to work for someone that has done the opposite of protecting the rights of its players?

The better players would go to other leagues, and that includes the best of the players as yet undrafted. What's the NHL going to do, pay them more money to play in the NHL instead of elsewhere? Are they going to entice Nathan MacKinnon or Seth Jones to come be the next superstars after they've just walked away from the current player base? The owners are already complaining the can't afford what they're doing right now, and replacing the 700+ players currently on rosters as well as all the prospects already signed to contracts in juniors and minor pro leagues won't be near the same quality or quantity of players for fans to want to come cheer them on for anywhere near what teams would want to charge for games to make it profitable and still attract talent.

This isn't a workforce of illegal immigrants that is paid next to nothing because they have no rights. This isn't a third world country where there are little to no labour laws to protect workers. This isn't a business that could produce the same product regardless of workforce.

The product is the players, and if you think the NHL owners can just drive down to the nearest Home Depot and wave some money at a few guys standing on the street to get them to come landscape their yards and play first line center, you're sadly mistaken.
  • 1

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2014 ajhockey

ajhockey

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,283 posts
  • Joined: 16-July 10

Posted 28 October 2012 - 12:28 PM

Lets face it. The NHL owns the league and the stanley cup. The players own nothing.


This is what unions are for. Because of the existence of the NHLPA, the players DO have power. The NHL may own the league and the Cup, but without the players, those are next to useless.
  • 0

14ndb35.jpg
Credit to -Vintage Canuck- for the awesome sig!

"Gino, Gino, Gino, Gino!"
Rest In Peace, Rypien, Demitra, and Bourdon


#2015 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,522 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 28 October 2012 - 12:33 PM

For those still not understanding, maybe I can try and put this in a different context.

In the event this could be decided by an independent labour mediator:
- Which of the most recent proposals would you think that mediator would think was more reasonable: the one that no longer exists from the NHL, or the 3 options the other side presented?
- Which side do you think the mediator would think was being more reasonable: the one who had a take it or leave it offer and wasn't willing to negotiate on anything else, or the side that made repeated attempts to negotiate with no conditions?
- What approach would the mediator take to resolve this: see that one side couldn't make any better offer and make minor tweaks to that alone, or find a middle ground between the two sides taking pieces from both offers and making adjustments as was fair?

This is what unions are for. Because of the existence of the NHLPA, the players DO have power. The NHL may own the league and the Cup, but without the players, those are next to useless.

Don't let him repeating the words make it true - the NHL does not own the Stanley Cup.

The NHL does have copyrights on the name and image but in the event the trustees of the Stanley Cup wanted to take away the NHL control and award it to another league, those copyrights have already been questioned and could easily be overturned on the basis the NHL would have no control over the very thing they want to copyright.

Edited by elvis15, 28 October 2012 - 12:36 PM.

  • 1

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2016 boxiebrown

boxiebrown

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 639 posts
  • Joined: 06-May 08

Posted 28 October 2012 - 01:03 PM

Actually no. The players have a contract only if there is a current CBA. So all the contracts are in limbo. And since they dont work for the NHL anymore, the owners can lock them out and refuse them on the property.

So. All the owners have to do is simply IGNORE the NHLPA , refuse to sign a new CBA .

Then sign new players , get them to form a new union, and sign a new deal with them.

Oh yes they can.


I don't know how labour law works in the states, but at least in Canada what you're describing is very much illegal. I would guess that it is in the US, as well.
  • 0

#2017 Wolfman Jack

Wolfman Jack

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,460 posts
  • Joined: 27-April 07

Posted 28 October 2012 - 01:19 PM

Welcome back. Where is Sharpshooter?

Your post makes little sense. The players are continually replaced. The NHL can and will draft new players . If you think fans are going to POUT and go get a subscription to the KHL then you are mistaken.

They will watch with distain at first , but will get used to it and the players will be replaced by the draft . The NHLPA has no leverage here.

Lets face it. The NHL owns the league and the stanley cup. The players own nothing.


