disagree. it's more of an upper class sport and the reason it's not more popular is that it is too expensive to play.
- Fountain-San

Totally agree with you. Add the fact that ice time is so hard to come by, most games dont happen till 10 or 11pm and sometimes later.

I'm starting to think that some of this stuff is bs

I'm starting to think that some of this stuff is bs
- Skalapy

My feeling is that the Season starts in January.
- MJL

ing
Does it really matter what the people who pay the freight ( the fans) think. The NHLPA is showing complete disregard for them. How many of them make anywhere near what the average member of their union?

ing
Does it really matter what the people who pay the freight ( the fans) think. The NHLPA is showing complete disregard for them. How many of them make anywhere near what the average member of their union?
- bigmurr98

In the reality of the situation, no it doesn't matter. This is about business. The reality is that the fans aren't a part of these negotiations. The NHLPA's job isn't to show regard for the fans. The job of that Organization is to represent the players. Not the fans. That's the reality. Want to get a true understanding of the situation? Stop comparing regular working fans to Pro athletes. It's an irrelevant comparison. This is about how to divide up 3.3B.

And let's remember who locked out who. The players stated that they were willing to play under the old CBA while the negotiations continued.

I'm generally suspicious when the headline starts with the word "source".

I'm generally suspicious when the headline starts with the word "source".
- mhp

DING! Correct!

Eklund: Source: "NHL Extremely Interested in PA Proposal"
- Eklund

Makes sense; lower the split for the players while revenue continues to grow.

Sounds like a win-win but also sounds too good to be true.

In the reality of the situation, no it doesn't matter. This is about business. The reality is that the fans aren't a part of these negotiations. The NHLPA's job isn't to show regard for the fans. The job of that Organization is to represent the players. Not the fans. That's the reality. Want to get a true understanding of the situation? Stop comparing regular working fans to Pro athletes. It's an irrelevant comparison. This is about how to divide up 3.3B.

And let's remember who locked out who. The players stated that they were willing to play under the old CBA while the negotiations continued.
- MJL

Of course they are willing to play without a new CBA, they would only do so with the old CBA being valid until a new deal is signed, which means they lose nothing ($) and have the right to strike at any point if the discussions aren't progressing (end of season), players get no money in the playoffs. The owners are using the only card they have to put the players on the spot and force them to negotiate. Both sides have no respect towards each other, all they care about is $$$.

Makes sense; lower the split for the players while revenue continues to grow.

Sounds like a win-win but also sounds too good to be true.
- Domidives

Players want nothing to do with a lower % the first year, they won't accept a pay cut. The only way they will sign is if their % goes down as the revenue go up. If revenues stay the same, they lose nothing, if revenues go down, they lose nothing.

Of course they are willing to play without a new CBA, they would only do so with the old CBA being valid until a new deal is signed, which means they lose nothing ($) and have the right to strike at any point if the discussions aren't progressing (end of season), players get no money in the playoffs. The owners are using the only card they have to put the players on the spot and force them to negotiate. Both sides have no respect towards each other, all they care about is $$$.
- Symba007

In this negotiation that is all they're supposed to care about. That's what it's about. Core economic issues. Pretending it is anything else is kidding yourself. Clearly at this point the lockout isn't putting the players on the spot. That can certainly change. But which side has compromised and which side hasn't?

And the players would have no reason to strike. They like the current CBA. I don't see them deciding to walkout when the playoffs start.

In addition or rumblings the PA is trying to find a source to see which NHL owners really want a season this year.

Players want nothing to do with a lower % the first year, they won't accept a pay cut. The only way they will sign is if their % goes down as the revenue go up. If revenues stay the same, they lose nothing, if revenues go down, they lose nothing.
- Symba007

The last players proposal included taking a lower percentage of revenue. So they've already agreed to that. What they're counting on is that the historical growth in revenue continues. So even though they are getting a lower percentage, they aren't taking a cut to current salaries. They aren't at this point willing to accept a paycut. And I don't blame them for that. They did that the last time, and it did not fix the issues.

I'm generally suspicious when the headline starts with the word "source".
- mhp

I'm generally suspicious when the headline starts with the word "source".
- mhp

I'm generally suspicious of anything I read on this site. It's a rarity to read a rumor on this site and have it actually come to fruition.

And let's remember who locked out who. The players stated that they were willing to play under the old CBA while the negotiations continued.
- MJL

So what?

Let's say employees are striking for more money, and the owners came to them and said ... "let's just work under the current situation and we'll work something out".

Uh, yeah. That isn't going to work and everyone knows it. Unions sometimes strike because they are not getting what they want.

By the way, the owners invited the players to start negotiations at the beginning of 2012. The players postponed negotiations until late in the summer and have not moved materially from their first offer... which reverted back to status quo after 4 years.

How would a union feel if the offer from the owners had their wages returning to status quo after 4 years?

Who is locked out or striking is not even remotely relevant.

So what?

Let's say employees are striking for more money, and the owners came to them and said ... "let's just work under the current situation and we'll work something out".

