Mark VI Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 The dumb ass players lose big time and they deserve it. Owners said play for $1-$3 million or don't play at all. Players chose to not play at all and now they are all screwed. Players had zero leverage to begin with and in sticking to a no cap stance they just f-ed themselves. The NHL wants to break the players union and will do just that. What happens next is this: If there is no agreement and the entire season is canceled, the NHL can declare an impasse and show they offered numerous proposals that were all rejected and the players union refused to negotiate. Then the NHL can draw up their own CBA with a hard salary cap and any other rules that they want and that becomes the agreement without any vote necessary from the players. Next September, the owners will declare an end the lockout and open training camps. Anyone who wants to tryout for an NHL team can show up and the season will start in October. Union broken, salary cap implemented and "cost certainty" is achieved. NHL 1 NHLPA 0. 228811[/snapback] Dead on. When ESPN achieves a rating of 1 % ( 800,000 homes ) for an NHL playoff game, the advertisers go elsewhere. Old reruns of Law and Order do a 4%. How can the players justify high salaries when a major TV contract is non-existent? The Owners take on the risk and the debt. The players still believe they are a major sport, on level with Football, Basketball and Baseball. This just in.... They're not. Disband the NHL and start from scratch. They'll come back and play for 1 Mil when they find out McDonalds pays less. This is long overdue.
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 Like I said, when the owners decide to use replacement players (it's coming, watch), the players union will crack. That's the way a lot of these types of things need to get resolved, i.e. a cold, hard, slap in the face to the players. Sorry that the players with their inflated egos think they should be making as much as the owners. The fact is, they shouldn't. If they don't like it, they can play elsewhere, or try to form their own league (ha, good luck!).
Commander Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 If you keep watching E$PN and all their garbage, that is true. So what if the NHL isnt mainstream media? Shoot, its probably BETTER OFF that way. This can still be a good thing for the NHL, IF they get rid of Bettman and get a HOCKEY guy in as the commish...not some punk who generalized the league like Bettman did...IF they get rid of Goodenow, and IF they make rules changes and lower ticket prices to make it the great game it once WAS!!! 228654[/snapback] Wasn't it Bettman who pushed for the NHL to take on the Sabres operating costs after Adelphia went bankrupt??? Wasn't it Bettman who did what it took to find a buyer to keep the franchise in Buffalo and not Portland??? The ire against Bettman is totally misplaced...it is the a-holes in the NHLPA who really should be held accountable. If a salary cap is good enough for the NFL, it's good enough for those pukes.
Arkady Renko Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 Dude you must not know alot about Canada. In a lot of ways Canada is superior to the USA. I'm a citizen of both countries and can see the pro and cons on each side of the fence. 228746[/snapback] Hmm... "I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen."
Fake-Fat Sunny Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 Like I said, when the owners decide to use replacement players (it's coming, watch), the players union will crack. That's the way a lot of these types of things need to get resolved, i.e. a cold, hard, slap in the face to the players. Sorry that the players with their inflated egos think they should be making as much as the owners. The fact is, they shouldn't. If they don't like it, they can play elsewhere, or try to form their own league (ha, good luck!). 228853[/snapback] However, look back at the NFL and the results of their use of replacement players. They certainly beat the crap out of the NFLPA and showed they had bigger cojones than the union, but the result was that NFLPA "surrendered" and moved to decertify itself. This move would have forced a free-market on the owners which would have had to negotiate with each individual player with the highest bidder winning. In the NFL owners like Jerry Jones or a Dan Snyder who are committed to spending whatever bucks it takes to win would buy the best players, those in smaller markets, with less bucks or less willing to spend their bucks would end up with lesser players. The NFL realized (after a little twisting and moaning and whining) that it needed the a CBA and the union in order to restrain trade and operate in a less free market in order to survive. Instead of battling each other over the original NFLPA proposal for 52% of the gross receipts, the NFL and NFLPA entered into a partnership which is still developing but the players won roughly 70% of the designated gross in bargaining a new CBA. The agreement provided the labor peace