No they do not own the Stanley Cup, in fact they don't even LEGALLY control it.
  • 1
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.
Blaise Pascal

#2018 Rivera

Rivera

    K-Wing Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 79 posts
  • Joined: 11-September 08

Posted 28 October 2012 - 02:14 PM

Lp
  • 0

#2019 canuckelhead70

canuckelhead70

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 609 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 12

Posted 28 October 2012 - 02:19 PM

For those still not understanding, maybe I can try and put this in a different context.

In the event this could be decided by an independent labour mediator:
- Which of the most recent proposals would you think that mediator would think was more reasonable: the one that no longer exists from the NHL, or the 3 options the other side presented?
- Which side do you think the mediator would think was being more reasonable: the one who had a take it or leave it offer and wasn't willing to negotiate on anything else, or the side that made repeated attempts to negotiate with no conditions?
- What approach would the mediator take to resolve this: see that one side couldn't make any better offer and make minor tweaks to that alone, or find a middle ground between the two sides taking pieces from both offers and making adjustments as was fair?




Just because someone has a different opinion then your does not mean they do not understand.

Maybe the meditor might look at things this way, 6 or 7 teams make a boat load of money, 18 teams lose money and 5 team sniff a small profit and on the other side 700 players all make money. 14% of these players make over 6M a year. The player has guarentee contracts so it doesn't matter if they score 70 goals or 1 goal, they will still get paid. They will not be fired if they do not produce. These top earning teams fork over money to teams that are not making a profit to help pay the salaries of the 23 players that are on losing revenue teams rosters. Every player is guarenteed to make a profit every year and the owner is not.
  • 0

#2020 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 28 October 2012 - 02:24 PM

I still really want to know where these replacement players are coming from. Is there a hidden untapped reservoir of world class talent that I'm not aware of? Is the plan just to do a wholesale trade with the KHL - we'll give you our players, you give us yours?

Another way to look at it - Drybone, are you a fan of the NHL because of the quality of product, or because it happens to be the hockey that is on TV when you turn it on? Would any group of players on ice suffice so long as there's an NHL logo in the corner of the screen. and the team names are familiar?

Personally I watch because of the excitement bred by the on-ice talent. The last thing I want to see is the NHL games turning into a worse debacle than we saw a couple months back in the NFL (and that was only the refs, not the players!).
  • 1

#2021 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,522 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 28 October 2012 - 03:30 PM

Just because someone has a different opinion then your does not mean they do not understand.

Maybe the meditor might look at things this way, 6 or 7 teams make a boat load of money, 18 teams lose money and 5 team sniff a small profit and on the other side 700 players all make money. 14% of these players make over 6M a year. The player has guarentee contracts so it doesn't matter if they score 70 goals or 1 goal, they will still get paid. They will not be fired if they do not produce. These top earning teams fork over money to teams that are not making a profit to help pay the salaries of the 23 players that are on losing revenue teams rosters. Every player is guarenteed to make a profit every year and the owner is not.

Although I didn't quote him again, it was more of a reply to Drybone and his premise that the NHL could just walk away from the current players and go get new ones. The scenario was a different look at how the NHL could even get to that point of being able to legally negate the contracts of the players who are still asking to negotiate when the NHL is refusing to meet except under very specific criteria. The NHL would have to be able to say they'd done all they could to reach a new CBA, which would likely involve a mediator before they could just fire the players in the NHLPA.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2022 Mauii

Mauii

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Joined: 28-January 06

Posted 28 October 2012 - 03:34 PM

The appeal of the NHL is that they have the best of the best...the best hockey players in the world and this is known internationally. With high/elite quality product you get high/elite dollars. You get what you pay for and then some. It would be naive of the NHL to think they can just ice anyone and still make 3.3 billion without skipping a beat. Nor does it make good business sense to dismantle a business that just raked in 3.3 billion in revenue. If they were losing 3.3 billion then yes drastic changes should be made. Not quite sure the intent of the NHL doing what they're doing or the principles their functioning on...are they willing to destroy a business just to show who's boss or do they truly believe dishonoring players, taking away their rights, not willing to negotiate with the union and replacing players is a good business move and is for the betterment of the league and business.