Uh, yeah. That isn't going to work and everyone knows it. Unions sometimes strike because they are not getting what they want.

By the way, the owners invited the players to start negotiations at the beginning of 2012. The players postponed negotiations until late in the summer and have not moved materially from their first offer... which reverted back to status quo after 4 years.

How would a union feel if the offer from the owners had their wages returning to status quo after 4 years?

Who is locked out or striking is not even remotely relevant.
- NightTrain_AlMo

So what? That answer was to the poster who said that the NHLPA had no regard for the fans. As if they were on the only side involved in this lockout. So in those terms, it certainly is relevant. And it wasn't offered as a solution to the lockout. I agree with your point about the NHLPA delaying the start of negotiations. That is a legitimate criticism that I agree with. The players are the only side in my opinion that has made any concessions and offered a compromise. While the League set up their base of negotiations with the laughable first offer, to set up another proposal so they can falsely set up the charade that they have compromised. Which they really haven't.

Eklund: Source: "NHL Extremely Interested in PA Proposal"
- Eklund

Jesus tap-dancing, cart-wheeling Christ- is this the first time any of these people have negotiated anything? It would seem so, given their inability to schedule regular meetings, explain how they perceive revenue and lack of progress.

It makes me realize that moron is a condition that affects people of all walks of life, is unbiased toward race, religion,wealth or ethnicity and lurks around every corner across every square inch of this earth. We, as a species, are in serious danger of ruining everything due to complete and utter stupidity and the me first mentality.

http://1025thegame.com/

To listen to Eklund now

Jesus tap-dancing, cart-wheeling Christ- is this the first time any of these people have negotiated anything? It would seem so, given their inability to schedule regular meetings, explain how they perceive revenue and lack of progress.

It makes me realize that moron is a condition that affects people of all walks of life, is unbiased toward race, religion,wealth or ethnicity and lurks around every corner across every square inch of this earth. We, as a species, are in serious danger of ruining everything due to complete and utter stupidity and the me first mentality.
- jmo16

Realize that not negotiating is a part of negotiating. Both sides are very experienced in situations like this. This is not going to be an overnight process. It is likely to take a couple of months. I understand the frustration. Thinking that this has anything to do with stupidity is foolish. They're very capable of explaining how they perceive revenue. It's agreeing to common ground on how to perceive it that is the issue.

So what?

Let's say employees are striking for more money, and the owners came to them and said ... "let's just work under the current situation and we'll work something out".

Uh, yeah. That isn't going to work and everyone knows it. Unions sometimes strike because they are not getting what they want.

By the way, the owners invited the players to start negotiations at the beginning of 2012. The players postponed negotiations until late in the summer and have not moved materially from their first offer... which reverted back to status quo after 4 years.

How would a union feel if the offer from the owners had their wages returning to status quo after 4 years?

Who is locked out or striking is not even remotely relevant.
- NightTrain_AlMo

do you think their demands would have been any different just because they offered to start the process at an earlier date? It would have been distracting to publicly conduct this while the season is in effect. They should have started the day after the Kings won the cup.

Jesus tap-dancing, cart-wheeling Christ- is this the first time any of these people have negotiated anything? It would seem so, given their inability to schedule regular meetings, explain how they perceive revenue and lack of progress.

It makes me realize that moron is a condition that affects people of all walks of life, is unbiased toward race, religion,wealth or ethnicity and lurks around every corner across every square inch of this earth. We, as a species, are in serious danger of ruining everything due to complete and utter stupidity and the me first mentality.
- jmo16

So you know more about labour negotiations than Fehr and Bettman?

Really, jmo16?

Really?

Realize that not negotiating is a part of negotiating. Both sides are very experienced in situations like this. This is not going to be an overnight process. It is likely to take a couple of months. I understand the frustration. Thinking that this has anything to do with stupidity is foolish. They're very capable of explaining how they perceive revenue. It's agreeing to common ground on how to perceive it that is the issue.
- MJL

No, they're not capable of explaining it and are unwilling to divulge their actual revenues to the public. That's shady move #1, being dishonest/deceptive. Now they have the other side on guard which makes them suspicious of any other facts or figures they are presented with.

What's more frustrating is that they pretty much got to script the last CBA and they cancelled the season in order to get what they wanted. If history repeats itself, then all the talk of them willing to consider other options is in vain. They know what worked last time and they are willing to do it again to get what they want. It's behavior that reminds me of a spoiled child. And they don't care who they screw to get it.

Robinson Cano

Lockout

So you know more about labour negotiations than Fehr and Bettman?

Really, jmo16?

Really?
- Atomic Wedgie

Really Atoumic Wedgie, how do you know that I don't? In my former corporate career, I easily negotiated and spent in excess of $4-5 Billion, yes Billion, for my clients. I've worked with/for the largest corporations in America. I'm actually very well versed in negotiating. My field was not labour negs but when you're dealing with others' $$$ you have to be good at what you do or you won't last very long.

I'll take an IQ test against any of them and if you can measure common sense and fairness, I'd blow them off the map.

I'm also extremely sarcastic, which is how I hoped my previous post was perceived.