Still doesn't explain how they're afraid.
- MJL

Why wouldn't they want to meet with the owners to talk? They keep saying they don't understand why the owners are doing this lockout, that not all the owners are there. Have the players show up at the BoG meeting with all the owners there. If they want this lockout to end, they have to talk. They say they hate Bettman and the owners hate Fehr, time to do some talking face to face without those 2 there. No negotiation....just a free forum to talk with their owners.

Why wouldn't they want to meet with the owners to talk? They keep saying they don't understand why the owners are doing this lockout, that not all the owners are there. Have the players show up at the BoG meeting with all the owners there. If they want this lockout to end, they have to talk. They say they hate Bettman and the owners hate Fehr, time to do some talking face to face without those 2 there. No negotiation....just a free forum to talk with their owners.
- Symba007

Because it can be used as a PR stunt against them, if nothing results from it. I hope it happens. But if it doesn't, it's not because they're afraid to.

Fehr won't be there do to the talking for them. It's one thing to have Bettman and Fehr talk with some players and owners attending. Players should welcome the opportunity to meet the owners and talk, if they want to lockout to end, they have to talk with each other.
- Symba007

U actually believe that the proposed players/Owners meetings can find a deal??.....Good luck....The hard line owners will have the final say just like the Majority of players will signoff when Fehr tells them they have a good deal on the table..


This gets done when Buttman and Fehr agree on a deal, the rest just window dressing..

I haven't done a complete anything. Where did I say the lockout was due to player pride? Please point out where I said that!

How did the checks they put in place work out?
- MJL

All your quotes
___________________

Not blindly, he believes in the cause. That cause isn't going to change if they don't de-certify.


The cause is not allowing the Owners to repeatedly take from the players, due to the Owner's lack of ability to manage their business properly. The cause is to have the contract that they signed in good faith, honored by the men who agreed to it.

So you don't believe in honor, or giving your word and sealing it with a handshake?

And if the Owners call the shots, why aren't they playing Hockey?

You can certainly make a good argument that the players aren't making the smartest business decision, no doubt. But it seems to me, and please correct me if I'm wrong. That you seem to think that the players should just take what they have and be happy with it. But where does it end? They had a lot taken away from them in the previous lockout. And they stand to lose more in this lockout. What indication is there that when the next CBA ends, it won't happen again. And they lose more? At some point, they have to fight back. I don't see how fighting for what is rightfully yours, is stupid. For putting principle in front of money. And I'm not about to call them stupid for it, while I'm sitting on the sidelines.
___________________

I guess you mention poor business decisions briefly...

And the checks they have put in place in the past have worked well... please see my example of trading Gretzky for money as an example of how the leagues financial structure has improved.

They just need more checks and balances, adapt or die.

I disagree completely that it was the Agents who introduced frontloading. It was the teams that did so. And I also disagree that no Owner wants to sign a frontloaded deal. They absolutely do. Because the richer teams can fit more quality players under the Cap, to try and win.

I would say that more then being pro player. I'm pro what I think is right. It just so happens that more times then not, then comes out on the players side.
- MJL

well, on the first point, we'll never know. matter of opinion.

as for owners, they want to make money. yes they want to win, but they would rather win while paying out cash evenly than paying out huge chunks at once. this is simple cash-flow economics. you're paying a player $10 million this year while his hit is $6 million? that has a huge impact on your bottom line. huge.

All your quotes
___________________

Not blindly, he believes in the cause. That cause isn't going to change if they don't de-certify.


The cause is not allowing the Owners to repeatedly take from the players, due to the Owner's lack of ability to manage their business properly. The cause is to have the contract that they signed in good faith, honored by the men who agreed to it.

So you don't believe in honor, or giving your word and sealing it with a handshake?

And if the Owners call the shots, why aren't they playing Hockey?

You can certainly make a good argument that the players aren't making the smartest business decision, no doubt. But it seems to me, and please correct me if I'm wrong. That you seem to think that the players should just take what they have and be happy with it. But where does it end? They had a lot taken away from them in the previous lockout. And they stand to lose more in this lockout. What indication is there that when the next CBA ends, it won't happen again. And they lose more? At some point, they have to fight back. I don't see how fighting for what is rightfully yours, is stupid. For putting principle in front of money. And I'm not about to call them stupid for it, while I'm sitting on the sidelines.
___________________

I guess you mention poor business decisions briefly...

And the checks they have put in place in the past have worked well... please see my example of trading Gretzky for money as an example of how the leagues financial structure has improved.

They just need more checks and balances, adapt or die.
- Thesource

Nothing in there about Pride. Didn't use the word once. In fact the word I did use that best describes it is principle! So how have I done a 180 again?