necessary to provide more certainty to the owners in terms of investments and also more certainty for the product in terms of sales to fans, marketers and most important for football to the networks. With the designated gross concept the players have access to a smaller portion of the owners bucks than the raw gross number which was part of the original 52% proposal, but the amount of money is so much bigger under the labor peace of the new partnership, the achievement of a higher % of the designated gross has given the players far more raw $ than before. My guess is that thr NHL does move to install its own CBA on the players after a year without the league, and at that point the NHLPA threatens or moves to decertify itself and rather than operating in a free market where teams like the Rangers are operating in a different financial world that teams like Buffalo or other teams which are less well off and the league has to reach some agreement with the NHLPA or things will fall apart. I think folks who view this simply as a battle between the owners and the players are missing the point. Its not a fight over which one will win over the other, but a fight over how they are going to co-operate with each other. My sense is that if forces do want to view this simply as a battle between the owners and the players the owners unlike the NFL are destined to lose this fight. Hockey is much more of an international sport that football and it is a sport originally created in another counry. There are simply too many other options for players who though they will never get the gravy train that the a US based NHL provided, they will still be able to get more money than they have ever gotten playing for the competitors of the NHL if it does not have the restraints on trade a union offers it. Even worse, it is just a far more multi-national economic world than it was 20 yeas ago. NHL owners provide capital but there are simply far too many sources of money in the world for the NHL to try to throw their weight around like the NFL owners used to. My hope is that the labor battle ends quickly, but I don't really care if that is because the NHL owners survive or because the players cut out the owners who are simply middlemen and find other sources of capital most likely from themselves.
Mark Vader Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 I am deeply depressed about this. With iving in San Jose all my life, this city was always in the shadows of San Francisco & Oakland. Then when the NHL awarded San Jose with a franchise, finally we were on the map, and no longer just the silicon valley. I love the Sharks and going to their games is always a blast. There are real hockey fans that go to the game to have fun, not to just be there with the crowd, as Stevestojan said the Panthers fans do. I have been to several playoff games as well, and nothing is more exciting. MadBuffaloDisease Posted Today, 07:51 PM Like I said, when the owners decide to use replacement players (it's coming, watch), the players union will crack. That's the way a lot of these types of things need to get resolved, i.e. a cold, hard, slap in the face to the players. Sorry that the players with their inflated egos think they should be making as much as the owners. The fact is, they shouldn't. If they don't like it, they can play elsewhere, or try to form their own league (ha, good luck!). I agree with you Mad. Bring in replacement players. Let's see some hockey from players who actually care about playing. I want my Sharks hockey back. GO BILLS!!!!! GO SHARKS!!!
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 I think folks who view this simply as a battle between the owners and the players are missing the point. Its not a fight over which one will win over the other, but a fight over how they are going to co-operate with each other. If the owners get their cap (and I suspect they will), they will effectively have "won." If they follow the NFL's model and base the cap on a percentage of revenue, then all teams will be profitable and thus the league will be profitable and stable for as long as the CBA remains. And when you consider that an owner's potential "career" is a lot longer than a player's career, it's a longer-term "win." And again, since the NHL will be around (potentially) a lot longer than players and even owners, it's the best thing for the league, which also is the best thing for the players. The problem is the players don't know that or don't WANT to know that, since their careers are short and they are thinking short-term and the money they are losing. The only "cooperation" the owners need from the players is to agree to the cap and to play, while the players need the owners to be truthful about revenue.
Formerly Allan in MD Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 And Dennis Hextall, Gilles Villemure, Larry Wilson. A seat in the "upper" greys used to cost something like 75 cents... 228673[/snapback] And Gaye Stewert, Donnie Marshall, Dickie Gamble, Ken Wharram, Ed Slowinski. Anyone remember the Coal Truck?
