NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Welcome to the main forum of our site. Anything and everything to do with the Vancouver Canucks is dicussed and debated here.

Moderator: Referees

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Topper » Sat Jul 14, 2012 6:48 pm

Callicles wrote:If it weren't for unions you wouldn't have the weekend. Or overtime, or health and safety rules, rules against child labour, and pretty much every other right and benefit you have as a worker.

Yes and millionaires need his sort of protection. Actually, what they need is protection from their own Allan Eagleson.

Long gone is the day when Bobby Orr gave back his salary the the 'hawks when he retired due to injury.
Over the Internet, you can pretend to be anyone or anything.

I'm amazed that so many people choose to be complete twats.
User avatar
Topper
CC Legend
 
Posts: 4552
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Callicles » Sat Jul 14, 2012 7:58 pm

Lancer wrote:
Callicles wrote: If it weren't for unions you wouldn't have the weekend. Or overtime, or health and safety rules, rules against child labour, and pretty much every other right and benefit you have as a worker. And, might I point out that it makes little sense to me to be disappointed in the millionaire players who actually provide the product and not with the billionaire owners trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of everyone.

I also would have to say I whole-heartedly agree with the suggestion that supplementary discipline should be the work of a third-party panel and referees should be held to a higher standard.


Whoa, easy there Mr. Shop Steward! :lol: :lol:

Totaly agree with the principle of the existence of unions and all, but it's a matter of approach. Trust me, I'm no more enamoured with the league's propposal than anybody in the 'PA but I understand their position in terms of giving themselves a position from which to negotiate. No shilling for the owners here. ;)

Frankly, they look more like asses than anything else with this proposal going public. Fehr has gone out saying the status quo - which the league imposed when the players' union finally caved - is okay as an interim measure and would be happy to see another season of the same if another CBA can't be reached. The league looks like a bunch of screw-tightening arses with this proposal. It's what gets agreed to in the end that matters in the end, but the court of public opinion can't be disregarded and right now the PA and the league are painting the league as a bunch of juice-assed schmoes.

Ball's in the PA's court, let's see what their return is.


I tend to thinkt he owners end up looking like asses no matter what. As for the proposal they issued, it's just typical negotiating tactics. Owners/managers offer nothing, workers demand everything. It's just the dance. Of course, it's an enormous waste of time and energy, but that's where 'negotiating' is at these days. The NHLPA should just be happy they're not only in Canada or they'd just be legislated to work whatever contract the employer fancies.

The owners really look like asses because they yelled, stomped their feet, cried poor and all the rest to get the last CBA just how they liked it, then immediately began finding ways to circumvent it. Players make what players make because owners pay them. I don't feel sorry for pro hockey players, they are well compensated, but I feel even less sympathy for billionaire owners who are making more money than ever and still sniveling and whining. Talk about a sense of entitlement. How on earth anybody can reconcile a belief that ownership shouldn't have to deal with the demands of unionized millionaires with a belief that players shouldn't be able to shop their services for 'market value' is beyond me, but there it is (not that you are saying hat, but that is often the general tone of conversation around this particular issue).
Callicles
AHL Prospect
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 12:11 pm

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Callicles » Sat Jul 14, 2012 8:06 pm

Topper wrote:
Callicles wrote:If it weren't for unions you wouldn't have the weekend. Or overtime, or health and safety rules, rules against child labour, and pretty much every other right and benefit you have as a worker.

Yes and millionaires need his sort of protection. Actually, what they need is protection from their own Allan Eagleson.

Long gone is the day when Bobby Orr gave back his salary the the 'hawks when he retired due to injury.


And the billionaires need protection from millionaires? They band together to get what they want. If it's noble and should be expected that a player return salary when injured (or underperforming maybe?), shouldn't management increase salary when a player performs above expectations?
Callicles
AHL Prospect
 
Posts: 23
Joined: Fri Jul 13, 2012 12:11 pm

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Boston Canucker » Sat Jul 14, 2012 8:15 pm

Callicles wrote:
Per wrote:
Lancer wrote:If it weren't for unions you wouldn't have the weekend. Or overtime, or health and safety rules, rules against child labour, and pretty much every other right and benefit you have as a worker. And, might I point out that it makes little sense to me to be disappointed in the millionaire players who actually provide the product and not with the billionaire owners trying to squeeze every last penny they can out of everyone.

I also would have to say I whole-heartedly agree with the suggestion that supplementary discipline should be the work of a third-party panel and referees should be held to a higher standard.


Very much agreed, well put.

