Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Devs3cups

Bettman "There will be a lockout if there is no deal by September

71 posts in this topic

Tri and DD are right though, it doesn't matter who's in the right realistically, it's always the players that get the brunt of it. Fans don't grow up dreaming of owning teams, they grow up dreaming of playing for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tri and DD are right though, it doesn't matter who's in the right realistically, it's always the players that get the brunt of it. Fans don't grow up dreaming of owning teams, they grow up dreaming of playing for them.

I don't know, not this time. In the past few years, the tide has turned on how people in this country, and especially in this AREA feel about "higher-ups", for lack of a better word. Billionaires and filthy rich corporate owners are not looked favorably upon in the past few years. Like sundstrom said, if we average Joe Schmoes don't get to watch hockey in the Fall, I think the filthy rich owners are going to get the brunt of our anger; the players aren't really trying to change anything.

Edited by DJ Eco

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know, not this time. In the past few years, the tide has turned on how people in this country, and especially in this AREA feel about "higher-ups", for lack of a better word. Billionaires and filthy rich corporate owners are not looked favorably upon in the past few years. Like sundstrom said, if we average Joe Schmoes don't get to watch hockey in the Fall, I think the filthy rich owners are going to get the brunt of our anger; the players aren't really trying to change anything.

I don't think so. Fans always look at it this way 'Oh, big deal, you go from making $2 million a year to $1.8 million a year, boo hoo!' Which is true. But we weren't born with superb athletic talent, and presumably we didn't work our ass off through our youth honing that talent. I can see the guy who went to the same 6 AM practices, the guy who missed out on a pro career because of injury, and so forth, being resentful - but why is that guy even watching pro hockey in the first place?

The problem is that even if the players are winning the PR war - and right now I think they are - the only leverage either side has is a widespread 'I'm not coming back if there's a lockout'. And with cost certainty, with the way the NHL grabs back paychecks if there are revenue shortfalls, the players lose just as much as the owners if that's the case.

Edited by Triumph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman and fehr are two extremely stubborn people. Neither is going to budge much during these negotiations, which is a shame because i believe the league could take a huge step forward from this CBA negotiations. They have the opportunity to make the league way more healthy, and level the playing field somewhat between the big and small market teams. The owners initial demands were definitely high, but i actually liked alot of the things they proposed. If the sides could meet in the middle it would be great.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HAHAHA

Chris Johnston ‏@reporterchris

As NHL's negotiating committee arrived, one fan yelled: "Hey Gary, are you going to take a pay cut too?"

Retweeted by Tom Gulitti

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman and fehr are two extremely stubborn people. Neither is going to budge much during these negotiations, which is a shame because i believe the league could take a huge step forward from this CBA negotiations. They have the opportunity to make the league way more healthy, and level the playing field somewhat between the big and small market teams. The owners initial demands were definitely high, but i actually liked alot of the things they proposed. If the sides could meet in the middle it would be great.

the owners proposal was almost 100% ludicrous. Since I assume that a luxury tax is a non starter for everyone (even though i think that in conjunction with the salary cap it makes the most sense), where this really should end up is with the players lowering their share from 57% to about 54% and the owners doing more revenue sharing from the rich teams to the poor teams. Having Florida and Ottawa and Columbus be able to turn profits makes the league more valuable and thus makes the leafs, rangers and flyers more valuable.

i would be ok if local tv and arena concessions (non merchandising) where the team owns or gets a cut of those concessions isn't part of HRR for the players but it is part of revenue sharing to keep lower level teams profitable. players pie should be national TV $, ticket sales, and merchandising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think so. Fans always look at it this way 'Oh, big deal, you go from making $2 million a year to $1.8 million a year, boo hoo!' Which is true. But we weren't born with superb athletic talent, and presumably we didn't work our ass off through our youth honing that talent. I can see the guy who went to the same 6 AM practices, the guy who missed out on a pro career because of injury, and so forth, being resentful - but why is that guy even watching pro hockey in the first place?

The problem is that even if the players are winning the PR war - and right now I think they are - the only leverage either side has is a widespread 'I'm not coming back if there's a lockout'. And with cost certainty, with the way the NHL grabs back paychecks if there are revenue shortfalls, the players lose just as much as the owners if that's the case.

I completely agree... As per the first part, I don't really resent hockey players salaries the way I do, say, baseball players or international soccer players. The money many of them make is ABSURD! I think hockey players' salaries are pretty deserved considering the physical demands of the job, and their grueling schedule. $27 Million per year for A-Rod?!?!?!?! That's just me though hahaha.. And doesn't really have anything to do with the discussion anymore..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the news and impressions from today;s talks actually seem encouraging.. Let's hope for the best!

:pray:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I completely agree... As per the first part, I don't really resent hockey players salaries the way I do, say, baseball players or international soccer players. The money many of them make is ABSURD! I think hockey players' salaries are pretty deserved considering the physical demands of the job, and their grueling schedule. $27 Million per year for A-Rod?!?!?!?! That's just me though hahaha.. And doesn't really have anything to do with the discussion anymore..

Baseball players play twice as many games as hockey players, they basically deserve twice as much money as a result.

I refuse to be encouraged, the league will come up with some gross counter and it'll fester until November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baseball players play twice as many games as hockey players, they basically deserve twice as much money as a result.

I refuse to be encouraged, the league will come up with some gross counter and it'll fester until November.

Eh it has nothing to do with that, season lengths are all relative, that'd be like saying football players deserve a tenth of the pay for playing a tenth of the games. It has to do with revenue (baseball revenues are much higher than hockey) as well as the fact hockey has a cap and baseball doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baseball players play twice as many games as hockey players, they basically deserve twice as much money as a result.