As it stands the NHL's methods of conducting their business in the course of this CBA negotiation is coming across very poorly. Continue down this path and they would be hard pressed to retain talent. I dont believe player's talks of jumping ship to be a negotiating tactic, it just makes good sense to not want to work for a company/business that does not respect your rights and contribution to the businesses and expect you to pay for their shortcomings. Money doesn't always cut it, there's also a thing called principles and choosing to work for a company you are proud of, have trust in and want to represent that provides mutual respect.

Edited by Mauii, 28 October 2012 - 08:17 PM.

  • 1
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil."

#2023 poetica

poetica

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,461 posts
  • Joined: 09-June 11

Posted 28 October 2012 - 03:42 PM

Just because someone has a different opinion then your does not mean they do not understand.

Maybe the meditor might look at things this way, 6 or 7 teams make a boat load of money, 18 teams lose money and 5 team sniff a small profit and on the other side 700 players all make money. 14% of these players make over 6M a year. The player has guarentee contracts so it doesn't matter if they score 70 goals or 1 goal, they will still get paid. They will not be fired if they do not produce. These top earning teams fork over money to teams that are not making a profit to help pay the salaries of the 23 players that are on losing revenue teams rosters. Every player is guarenteed to make a profit every year and the owner is not.


First, it's not a "profit" to get paid for doing your job. It's called called a salary. Every employee of every company gets one. That's business. Second, if the company is overpaying or signing unreasonable contracts that fail to protect their own best interest, that's on them. That too is business. Why would you assume a mediator would hold NHL owners to a lesser standard in business than a freelance writer?

Furthermore, I would think that any mediator worth their weight in dirt would weigh many facts during their deliberation, such as the fact that players are already offering to give up some of their share in the interest of making the league more profitable AND the players are asking for a minor increase in team revenue sharing (which, if I'm not mistaken 25% of comes from players' escrows) to help the poorer teams, whereas owners are offering to give nothing while making even more demands without any proof that their new demands will in any way positively effect the bottom line of the very teams they're using as examples of their collective need. After all, the owners swore in 2005 that a cap would ensure franchises were profitable, but then they found a way around the cap and suddenly it wasn't enough despite record league profits and a rise in overall revenue for almost all teams. Now they are saying contract lengths and inclusion of NHL contracts in the minors will make teams profitable, but how long will it be before some owners find ways around those rules and in turn negate all positive effects those rules may have had on the bottom line of other teams?

What you and others seem to not see is that players are paid to compete with one another, but they aren't really in direct competition with one another. Teams look for players to fill certain positions on and off the ice based on any number of factors, meaning there's actually very little direct competition between players for individual jobs. Owners, on the other hand, are in constant and never-ending competition with one another. They have a very real reason to find ways around the rules they put in place to control other owners. The problem is that owners with the most influence over bargaining may not always bargaining for the health of the league as a whole as much as for the health of their individual team, even at the cost of others teams and the league as a whole. There is always a conflict of interest. We've already seen that play out during the last CBA where some teams skirted the rules because they could and in turn made things worse for teams that couldn't afford to. The only way to address that very real ongoing problem for the long term health of the league is to require owners to take personal responsibility for their teams, their financial decisions, and their league.
  • 1
Go, Canucks, Go!
Every single one of them.

Thanks for the memories, Luo! :'(

#2024 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 28 October 2012 - 04:43 PM

The appeal of the NHL is that they have the best of the best...the best hockey players in the world and this is known internationally. With high/elite quality product you get high/elite dollars. You get what you pay for and then some. It would be naive of the NHL to think they can just ice anyone and still make 3.3 billion without skipping a beat.


Absolutely. This is what confounds me whenever the replacement player idea comes up. We already have the AHL, BCHL, WHL, OHL, etc. etc. etc. They're playing right now. It's like people are asking for ways to see lesser players compete while still paying NHL prices.
  • 0

#2025 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 69,143 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 28 October 2012 - 04:48 PM

Jon Rosen of Fox Sports West talked with Jaromir Jagr:

“Hopefully the season’s going to start. It would be very sad for everybody for us me and Teemu especially,” Jagr said. “We don’t have many games left. The separation, the goal separation is only two goals. It’s the final countdown. It would be kind of special, but you never know what’s going to happen.”


http://prohockeytalk..._medium=twitter

Edited by -Vintage Canuck-, 28 October 2012 - 04:48 PM.

