2012 CBA/Lockout talk, It's not looking good VI

[EverettMike]

There is no CBA in place. That old CBA was based around the landscape of the NHL 6 years ago. It's gone, finito. The concessions are based on the current landscape, not the landscape from 6 seasons ago.

50/50 is a reality. It's happening, it isn't a concession. The sooner the players get on board with that the sooner the NHL can avoid a lost season. The owners can show why 50/50 is necessary, and why the NHL needs such a split to continue to make the league viable. Make whole however is a concession, the owners gave on that large adding an additional 100 million to the pot essentially splitting the difference. Not good enough because Fehr thinks he can do better and solely because Fehr thinks he can do better.

10 years is in everyone's best interest, mainly the NHL's for a plethora of reasons. The whole "but that won't give new players a chance to be a part of a lockout" excuse Fehr threw out there is asinine. Poll the young players and ask how many want to lose a years salary to be a part of this process.

5 year contract limits hurt only high end players and likely won't even hurt them, because it eliminates cap circumvention. 90% of the players won't be affected by such a stipulation. It allows owners to insure contracts fully and prevents dead space contracts like Dipietro which do no one any good except Dipetro. 1 contract 6 years or longer in 2004, 90 in 2012. It's become an issue. Thinking it hurts 4th liners making minimum salary is ridiculous. They'll still be 4th liners and they'll still be making near the NHL minimum.

I like how Fehr avoided the player vote question in his presser. It will be put to a player vote when and only when he puts his stamp of approval on it, and that won't happen until he gets everything he wants. Put it to a vote now.

You aren't describing a negotiation if you say the old CBA has no bearing on this one or how it works in terms of give and take.

You are describing a scenario where one side dictates how things will work and the other side needs to accept that.

I can see why the players are upset then.

(The players have gone to 50/50. I personally always said they had to.)

 

[cat400]

The perils of being part of any Union is that the negotiating committee control the agenda and usually will not let the majority vote on the owners' proposal that the leaders deem unsatisfactory.

Over time we have seen many a National Union Boss tell the local union members who are strike to stand up to the employer and that the offers will be sweetened: end result the employer is not bluffing and the plant is closed for good.

For a good number of the 3rd & 4th liners along with the over 35 crowd, every game lost is money that they will never get an opportunity to earn back as a NHL player.

Time for the rank and file to tell Fehr to cut a deal or take a hike.

Unfortunately the players appear blinded by their detest for Bettman and it is only going to be to their own detriment.

 

[Kaoz*]

You aren't describing a negotiation if you say the old CBA has no bearing on this one or how it works in terms of give and take.

You are describing a scenario where one side dictates how things will work and the other side needs to accept that.

I can see why the players are upset then.

(The players have gone to 50/50. I personally always said they had to.)

They did have to, and that's why it isn't a concession. And yes, you can still have a negotiation based on the financial issues facing the NHL today. You wouldn't have CBA negotiations based on the players rights in 1994 would you?

 

[EverettMike]

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-puck-daddy/watch-gary-bettman-blow-lockout-negotiations-depressed-nhl-032314428--nhl.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Wyshynski with a good take. Plenty of blame for both sides.

 

[Salem13]

The perils of being part of any Union is that the negotiating committee control the agenda and usually will not let the majority vote on the owners' proposal that the leaders deem unsatisfactory.

Over time we have seen many a National Union Boss tell the local union members who are strike to stand up to the employer and that the offers will be sweetened: end result the employer is not bluffing and the plant is closed for good.

For a good number of the 3rd & 4th liners along with the over 35 crowd, every game lost is money that they will never get an opportunity to earn back as a NHL player.

Time for the rank and file to tell Fehr to cut a deal or take a hike.

Unfortunately the players appear blinded by their detest for Bettman and it is only going to be to their own detriment.

Exactly, they didn't learn by watching Hostess.

 

[EverettMike]

They did have to, and that's why it isn't a concession. And yes, you can still have a negotiation based on the financial issues facing the NHL today. You wouldn't have CBA negotiations based on the players rights in 1994 would you?

No, I wouldn't.

A strawman probably would though, so I don't see how that question is relevant.

 

[bruinmann77]

Time to shut it down and go home because i think the FANS don't really care anymore.
I usually go to boston to see a few games but not this time . I probally enoy the nicer weather during baseball season.

 

[EverettMike]

Time to shut it down and go home because i think the FANS don't really care anymore.
I usually go to boston to see a few games but not this time . I probally enoy the nicer weather during baseball season.

Stay away from Boston for that too.

I KID I KID I NEED THE SOX TO BE GOOD SO I SOMETHING TO WATCH IN APRIL MAY AND JUNE.

 

[EverettMike]

Alright, goodnight guys and gals.

This conversation has been very civilized. Only took us 6 threads to get it right.

 

[JRull86]

Alright, goodnight guys and gals.

This conversation has been very civilized. Only took us 6 threads to get it right.

It has been, it's refreshing. Take care EM.

 

[Kaoz*]

No, I wouldn't.

A strawman probably would though, so I don't see how that question is relevant.

"Strawman argument" must be the argument du jours of hfboards this week. If it was it was not my intent I assure you.

Expanded version... The financial landscape of 2004 is no better to negotiate off of then the 1994 landscape. Both dates are in the past and completely irrelevant. Yes, the players got 57% of revenues in the last CBA, but many teams still lost money even as revenues grew. The only ones getting richer were the players.

