The one problem in all your arguments is the fact that most players have a 3-4 year shelf-life... so what happens in 5...6...7.. years means jack poop to them.

Losing 2-3-4 or more paychecks in 1 season will amount to those players losing much more than if they had signed the deal today.

As for players losing 1 billion dollars... that is POTENTIALLY 1 billion dollars, if the NHLPA's calculations are correct and IF the NHL revenues continue to grow at the current pace (unlikely, no real expanded new avenues of additional revenue and the Canadian dollar is not going to be worth $1.30-$1.50 of the American dollar). Given this league is mostly ticket driven revenue, you know where that $1 Billion will come from?

So I am not sure how much is really potentially as risk, but it is certainly in the 100s of millions of POTENTIAL additional revenue growth.

Like I said, the NHL will ram this agreement down the NHLPA's throat - it is gonna happen. I am not advocating this is fair to the players or even deserved.

But it will happen.

And as soon as games start being lost, the players will lose. And will lose even more, as revenues are more likely to decline in the short term, rather than grow.

Take the best deal they can and get going.

If you want to live in the players utopia, feel free to do so... but you will be disappointing with the outcome.
- JDJ

I don't think that figure is correct. There are over 700 players in the League. The majority of those players will have a career longer then that. So it's not a problem of my argument. League revenue's grew somewhere around 8-10% the last 2 years. So even if they use the League's figure of 5% potential revenue growth, it's still a hell of a lot of money that is up for grabs. So I think it is incorrect that losing a few more paychecks means they would lose more. Do you really beleive that the NHLPA is that clueless? If your premise is correct, why don't they sign the deal?

You can make all these comments that I'm living in the players utopia all you want. That is first of all inaccurate. And secondly, doesn't have anything to do with anything.

The NHL isn't going to ram anything anywhere. If that was going to happen, it would have happened already.The players will take some kind of cut. That has never been in doubt. If you think the players are just going to fold, I think you're badly mistaken. The players are simply looking to keep current deals in tact. There's no reason why that can't be done while lowering future salaries to the 50/50 mark.

Stop telling people to "stop buying into the rhetoric" because you are clearly overdosed on NHLPA Kool Aid.

Step back and see things from both sides...


- JDJ

My posts on this subject have zero to do with rhetoric. I understood exactly what was being said when Fehr said he hasn't run the numbers. Just as I understood the reasoning behind the 3 proposals. There is plenty of information out there from neutral observers talking about this and what's happening. Your idea that I'm only seeing things from the players side is simply incorrect.

Ask yourself how many NHLers make 1 million.

Those making 1 million will get less than 80k for the whole year. Tax effect that and your down to around 55k.

Now how many millionares are used to living off 55k a year.
- Gerk

Aren't you leaving off a zero?

I don't think that figure is correct. There are over 700 players in the League. The majority of those players will have a career longer then that. So it's not a problem of my argument. League revenue's grew somewhere around 8-10% the last 2 years. So even if they use the League's figure of 5% potential revenue growth, it's still a hell of a lot of money that is up for grabs. So I think it is incorrect that losing a few more paychecks means they would lose more. Do you really beleive that the NHLPA is that clueless? If your premise is correct, why don't they sign the deal?

You can make all these comments that I'm living in the players utopia all you want. That is first of all inaccurate. And secondly, doesn't have anything to do with anything.

The NHL isn't going to ram anything anywhere. If that was going to happen, it would have happened already.The players will take some kind of cut. That has never been in doubt. If you think the players are just going to fold, I think you're badly mistaken. The players are simply looking to keep current deals in tact. There's no reason why that can't be done while lowering future salaries to the 50/50 mark.
- MJL

Not true.

http://www.quanthockey.co...utions/CareerLengthGP.php

About 48% of players play 3 years or less, and about 63% will play for 5 years or less.

And if you look at games played, about 50% of the players will suit up for 100 or less career games and about 70%+ suit up for less than 240 games (or roughly 3 seasons worth of games).

