LeanBeef Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Man... I'm starting to feel depressed... All this homework and no hockey afterwards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 The Idea that 8 team owners could dictate the fiscal reality that would be faced by 30 teams doesn't make sense. If you had $250 mil invested in a franchise would you go for such a situation? I suspect it is more the concept 8tem might be the negociation committee of ownership. Just as the NHLPA has a player's committee. Some fans might take some kind of solace in the idea that Bettman has hyjacked the NHL along with 8 owners but IMHO that is laughable. Apparently some NHLers feel the same if the Boyle quote is accurate. Of course if you can believe this then the assumption might be that the other 22 owners will reassert their ownership authority and remove Bettman and the Group of 8. Not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Here's what I don't get. People say that the players caved last time and were screwed over by the owners. Yet today the average player salary is through the roof, and players are getting ridiculous contracts. So were they really screwed that badly? They say they're doing it for future generations of players, but the reality is they're doing it for themselves. By the time the new CBA has expired, player salaries will be right back up to the ridiculous amounts they are right now. And players who are going to become UFA's in the next year or so, like a corey perry, will get what they're worth. You don't think teams will offer Perry 6-7 million no matter where the cap is at? And if he thinks he's worth more than that, then that's what's wrong with the NHL. They're really only sticking up for players who don't deserve big contracts, because if a player deserves a big contract, they'll get it. If a player doesn't, like a Leino or Ehrhoff, then they shouldn't be getting paid that much anyways. All that does is make the true elite players in the league want more, because they know they're way better. Bottom line is, salaries need to be corrected just like in 04/05. Sure revenue is up, but so are expenses. There's no way a league that is making 3+ billion dollars should have so many struggling teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Islandboss Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Yup pretty high salaries but no one forced any of the owners to the cap or contract lengths they offered players it's their own fault.Biggest fault in any agreement in the NHL is the one the owners have where it only takes 8 teams to veto a players offer.I would bet if it took over at least 50% of them we'd have a season already.Only the crappy teams in the south want the lockout.They'd save alot of money if they lowered Gary's salary, 8 million to be hated is way to much coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Yup pretty high salaries but no one forced any of the owners to the cap or contract lengths they offered players it's their own fault.Biggest fault in any agreement in the NHL is the one the owners have where it only takes 8 teams to veto a players offer.I would bet if it took over at least 50% of them we'd have a season already.Only the crappy teams in the south want the lockout.They'd save alot of money if they lowered Gary's salary, 8 million to be hated is way to much coin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 BS posturing by Bettman. It makes the owners seem more resolved if they come out and say that they are all together. I guarantee not every owner agreed to the lockout. In fact it has come out recently that quite a few owners were against it. Sure they may have wanted more cut of the revenue, but they were willing to negotiate while playing under the old CBA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pears Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Not sure how much longer I can go without NHL hockey :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckelhead70 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 The NHLPA does not want to give back 7% to bring revenue sharing to an equal 50/50 split with the owners. The NHLPA claims that revenues are going to grow 7% a year in each of the next 5 to 6 years, so basically according to the math of the NHLPA it would be a 1 year roll back then they would be back where they are today. Now 2 weeks have been cancelled and the NHLPA players have lost 7% of salaries this year. NHL players are going to play in a league (KHL) that has a salary cap of 36M and are allowed only some many imports. The only players that can make any kind of big money in the KHL are Russian born players. With players going to play overseas does that not seem to show that the players are not sticking together as a union but only thinking of themselves? How many third and fouth line players have been offered contracts to play overseas? I thought a union was all for one and one for all. 30 000 auto workers that are making a lot less then these hockey players are were able to take concessions from a company that was making billions, so I find it hard to see why players that are making millions won't........for now. I believe we will not see hockey until Dec 2013. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeanBeef Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Not sure how much longer I can go without NHL hockey :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 I agree it's the owners dumb fault for letting things get out of control, but at the same time someone needs to put a stop to it before things get really out of control. Basically you can either blame the rules that are in place, or you can blame the people taking advantage of them. Blaming the people taking advantage of them doesn't address the problem though. The owner's are always going to take advantage of the rules to put their teams in the best position, so the only way to fix things is by changing the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 I've been giving this some thought. Maybe it's more a case of the owners being trapped by their own constitution. My guess is that for big decisions like this, it takes 75% of the owners (23) to sign off on a new deal. When worded that way, it doesn't sound entirely unreasonable. It would make fairly good sense that it would take a significant majority in order to set the course for the balance of the teams. However, the unintended consequence of such a rule is just like you describe. It only takes 8 owners to prevent a potential deal from being accepted. So I don't think they can dictate any sort of direction or decision, but they certainly could block progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted October 8, 2012 Author Share Posted October 8, 2012 Looking like talks will resume on Wednesday or Thursday, but it’s not finalized yet. Looking like Wed/Thurs in NYC for NHL talks to resume but still not finalized. Both sides will finalize Monday ...— Pierre LeBrun (@Real_ESPNLeBrun) October 8, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted October 8, 2012 Author Share Posted October 8, 2012 Ilya Bryzgalov thinks that some Russian players will not return to the NHL: “(NHL) owners…they create this situation and they put themselves into this situation,” explained Bryzgalov. “Like I said before, they have to take responsibility for their own actions. “If you watch what they did consistently, like saying: ‘It’s going to be (a) lockout. We’re not happy with the system, we can’t operate with the system that we had’…and (yet) they continued to sign the players during the negotiation process, signing the players to long-term contracts for big amounts.” “I think some of the players may not return to the NHL because you have everything here and major companies are going to pay the top players here big money. And, especially for Russians players who can play at home in front of their own fans and families and [earn] even bigger money than they have in the National Hockey League,” said Bryzgalov. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=406898 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckelhead70 Posted October 8, 2012 Share Posted October 8, 2012 Ilya Bryzgalov thinks that some Russian players will not return to the NHL: “(NHL) owners…they create this situation and they put themselves into this situation,” explained Bryzgalov. “Like I said before, they have to take responsibility for their own actions. “If you watch what they did consistently, like saying: ‘It’s going to be (a) lockout. We’re not happy with the system, we can’t operate with the system that we had’…and (yet) they continued to sign the players during the negotiation process, signing the players to long-term contracts for big amounts.” “I think some of the players may not return to the NHL because you have everything here and major companies are going to pay the top players here big money. And, especially for Russians players who can play at home in front of their own fans and families and [earn] even bigger money than they have in the National Hockey League,” said Bryzgalov. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=406898 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Everybody Hates Raymond Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Remember what we're in this for, what we're trying to get back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Not sure how much longer I can go without NHL hockey :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owen Nolan Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Both sides are a joke.. Not even talking core economics this week, just the minor details. Something needs to be done! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheRocket18 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Wow... can't believe its taking this long... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elvis15 Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Good, maybe then we can get back to the 80's style of hockey when there were more North Americans in the league Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brambojoe Posted October 9, 2012 Share Posted October 9, 2012 Signing and breaking contracts (via clawback) without good reason is bad business - it smacks of being out of control and using the expiry of the CBA as a stopgap doesn't impress. I agree that the players should not agree unless something is proposed that doesn't inevitably lead to another lookout as soon as this CBA expires. That said they are taking a financial loss on principle here so I hope it works out for them. The owners I don't understand at all since as a league they are taking a financial loss on a bottom line issue. Locking out when the league is profitable is a bizarre move. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.