Most Obvious Statement I've Read in Weeks

[sheeps]

"Both of the salary-cap proposals they put forth today were worse than the proposals that we had rejected on a number of prior occasions," NHLPA senior director Ted Saskin told The Canadian Press.

Didn't the NHL tell you that the $42.5 mil de-linked proposal was the best you'd see?

I repeat what I said in another thread: if you want to be pro-player, fine. But you need to look at the reality of the situation. The offers aren't going to get any better than the $42.5 mil de-linked proposal. Simple as that.

The NHL isn't going to budge.

[NJDevs4978]

Unbelievable isn't it? Just shows how clueless and egotistical that the NHLPA is, that they STILL think the owners are playing possum even after they cancel a season.

[BlueSkirt]

Has, excellent post.

The NHL already went "all-in" with the lockout, followed by the cancellation of the entire season/playoffs/awarding of the Stanley Cup.

Yet the NHLPA still clings to the idea that a deal better than February's one is still possible. News flash to the NHLPA - uh, they're not bluffing !

There is no product. I repeat there is no product, so how can the NHLPA think that the owners can offer more than what they did offer in Feb. when there was still a product?

[Derek21]

To the pro management side, why should the NHLPA be pleased with what the NHL is doing?

From their proposals, it looks like they're trying to break the union. Something Bettman publicly denied several times.

Why should the management side get a 100 percent victory and screw over the product when they were partially responsible for their own demise?

Where's the logic?

[PeteyNice]

The logic, Derek, at least as I understand it is "The owners are the owners and they should get whatever they want because they sign the checks. The players should just be counting their blessings they aren't working at McDonald's and take whatever the owners are charitable enough to give them."

[Derek21]

And that's even if these so-called great owners won't share the profits keeping it all for themselves! So much for a partnership.

[sheeps]

Logic says one thing.

Reality says another.

[Derek21]

So, the reality is the owners should get whatever they want without something being reached that makes sense for both sides where neither will be bitter? I don't understand.

[NJDevs4978]

The reality is both sides lost a lot of money with the cancellation of the season and the owners warned the players that the offers would only get lower, and why not, why should the offers get HIGHER with LESS profit, whoever you want to blame for the cancellation of the season the fact is there WILL be less money in the pie. The players should realize this, but in their own little world they think the owners are still lying. That's the only way they can convince themselves things aren't as bad as they are.

Edited March 18, 2005 by Hasan4978

[Devils731]

As it has been all along the owners have been completely upfront with what they want and need while the players have been posturing the entire time. The NHLPA acts shocked when the owners do exactly what the owners said they were going to do.

[Triumph]

When they were responsible for the demise? What are you talking about? The NHL offered deals the whole time. If the NHLPA wanted a fairer deal, THEY SHOULD HAVE NEGOTIATED. They refused to until the last minute.

If the PA had wanted, they could be playing hockey right now under a 40-44 M cap with some incentives on the players' side.

The only way out of this quandary is two-way linkage at 57% of revenues or thereabouts. The NHL cannot operate without linkage at this point.

[Derek21]

I get it Tri. The owners had no role in why the old system became a joke. It was all the PLAYERS.

And I get it. It's okay for the owners to offer less and less. Seems fair to me.

In seriousness, Triumph, how by decreasing the offer is that going to get a deal done? I have an even better question for these owners. If they continue to decrease the offer, how is that a fair negotiating practice?

[LizDevil30]

Can you see it -- Mike Modano standing on a Dallas street corner holding a sign "Will work to feed dog."

[Triumph]

Derek, the season was canceled. That means advertising revenues, ticket sales, etc. are going to fall. A lot. The players are not getting a better offer than they received in February. The owners simply do not have the revenue streams they had before the lockout. The only way the players could possibly do better than the 42.5 M offer is if they take two-way linkage and the NHL grows a great deal over the next 10 years. This has nothing to do with fairness. It has to do with money, and there just isn't as much of it as there was before. The players made a colossal mistake, and they've backed the owners into a corner where they have to unilaterally win these bargaining sessions or risk similar losses for the next 10 years. This means no concessions by the owners or Bettman.

Why should the owners 'take the blame'? They already have over the past few seasons. Arbitration and guaranteed pay increases are the two biggest problems with the old CBA.

['7']

The owners lowballed the players from the beginning, crying poverty and exaggerating there losses. Bettman says that he had to stretch just to get them to 42 mil? BULLsh!t!

let the owners fight it out amongst themselves, eventually the mid and higher level clubs will overpower the small market yahoos & Bettman who have directed this hard line strategy from the very beginning, ever since he promised 100% victory and busting the union. The owners realize they could make money on a fair compromise with a cap in the mid to upper 40's. The players can wait them out until they get what they want.

[Triumph]

The money is not there for an upper 40s cap anymore. Ticket prices will have to come down 25%, so that means the cap comes down 25%. Advertising revenues will be cut.

If the players wanted a lower cap, they should have asked for it. They did so 2 days before the deadline, failing to realize that there were several other unresolved issues that needed serious deliberation.

The fact that you, as well as Brooks and the PA, have dropped their no cap demand tells me that all three of you believe the owners to an extent.

Edited March 18, 2005 by Triumph

[sheeps]

So, the reality is the owners should get whatever they want without something being reached that makes sense for both sides where neither will be bitter? I don't understand.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Did I say that? Do I believe that? In both cases, NO.