  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#2026 -Vintage Canuck-

-Vintage Canuck-

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 69,143 posts
  • Joined: 24-May 10

Posted 28 October 2012 - 06:40 PM

Bruins’ Claude Julien coaches youth team while waiting for end to NHL lockout:

Boston Bruins coach Claude Julien is looking forward to the end of the NHL lockout.


He managed to have a little fun Sunday when he served as a guest coach for a youth team that won a charity raffle for his services. He was on the bench for Winthrop’s 3-2 victory over Watertown.


Julien addressed the team made up of 8- and 9-year-olds before and after the game. He also met with the other team and signed autographs for as long as it took for everyone to get items signed.


Julien is anxious to return to his job and says “the people that are involved in those negotiations want the same thing as well.”


http://www.theglobea..._medium=twitter
  • 0

307mg00.jpg


#2027 StanleyCup=HolyGrail

StanleyCup=HolyGrail

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 509 posts
  • Joined: 14-April 03

Posted 28 October 2012 - 08:51 PM

Is it time for a new league? I think this is the relevant question we the fans should really be asking. The NHL as we know is heading for oblivion. Determination to stay in markets that don't care about the game and therefore create a poorer on ice product as a result. Determination to try to force the players to pay for this financial screw up made by Mr Bettman and endorsed by the owners who are investors and the investment has most certainly gone bad. The result will be a league where former beer leaguers might be good enough to play in it. The better players will follow the money and go someplace else and I on their side. Any employer tries this crap on any of us and it is "F...you !!!, I am out of here." So Mr Bettman's NHL will be a feeder league for other leagues. The second rate and over the hill players that are not good enough to play elsewhere will be the ones playing in the NHL. And the owners are quite content to sell us this crap and probably will raise ticket prices for it so that they can expand into more markets that are guaranteed to lose tons of money. But they will be safe from loss because Joe Schmoe the fan gets the bill for it in the end. Bite me !!! Mr Bettman. It is time to kiss Bettman's NHL: good bye.
So, what should a proper league that gurantees continued excellance on the ice look like? Well, start by turning the owners into what they are. Nothing but investors. They have a vote and a say in what goes on sure. But in the end, people who actually run the business make the call. Given that the players are the business and without the best in the game playing in this league then this league sucks. The players are the ones that should be making that call. Perhaps with some quality advice from well educated professionals. In the business of entertainment and that is what this is, the entertainers get the lion's share of the pie and so they should. That is fair. I think the players have been excessively generous in their 50-50 split offer. It actually should be at least 60-40 in their favour. By the way people. When the players cut of the pie goes down. The revenue sharing that they are arguing over. We still have a cap and teams must get within it. So, everytime the players take a cut in that, guess who pays for it? We do. The dollars have to add up to stay under the cap. The revenues have to be there for that to happen and so everything goes up in cost. We, the fan will get the bill. So, the players are fighting for our dollar more then they are theirs. Think about that next time you get jealous that a hockey player earns millions to play a game that they love. Remember that an owner offered them that money in the form of a contract and now that same owner is trying to get out of paying some of it.
What i want to see is a deal where there are no disputes like this. This is the split, that is the way it will always be. We are going to negotiate over what to do to make the game better. More entertaining, safer for the players, etc. The split, players share and investors share is set in stone. NO MORE lockouts, strikes or other bull that only pisses your customers off. To the point where if I found out that hockey clubs in a new league were offering up public shares. You bet i am buying some.
  • 0
Shootouts are entertaining but they are not worth points!!!




Posted Image

#2028 Drybone

Drybone

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,403 posts
  • Joined: 01-July 12

Posted 28 October 2012 - 09:05 PM

The NHL owns the rights to the stanley cup.

The players do not have a CBA and thus they dont work for the NHL. If it was illegal to lock them out, the NHLPA would have sued by now. They tried in two provinces and were shot down.

There is no 'time limit' the owners can lock the players out .........then it becomes ILLEGAL. Its legal and stays legal. The contracts all say there has to be a CBA to enforce the contracts.

There is no 'time limit' to how long they can lock these players out. They own the NHL and can hire whomever they want. The NHLPA .........get ready........are you sitting down..................