As well, let's keep in mind that this is less an argument between players and owners than between the revenue making owners and the small market, can't turn a dime (but we'll shell out 10 yr contract) owners. You can bet NYR, Van, Tor etc want no part of a lockout, but Bettman is carrying water for the likes of Craig Leopold, who hands out 12 year deals and says the system needs to change...
Boston Canucker
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:30 am

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Meds » Sat Jul 14, 2012 9:06 pm

A 50/50 split is fair. The players don't have jobs without the owners. The owners don't have exciting teams without the players. The players do take the physical risks on the ice, but the owners do take the risk financially on the players.

So long as they close the loop holes in the next CBA, and do away with structured contracts, then the new system should be more balanced.
User avatar
Meds
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3123
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:50 pm

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby rikster » Sat Jul 14, 2012 9:23 pm

You can bet NYR, Van, Tor etc want no part of a lockout, but Bettman is carrying water for the likes of Craig Leopold, who hands out 12 year deals and says the system needs to change...


Why wouldn't those teams want to tweak the system and I don't understand why some are surprised both sides would want changes to the current agreement...

The system is inflationary which is bad enough, but it's also uses a flawed " as compared to other players " method of setting salaries....

When a Sydney Crosby is given a new contract, his salary takes into consideration his on ice performances and his ability to draw revenues for both the league and his owner...

That sets the bar for other players who compare their on ice performances only while ignoring the ability to influence revenues for the team and the league..

And while fans and media are quick to point out and blame owners for not being able to control themselves, nobody seems to mention the player agents who for me are the silent villains ...

Speaking of those player agents, I'd love to see their pay changed from a percentage of the contract to a flat fee for services ...

The CBA is a compromise and not a solution which is another way of saying it is an imperfect system....

If both sides really wanted a more perfect agreement, they would begin by deciding how many teams need to be contracted from the league...

That won't happen which means when the next CBA is crafted, it too will have flaws and by the time it expires both sides will again be looking for more changes...

Take care...
rikster
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:41 am

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Boston Canucker » Sun Jul 15, 2012 6:16 am

rikster wrote:
You can bet NYR, Van, Tor etc want no part of a lockout, but Bettman is carrying water for the likes of Craig Leopold, who hands out 12 year deals and says the system needs to change...

Why wouldn't those teams want to tweak the system and I don't understand why some are surprised both sides would want changes to the current agreement...
The system is inflationary which is bad enough, but it's also uses a flawed " as compared to other players " method of setting salaries....
And while fans and media are quick to point out and blame owners for not being able to control themselves, nobody seems to mention the player agents who for me are the silent villains ...
Take care...


Those teams are making money in this system, and they likely know in a new system they will end up having to help out the poorer teams even more. Aquilini is making money as is, I rather doubt he's interested in shutting down operations for a year.

I don't see a problem with the agents. So what? They are representing clients who have to negotiate with corporate entities and their many lawyers over complicated contracts. I'd get a freaking agent too. And yes, the owners do it have in their power to not sign the contract; they are not children (well, some are, in a sense). And by Bettman's account the present system has garnered record revenues, so someone is making money, a lot. If they split goes to 50/50, maybe that will be fine, but the elimination of arbitration, 10 years to UFA, harsh constraint on contract lengths, that won't wash; limits player freedom of movement and negotiation too much, and also make being a fan a lot less fun. Look how difficult trades are to do now with the role of contracts, the meagers selection of UFAs this year; the nhl's proposal will only make it worse. Trade/UFA threads will be barren deserts. This will be a long haul negotiation. I definitely side with the players, hope they don't cave in to a brutal deal, likely they won't this time.
Boston Canucker
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:30 am

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby rikster » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:13 am

Aquilini is making money as is, I rather doubt he's interested in shutting down operations for a year.


Not sure who you are to tell an owner who has spent millions of dollars on an investment what he should be happy with for a return?...

And you are looking at it as a snapshot in time...

If negotiations lead to the league being shut down, some owners may be losers in the short term but over the long term I would expect that they experience a greater overall return than if they had carried on status quo...

Agents best before date came and went the day hockey players became multi millionaires with guaranteed contracts...If we can't change the way they are paid, can we at least require that they are required to make public their revenues and expenses?

After all, owners are required to make public hockey generated revenues and players contracts are made public, so why not make the same requirement of agents?

There are no virgins in this dispute, not the owners, not the players and not the agents, the three headed monster as I see it, so if I am to pick a side it will be on the side of the ones writing the cheques...

Take care...
rikster
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:41 am

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Boston Canucker » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:43 am

rikster wrote:
Aquilini is making money as is, I rather doubt he's interested in shutting down operations for a year.


Not sure who you are to tell an owner who has spent millions of dollars on an investment what he should be happy with for a return?...

There are no virgins in this dispute, not the owners, not the players and not the agents, the three headed monster as I see it, so if I am to pick a side it will be on the side of the ones writing the cheques...

Take care...


