There will be a strike

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: There will be a strike

Postby Fred » Fri Dec 28, 2012 11:27 pm

Hey UK, as pointed out in THN the NHL is actually bargaining against it's self

http://www.thehockeynews.com/articles/4 ... osing.html
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Topper » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:29 am

okcanuck wrote: why didn't they come up with this 3 months ago.

The same can be asked of the NHLPA.

Butt there are already rumours that they will spurn this deal as well. Did you notice all the Kelly clauses in the proposed deal?
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: 4792
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Arachnid » Sat Dec 29, 2012 6:57 am

I really don't care anymore.

As far as I'm concerned, they ruined the season for me, whoever wins the Cup this year will get an * beside it and no one will respect that.

I'll more than likely be back to watch Your Vancouver Canucks™ in the Fall but for now it's gotta be an eye for an eye.

Fuck you very much you greedy little bastards NHL/NHLPA :evil:

You saved the game! WhoopedDeeDoo!
There is no such thing as climate change...there is no such thing as climate change...there is such thing as climate change...
Arachnid
CC Legend
 
Posts: 5013
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2008 12:56 pm
Location: Old Berlin

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Sat Dec 29, 2012 10:32 am

The only thing I have faulted the owners for though is their original request for a salary rollback.

but not the dishonest negotiating tactics, the lies and deceits and the clumsy attempts at manipulation... or that we are three months into what would have been the season and they still havent pitched their best offer?
That was garbage, honor the contract you signed, don't entice a player to work for you for $X and then say, "Oh sorry, we really didn't want to pay that do you'll have to give some back." That is just low, especially in a profitable marketplace.....

I agree, an argument was put forward earlier by someone that they thought players like Suter and Parise weren't signing in good faith either because they knew going in that a new CBA was forthcoming, but I cant agree with that. Those players do not have control of the owners actions or will. They could suspect but not know and the offer was there, who can blame them for taking it?
although apparently some teams are in the red and losing money, so I can appreciate some owners being tired of forking out cash via sharing in order to fund other teams.

I understand the sentiment but in the hard cold world of business is business if you are dumb enough to run the ship into the ground...well ask the captain Francesco Schettino of the Costa Concordia...
To me it sure seems like winning a stanley cup does not create a stable hockey market, Tampa, Raleigh and Denver each have cups and star players and each have or are struggling... These new franchises that need the help? Build some community rinks and buy a bunch of kid sized equipment and give out luxury box tickets to peewee teams... that will do more to create a client base than some rich snot arsed Russian superstar. bottom line, just don't sign mega contracts until you have the money from a rabid season ticket base and major corporate involvement to do so.

I have also said that the owners are the guys underwriting the league and signing the paycheques. They are the ones who either made their money, or inherited it in some cases, but either way they are the people on the hook with contracts to honor and expenses to pay if the market crashes and suddenly profits are hard to come by.

And for their trouble, and allowing their money to do the work for them they are entitled to happily divide up 1.5 billion dollars a year not a bad investment, considering... plus as Per points out they can parlay all that cachet into even more profit in all their other enterprises.


The players are guaranteed money regardless of performance and team financial situation. They cannot be laid off, they can not be fired, they will get their money.
isn't that kind of the point, they put in the work and have the genetics as Coco pointed out, and that's the pay off for being the draw that we the fans pay WILLINGLY pay through the nose to see play?

Every offer the owners have put on the table, since doing away with the rollback, has ensured that the NHLPA members will still be the most highly paid hockey players on the planet.

Since when does not accepting a roll back given up by the players in the last CBA constitute something worth a pat on the back for?

They have pretty much guaranteed that players an incredible lifestyle that the majority of North Americans can only dream of having. They have all but promised that these players will be set for life after just a few short years in the NHL.

The industry provides the means for such wealth and its the fans love of the game and the players star power that guarantee that wealth, the owners have a part too but they make out pretty damn good out of the deal.

But apparently that isn't good enough.

I think that what's not good enough is having the players collective share being continually clawed back with each CBA negotiation. Considering the results of three lockouts, It doesn't take a crystal ball to predict what will be on the table during the next one...at some point you got to take a stand.

