Where Will They Play?

[tantalum]

Actually I think it's simply a case of the NHL not caring if the bigger salaried guys decide to go play elsewhere while the lower paid guys sit at home wondering why they aren't getting a paycheque.

Comments are starting to come out right now that many of the rank and file are not happy in the PA over the fact they aren't negotiating. That number will only increase as each day passes.

[ukcanuck]

Actually I think it's simply a case of the NHL not caring if the bigger salaried guys decide to go play elsewhere while the lower paid guys sit at home wondering why they aren't getting a paycheque.

Comments are starting to come out right now that many of the rank and file are not happy in the PA over the fact they aren't negotiating. That number will only increase as each day passes.

I guess it was never going to be easy to present a unified front but somehow I think Fehr is smart enough to not start sawing off a branch while he was sitting on it.
But you bring up a good point, we know how Bettman changed league bylaws to create a power block, but I at least don't know how the PA bylaws work if there is a revolt like linden's back stab...(queue toppers lol )

[Potatoe1]

but I at least don't know how the PA bylaws work if there is a revolt like linden's back stab...(queue toppers lol )

You mean Linden, who unlike Goodnow, listened to the players who clearly wanted to settle...

Then negotiated a deal from a position of weakness that ended up being fantastic for the players....

Yeah a real back stabber...

[Topper]

Linden deserves a spot in the HOF as a builder for his work ending the last labour dispute.

[okcanuck]

but I at least don't know how the PA bylaws work if there is a revolt like linden's back stab...(queue toppers lol )

You mean Linden, who unlike Goodnow, listened to the players who clearly wanted to settle...

Then negotiated a deal from a position of weakness that ended up being fantastic for the players....

Yeah a real back stabber...

Good one Pot, I get tired of people dissing Linden because he caved to the owners,thats bullshit. The players all made out like bandits and they should all be thankful that Linden was involved in the process.

[ukcanuck]

Linden deserves a spot in the HOF as a builder for his work ending the last labour dispute.

Yeah, just not as a player eh?
Hey when you waste a year to hold out for principle and then go behind your leadership to broker a deal. I'm sorry, I loved linden as a player, on the ice he's top two or three Canucks all time, but as a union member?? not so much

[ukcanuck]

but I at least don't know how the PA bylaws work if there is a revolt like linden's back stab...(queue toppers lol )

You mean Linden, who unlike Goodnow, listened to the players who clearly wanted to settle...

Then negotiated a deal from a position of weakness that ended up being fantastic for the players....

Yeah a real back stabber...

Linden clearly wanted to settle, and clearly there were some players who wanted to settl, but also as clear is that the PA ran linden out of its leadership and there are, as I understand it, players who still refuse to speak to him (Chelios.) so I don't think it's that clear what was wanted exactly last time around.
And its amazing how cavalier some are about other people's freedom. The cap sucks for the players, all the pros have tried to avoid it. It's an artificial limit on what a player can make. I can't imagine any liking it no matter how much they get paid.

[tantalum]

The PA ratified the deal in overwhelming numbers (87% to 13%) it is clear what the players wanted.


You know what also sucks for players? lack of guaranteed contracts. You better believe that if the cap comes off the table so do guaranteed contracts. etc.

The cap isn't bad for players. Just because they can't accelerate salaries at a huge rate doesn't mean it's bad. If they did accelerate at the rate they'd like to many of those players that the cap is soooo bad for wouldn't have a job because teams would fold. Without the cap you would start to see a polarity in the league develop so that a larger chunk of the PA membership wouldn't have a truly legitimate chance at winning a cup. The cap isn't evil nor is linkage and talking to people in one organization a very large chunk of the PA wants to settle. The Crosby's, Iginla's and Ovechkin's are not speaking for them and they will get more vocal as this goes on.


Hall of Famer now Player agency owner Bobby Orr has also mentioned they should meet until it gets done and not lose out on the momentum. His comments are clearly not biased towards the union as most agents comments have been and if he's saying something then he has clients of his agency that are saying something similar. Funnily enough his agency also represents Spezza who is one of the hardliners in the early going.

"If I were to give them any advice at all, I would say, lock both sides in a room, give them bread and water and don't come out of the room until you make the deal," Orr said. "Everything is going so well in that league, with LA winning the (Stanley) Cup and the Rangers are going to be strong. We have so many great, young players in our game. The game is in such great shape."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=405745

[ukcanuck]

The PA ratified the deal in overwhelming numbers (87% to 13%) it is clear what the players wanted.

Thats a red herring, it ignores the fact they held out and lost a year before they capitulated by that number. if they truly wanted the cap and the deal Linden was a part of, they would have signed and not lost the year. so its not clear at all what Linden's culpability was. He could have been a hero as Pot says or he could have been Judas...one thing is pretty clear he was run out of the PA leadership at the time...doesnt sound like a hero really....

You know what also sucks for players? lack of guaranteed contracts. You better believe that if the cap comes off the table so do guaranteed contracts. etc.

I've agreed with tis sentiment, if the cap is off the table guaranteed contracts needs revisiting. however if the cap stays then real Honest to God revenue sharing needs to be on the table as well.
* the players have offered to help fund the revenue sharing while the league grows and its out of the pickle its in at the moment btw

[Tiger]

UK Canuck said :
* the players have offered to help fund the revenue sharing while the league grows and its out of the pickle its in at the moment btw

Wonder if the players really would pay there share ( 57% ) of the overall team losses in the NHL???
Doubt it.. an NHL franchise is not a way to get rich .. "Revenue sharing"? .. means taking the $$ on the front end with no regard to the profitability of the business .. If the players share was of the net profits ... they would lose one hell of a lot of their present salaries.. and some of the the present teams would vanish as owners get tired of losing money .. A cap prevents that from happening..
Their is a reason that NHL players don't buy Teams.. Its a lousy investment.. The only one that did that is Mario.. and he had to do it to collect his salary as the previous owner went broke..

[Potatoe1]

Thats a red herring, it ignores the fact they held out and lost a year before they capitulated by that number. if they truly wanted the cap and the deal Linden was a part of, they would have signed and not lost the year.

Of course they didn't want a cap.....

But they held out thinking the owners would cave and they didn't. The moment the season was canceled all hell broke lose in the PA, the players turned on Goodnow in large numbers and were not willing to miss another game.

The cap deal was not negotiated behind anyone's back Goodnow had long been removed from any negotiating power.

Linden and the player reps wanted to get back to playing and they new the only way to do it was to agree to the linked cap.

so its not clear at all what Linden's culpability was. He could have been a hero as Pot says or he could have been Judas...one thing is pretty clear he was run out of the PA leadership at the time...doesnt sound like a hero really....

The players lost a full year and still ended up with a salary cap. It appeared to be a complete disaster.

Everyone was mad at someone.

The hard liners blamed Linden and Saskin, and the moderates blamed Goodnow. The PA was a giant clusterfuck for years after the lock out.

At the end of the day though, despite the incredibly weak bargaining position that Linden and Saskin were in, they still managed to get a CBA that was very good for the players. In fact mid level players seem to be better off under the new system. Yes the players as a group were getting a higher percentage of revenue before but there was a disproportional amount going to 30+ year old star players.

Back in 2003 you had good top 4 defenseman making 1.5 to 2 mill per year during their prime years. Now those guys make 3.5+ after their ELC and 4.5 to 5.5 once they hit free agency at 27.

On the Flip side the top paid guys in the league are making about the same or a little less then they were 10 years ago.

For mast players the caped system with a lower free agency age has been better then the uncapped system where your ass was owned until you turned 31.

the players have offered to help fund the revenue sharing while the league grows and its out of the pickle its in at the moment btw

This is a myth that the PA has sold to the media. I have explained why numerous times.

If the players offer had included linkage and did not revert back to 57% in the final year the the owners would certainly be willing to up revenue sharing to the level the players proposed.

It wasn't the extra 60 mill in revenue sharing that the owners didn't like about the players offer.

[Potatoe1]

Hmm looks like the PA might still be a clusterfuck.

Because they believe the clubs are partly responsible for Boogaard’s death, his parents went to the players’ association, which according to the report promised to help them file a grievance to get the Rangers to pay out what was left on the contract with the team.

According to the lawsuit, the NHLPA failed to file the grievance by the required deadline, leaving the Boogaards unable to collect the remainder of the money, TMZ reported.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/h ... um=twitter

So ummm, Boogards parents ask them to file a grievance and they uhhhhh,,,,, forget?

Nice job guys...

[ukcanuck]

Are we talking about the same thing regarding revenue sharing?
At the rejection of the leagues latest final offer, Fehr explained the revenue sharing system used by baseball which is different to the one in the NFL but nonetheless is much more
significant than the current one the NHL uses, which would be funded fifty/fifty By the players and the "have" teams was flatly rejected. Once again to me at any rate that says the owners are not interested in any solution but the one they want.
It's just an unreasonable position to take in an a negotiation unless it's union busting... Then it makes sense.
Of the exercise is to break the union and their solidarity, then locking out and stonewalling makes perfect sense.

[Potatoe1]

At the rejection of the leagues latest final offer, Fehr explained the revenue sharing system used by baseball which is different to the one in the NFL but nonetheless is much moresignificant than the current one the NHL uses,

In 2009, for example, that figure translated to about $433-million (all currency U.S.) that was paid to MLB`s lower revenue teams from the total revenue of $6.6-billion. According to a memo from NHL commissioner Gary Bettman to the league`s governors that was obtained by The Globe and Mail, the league`s HRR for the 2008-09 season was about $2.6-billion. Bettman said in the memo that the revenue-sharing obligation was about $146.1-million.

MLB's ratio is .0656 and the NHL's current ratio is .0561.

However the NHL owners latest proposal upped the number to a projected 180 mill which brings it right up the the same level as MLB. The Players offer apparently would have increased the sharing by an additional 60 mill.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/h ... le4451062/

Also keep in mind that it is quite a bit harder to share revenue in the NHL as the national TV deal is substantially smaller.

Getting things to the same level as MLB given the circumstances is quite an accomplishment.

which would be funded fifty/fifty By the players and the "have" teams was flatly rejected. Once again to me at any rate that says the owners are not interested in any solution but the one they want.

Again with this....

It wasn't the "revenue sharing" aspect of the players proposal that made it a non-starter, it was the fact it de-linked the cap from over all revenue.

[Strangelove]

Linden clearly wanted to settle, and clearly there were some players who wanted to settl, but also as clear is that the PA ran linden out of its leadership and there are, as I understand it, players who still refuse to speak to him (Chelios.).

Oh so.... the psychos... don't like Linden, well ain't that a shame!

"Bettman should be worried about family and well-being. Some crazed fans, or even a player might take matters into their own hands and figure they get Bettman out of the way." - Chris Chelios

Mad Dog Chelios and Company comprised the 13% who voted 'no'.

Linden did well to walk away from that no-win situation with most players giving him the thumbs up.

Linden could have been a hero as Pot says or he could have been Judas...one thing is pretty clear he was run out of the PA leadership at the time...doesnt sound like a hero really....

Not true. Linden served as NHLPA President for a full year after the agreement was signed (July 2005). When his term came up Linden announced (July 2006) that he had chosen not not run again. Linden served as President of the NHLPA for 8 years in total.

Meanwhile NHLPA Executive Director and General Counsel... and Chelios pal... Bob Goodenow was forced to resign 5 days after the agreement.

UKcanuck, are you now or have you ever been a member of the Communist Party of Britain?