Satans Hockey Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 (edited) Fair enough but still, we aren't losing anything of real tangible value. It really sucks we could be missing out on another season, but we have no financial stake in this like the players and owners do. I'm losing my passion and my favorite hobby that I enjoy atttending with friends and family members who won't get these years back that we lost. We lost the possibility of have enjoying great moments together like game 6 of the ecf and etc. And more importantly this is having a big impact on many families around the US and Canada, families whose lives depend on the NHL. The workers at the arena, people who work for the team, the resturants around the arenas and even some members of this board who are either losing their jobs or are having their hours being greatly reduced. These people are the ones who are being hit hardest financially and they have no say in the matter. These people can't go over to Europe and work like the players are doing.The NHL owners and the NHL players couldn't give two sh!ts about these people let alone their own fans who pay their ridicilious salaries. This is the major issue I'm having and the main issue with why I'll struggle to give the NHL or Devils any more money if we miss an entire season. Both sides are greedy and entitled and both sides don't deserve my money. Edited October 1, 2012 by Satans Hockey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmorc2003 Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Sorry dude, no sympathy here. 20% cut when you're making 1.5 mil hurts you a lot less than the guy supporting his family on 70k (or less in many cases). Too bad you're going to have to keep working after hockey, everyone here is working until their 65 too (not to mention, an ex-nhler has a specilized skill and experience, go hustle around the camp and clinic circuit, consult). Physically demanding? A guy that did some masonry work for me, in his early 40s can barely stand straight up at the end of the day. I know plenty of people who have worked hard, sacrificed (and I'm not talking about playing a sport they love either), and are still just making it. Paul Bissionette makes public appeals for sympathy then tweets pics of him and his favorite seamstress at Barney's. Sorry again dude. I don't feel the least bit sorry for you either. If your payday is so fleeting, maybe you should live more conservatively. Players are coming off like immature, uneducated, babies. I'm not taking the owners side either. They're just as greedy. No one is winning here. Good point about the people who depend on a games for their livelihood. But the players and owners could give a crap. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven M. Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 I'm not saying anyone should just take a huge paycut and be happy with it, I'm just saying perhaps his choice of words, his platform of communicating them (twitter), and his audience (the fans) was pretty much all wrong. Going to be hard to find any sympathy from fans, an overwhelming majority of whom will all need to work for most of their lives. I understand there are drawbacks to being Krys Barch in the NHL, the physical punishment, the short timespan with which he will be relevant... but I think most people will agree he's pretty well compensated for his efforts. I hate that this is what we have to talk about in October. ugh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLL765 Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Bottom line is, player or owner, the lockout is not going to leave you broke. The true victims here are the front office people who got laid off, the restaurants, bars, etc. around NHL arenas that will have a lot less business if there's less game days this year. The owners and employees of those establishments are going to be the one's who truly feel the effect(money-wise) of losing games this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsfan26 Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 I'm losing my passion and my favorite hobby that I enjoy atttending with friends and family members who won't get these years back that we lost. We lost the possibility of have enjoying great moments together like game 6 of the ecf and etc. Yes that is true, and it sucks tremendously, but it doesn't have any monetary value. The fans have less to lose in this ordeal out of anyone involved. And more importantly this is having a big impact on many families around the US and Canada, families whose lives depend on the NHL. The workers at the arena, people who work for the team, the resturants around the arenas and even some members of this board who are either losing their jobs or are having their hours being greatly reduced. These people are the ones who are being hit hardest financially and they have no say in the matter. These people can't go over to Europe and work like the players are doing.The NHL owners and the NHL players couldn't give two sh!ts about these people let alone their own fans who pay their ridicilious salaries. Now this I agree with 100%. These are the people who are losing the most. Their financial futures are at stake, the fans' have nothing of the sort at stake here. The players and owners are arguing over millions and millions of dollars, but either side will be just fine regardless of how it all shakes down, but the longer this goes, the more these workers lose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exit56 Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Couple things to remember here: Owners did this, the players offered to play under no CBA. It's the owners fault 100% for this current lockout. The players are doing what any one of us would do under the same circumstances. The regular people have always been and will continue to be cannon fodder in all of this. That's just where we are. Until we make a conscious decision to not be their monkeys any more, it will continue. I mean, come on, we're "consumers" for f's sake. not "customers", not "the public" - CONSUMERS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zubie#8 Posted October 1, 2012 Author Share Posted October 1, 2012 Couple things to remember here: Owners did this, the players offered to play under no CBA. It's the owners fault 100% for this current lockout. The players are doing what any one of us would do under the same circumstances. The regular people have always been and will continue to be cannon fodder in all of this. That's just where we are. Until we make a conscious decision to not be their monkeys any more, it will continue. I mean, come on, we're "consumers" for f's sake. not "customers", not "the public" - CONSUMERS. Why on Earth would the NHL allow the players to play with no CBA where Fehr can have them strike at any point in the season giving the players all the leverage... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exit56 Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012/08/09/bettman-on-cba-the-owners-will-not-play-another-year-under-the-current-agreement/ Sorry, mis-spoke.. Play under the current/previous CBA. There's no leverage if that was the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThreeCups Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 I'm trying to accept the fact that there will be no season... LET'S GO GIANTS!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Again I'm surprised people don't point out how the owners sat out a year to get 'their' CBA and now they won't play under the current CBA, they need another new one. So either they sat out a year for a subpar deal (in which case why they're so willing to sit out again is beyond me) or they're full of **** about needing a new deal and are just looking to bully one out of the union. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aylbert Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Again I'm surprised people don't point out how the owners sat out a year to get 'their' CBA and now they won't play under the current CBA, they need another new one. So either they sat out a year for a subpar deal (in which case why they're so willing to sit out again is beyond me) or they're full of **** about needing a new deal and are just looking to bully one out of the union. Because unlike players, the league is looking long term. Last time, they sacrificed the year to get the salary cap the players swore they would never accept. In doing so, they gave them a very high percentage of the revenue. It's time they split the revenue evenly. If I'm the union, my focus is try to get 53 player / 47 NHL share... with no roll backs... and then agree to 50/50 with no rollback. What is HRR? That's a fun debate. But at leas they are still discussing that part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted October 1, 2012 Share Posted October 1, 2012 Re: Barch's career salary leaving you set for life - that's absurd. Yes, if someone lived like a complete miser while their peer group (which for high level athletes seems to comprise only other high level athletes, and usually those of the same persuasion), they could possibly never work again. Again, when your peer group are millionaires most of whom are living like, well, millionaires, it's tough to live in a studio apartment to save cash. Furthermore, who actually wants to be retired at 35? Barch's larger point is that people who play NHL hockey, by and large, are not set for life. I also am not sure if they should be, but the point is that the money is there. People spend lots of money on the NHL. Where do you want the money to go - players or owners? aylbert: The league is not looking long-term. It is not investigating revenue sharing in any significant form. Without that, this cycle will continue to repeat, hurting owners, players, and fans. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 (edited) Because unlike players, the league is looking long term. Last time, they sacrificed the year to get the salary cap the players swore they would never accept. In doing so, they gave them a very high percentage of the revenue. It's time they split the revenue evenly. The players had already capitulated on the cap before the season was canceled, they just wanted a number in the high 40's and the owners wanted low 40's. Funny how that wound up canceling the season and the cap wound up going to 70 million. If they're thinking long-term they're not doing a very good job of it since we come up with this after EVERY SINGLE CBA. Other than the NBA recently with a two-month stoppage, other leagues have managed to get their **** in order in time to not miss games and the NHL has done this three times! Edited October 2, 2012 by NJDevs4978 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Eco Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 Anyone hating on Barch for this would be similarly pissed if you were in his shoes. Yes, "it's all relative", so imagine you getting a 20% pay-cut, or even worse, not getting paid til you agree to that pay-cut!!! Hating on how much these athletes make is an entirely different issue and if you felt strongly about that, you wouldn't support them by going to the games or buying their jerseys. Barch and every player has every right to complain, and he did so quite eloquently I think. If this were Janssen's Twitter (if he had one), I'm sure you'd sympathise with him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Eco Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 This is the major issue I'm having and the main issue with why I'll struggle to give the NHL or Devils any more money if we miss an entire season. Both sides are greedy and entitled and both sides don't deserve my money. Playing devil's/Devils' advocate here, but I doubt Vanderbeek is on the frontlines of any of this lockout nonsense. This lockout does nothing to help him and the "situation" we're in. It's in his best interest to start the season immediately. However, he's obviously involved in this by default. I imagine the owners of teams like the Flyers, Rangers, Maple Leafs, Blackhawks running the show, big time. There's a lot to blame on these organization about what's happening right now and what's to come. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsfan26 Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 Anyone hating on Barch for this would be similarly pissed if you were in his shoes. Yes, "it's all relative", so imagine you getting a 20% pay-cut, or even worse, not getting paid til you agree to that pay-cut!!! Hating on how much these athletes make is an entirely different issue and if you felt strongly about that, you wouldn't support them by going to the games or buying their jerseys. Barch and every player has every right to complain, and he did so quite eloquently I think. If this were Janssen's Twitter (if he had one), I'm sure you'd sympathise with him. Indeed, though I don't think Janssen saying it would matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouse Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 Re: Barch's career salary leaving you set for life - that's absurd. Yes, if someone lived like a complete miser while their peer group (which for high level athletes seems to comprise only other high level athletes, and usually those of the same persuasion), they could possibly never work again. Again, when your peer group are millionaires most of whom are living like, well, millionaires, it's tough to live in a studio apartment to save cash. Furthermore, who actually wants to be retired at 35? Barch's larger point is that people who play NHL hockey, by and large, are not set for life. I also am not sure if they should be, but the point is that the money is there. People spend lots of money on the NHL. Where do you want the money to go - players or owners? Also, not to say they aren't well compensated, but NHL players lose a decent amount of money for work. Most of them live 2 places. They also lose some of their money on offseason training. Thrown in the high tax bracket, and you see how they could lose money. I don't feel bad for them per se, since I survive on a teacher's salary with student loans to pay, but they do have the right to fight to keep their piece of the pie, especially because their efforts have made it a decent sized pie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ATLL765 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 Re: Barch's career salary leaving you set for life - that's absurd. Yes, if someone lived like a complete miser while their peer group (which for high level athletes seems to comprise only other high level athletes, and usually those of the same persuasion), they could possibly never work again. Again, when your peer group are millionaires most of whom are living like, well, millionaires, it's tough to live in a studio apartment to save cash. Furthermore, who actually wants to be retired at 35? Barch's larger point is that people who play NHL hockey, by and large, are not set for life. I also am not sure if they should be, but the point is that the money is there. People spend lots of money on the NHL. Where do you want the money to go - players or owners? aylbert: The league is not looking long-term. It is not investigating revenue sharing in any significant form. Without that, this cycle will continue to repeat, hurting owners, players, and fans. If you have a couple million and you're smart with your investments, you won't have to "work" another day in your life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 If Barch wants to trade his salary for mine I am down for it. Cry me a fvcking river. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 If you have a couple million and you're smart with your investments, you won't have to "work" another day in your life. Yes, this is true, but what are the odds this happens? How many athletes retire on that kind of money and avoid bankruptcy? Not many. And there's reasons beyond 'athletes are dumb'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJDevs4978 Posted October 4, 2012 Share Posted October 4, 2012 (edited) A lot of 'normal' people aren't smart with their money either. Plus there's non-monetary considerations that athletes face, like being away from their family for large chunks at a time, although it doesn't seem to be as much of an issue for the players that are going overseas Edited October 4, 2012 by NJDevs4978 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsfan26 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 If Barch wants to trade his salary for mine I am down for it. Cry me a fvcking river. Yeah except he isn't comparing his salary with yours. He's frustrated with the owners asking them to all take a pay cut despite their contracts that the owners offered and signed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DevsMan84 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Yeah except he isn't comparing his salary with yours. He's frustrated with the owners asking them to all take a pay cut despite their contracts that the owners offered and signed. Then he can trade is post pay cut salary with mine and I will take it every time. I know he was promised a salary with a contract but hard to feel sorry for a guy where current league minimum is about $500,000 a year. With that money they can cut that in half and I would be more than happy with that salary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Triumph Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Then he can trade is post pay cut salary with mine and I will take it every time. I know he was promised a salary with a contract but hard to feel sorry for a guy where current league minimum is about $500,000 a year. With that money they can cut that in half and I would be more than happy with that salary. I don't think Barch is asking anyone to feel sorry for him. He is telling people why the players are upset and why games aren't happening. The players aren't set for life. All of them don't have a winning lottery ticket. Also, I imagine your job doesn't involve taking punches in the face. More than anyone in the NHL, enforcers 'earn' their money - and they certainly pay for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
devilsfan26 Posted October 5, 2012 Share Posted October 5, 2012 Then he can trade is post pay cut salary with mine and I will take it every time. I know he was promised a salary with a contract but hard to feel sorry for a guy where current league minimum is about $500,000 a year. With that money they can cut that in half and I would be more than happy with that salary. Yeah except you don't have the athletic ability that gets you that kind of salary. The point is ANYONE in their position, regardless of salary would be rightfully pissed off about what the owners are doing to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.