The NHL has said they feel badly and are sorry for fans and concerned about the secondary businesses that are feeling the effects of this lockout.

funny that you apparently accept that sentiment from the people who control the lockout but not from the people who are locked out? Seems kind of backward to me...

They have made no bones about the fact that they have a bottomline and will not go back to playing hockey until they get a deal in place. They have, since their initial offer, made multiple concessions, offered several different deals, and even swallowed a few fairly significant issues that they would certainly rather have spit out.

Can I point to the evidence that this drawing of a line in the sand and then drawing another line in the sand, and then drawing another line in the sand says that the bottom line is wholly made up?
I'm pretty sure that if I'm a hotdog vendor I'm wishing that whatever the bottom line is, can we just get to it? Please?


The NHLPA has offered the same proposal (essentially) multiple times.

Really is it up to the PA to make any offer at all? They are being locked out until they accept a deal mandated by the league...it's up to the league to find a palatable solution. I'd say get on with it, Bettman has to know what it's going to take


The PA has made a big show about being about the fans, but really, only so long as they keep making ludicrous sums of money which is ultimately paid to them by said fans.

I suppose they both could be tarred with the greedy bastard brush, but kinda hypocritical for me to point fingers and then dig out my wallet...
Btw: this is why I'm softening my position in the owners, I'll concede their motives are human.

For the most part most most of these players don't understand the financial issues at the center of this lockout, they don't have a clue about how tenuous the current global economy is, and they seem to be ignorant to the fact that the people who really pay them make peanuts compared to them.

This is Fred's point too, I don't see how this is really relevant, pro sports does not suffer in depressions, entertainment is a needed commodity when times are tough. The proof is right there in Forbes, through the worst economy since the depression the NHL has had record growth. Neither side should be trying to use the sky might fall tomorrow...the Mayans could have been correct too, so what?

They should, in all reality, be absolutely thrilled to be playing hockey for a living, and being paid 6 and 7, and even 8, figures to do so. Many of them would be flipping burgers or roughnecking on the rigs if not for hockey, and while I understand that everyone will fight to keep what they have, when you ultimately have, and will continue to more than anyone else in the same line of work, or in most other lines for that matter, then I think you need to take a long hard look at yourself and wonder why the hell you are worth so much at the expense of others. The average NHL player makes more per year than most doctors......yeah......they're worth that.

Simple answer don't buy the tickets. the players make out great, the owners make out great, ordinary joe can't afford a game...it's all true
So was the image of little kids bringing their piggy banks to save the Jets in 96...
To me either you blame the whole thing and boycott the entire disgusting thing or you hold your nose and concentrate on the game.
I just can't see only pulling on one thread.

So while I fault both parties, UK, I have never been in the middle.


Well they do say that the middle of the road is where you are likely to get run down...lol mind you, being too far to one side can get you shot :) :)
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2429
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Postby BurningBeard » Sat Dec 29, 2012 1:35 pm

ukcanuck wrote:
The only thing I have faulted the owners for though is their original request for a salary rollback.

but not the dishonest negotiating tactics, the lies and deceits and the clumsy attempts at manipulation... or that we are three months into what would have been the season and they still havent pitched their best offer?

Dishonest negotiation tactics like filing a notice of disclaimer of interest to dissolve the union when you have no intention of doing so? At what point during the process did the NHLPA pitch their best offer? This is tiresome, take off the blinders.
Every time I look out my window, same three dogs looking back at me.
User avatar
BurningBeard
CC 1st Team All-Star
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Sat Dec 29, 2012 1:57 pm

BurningBeard wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:
The only thing I have faulted the owners for though is their original request for a salary rollback.

but not the dishonest negotiating tactics, the lies and deceits and the clumsy attempts at manipulation... or that we are three months into what would have been the season and they still havent pitched their best offer?

Dishonest negotiation tactics like filing a notice of disclaimer of interest to dissolve the union when you have no intention of doing so? At what point during the process did the NHLPA pitch their best offer? This is tiresome, take off the blinders.