50/50 was the starting point in this CBA. Everyone knew that going in to this, the players did as well hence the hiring of Don Fehr. The NHL won't support a 57/43 split, the numbers support that and therefore using that as your starting point for negotiations makes no sense at all. Choosing to fight that is choosing the wrong battle to fight which the players seem to have been doing a lot of.

 

[Bi Coastal Bawse*]

we got in a fight over her status

you think because you read the blogs and posts and forums and blah blah blaaaah you know everything. you think what you want and i will what i want. at least i go to hockey games. unlike you.

Now shes taking shots at u guys

 

[dtam83]

so which KHL team should the former bruins fans root for?

 

[Over the volcano]

The only danger all along has been if either side starts believing their own ********.

Looking at where they are now compared to the last deal- the owners have cleaned house. The need to accept their win and unlock the doors so everyone can start making money again. They can't really think that the difference between 5 year and 8 year contract limits is a deal breaker when they'd be getting an additional 7% of the entire league revenue (effectively a 16% raise). . .unless they really believe their ********.

 

[JRull86]

we got in a fight over her status



Now shes taking shots at u guys

The nerve!

Seriously though, some people just refuse to accept the truth because they've been on that JJ hate bandwagon for so long, even when the evidence suggests otherwise in this case.

Unfortunate.

 

[Over the volcano]

"Strawman argument" must be the argument du jours of hfboards this week. If it was it was not my intent I assure you.

Expanded version... The financial landscape of 2004 is no better to negotiate off of then the 1994 landscape. Both dates are in the past and completely irrelevant. Yes, the players got 57% of revenues in the last CBA, but many teams still lost money even as revenues grew. The only ones getting richer were the players.

50/50 was the starting point in this CBA. Everyone knew that going in to this, the players did as well hence the hiring of Don Fehr. The NHL won't support a 57/43 split, the numbers support that and therefore using that as your starting point for negotiations makes no sense at all. Choosing to fight that is choosing the wrong battle to fight which the players seem to have been doing a lot of.

Actually, the nhl's starting point was a 43/57 split going the other way.

Fwiw my union has been working all year without a contract. The NHL could be doing the same, but they chose to lock the doors instead.

 

[Bi Coastal Bawse*]

She goes to games "unlike" me who lives in CA............

Yes I will go to Sharks games even though I like the Bruins

 

[BlackNgold 84]

we got in a fight over her status



Now shes taking shots at u guys

Sooooo.. how olds your sister? i i keeddd.. Yeah.. so i was leaning towards the players side.. now i'm more towards the middle. The players needs to wake the **** up and get rid of Da Fehr. Also been to two p-bruins games this year.. looks like i'll have to go to some more to get my hockey fix. Friday December 21st.. dog and draft night... 21 bucks. See you guys there?

 

[Artemis]

Some even-handed thoughts from LeBrun:

One NHL governor told ESPN.com that they were shown both offers from the league and NHLPA in the board of governors meeting.

"I looked at them both and wondered how this thing isn’t done already," he said.

And those were previous offers. Not the ones from the past 24 hours that showed more movement from both sides.

What we need now is for both sides to exhale and get back to the table no later than Monday.

For the millionth time, there is a deal here. Stop the politics and get it done.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nhl/post/_/id/20628/you-have-got-to-be-kidding-me

 

[IntentionallyWide]

I can't sleep because I'm so frustrated at both sides. Then I get frustrated even more for letting it bother me. Ugh.

 

[mHlnGXt9Xlnn1Qes3Vtn]

How many players are thinking "Holy crap, Fehr has got to go."?

Wish we would hear from them like those who spoke out against Bettman.

 

[Bi Coastal Bawse*]

Sooooo.. how olds your sister? i i keeddd.. Yeah.. so i was leaning towards the players side.. now i'm more towards the middle. The players needs to wake the **** up and get rid of Da Fehr. Also been to two p-bruins games this year.. looks like i'll have to go to some more to get my hockey fix. Friday December 21st.. dog and draft night... 21 bucks. See you guys there?

30 and dating someone younger than me(her brother) which makes the parentals cringe

 

[BlackNgold 84]

How many players are thinking "Holy crap, Fehr has got to go."?

Wish we would hear from them like those who spoke out against Bettman.

I kinda wanna see shawn thornton beat his face into a jelly of sort. I'd pay him like $150. Good enough right?

30 and dating someone younger than me(her brother) which makes the parentals cringe

Yikes.. shes 30 and venting on facebook.. oh wait i'm 28 and do that. Tell her if she keeps on getting emotional she will be getting no xmas presents.

 

[Greyhounds]

How many players are thinking "Holy crap, Fehr has got to go."?

Wish we would hear from them like those who spoke out against Bettman.

If this isn't resolved soon, I think we will hear several comments along those lines. It's become apparent that der fehrer will probably have to go, if anything is to be salvaged here.

 

[Artemis]

This is bizarre.

"Once we made clear that ... we had to get our union leadership, that we've hired for this, in the room, there was just a very big change," Hainsey said on Thursday, after talks broke down. "It was alarming, and I was told that if we were going to do that, it was possibly a dealbreaker. That was made clear last night. It was confusing, because we kind of agreed that we were moving toward each other, and we weren't that far apart. So, it's confusing for the players to think that we were supposed to finish this ourselves."

Hainsey was then asked to confirm, point blank, what he had just said: The owners told you that bringing Don Fehr into the room would be a dealbreaker for the progress you had achieved?

"That's correct," Hainsey said.

http://aol.sportingnews.com/nhl/sto...owners-gary-bettman-ron-hainsey-hockey-strike