The NHLPA has no contract with the league. Its called a Collective Bargaining Agreement.

The NHLPA has no authority to FORCE the owners to sign a new one. They can tell the NHLPA to get lost and no, they dont have to honor contracts without a CBA.

Thats dead wrong.

The NHLPA players are locked out. There is nothing they can do about or they would have done so by now. What part of this dont you get?

I know its not what you kids want to read because ;you worship the players . I know , I used to be one of them. I still mancrush Ryan Kesler but I would tell him to go play in the KHL if push came to shove.

As for replacement players, there are THOUSANDS of players in various leagues including the AHL that would be more than glad to have NHL pay and NHL careers.
  • 0
Posted Image

#2029 theminister

theminister

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,177 posts
  • Joined: 07-July 03

Posted 28 October 2012 - 09:10 PM

Drybone, you have no concept that labour laws exist in both countries that cover this type of situation.

You're just butthurt that people are pointing out your statements which are factually incorrect.

The NHL owns the Stanley Cup? Please.

Edited by theminister, 28 October 2012 - 09:11 PM.

  • 0

small.pngNEW YORK ISLANDERS ROSTER - CDC GM LEAGUEsmall.png


2013 CDCGML CUP CHAMPIONS


#2030 EmployeeoftheMonth

EmployeeoftheMonth

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 18,401 posts
  • Joined: 04-September 06

Posted 28 October 2012 - 09:42 PM

The NHL owns the rights to the stanley cup.

The players do not have a CBA and thus they dont work for the NHL. If it was illegal to lock them out, the NHLPA would have sued by now. They tried in two provinces and were shot down.

There is no 'time limit' the owners can lock the players out .........then it becomes ILLEGAL. Its legal and stays legal. The contracts all say there has to be a CBA to enforce the contracts.

There is no 'time limit' to how long they can lock these players out. They own the NHL and can hire whomever they want. The NHLPA .........get ready........are you sitting down..................

The NHLPA has no contract with the league. Its called a Collective Bargaining Agreement.

The NHLPA has no authority to FORCE the owners to sign a new one. They can tell the NHLPA to get lost and no, they dont have to honor contracts without a CBA.

Thats dead wrong.

The NHLPA players are locked out. There is nothing they can do about or they would have done so by now. What part of this dont you get?

I know its not what you kids want to read because ;you worship the players . I know , I used to be one of them. I still mancrush Ryan Kesler but I would tell him to go play in the KHL if push came to shove.

As for replacement players, there are THOUSANDS of players in various leagues including the AHL that would be more than glad to have NHL pay and NHL careers.


Not much of what you've said here is correct. At most some of the things are partially correct.


THE STANLEY CUP
The NHL has registered trademarks associated with the name and likeness of the Stanley Cup, although the league's right to outright own trademarks associated with a trophy it does not own has been disputed by some legal experts
The regulations set down by Lord Stanley call for two Trustees, who had the sole, joint right to govern the Cup and the conditions of its awarding until 1947, when they ceded control to the NHL. While the original regulations allow for a Trustee to resign, to date, all Cup Trustees have served until their deaths; a deceased Trustee is replaced by the surviving Trustee.
http://en.wikipedia....iki/Stanley_Cup

Can we stop the misinformation about the cup now?

Most everything else is just skewed from what the actual truth is but you are flat out wrong about the cup; even with your recent change of tune by adding the word "rights" instead of saying they outright own the cup.

Edited by EmployeeoftheMonth, 28 October 2012 - 09:50 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#2031 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,522 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 28 October 2012 - 09:46 PM

Drybone, you have no concept that labour laws exist in both countries that cover this type of situation.

You're just butthurt that people are pointing out your statements which are factually incorrect.

The NHL owns the Stanley Cup? Please.

Exactly. If Drybone can't start with a fact but instead starts with a lie, then why would anyone believe anything else he posts?
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2032 Tangerines

Tangerines

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,313 posts
  • Joined: 18-January 12

Posted 28 October 2012 - 10:05 PM

So what happens next? Which one of these sides is going to commit to some kind of compromise first? This whole ordeal is driving me bonkers! What the heck will motivate these guys to make some progress let alone get them in the same room together agian?
  • 0

#2033 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,522 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 28 October 2012 - 10:22 PM

Hard to say, most likely one side will feel pressure to get an agreement done - pressure they hadn't felt to this point. For the league, it could be the cancellation of money making events like the Winter Classic and All Star games. For the players, it could be a tipping point in how much salary they lose, or the prospect of a full season being wasted.

First things first though, the NHL will have to agree to even talk about it.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2034 Mauii

Mauii

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,156 posts
  • Joined: 28-January 06

Posted 28 October 2012 - 11:34 PM

Drybone the CBA is between the NHL and NHLPA so the NHL does have to negotiate with the NHLPA. The NHL cannot negotiate a CBA with themselves, although they seem to be acting like it because they wont consider the NHLPA's counterproposals nor can the NHL hire new people to replace the players while negotiating a CBA with the NHLPA. How long can they continue with a lockout...who knows. When franchises start folding maybe. Kind of hard to sustain a business without any revenue coming in.

Edited by Mauii, 29 October 2012 - 12:14 AM.

  • 0
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil."

#2035 DeNiro

DeNiro

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 21,752 posts
  • Joined: 22-April 08

Posted 28 October 2012 - 11:35 PM

They better start negotiating it now, instead of waiting right up until the deadline like before.

Something tells me that the NHL doesn't know how to negotiate without using a pressure tactic like that though.

Edited by DeNiro, 28 October 2012 - 11:36 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image


"Dream until the dream come true"


#2036 Scoobydooby

Scoobydooby

    Canucks Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,388 posts
  • Joined: 17-January 08

Posted 29 October 2012 - 12:54 AM

the longer this goea the less I feel like there will be a season at all.

once all is said and done I hopethe fans will t least try to teach the nhl as a whole a lesson and stop opening up their wallets for all things nhl related.. the fans should not have to put up with this bs and I really hope that when the lockout does end that fans will keep their money to themselves or support other leagues more willingly..
  • 1

Posted Image


#2037 The Bookie

The Bookie

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,752 posts
  • Joined: 10-May 10

Posted 29 October 2012 - 01:57 AM

Has anyone else had the chance to read The Instigator, the book that was published in September chronicling Bettman's time as Commissioner of the league? I figured with all my spare time freed up from watching hockey, I should devote some time to learning a bit more so I picked it up yesterday and am already halfway through. Absolutely fascinating stuff, really helpful in understanding how they got to where they are today.

In the chapter I'm currently reading, the author details the significant inroads the NHL has made in the States since the 2004 lockout, particularly the Winter Classic and the new NBC national broadcast deal. It's really reinforced what I've said all along, that this time around the owners will not be willing to sacrifice an entire season, and all the momentum they've picked up down South. (in 2004, they basically had nothing to lose). I almost wonder if their back up plan all along has been to reach an agreement in December and have the WC as the first game of the season. It would certainly be huge publicity.

I guess we'll have a better idea by the end of the week.

Also, an interesting quote at the end of this National Post article from three days ago:

George Smith, a Queen’s University professor and former labour negotiator, suggested the NHL leaked word of a potential cancellation for a reason. Smith said the move to release the proposal to the public was an unusual step and that he believes “some of this tactic is actually to distract from that and get back to their agenda and get the owners all on board.”


  • 0

#2038 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,522 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 29 October 2012 - 10:18 AM

That's pretty accurate to what I think of the lockout this year as well. The last lockout was over major fundamental differences in what both sides wanted - namely the salary cap. This time around it's more about getting the numbers right, so I think there is less pressure on the players and more on the league considering all the momentum they had started to gain in the US and the major money events (WC, All Star) they would lose if they did cancel the season.

To DeNiro's point earlier, I think they know there is another option on how to negotiate, but either lack the skillset to do so where they think they can get a fair deal, or they have grossly underestimated the players and think they'll cave to heavy-handed tactics like false deadlines and take it or leave it deals.

While both sides will have to end up settling for less than they want, the first step is to have the NHL willing to even talk about something other than a minimal offer. Considering the power a small number of the owners have, there might even be an internal conflict that's really keeping things from moving forward. The profitable owners might be struggling against an increasing number of less powerful owners wanting to make a deal, and there could be a definite play going on behind the scenes that could result in a very quick resolution to this in order to avoid losing more of the season.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 


#2039 fwybwed

fwybwed

    Canucks Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,945 posts
  • Joined: 13-January 03

Posted 29 October 2012 - 10:45 AM

I have decided to take the name patch of Luongo off the jersey and put.........Wait for it......WAAAIIIIT~! "Aquilini" and then put the letter "O" where the C should be hahaaa GO OWNERS~!
  • 0

#2040 elvis15

elvis15

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 20,522 posts
  • Joined: 27-February 07

Posted 29 October 2012 - 11:53 AM

A couple of articles that put an interesting perspective on the financial strain the owners may or may not be under considering the overall health of the league and the lockout's impact:

NBA licensing revenue climbing

Staring into the teeth of a lockout a year ago, NBA licensing executives were anticipating that their business would drop by more than 25 percent.

Fast forward to today. In the NBA fiscal year that ended in September, licensing revenue was up in a season that was contracted by 16 games.

Even the bellwether apparel category was up, said Sal LaRocca, the NBA’s executive vice president of global merchandising, who had earlier predicted a double-digit drop in sales. “We were using 1999 [the date of the prior NBA lockout] as a benchmark for re-entry,” LaRocca said, “but I’m happy to say it was not an accurate benchmark.”

LaRocca offered a number of reasons for the unexpectedly positive results, including:

A condensed schedule of games that produced a seemingly continuous run of compelling NBA matchups;

Continued demand across the basketball category (Spalding had its best year in 29 years as an NBA licensee);

The seven-week Jeremy Lin phenomenon; and

Improvement by big-market teams such as Chicago and New York, the emergence of Oklahoma City, and the championship run of the Miami Heat and LeBron James, who normally is at or near the top in player-specific jersey sales.

...

Clearly the NHL wouldn't have the same factors, but it's just to show there is the possibility the NHL recovers revenue in a number of areas. Will there still be a number of people wanting to buy Quick jerseys if LA's casual fans drop off, and how many people in Washington or New Jersey will be willing to rush out and get an Ovi/Kovi jersey after their comments about staying in Russia in light of how the owners are acting?

This could still suggest the NHL can expect closer to the 5-7% revenue growth the players are predicting rather than the 3+% the owners are trying to counter with. That would impact how quickly a slide to 50/50 of HRR would occur rather than an immediate drop.

Senators announce sponsorship of PGA Tour member Brad Fritsch

The Ottawa Senators announced today a partnership with local golfer Brad Fritsch, who qualified for the 2013 PGA tour this past weekend. The Senators entered into this promotional partnership with Fritsch this past summer, with the aim of assisting him to reach his goal of earning a PGA tour card.

Fritsch accomplished his goal and earned his PGA tour card this weekend by finishing tied for ninth place in the year’s final tournament, the Web.com Tour Championship at TPC Craig Ranch in Texas, which left him in 18th place on the Web.com Tour money list.The top 25 in earnings on the money list of the Web.com tour automatically earned PGA tour cards for the 2013 golf season, which begins in January.

“We want to congratulate Brad on achieving his goal and earning his PGA tour card,” said Jeff Kyle, Senators vice-president of marketing. “We entered into this partnership with Brad because we believe that many of his best qualities, including his dedication and perseverance, reflect much of what the Ottawa Senators organization is all about. In sports, one of the most important ingredients to success is belief in achieving the ultimate goal and we were glad to be able to demonstrate to Brad that we are here to support him during the most important time of his career.”

Fritsch’s partnership with the Senators provides him with financial support and will see him sporting the Senators logo on both his shirt and his golf bag on the 2013 PGA Tour. Fritsch will also be participating in a number of community events with the Senators.
...

This basically falls under the advertising budget for the Sens, but it goes to show some teams have some innovative ways to spend money. At a time when the owners are pointing to rising expenses as a significant reason to take a larger HRR share and reduce player salaries, it looks a little strange to be spending money in non-traditional ways.
  • 0

c3c9e9.pnganimalhousesig.jpg

Tanev is going to EDM. I can put my life savings down on it

 





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.