Alaska Darin Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 I am deeply depressed about this. With iving in San Jose all my life, this city was always in the shadows of San Francisco & Oakland. Then when the NHL awarded San Jose with a franchise, finally we were on the map, and no longer just the silicon valley. I love the Sharks and going to their games is always a blast. There are real hockey fans that go to the game to have fun, not to just be there with the crowd, as Stevestojan said the Panthers fans do. I have been to several playoff games as well, and nothing is more exciting. I agree with you Mad. Bring in replacement players. Let's see some hockey from players who actually care about playing. I want my Sharks hockey back. GO BILLS!!!!! GO SHARKS!!! 228940[/snapback] I was there the year the OV line and Arturs Irbe upset the number 1 seeded Detroit Red Wings in the first round of the playoffs. It was really something to behold. There are some good hockey fans in San Jose - most of them ain't FROM San Jose, however.
olivier in france Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 the cure is to give hockey back to their fans, to the people that actually care... there is (was?) NHL franchises in Phoenix and Atlanta and not in Quebec and Winnipeg!!! Location is one of the basic rules of business you gotta be where your market is... They should go back to a 15-25 franchises league based in real hockey towns both side of the border. And if they want one day to have a 30 franchises league again thet'd better make an european division( Stockholm-Helsinki-Moscow-Prague- Munich) than to try to sell hockey in the Carolinas!
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted February 5, 2005 Posted February 5, 2005 It is a niche sport. Things seemed to work well when it was a 21 team league.....they could have halted expansion at 24 teams and been fine. The NHL of today is a sad looking thing compared to years gone by. A few owners went berserk with giving out contracts, now the players think that their gravy train should continue forever. The owners have the chance to get the economic situation workable for 30 teams. I don't know though.....the league has a television contract that belongs on cable access. The players are losing a whole year's salary.....just so NHLPA Prez Bob Badenow can try and work his magic in an 11th hour deal. Many of the rank and file players want to put the idea of a cap to a vote......Badenow is relenting, albeit he left the meetings yesterday and threw a hissy fit.....like a scorned, red-haired stepchild. Badenow only does the things that his player cronies, ie McCabe, Pronger, Chelios and the like want him to do. These are the sad primadonnas in the league......if McCabe, Pronger and Chelios all ended up with career ending injuries, that would only be too kind a way for that trio of f***heads to exit the game. Nobody is innocent on either side......but the players are the one who, if the league survives, will have to take the slap to the face this time......just like the owners found out that is what happened to them in 95.
Like A Mofo Posted February 7, 2005 Author Posted February 7, 2005 Bumping this, just thinking about this so called hockey league... Any of you think because there has been nothing new reported in the past 2-3 days that something is FINALLY getting done to resolve this mess???
KD in CA Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Bumping this, just thinking about this so called hockey league... Any of you think because there has been nothing new reported in the past 2-3 days that something is FINALLY getting done to resolve this mess??? 231461[/snapback] No.
Like A Mofo Posted February 7, 2005 Author Posted February 7, 2005 No. 231469[/snapback] You are probably right, my thinking is proabably distored due to too much caffiene LOL
Alaska Darin Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 You are probably right, my thinking is proabably distored due to too much caffiene LOL 231472[/snapback] Switch to vodka.
Like A Mofo Posted February 7, 2005 Author Posted February 7, 2005 Switch to vodka. 231475[/snapback] What kind do you recommend?
Alaska Darin Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 What kind do you recommend? 231477[/snapback] Grey Goose and Chiroc are my personal favorites. Ketel One is good for those on a budget. Stojan recommended Iceberg, but ironically enough I can't find a distributor in Alaska that carries it!
EZC-Boston Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Grey Goose and Chiroc are my personal favorites. Ketel One is good for those on a budget. Stojan recommended Iceberg, but ironically enough I can't find a distributor in Alaska that carries it! 231487[/snapback] Grey Goose is overrated, go with Belvedere
rolly Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 Try the AHL. It's always been better anyway. 228633[/snapback] HAHA, now that's just funny. The talent level between the two leagues is well, minor and major.
Alaska Darin Posted February 7, 2005 Posted February 7, 2005 HAHA, now that's just funny. The talent level between the two leagues is well, minor and major. 231511[/snapback] Skipping the talent part, you're much more likely to see passion on any given night in the AHL. Especially during the regular season. Not to mention the fact that it's about one/fifth the cost.
Recommended Posts