I never said the owners weren't at fault. I never said the owners weren't being unfair. I never said I wanted a lopsided deal.

I'm looking at the reality of the situation. The NHL isn't going to budge. The end. You should know this. The PA and especially Goodenow should know this. They're not going to get a better deal than the $42.5 mil one.

My post has nothing to do with "should" or who is "right." Nothing to do with it. You can keep bringing that stuff up and keep distracting yourself from the reality at hand. The NHL isn't going to budge, it's as simple as that.

['7']

The money isn't there? For some teams it is, for some it isn't. I'm betting the big and mid level teams continue to sour on Bettman, realizing they could've made money under the players offer, and will help force his hand since they don't want to take a risk with replacement players.

we believe that the league as a whole has lost money, yes that has been happening for decades. But the owners demands are just far too unreasonable, they were not out to get a fair deal, but to screw the players and break the union.

Edited March 18, 2005 by '7'

[MantaRay]

What a fantasy world do you live in "7".

The players are in no position to be waiting on anything. The more the players wait the more likely Bettman WILL get 100% victory and the players will have to live with a $30 million team cap.

[Triumph]

You will be absolutely wrong, ^7^. I hope you don't bet on many things. You already owe me a steak dinner for the Arnott trade.

The players' offer contained upward linkage and salary arbitration as it is now, as I remember. There can be no upward linkage, and salary arbitration cannot exist as it did in the previous CBA. It will not happen. The owners will never accept an offer with upward linkage: that is hypocritical and insulting. They say the owners have been lying but they're willing to accept the lies as long as they get a cut? What foolishness.

The upper level teams could've made money on the players' offer, but not the mid-level clubs. That's irrelevant. The owners recognize they cannot be the party to break or they will end up suffering losses again for the next 10 years.

['7']

what does bettman have to threaten the players with?

Nothing.

he has no idea what he's doing, Bettman thought the NHLPA would've broken up by now, and I don't think he can handle the dissention in his own ranks. go ahead and try scabs, I dare you.

the owners can't be trusted, 2 way linkage is code for a one way street DOWN. The players are not going to let themselves be backed into a corner like that.

We already heard from Montreal who said they would rather be playing, shortly after the gag order came back. Charles Wang and the Islanders are among the lower tier of the mid level teams, bordering on small market. And even he said he could've settled at 45 million.

Edited March 18, 2005 by '7'

[Don]

what does bettman have to threaten the players with?

Nothing.

Not paying them for another year. And another year after that. And another year after that. And another year after that.

We already heard from Montreal who said they would rather be playing, shortly after the gag order came back. Charles Wang and the Islanders are among the lower tier of the mid level teams, bordering on small market. And even he said he could've settled at 45 million.

I hope you are not supposing that Gillet meant that he would have signed the players ridiculous $49M offer when he said "we'd rather be playing" because, even with the gag off, he said in the same breath that he supports the league stance.

[Sarge18]

Im honestly getting tired of this "the owners cant be trusted" line. Seems that the NFL and NBA got past the owners cant be trusted thing just fine. I read an article a while ago about the Lightening's owner, who also happens to own the Detriot Pistons. He has never been citied for an infraction against the NBA cba with regards to his financials. No player or organization has decided to dispute him. Yet when it comes the Bolts, everything is a big fat lie and the man is absutely trying to hide everything? RIiiight. Ok players keep playing your rhetorical fantasy land living. The fact of the matter is there are devices that can force at least a shakey trust between the two sides, yet the league refuses to even consider that, no matter what framework is built they will cry foul. This coming from an organization that is legally able to collude to drive salaries up in a system that has minimal devices to keep them down leaguewide and has been brutally effective in doing so, to the point that this mess is the result(and no i dont blame the pa for everything for why we are here, but to let them off the hook for their part in salary escalation is rediculous)

This comes down to the same old issue again and again. The PA just wants their money and as much of it as possible and dont care how they get it or where it comes from. They say they want a fair deal, yet whenever presented with a cba full of devices that work both ways they flat out reject it each time. What is so wrong about 2 way arbitration, qualifying offers under 100%, a 2 way linkage, and rights to a % of profits past a certain number. We as fans have NEVER gotten a straight logical answer as to why they are so evil. Of course the pa supporters will say that the league will fix the books so that there will be no profit past that point, and but no one ever looks to the details about this, how they would calculate revenues, how the accounting methadology can be similarized league wide, there are ways to prevent this all, but of course the pa and pa supports continue to ignore these ideas.

The pa says that " we only want to be payed what the owners feel we are worth" well the owners have said it loud and clear, you arent worth to us now what you were 1 year ago. Sorry boys the dream ride is over, back to reality.

[Pezzer]

what does bettman have to threaten the players with?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You think hockey players have better fall back options than billionaire owners?

The owners have so many better things to do with their money than run a losing operation.

Most players' second best option is 90% worse than what they would've had if they accepted in February.

[PeteyNice]

You can't compare football and basketball to hockey. In the NFL the vast majority of money comes from TV which you cannot hide and the players get 65% of revenues. The NBA system is based on a fixed number so from year to year it doesn't really matter what teams say their revenues were. If the NBA tries to go with a percentage deal when their labor deal expires I am sure you will hear the same kind of things from the NBAPA.