Wait, did they actually file or did they just hold a vote to allow the PA to file when and if its necessary?
Besides there is nothing dirty about dissolving the union to allow the players protection from anti trust. Nothing more dirty than locking out employees as an opening position to negotiate a new deal anyway.

The funny thing is even if you support the owners position and feel they are right to seek a better financial arrangement, you still have to wonder at the way Bettman had gone about it.

From what I've read even hard core supporters question the leagues moves.
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2429
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Potatoe1 » Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:10 pm

- "Cap Advantage Recapture" formula applicable to existing long-term contracts (in excess of 6 years) for years in which Player is retired or fails/refuses to perform under his NHL SPC.


This + the 60 mill cap make it another terrible deal for the Canucks. I would rather lose the year then see a deal which directly screws the Canucks.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:28 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
- "Cap Advantage Recapture" formula applicable to existing long-term contracts (in excess of 6 years) for years in which Player is retired or fails/refuses to perform under his NHL SPC.


This + the 60 mill cap make it another terrible deal for the Canucks. I would rather lose the year then see a deal which directly screws the Canucks.

Don't you just love the language, "cap advantage recapture, back diving contracts, make whole provision" my old English prof would shit a brick.

Anyway I gather you mean this CAR as applicable to luongo's contract? I guess that would hurt a little but there should be ways to mitigate that?
As for the The 60 mil cap, isnt that just a level playing field for all the contending teams? We can't be the only half decent team with a couple of 4 million dollar Albetross third liners...
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2429
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Fred » Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:33 pm

Have to agree lets call the season, let Herr Fehr sit and contemplate his naval for the summer.
cheers
Fred
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3433
Joined: Mon Aug 09, 2004 7:00 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Potatoe1 » Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:42 pm

ukcanuck wrote:
Anyway I gather you mean this CAR as applicable to luongo's contract? I guess that would hurt a little but there should be ways to mitigate that?
As for the The 60 mil cap, isnt that just a level playing field for all the contending teams? We can't be the only half decent team with a couple of 4 million dollar Albetross third liners...


Eating a 5 mill cap hit for a player who isn't even on your roster isn't all that easy to work around.

As far as "leveling the playing field" who the fuck wants that?

The best thing that could happen as a Canuck fan is a lost year and full desertification.

Then high revenue teams like Vancouver, Toronto, New York, Detroit, Montreal, and Minnesota, get to cherry pick all the top FA's and run rough shot over the small market clubs.
Potatoe1
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 1613
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:06 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Sat Dec 29, 2012 2:57 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:
Anyway I gather you mean this CAR as applicable to luongo's contract? I guess that would hurt a little but there should be ways to mitigate that?
As for the The 60 mil cap, isnt that just a level playing field for all the contending teams? We can't be the only half decent team with a couple of 4 million dollar Albetross third liners...


Eating a 5 mill cap hit for a player who isn't even on your roster isn't all that easy to work around.

As far as "leveling the playing field" who the fuck wants that?

The best thing that could happen as a Canuck fan is a lost year and full desertification.

Then high revenue teams like Vancouver, Toronto, New York, Detroit, Montreal, and Minnesota, get to cherry pick all the top FA's and run rough shot over the small market clubs.

You know what, If that happened and the league came out of this whole mess leaner and meaner I wouldn't complain.
I would welcome a return to the league that it was in the early 90s. Bring back the Prince of Wales and Clarence Campbell divisions too!
Unfortunately if they do decertify and the whole shittin match goes to court, who knows where this ends up?

The CFL "retrenchment" comes to mind. four more Canadian teams and the loss of another half dozen teams.
The KHL about par for skill and a lot more permanent junior and minor league followers ...
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2429
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Blob Mckenzie » Sat Dec 29, 2012 3:58 pm

They decertify and the whole thing gets to court and takes two - three years to figure out.....yes that's a brilliant move by the NHLPA. more than half of them wouldn't be good enough to play in the league when it finally got going again. Believe me , the courts would be disgusted to deal with this mess and would be in no hurry to sort it out. Not to mention the global economy is in the sewer but nobody on either side gives a shit about that.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: The STH is THE most powerful component in this whole skidmark. They control everything and if they had a collective brain they could bring the Kro Magnons and the neanderthals to their collective knees.... strap a blond wig on both of them and feed them their vitamin c .
Tell me how my ass tastes.
User avatar
Blob Mckenzie
CC Legend
 
Posts: 3092
Joined: Wed Aug 11, 2004 12:34 pm
Location: Oakalla

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Topper » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:18 pm

The push for the league is the end of the NFL season. That is when the NBC games kick in, sure they can take the $200mil this year, but they need to give a freebie up at the end of the deal.