So, when these guys lose 2-3-4 paychecks this season (let alone the whole season), that impact will likely be greater than if they took the current deal on the table, with a properly negotiate "make whole" provision by the NHLPA.

That is the reality.

So who really benefits from NHLPA's position? The star players are the ones who have the most to gain by the NHLPA's stance / the most to lose on the NHL's proposal.

Like I said, it is the star players the NHLPA is negotiating for, not the "average" player who will get (frank)ed over in this process. The star players will make more than enough money, regardless of what the final deal is.

Feel free to look at actual numbers and put them into context to reality, not what should happen or what is right or what you want to see happen or what could potentially happen if some miracle revenues keep climbing 7%-10% a year with no new revenue outlets given the NBC deal is locked for 10 years and only ticket increases will sustain that growth.

The players will lose, regardless of the deal struck. And if revenue is impacted down the road by games missed / season cancelled, it will just end up being a worse deal for them.

And that ain't rhetoric talking.

What does "a few hours" mean in Canadian?

Precisely... Who (frank)in' cares if you live in the US?!?!
- As_I_See_It

Layne kicks copious amounts of asss

It would be awesome to get a full 82 game schedule, but I'm not betting on it, if Bettman and Fehr want to continue their pissing match we could be without NHL hockey for a long, long time. The fans who bought season tickets are the ones suffering from the lockout the most.

What does "a few hours" mean in Canadian?
- SotaPopinski

it means a few hours. ek is american you tit.

it means a few hours. ek is american you tit.
- joel878

Generally speaking, in America, a few is 3 or so... therefore, I was under the impression that he was speaking Canadian, as it has been nearly 8 hours now

Generally speaking, in America, a few is 3 or so... therefore, I was under the impression that he was speaking Canadian, as it has been nearly 8 hours now
- SotaPopinski

Perhaps he was speaking in metric, rather than imperial.

Who knows...

name another sport that has guranteed contracts?

Generally speaking, in America, a few is 3 or so... therefore, I was under the impression that he was speaking Canadian, as it has been nearly 8 hours now
- SotaPopinski

come on, you live in minnesota.. you're not that ignorant.

a few in canada is 3. wierd. it's almost like we speak the same language or something.

name another sport that has guranteed contracts?
- joshs

trick question?

football.

trick question?

football.
- joel878

not a trick question. football players can be cut and not paid. hockey players have something no other sport has in guranteed contracts. once the deal is signed you can sit on the couch and eat mcdonalds all day bcz you are guranteed that money. although i think there is a clause about that but you get the idea

not a trick question. football players can be cut and not paid. hockey players have something no other sport has in guranteed contracts. once the deal is signed you can sit on the couch and eat mcdonalds all day bcz you are guranteed that money. although i think there is a clause about that but you get the idea
- joshs

football players sign contracts with guaranteed portions. they can be cut, but they still get paid their guaranteed money. ask the eagles how they feel about giving michael vick his 40 million guaranteed or whatever it was.

baseball isn't even comparable.. there's almost 300 million dollar contracts signed in the mlb. different sports, different economics. it's not a knock on the players that they get paid the money they're supposed to receive when they sign their names.

the only way hockey players could ever really screw it up for themselves is if they sign away their guranteed contracts.

football players sign contracts with guaranteed portions. they can be cut, but they still get paid their guaranteed money. ask the eagles how they feel about giving michael vick his 40 million guaranteed or whatever it was.

baseball isn't even comparable.. there's almost 300 million dollar contracts signed in the mlb. different sports, different economics. it's not a knock on the players that they get paid the money they're supposed to receive when they sign their names.
- joel878

yeah but NHL players total contract is guranteed. sign a 4 year deal worth 12million you will get that even if you dont produce or get sent to the AHL. i am from buffalo the bills signed merriman last year then cut him this year and now resigned him & thats the uber spetacular NFL

yeah but NHL players total contract is guranteed. sign a 4 year deal worth 12million you will get that even if you dont produce or get sent to the AHL. i am from buffalo the bills signed merriman last year then cut him this year and now resigned him & thats the uber spetacular NFL
- joshs

merriman should've ensured he had more guaranteed money in his contract before he signed it.