I never said he should be happy with it, I surmised that he's not at the head of the pack leading the charge. And dollars to donuts, I am right. But then again, that could be turned around: who is to tell a player that he has to limit his market value and freedom of contract and be "happy with that return"? To say to a player: "you can make this much, but not that much, you will work here, determined by a draft, for this long, determined by your ELC, and can be free to market your services to anyone but not for, say, 8-10 years...and you should be happy for your return even though your career earning span is miniscule next to the decades an owner can earn." In that dynamic, I'll always side with the player, easy. And in terms of the snapshot, the longview is property value, of the team, the building etc which is not accounted for in HRR. That's the long term profit the owners never want to talk about.
Last edited by Boston Canucker on Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:51 am, edited 1 time in total.
Boston Canucker
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 624
Joined: Mon Jul 11, 2011 7:30 am

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Hockey Widow » Sun Jul 15, 2012 7:46 am

I would love to see NTC/NMC modified or restricted somehow. Like no more full NTC, only ones where a player must submit a list of teams he will go to. I don't know how big the list should be. Or a reverse list of limited number of teams he won't go to or maybe a combination of the two. Something that allows the player to be moved but still allows the player some control. Or even allow a window between the end of the season and July 1 where all NTC/NMC are suspended.

I would also like to see where a player demands a trade he can be suspended (team choice) until traded with his cap not counting until he is moved to a new team.

I'd eliminate the NMC altogether, or restrict it to players over 35 with a minimum 15 years in the league. The idea is for there to me very few NMC in effect and only for the old warhorses.

I like the change to the ELC. But I would increase the amount the players can make for years 4 and 5. It would change the cap hit for all 5 years but it would keep the player on the team at a more reasonable salary for two extra years. Bet Edmonton would have loved this one already.

The 5 year limit on player contracts is really going to test how good a GM is. Speaking of Edmonton, they have a lot of kids who will be coming off their ELC over the next few years. Without the ability to sign them to 13 year deals they will have some huge cap hits and begs the question if they can keep all their kids. Not sure if I like that one. Not sure if Edmonton can afford Steven Stamkos money for 5-6 players at the same time.

I'd like to see all contract two way contracts. If a player can't make the team he should not draw his NHL salary. If a player is placed on waivers and picked up allow the new team to renegotiate his contract. Give the team X days to work out a new deal or the player becomes FA. Players like Redden may still be in the league if this happened. If the player isn't claimed on waivers then you should be allowed to freely recall him but go through the same process if you want to send him back down. I think fewer players would end up being sent down but if they were a team would at least be able to recall them without fear of losing them or paying half their salary.
The only HW the Canucks need
User avatar
Hockey Widow
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3499
Joined: Sun Jul 10, 2011 8:52 pm

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Potatoe1 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 9:20 am

Hockey Widow wrote: would love to see NTC/NMC modified or restricted somehow.


I think that something like this would make players less likely to give home team discounts. Why take less money if you are at risk of being moved to place you dont want to be?

I'd eliminate the NMC altogether, or restrict it to players over 35 with a minimum 15 years in the league. The idea is for there to me very few NMC in effect and only for the old warhorses.


I agree on that one.

I like the change to the ELC. But I would increase the amount the players can make for years 4 and 5. It would change the cap hit for all 5 years but it would keep the player on the team at a more reasonable salary for two extra years. Bet Edmonton would have loved this one already.


I like that one as well.

The 5 year limit on player contracts is really going to test how good a GM is. Speaking of Edmonton, they have a lot of kids who will be coming off their ELC over the next few years. Without the ability to sign them to 13 year deals they will have some huge cap hits and begs the question if they can keep all their kids. Not sure if I like that one. Not sure if Edmonton can afford Steven Stamkos money for 5-6 players at the same time.


I agree.

I like that you can reduce the cap hit on franchise type players by giving them term.

I'd like to see all contract two way contracts. If a player can't make the team he should not draw his NHL salary.


This is basically the same as eliminating guaranteed contracts.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby rikster » Sun Jul 15, 2012 10:24 am

" In that dynamic, I'll always side with the player, easy.


Fair enough, I'm a believer in being paid for the value you give your employer rather than being based on an employers bottom line so we disagree...

If owners really wanted Armageddon as has been suggested, with their opening offer they would have put the elimination of guaranteed contracts on the table.. I understand that a number were pushing to take the bargaining in that direction because they are upset at the number of players whose on ice play do not justify the contracts they were given...

I think in a system that has;

*One market generating over $200 million more in revenues per year than the smallest market does and markets whose revenues are below the salary cap ceiling...

*A salary cap floor which forces some teams to take their payrolls to levels that their revenues don't justify and which causes them to sign marginal players to goofy contracts just so that they can reach the floor which in turn influences other player contracts...

*Has most of its league wide revenues being generated by a handful of its teams...

You end up with a number of holes in the system that can be taken advantage of by players and their agents...

