NHLOL Offseason

Discussion in 'Sports and Fitness' started by the 4th hanson bro, Jun 21, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Timby

    Timby LIKE LIGHTNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Re: NHL Offseason

    Yeah, we'll wait and see on this. Guys like Jacobs and Leonsis are firmly entrenched in the "fuck the players" camp.

    Remember, Don Fehr went to Bettman and said, "Okay, look, what if we caved and gave you everything you want on hockey-related revenue. Would we then have room to negotiate on contractual pushbacks?" And Sir Douchenozzle said, "Nope, those have to happen, too."

    Edit: This report appears to have some traction. After initially planning to take two weeks off, CBA discussions in New York will resume on Monday. Snider may be marshaling the troops.

    Edit 2: Unconfirmed report that employees within the Bruins organization have been told to have the ice ready for Black Friday, but I'm taking that with a truck of salt.

    The 2004 - 05 season wasn't canceled in full until February 16, 2005, for what it's worth.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2012
  2. Timby

    Timby LIKE LIGHTNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Re: NHL Offseason

    Games canceled through December 14 and the All-Star weekend has been scrapped. Talk of the NHLPA de-certifying and going after the NHL's antitrust exemption in the courts is starting to heat up.
     
  3. gblews

    gblews Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2004
    Location:
    So. Cal.
    Re: NHL Offseason

    From what I have been reading here with the way these "negotiations" have been going and in light of the history here, I find it really hard to believe the NHLPA is just now "floating rumors" about doing this. The NFL players wasted no time getting to this action because they knew what a--holes they were dealing with. The NBA players, who have probably the most leverage of any of the professional team sports, even decided on this action in less time.

    Unless I'm missing something, the NHL players union, who have never appeared to have much bargaining power, should have de-certified and begun anti-trust lawsuits weeks ago. At this point, the union may have waited so long that player support of the union may be in jeapardy. What is with their leadership?
     
  4. Timby

    Timby LIKE LIGHTNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Re: NHL Offseason

    De-certification and antitrust lawsuits are very, very expensive propositions, and the NHLPA isn't on the same firm financial footing that the NFLPA and NBPA were when they initiated those actions. The NFLPA, for example, had a secret insurance fund that would have paid every player $200,000 in the event that the 2011 season were canceled; it was able to afford that because it had more than $200 million in the bank during the spring of 2011. De-certification is the nuclear option and commits the NHLPA to a lot of very expensive maneuvering. I don't think it'll happen until the NHL cancels the entire season.

    Fehr is a master negotiator, and it's important to keep in mind that Bettman and the owners have never faced a strong union before, which is why they keep pushing buttons -- this is uncharted territory for them. Fehr spent 32 years fucking Major League Baseball up the ass and got the sport to a point where they've had 17 years of uninterrupted labor peace.

    Remember, the league opened up this labor war by demanding that the players give up everything, and the only movement from them is now they're demanding the players give up almost everything. Fehr knows what he's doing, and believe me, he's got the support of the players. Fehr doesn't set policy: He'll guide and he'll advise and he'll suggest, but at the end of the day he doesn't make decisions, he lets the players make decisions. He dominated baseball by knowing to reduce demands rather than negotiating without the full support of his union.
     
  5. the 4th hanson bro

    the 4th hanson bro No one can resist my Schweddy balls! Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2001
    Location:
    the 4th hanson bro
    Re: NHL Offseason

    Just go ahead and cancel the season already. The meetings with the federal mediators have ended in failure.
     
  6. Timby

    Timby LIKE LIGHTNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Re: NHL Offseason

    Apparently Bettman proposed that ownership and the players meet face-to-face, without the commissioner's office / union representation.

    What a bald-faced "fuck you." That's such a fucking shrewd and shitty move by the owners.

    What are the players supposed to do? Get thrashed in a negotiation by a bunch of billionaires that clearly have the business advantage over a bunch of guy who probably don't have anything higher than a high school education? Or say no, and then the media goes "LOOK THE PLAYERS AREN'T EVEN TRYING GREEDY FUCKS."
     
  7. Gil T.Azell

    Gil T.Azell Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2005
    Location:
    Gil T.Azell
    Re: NHL Offseason

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Josan

    Josan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Location:
    London, Canada
    Re: NHL Offseason

    Donald Fehr is the real problem. I'm not a fan of Bettman but a deal could be made and the season saved if the PA didn't have Fehr running things.
     
  9. Timby

    Timby LIKE LIGHTNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Re: NHL Offseason

    This ... this is a fake post, right? You're joking, right? Because the NHLPA has made all the concessions thus far and the league is still firmly dug in. Without Fehr, the players would have gotten steamrolled even worse than they did eight years ago.
     
  10. BigFoot

    BigFoot Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2001
    Location:
    Slovenia (EU)
    Re: NHL Offseason

    ^ Exactly.
     
  11. Josan

    Josan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Location:
    London, Canada
    Re: NHL Offseason

    Nope. It's 100% sincere and the prevailing view in Canada held by the majority of fans and the media.

    The NHL moved on the "make whole" request, meeting them half way and the league's insistence on contract term limits and a long term CBA is entirely reasonable. For example, the league wants a 10 year CBA. The PA wanted 5. Then the PA said they'd go with 8 and an offer to opt out after 6. The NHL wants certainty. The PA doesn't.

    And when whiners like Sedin recently say to the media that they are giving, giving, giving and the league isn't he's clearing ignoring that the league gives him full benefits, all expenses covered, a multi-million dollar annual salary and a pension. The only players I have any sympathy for are the third and fourth line guys that make barely more than league minimum.

    And the players didn't get steam-rolled 8 years ago. The average player salary has increased 70% and they have all those lovely 10-12 year front loaded contracts.
     
  12. Rob Hal

    Rob Hal Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 1999
    Location:
    London, ON
    Re: NHL Offseason

    There are some rumblings that some players would have liked to seen a vote on the NHL's last proposal. Fehr made the PA counter with a new proposal, one that cherry-picked everything they liked from the NHL's proposal, despite the NHL making it clear that the what they had offered in their proposal was meant as a whole package.

    Personally, I think both sides share a lot of the blame for the current grim situation. But I have to agree with the poster above who commented that Fehr is a real problem. He really is. I don't like Bettman very much, but I do think he has an interest in seeing that the sport is healthy. Fehr's only concern is getting everything for the players, regardless of the cost otherwise. Fehr refuses to compromise; he wants Bettman and the BoG to come to him begging for a season.
     
  13. Timby

    Timby LIKE LIGHTNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Re: NHL Offseason

    This is really quite sad.

    Wow, they moved to make whole on contracts that they signed, presumably in good faith. Holy shit, my cup runneth over.

    Players don't sign those contracts with themselves. The fact remains you have guys like Leopold signing two huge long-term contracts with cap evasion techniques ... and then turning around and locking out the players because of long contracts with cap evasion techniques. It's bullshit.

    The players got hammered in the last CBA, and it was written exactly to the owners' demands. In any event, do you know what that 70 percent salary increase means? It means that the league is healthy and wasn't in need of being blown up by reactionary, hardline owners.

    Everything that happened this week was a carefully planned PR move by the league (note how "moderate owner" Ron Burkle's statement slamming Fehr was up on NHL.com literally minutes after talks broke down). The players agreed to meet face-to-face, not negotiate. Owners wanted the players to skip talking to their legal counsel and go straight to accepting a deal and got upset when the players said, "Whoa, wait a minute."

    Basically the owners tried to pull a fast one (like we knew they would) and got angry because they didn't get away with it. It was basically:

    "Hey you give me your action figure, and I'll let you play with this (broken) playset."

    "I dunno, let me go ask my dad."

    "Nope! Nevermind, I didn't want that action figure anyway. Don't tell your dad."

    It's very amusing (and sick) that Bettman and Daly keep saying they walked away from "X position that was completely fucking insane" as if they were giving concessions.

    The players aren't starving by any stretch of the imagination, but the attitude that the players are greedy, should "give in," etc., as well as the disrespect the owners show the players by not treating them as equal business partners is depressing, and emblematic of labor's long, slow decline. I mean, one of the things the players have been asking for is revenue sharing, which doesn't actually help them! They're basically arguing in favor of NHL teams that are losing money, and somehow they have to fight the NHL to get that, even though it's of no benefit to the players and of great benefit to 2 / 3 of NHL teams.

    The owners are the ones that are refusing to negotiate. So far they've only given shitty threats ("our next offer will be worse"), and take-it-or-leave-it bullshit that is contingent on the players giving up additional concessions without reciprocation. This is their lockout. This is their work. Three lockouts in less than two decades. Pitiful.

    That the league hired Proskauer Rose (which represented the NFL and NBA in their recent lockouts; the law firm is basically dedicated to breaking unions) to represent itself in this matter was a clear sign from day one that there was never going to be an attempt to negotiate in good faith on their part. The owners' refusing to negotiate or actually make any meaningful concessions is hurting the players financially, but more importantly they are severely damaging their own business long-term and alienating millions of fans in the process. How you can attempt to blame the players for this situation is baffling.

    How does taking a hardline stance on everything that does this much economic damage to the league at large benefit anyone but the owners? Once this is eventually resolved, the league only has one product to sell: The players, whom they have treated like dogshit and second-class citizens throughout this entire ordeal.

    This is the first time the NHL has ever faced a strong union (Eagleson was corrupt and in bed with the league, Goodenow was an ineffective idiot), and this is a good thing. I hope Fehr burns the whole fucking thing to the ground and rides Bettman like a pony.
     
  14. Josan

    Josan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Location:
    London, Canada
    Re: NHL Offseason

    The players made out like bandits after the last CBA. Yes, the league was healthy. In large part, because of the salary cap that allowed parity and revenue sharing for the weaker teams. And the players benefited immensely. Record revenues, record salaries and contracts. The players in no way, shape or form suffered from the last CBA.

    Also remember that the league wanted to start negotiating in the spring. Fehr refused to start negotiating until September, just days before training camp was supposed to start.

    I don't like Bettman. I don't like his failed experiments with hockey in non-traditional markets and his stubborn refusal to admit that hockey in Phoenix, for example, just doesn't work. But I like Fehr and his tactics even less.

    The players are not equal business partners. Every single expense is covered by the owners. Again, full medical benefits, in fact better than anything a normal working person gets. A player gets a little boo-boo and get taken straight to the hospital for an MRI while normal people here in some parts of the country are on waiting lists for months. All travel and lodging expenses covered by the owners. State of the art fitness facilities. All covered by the owners. And multi-million dollar salaries. No. They're are not equal partners. They are extremely coddled employees. And while they are 'product', players come and players go. While some fans follow individual players, most fans follow teams. Players get traded, they retire and the teams and the game goes on.

    Hey Rob, thanks for backing me up. Since we're in the same city I'd suggest watching some games together but... damn, there aren't any. ;)
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2012
  15. Timby

    Timby LIKE LIGHTNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Re: NHL Offseason

    The last lockout needed to happen, because the system was very, very broken, but the players went from 76 percent of hockey-related revenue to 54 percent (now 57), and there was an across-the-board 24 percent salary reductions. The immediate effects upon the players were very, very real. But in the end, everyone won from the 2005 CBA.

    That being said, record revenues mean that the league is healthy, and there was no reason for this lockout to happen. The players wanted to keep playing under the existing CBA with some minor tweaks, and the NHL said "fuck that noise, you need to save us from ourselves." Since day one, this has been about breaking the union and nothing else.