so? one could argue that's the way contracts should be in all sports. a contract is a contract, signed in good faith from both parties. there shouldn't be a cop out. these are things owners should be taking into consideration before putting their john henry all over 100 million dollar contracts agreeing to participate in said contract.

being able to earn the money that's agreed to in their contract isn't a knock on the players..

come on, you live in minnesota.. you're not that ignorant.

a few in canada is 3. wierd. it's almost like we speak the same language or something.
- joel878

Very wierd.... sorry couldn't sleep and had an overpowering urge to come on here and act like an asshat

Jaromir Jagr still believes the NHL would be back in action this year. Not later than by December, to be sure.
That’s what he told the Czech idnes.cz website in an interview published Monday.
“I believe the owners want to play as many games as possible. It doesn’t mean much that we’ve lost a month. You get eight to nine games in during that month, and that doesn’t ruin the entire season. You can always make adjustments. You can have the playoffs games on every second day. It (the playoffs) is all over the place now because of television.”
Jagr is currently off the playing roster at his native Kladno because of an injury, but he’s still the owner of the club. His ownership status must have influenced his answer to the site’s question about what he thinks of Alexander Ovechkin’s round condemnation of the league. Ovechkin said the owners were trying to “cheat” the players out of paying their existing contracts.
“Cheating. I don’t know what he meant by the word. When someone owns something and wants to make as much as possible, you can’t call that cheating. You’d have to call a half of the world cheaters. It’s simply business. True, they need us to do the business, but still, they own it. And another thing: hockey is not the main thing for most of the owners. They make their money elsewhere. Unlike us, hockey players. They set the rules, no doubt about that.”
So, the Czech reporters inquired, what’s going to change between now and December?
“Everybody knows,” said Jagr, “that the first month (of the season) is nothing like a rose garden for the NHL. Only a few make some money, they face huge competition in American football and baseball. The baseball competition is getting into its playoffs, so, one competitor is gone, and the interest will switch to something else. And that something else is hockey. Simply, the first two months (of the season) aren’t as interesting for the owners as the rest. It doesn’t bother anybody that they’re going to lose the first month and a half.”
The topic of NHL commissioner Gary Bettman was on the agenda, too. What do you think, idnes.cz asked, is Bettman a great negotiator or someone who doesn’t give a hoot about hockey?
“First of all, I don’t believe he would be doing anything without hearing from the owners first. That he’d do something on his own during negotiations, no. He’s not that kind of a player. These are billionaires, there are 30 of them, so, he’s got his instructions. It does not depend on him only, definitely not.”
Edmonton Journal

Very wierd.... sorry couldn't sleep and had an overpowering urge to come on here and act like an asshat
- SotaPopinski

hah.. yeah. i get that. as soon as i saw minnesota i knew you were bluffing.

FIRST!!!














Any Habs rumours?!?














Nuff said

Again - why does it hurt unity that some decide to play in Europe and others decide to stay here?
- Canada Cup

Players who are playing in Europe have a different level of motivation to sign a deal and play, than players who are sitting at home.

If you can't see this. Then I can't help you.

That's buying into the rhetoric. Fehr saying he hasn't run the numbers is just another way of saying he's not willing to discuss that publicly right now.
- MJL

It was in the meeting with the league where he said he had not run the numbers.

Good Lord you NHLPA nut-huggers miss some freaking obvious points. It is like, by supporting the NHLPA you assume their level of intelligence.

not a trick question. football players can be cut and not paid. hockey players have something no other sport has in guranteed contracts. once the deal is signed you can sit on the couch and eat mcdonalds all day bcz you are guranteed that money. although i think there is a clause about that but you get the idea
- joshs

It is called the Wellwood rule.

There are 4 subsections

Wellwood.Doughty
Wellwood.Byfuglien
Wellwood.Tkachuk

and Wellwood.Kadri was added this year.