Had the league thought its revenues would take off the way they have post lockout many of the good will concessions handed out to the players in 2004 i.e., earlier free agency would never have been offered....

I thought in 2004 and still think that franchise exemption contracts should be added along with reducing the cap ceiling...

There are 30 teams in the league and probably not that many marquee players in the game and for those players I don't think they should have to take home town discounts to help their teams sign other players...

Would there be a NHL team let alone a new arena in Pittsburg if Crosby wasn't available for the Pens to draft? For those type of players I would like to see their contracts fall outside of caps and maximum contract amounts...

For the majority of players, especially given the systems play that dominates the game today, they are plug and play players and are being paid inflated salaries because of the loopholes and imperfections in the CBA...

I think at the end of the day this next CBA will be a bridge to expansion into Europe which will see under performing markets relocated over seas and expansion to make a Euro division...

For all the talk about relocating 6 to 10 struggling markets into Ontario and Quebec, when I do the math I still come up 4 to 8 markets short...

Take care....
rikster
MVP
MVP
 
Posts: 121
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 6:41 am

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Potatoe1 » Sun Jul 15, 2012 10:55 am

rikster wrote:*One market generating over $200 million more in revenues per year than the smallest market does and markets whose revenues are below the salary cap ceiling...


That is an "owners issue" which should be either left alone or corrected through revenue sharing.

It is unrealistic to expect that the worst run teams in the crappiest markets are entitled to proffits on the backs of the players.

*A salary cap floor which forces some teams to take their payrolls to levels that their revenues don't justify and which causes them to sign marginal players to goofy contracts just so that they can reach the floor which in turn influences other player contracts...


I agree, that issue should be corrected.

*Has most of its league wide revenues being generated by a handful of its teams...


Again, owners issue.

You end up with a number of holes in the system that can be taken advantage of by players and their agents...


Team managers are every bit as guilty if not more so.

Had the league thought its revenues would take off the way they have post lockout many of the good will concessions handed out to the players in 2004 i.e., earlier free agency would never have been offered....


Good grief, the owners crushed the players in 2004. They basically wrote the deal they wanted and said "sign here".

I think at the end of the day this next CBA will be a bridge to expansion into Europe which will see under performing markets relocated over seas and expansion to make a Euro division...


I hope you are wrong.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby Fred » Sun Jul 15, 2012 11:03 am

Owners + players = GREED

It's the fans pockets they have their hands in. Why are so many interested in either owners or the players wish to screw the fan to the max.

I hope they do shut down / strike and loose a lot of money. I can always watch the Giants or the BJHL for my fix, hey even the local Midget AAA play some good hockey, how about UBC.

I am frankly tired of the constant need both parties have to grasp more money for themselves.
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: NHL sends CBA termination notice!

Postby coco_canuck » Sun Jul 15, 2012 11:14 am

I have a hard time feeling sorry for NHL owners.

The system was in need of a major shake-up last time around, so I had no issue with the owners wanting to fix the league.

But now, the league is in much better shape, costs are more or less fixed, and revenues are growing exponentially.

There's no economic system in any free-trade market that guarantees a specific business, or franchise, unequivocal success. So I have a hard time accepting an even greater cutback on player costs because it will only serve to create greater parity, which in a hard-cap sports-league world is consistent with mediocrity.

It's just like any economy that needs competition and stratification to really succeed and create a good product. If the cap goes down to the 50M range and stays there for the most part, with shorter term contracts, then you're going to see a lot mediocre rosters with a few big money players spread around the league. If a player can't front load a deal, then you're looking at 5 year Max contracts for every star player, just like what's happened in the NBA.

Whatever anyone's view on guaranteed contracts is, the reality is that they're not going anywhere....at least not in this negotiation.

As Tater pointed out, the escrow pay-back works like revenue sharing, but if I were the PA, I'd be pushing for a more consistent revenue sharing program between NHL teams. Right now revenue sharing is very complicated, with many restrictions, and the burden falling nearly exclusively on the top 5-8 revenue sharing teams, which includes the Canucks.

If this really is a partnership, then the NHL and the PA have to be responsible for the overall health of the league, and that burden cannot fall on the players in each negotiation via a decrease in their earning potential and market freedom. The players are the product, and the owners create the environment where they play, but there's no other business other than sports where the employees (the players) are the product. When you have such exclusive talents, then there rightfully should be a high cost attached to getting that service. Therefore, there really needs to be a two-way partnership, and the costs of the business' success cannot be solely carried by one side.

Really, the sunbelt teams will only make money if they have an exceptional product, and that comes from good management that spends money the right way...not throwing it around or being overly frugal.
User avatar
coco_canuck
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Fri Jul 08, 2011 9:54 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSNbot Media and 1 guest

cron