    It's classic goalpost-moving bullshit. Instead of trying to meet the players in the middle, they make ridiculous demands, and thus move the center onto their side, so no matter what the owners benefit. We're supposed to believe that only taking away 7 percent of the total revenues from the players, and paying in full the already existing contracts that both sides signed, are "concessions." The players have demanded very little beyond "keep the CBA the way it is," and therefore have been making all the concessions.

    The NHL's first offer was a complete and utter joke. Fehr knew what he was doing.

    Wow, this just reads like crab mentality.

    Yeah, the players are well-compensated. And in return, they make billions of dollars for the owners. It's very much a symbiotic relationship, but the owners are treating the players like cattle.
     
  16. Josan

    Josan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Location:
    London, Canada
    Re: NHL Offseason

    You are clearly on the side of the players. I`m not on either side. I have no sympathy for billionaires and millionaires bickering over a larger piece of the pie. I don`t like Bettman or Fehr but Fehr is the worse of the two in my opinion. You see the owners treating the players as cattle, I see the players as what they are: spoiled little rich kids. They work for the owners. It`s that simple. They receive far better benefits, perks and salaries than those that pay their salaries (the fans) and have no regard for the jobs they've taken from European players or the loss of income to those who work in the arenas or the businesses nearby.

    The only players I have any sympathy or respect for are the 3rd and 4th liners that make league minimum and are lucky to have a career lasting more than a few seasons or the players that chose to stay in NA and do charity.

    You have your opinion, I have mine. But if you think my opinion read likes "crab mentality", I think yours reads like a prima donna 1% apologist.

    The tactful thing is to simply agree to disagree. Differing opinions on this matter certainly aren't worth lengthy posts and quotes and silly little crab mentality comments.
     
  17. Timby

    Timby LIKE LIGHTNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Re: NHL Offseason

    Okay, simple question: If, as we've agreed, the league is healthy and is making money hand over fist, why was there a need for a lockout? Outside of the loopholes that led to deals like the Hossa and Kovalchuk cap circumvention contracts (which the union wanted to fix), what was wrong with the 2005 CBA?
     
  18. Josan

    Josan Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    Location:
    London, Canada
    Re: NHL Offseason

    Other than the exploitation of the loopholes leading to absurd contracts, not much was wrong. Record revenues, record salaries and contracts. Neither side was hurting. The only other issue, to me, was the CBA length. In my view, CBAs should be at least 10 years in length. They shouldn't be going through this every 5-6 years. And I do agree with the league's desire for fixed terms on contracts lengths. Beyond that, it's simply two sides of rich people grousing at each other.

    I still see Fehr as the main obstacle to a deal being down and I think it'd be interesting if the PA put it to a vote of the players regarding the league's various offers.
     
  19. Timby

    Timby LIKE LIGHTNIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIING Administrator

    Joined:
    May 28, 2001
    Re: NHL Offseason

    Okay, so, since you agree that the CBA was essentially fine, how is Fehr the issue when the union went to the league and said, "Let's fix the contract loopholes and otherwise keep the CBA the way it is?" I don't think you're fully grasping just how ideologically driven the lockout is on the owners' part. They're the ones who opened up with offering the players 47 percent of hockey-related revenue, down from 57 percent. They're the ones who have demanded (another) salary rollback. They're the ones demanding that you have to play for ten years before hitting unrestricted free agency. They're the ones demanding that entry-level contracts run for five years.

    The owners were signing players to contracts all summer with full intention of not honoring them. It's reprehensible.

    None of this is the players' fault.

    Edit: I mean, this can't be repeated enough. If this were the players striking until the NHL gave them an increase, I'd be supporting the owners. This is the owners locking players out until the players cut their compensation and contractual rights across the board, despite the league making bucketloads of money. This is not a two-sided situation.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2012
  20. Danny99

    Danny99 Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2002
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Is it just me or does Bettman pull all his offers off the table instead of negotiating from them?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.