Spud, several teams are hosed in cap compliance with this deal. It isn't just those who spend to the cap but also those with low internal caps. Dallas looks in great shape tho.

Let the haves go over the cap by the amount they kick into revenue sharing to the have nots.
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: 4792
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Earth, most days.

Re: There will be a strike

Postby Strangelove » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:24 pm

Potatoe1 wrote:
ukcanuck wrote:
Anyway I gather you mean this CAR as applicable to luongo's contract? I guess that would hurt a little but there should be ways to mitigate that?
As for the The 60 mil cap, isnt that just a level playing field for all the contending teams? We can't be the only half decent team with a couple of 4 million dollar Albetross third liners...


Eating a 5 mill cap hit for a player who isn't even on your roster isn't all that easy to work around.

As far as "leveling the playing field" who the fuck wants that?

The best thing that could happen as a Canuck fan is a lost year and full desertification.

Then high revenue teams like Vancouver, Toronto, New York, Detroit, Montreal, and Minnesota, get to cherry pick all the top FA's and run rough shot over the small market clubs.


Pretty sure the Canuck cap-hit for a retired Luongo would never be as high as $5mil.

Not sure how this will work exactly, but a coupla weeks ago Mirtle explained the “cap benefit recapture formula”.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/h ... le6251627/

Not sure if a new CBA would count Lou's pre-new-CBA years (2 years).

If those 2 seasons DO count in the calculations and say Lou retired in July 2018

... I reckon the Canucks would be penalized ~$13.5mil over the last 4 years of the term.

So somewhere around a $3.4mil cap-hit penalty for 4 seasons.

If those 2 seasons DON'T count in the calculations and say Lou retired in July 2018

... I reckon the Canucks would be penalized ~$7.5mil over the last 4 years of the term.

So somewhere around a $1.8mil cap-hit penalty for 4 seasons.

Now if Lou retires in July 2019, Canucks would be faced with either $11.5 or $5.5mil spread over 3 years.

So either $3.8 or $1.8mil cap-hit penalty for 3 seasons.

Now I could be wrong, Mirtle could be wrong, and/or this new proposal may be different.

Also I'm just roughing out the math cuz I'm lazy, so it's gonna be off fo sho.

I looked this up earlier today and couldn't find any more info, maybe it's out now?

Or tomorrow?

Anyway, we could live with a $1.8mil cap penalty in a (probable) $100mil salary cap world.

*crosses fingers*

EDIT: changed the numbers, WAY OFF, still very rough numbers though lol...
Last edited by Strangelove on Sat Dec 29, 2012 9:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
____
The Ring Leader
User avatar
Strangelove
CC Legend
 
Posts: 7373
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:13 pm

Re: There will be a strike

Postby ukcanuck » Sat Dec 29, 2012 7:26 pm

Topper wrote:The push for the league is the end of the NFL season. That is when the NBC games kick in, sure they can take the $200mil this year, but they need to give a freebie up at the end of the deal.

Spud, several teams are hosed in cap compliance with this deal. It isn't just those who spend to the cap but also those with low internal caps. Dallas looks in great shape tho.

Let the haves go over the cap by the amount they kick into revenue sharing to the have nots.

Geez topper that's a good idea, you don't have any New York numbers you could call to suggest that do you?
aquaman could pay his way out of those pesky cap issues...
User avatar
ukcanuck
CC Hall of Fan Member
 
Posts: 2429
Joined: Sat Jul 30, 2011 3:04 am

PreviousNext

Return to Canucks Corner Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests