Archived

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

TOMapleLaughs

Henrik Sedin and Kevin Bieksa Speak Out Against Owners: "Mind-Boggling."

58 posts in this topic

it's mainly the hard line owners that want lockout.... like boston and philly..

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it speaks very poorly of your character if you can see yourself acting as many owners have during this lockout. The fact that your opinion seems oblivious to any personal or empathetic issues and is solely focused on maximizing financial return paints an eerie picture of distorted priorities.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, O'leary on dragons den/shark tank would tear a strip out of you...

Thats business, its harsh. The players need to just agree on whats put forth, they play hockey for a living.. The owners likely went through years of university and started off as young entrepreneurs working their butts off to be where they are.

Logging industries, teachers, fisheries, etc etc all take paycuts during recessions/tough times, thats the nature of the beast, highs and lows. Just like the opposite how gas and oil sands are booming!

Hockey isnt soccer in europe or football in the states. And unless canada becomes a world power with hundreds of millions of people any time soon, hockey will never become that.

The players gotta realize that the last few years theyve been fortunate, and now the axe is coming down! They are the ones who need to get a reality check!

You should too...

My hands are sore im texting all this on my phone damn u!!

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally... Been waiting for some of the Canucks to say something. lol Would be very interested to hear what Kes has to say on the subject.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another whiney player refusing to accept the players role in this stoppage. Both sides are culpable here but the players keep spouting off on how it's all ownerships fault.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what kind of a job you have. If your employer one day says, well times are slow and you're lucky I employ you, so I'll cut your salary to keep my profit high(er), then I would be pretty pissed. Especially if I'm the best in the world at something i.e. hockey.

Canada's relative world power? Newsflash - more than half of NHL teams are in the states. Even if it was just about Canada, that has nothing to do with evaluating the financials of a league. And if you really believe that the billionaire owners all started out with nothing, that's also not correct. But again, that has nothing to do with evaluating the financials of the league to justify these demands.

You're right. It's business. And business requires unbiased evaluation of what's wrong with the league to justify taking it from the players for the benefit of the owners. If the job of the players is to play hockey and most agree that we are seeing one of the most exciting hockey being played nowadays, you gotta ask if the owners/nhl is doing its job in running the business of hockey.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what kind of a job you have. If your employer one day says, well times are slow and you're lucky I employ you, so I'll cut your salary to keep my profit high(er), then I would be pretty pissed. Especially if I'm the best in the world at something i.e. hockey.

Canada's relative world power? Newsflash - more than half of NHL teams are in the states. Even if it was just about Canada, that has nothing to do with evaluating the financials of a league. And if you really believe that the billionaire owners all started out with nothing, that's also not correct. But again, that has nothing to do with evaluating the financials of the league to justify these demands.

You're right. It's business. And business requires unbiased evaluation of what's wrong with the league to justify taking it from the players for the benefit of the owners. If the job of the players is to play hockey and most agree that we are seeing one of the most exciting hockey being played nowadays, you gotta ask if the owners/nhl is doing its job in running the business of hockey.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tired of whiny players pretending they know how to run a business. The longer this goes on the more it hurts them, the owners can weather this, the players can't.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henrik and Kevin are stupid they have no idea what they are talking about just like people who have had jobs all life long. The playerd are getting 50 % of the revenue, which means 100% of that 50% revenue and they have no risk( and if you tell me what about their health...well then dont play hockey...their is risk involved in every job for ex. truck drivers, cab drivers, construction workers). At the ame time owners get 50% of the revenue, out of that they have to pay every expense including player salaries.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henrik and Kevin are stupid they have no idea what they are talking about just like people who have had jobs all life long. The playerd are getting 50 % of the revenue, which means 100% of that 50% revenue and they have no risk( and if you tell me what about their health...well then dont play hockey...their is risk involved in every job for ex. truck drivers, cab drivers, construction workers). At the ame time owners get 50% of the revenue, out of that they have to pay every expense including player salaries.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter what you want to say the simple fact is that this is a lock out and not a strike.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm, more than half of those 13 losing teams were either part of expansion or relocation under Bettman's watch. Yet, he has the nerve to try and say that the players should take a big cut in the amount of money they make? BS.

Imagine how well they would be doing right now if they took out those 7 losing expansion teams. Bottom line is, this league expanded faster than it should have expecting that times would be great forever. And now the owners and the NHL are trying to blame anyone but themselves for their poor business decisions.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No matter what you want to say the simple fact is that this is a lock out and not a strike.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The major part of any unions power is its ability to stop production and hold the labor workforce hostage. Its called a 'strike' .

When the owners come along and PUT the players on 'strike' ........as in lock them out..........then the union has very llttle power .

The owners have locked the players out because they had no CBA.

This is no new surprise. They have been told for YEARS that they need to hammer out a new CBA . They had a full year and a half to negotiate a new CBA when they were still playing.

The owners were only doing what they told the union they were going to do if they couldnt reach a deal on the CBA. There is no point to ..........playing under the old CBA ...............when you have just been doing this for a year and a half with no progress.

There had to be consequences sooner or later. Obviously we know which side was getting the better deal. The players werent complaining in the slightest. They werent complaining back in 2004 either when there was no salary cap and the league was bleeding to death.

The owners want a 50/50 split and to get rid of ridiculous contracts. It is not unreasonable. The players do NOT deserve 57% . They do NOT deserve 13 year contracts , or 10 year contracts. Or even 8 year contracts. Not guaranteed contracts anyway.

At this point, if you took the owners offer of the 50/50 , 300mil make whole, 5/7 year contract and 10 year CBA to the union there is no doubt in my mind 75% of them approve it.

If I was the owners, I call Fehr out on this and demand they let their union membership vote on the latest owner offer.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hard to argue that decisions like staying in Phoenix or NYI signing Dipietro and Yashin are not the real root of many owners problems. Viable markets are one key.

But the players share these risks. There are card carrying NHLPA members who are not going to vote themselves out of a job by supporting retraction (as much as Ovetchkin would grin like a mad pig). Nashville will never generate the revenue of Toronto, and still needs a viable way of attracting a competitive team.

I don't even see the 50% being so much the issue. I do believe, however, that revenue splits should include all revenues. Why should corporate sponsorships (or govt. subsidies :blink: ) not be discussed when they also tilt the competitive balance. A corporate sponsorship not only brings in dollars, it helps sell and promote the team brand in its community. Teams need to sell themselves better, of which a winning team helps. And the league should not be able to hide those dollars, as it is a ticket to free profits for the big markets without generating salaries in small markets.

The key is going to end up being in reduced contracting rights. It is the only way Nashville can compete with Toronto.

St Louis's problems simply mystify me?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Henrik and Kevin are stupid they have no idea what they are talking about just like people who have had jobs all life long. The playerd are getting 50 % of the revenue, which means 100% of that 50% revenue and they have no risk( and if you tell me what about their health...well then dont play hockey...their is risk involved in every job for ex. truck drivers, cab drivers, construction workers). At the ame time owners get 50% of the revenue, out of that they have to pay every expense including player salaries.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.