Define.... "play"... haha...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Baseball players play twice as many games as hockey players, they basically deserve twice as much money as a result.

woooo.... i'd be okay with that statement if you were talking about basketball or football or wtv... but baseball ? cmon now, some of those guys are barely moving for the whole game just standing at the same spot and running a little bit, they can even be fat and still be pros at that sport.

hockey is physical, dangerous and demanding physically, baseball is nowhere close to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

woooo.... i'd be okay with that statement if you were talking about basketball or football or wtv... but baseball ? cmon now, some of those guys are barely moving for the whole game just standing at the same spot and running a little bit, they can even be fat and still be pros at that sport.

hockey is physical, dangerous and demanding physically, baseball is nowhere close to that.

Basketball is God awful, Baseball is extremely difficult, Football is dangerous, Hockey is the greatest thing ever.

Edited by Zubie#8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basketball is God awful, Baseball is extremely difficult, Football is dangerous, Hockey is the greatest thing ever.

no Jessica Alba is

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eh it has nothing to do with that, season lengths are all relative, that'd be like saying football players deserve a tenth of the pay for playing a tenth of the games. It has to do with revenue (baseball revenues are much higher than hockey) as well as the fact hockey has a cap and baseball doesn't.

But it has everything to do with that - that and the fact that baseball stadiums have higher capacity than hockey arenas. If baseball had an 82 game season, they'd be paid more than hockey players, but not by all that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

per TG

Bettman says he's disappointed that league still doesn't have a full proposal from the NHLPA. Says a "wide gap" remains.

Bettman: 'the sides are far apart and have different views of the world'

this doesnt look good

edit: oh actually

per TravisHeHateME

Before you freak out over Gary Bettman's comments, please read the attached link. This was quite, quite expected.

http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog.php?post_id=46112#.UCvxoA9h4Ec.twitter

Edited by SterioDesign

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm almost at the point where I am ready to call MSG and tell them to cancel my tickets and refund my money, and then sell all of my rangers memorabilia..

"....have different views of the world." Translation: "I am not going to ask Toronto, NYR, Philly, Boston, Montreal, and Vancouver to support Columbus, Florida, and Phoenix."

Was reading on another site where someone said according to the numbers the NHLPA said they could be giving up, they are proposing ~52.5%. I haven't done enough research to determine if that is acurate. If it is true, they are likely offering that with that hope they will wind up at 50%.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm almost at the point where I am ready to call MSG and tell them to cancel my tickets and refund my money, and then sell all of my rangers memorabilia..

"....have different views of the world." Translation: "I am not going to ask Toronto, NYR, Philly, Boston, Montreal, and Vancouver to support Columbus, Florida, and Phoenix."

Was reading on another site where someone said according to the numbers the NHLPA said they could be giving up, they are proposing ~52.5%. I haven't done enough research to determine if that is acurate. If it is true, they are likely offering that with that hope they will wind up at 50%.

I do not care who caves first I just need my hockey, I love the Giants aswell but I cannot go another year without the NHL I will go nuts. So hopefully this is true about the PA giving in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm almost at the point where I am ready to call MSG and tell them to cancel my tickets and refund my money, and then sell all of my rangers memorabilia..

"....have different views of the world." Translation: "I am not going to ask Toronto, NYR, Philly, Boston, Montreal, and Vancouver to support Columbus, Florida, and Phoenix."

Was reading on another site where someone said according to the numbers the NHLPA said they could be giving up, they are proposing ~52.5%. I haven't done enough research to determine if that is acurate. If it is true, they are likely offering that with that hope they will wind up at 50%.

They're proposing 52.5% initially but it goes up to 57% by Year 4. But again, this is an initial offer. The key move the union has to make is to threaten to decertify - that's what'll get the owners actually negotiating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're proposing 52.5% initially but it goes up to 57% by Year 4. But again, this is an initial offer. The key move the union has to make is to threaten to decertify - that's what'll get the owners actually negotiating.

Will decertification REALLY mean anything? With the NFL, it seemed like that was just a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo that didn't really mean anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will decertification REALLY mean anything? With the NFL, it seemed like that was just a bunch of legal mumbo jumbo that didn't really mean anything.

Absolutely. They did it in the NBA as well. Without unions, there's no collective bargaining, and without that, all of the little rules the NHL has come up with go bye-bye. There's an argument that it's not even in the players' best interest to have a union. But once the union threatens to decertify, the owners will actually move to make a deal that resembles a compromise instead of the Judge Smails negotiation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely. They did it in the NBA as well. Without unions, there's no collective bargaining, and without that, all of the little rules the NHL has come up with go bye-bye. There's an argument that it's not even in the players' best interest to have a union. But once the union threatens to decertify, the owners will actually move to make a deal that resembles a compromise instead of the Judge Smails negotiation.

I understand, and I didn't follow the NBA's process. But, IIRC, the NFLPA decertified, they kept negotiating anyway, and when they reached an agreement the union re-certified. So, let's say the NHLPA decertifies and the owners still don't budge. Then what happens? The owners don't have to open the doors for the season to start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand, and I didn't follow the NBA's process. But, IIRC, the NFLPA decertified, they kept negotiating anyway, and when they reached an agreement the union re-certified. So, let's say the NHLPA decertifies and the owners still don't budge. Then what happens? The owners don't have to open the doors for the season to start.

I had forgotten this part of it - the NFLPA sued the NFL for antitrust violations, of which there are a gazillion. The NHL doesn't have specific antitrust exemption, but that's what the entire league is founded on and how the teams in the big markets stand to make so much money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0