The checks have worked well? Why is there a lockout then?

And this ladies and gentlemen, is what we have grown to accept in the flyers forum.

Eklund: The One Question The Players Can Ask the Owners That Will End The Lockout
- Eklund

"Are you done reaming us yet?"

well, on the first point, we'll never know. matter of opinion.

as for owners, they want to make money. yes they want to win, but they would rather win while paying out cash evenly than paying out huge chunks at once. this is simple cash-flow economics. you're paying a player $10 million this year while his hit is $6 million? that has a huge impact on your bottom line. huge.
- scotch_tape

The rich teams do it far too often to state that they don't want to do it. They have no problem doing it to attract and sign top players. Most often in Free Agency. Buffalo paid Christian Erhoff an 8M signing bonus in the first year of his deal. And 5M in the second year up front.

What it has an impact is on the Cap, and allowing them to fit more quality players under the Cap. That's what it's all about.

And this ladies and gentlemen, is what we have grown to accept in the flyers forum.
- flyer_nutter

well, on the first point, we'll never know. matter of opinion.

as for owners, they want to make money. yes they want to win, but they would rather win while paying out cash evenly than paying out huge chunks at once. this is simple cash-flow economics. you're paying a player $10 million this year while his hit is $6 million? that has a huge impact on your bottom line. huge.
- scotch_tape

Dont sign deals like that....Done..Fixed...

And this ladies and gentlemen, is what we have grown to accept in the flyers forum.
- flyer_nutter

You're welcome to join the discussion and actually contribute something.

And this ladies and gentlemen, is what we have grown to accept in the flyers forum.
- flyer_nutter

every forum has 1.

U actually believe that the proposed players/Owners meetings can find a deal??.....Good luck....The hard line owners will have the final say just like the Majority of players will signoff when Fehr tells them they have a good deal on the table..


This gets done when Buttman and Fehr agree on a deal, the rest just window dressing..
- Fruitcakenipple

They won't find a deal there but they must talk, start to build some trust.

every forum has 1.
- joshs

yes MJL is in every forum since the lockout.

Nothing in there about Pride. Didn't use the word once. In fact the word I did use that best describes it is principle! So how have I done a 180 again?

The checks have worked well? Why is there a lockout then?
- MJL

you're fun

talking with you is like playing ping pong against a wall, or arguing with my wife.

They won't find a deal there but they must talk, start to build some trust.
- Symba007

hopefully Molson is a better negotiator than beer maker.

you're fun

talking with you is like playing ping pong against a wall, or arguing with my wife.

- Thesource

You accused me of doing a 180. So I asked you to back it up. You couldn't do so. We were having a fine discussion until then.

hopefully Molson is a better negotiator than beer maker.
- Feeling_Glucky

Molson also represent one of the league biggest sponsor...Molson/Coors.

hopefully Molson is a better negotiator than beer maker.
- Feeling_Glucky

what are good beers?

yes MJL is in every forum since the lockout.
- Feeling_Glucky

I have no life! Wife wants to be left alone to watch TV. Kid is playing Video games with his bud!

Molson also represent one of the league biggest sponsor...Molson/Coors.
- Symba007

And they aren't happy!

So why haven't they put those checks in place in the past? What took them so long to do that? I agree totally that professional sports is not like any other business out there. But my problem is that what they call checks, is just taking from the players to fix the problems that the Owners caused themselves.



Nothing to do with players pride. Were in a lockout because the NHL and it's Owners can't control themselves. It is a fiercely competitive market. And we'll likely see uncontrolled spending again in Free Agency in the future. And there's a big difference between Escrow where the possibility exists that the players could get a check at the end of the year, versus a rollback.
- MJL

They have put them in place, but it's not working so they're trying to modify it. Also, the reason the haven't been able to fully put them in place is due to player resistance, which makes total sense, the owner's shouldn't have full reign over how they pay the players. But if it's not working, it's not working, and the players need to be able to see that. I honestly believe a lot of players do, and this lockout is a result of pre-signed contracts being threatened, which only represents a small percentage of the 700 players as a whole. The rest will make their money and sign to very similar money they would've been making pre lockout.

In terms of escrow, I'm pretty sure the max they could still make would be whatever they were signed for, the check they get would only be to balance out the full value, but yes, it's different than a rollback. Like I said, ideally they should be honouring the contracts, but the way things are structured, if it goes to 50%, that can't happen so the players need to understand that.

what are good beers?
- joshs

Molson Canadian is horrible. Moosehead is good.

I am not one to put much thought into BS numbers or negotiating tactics. Into percentages or other big wig terms rich people who need to look "smart" love to talk about.

I am a simple guy. I see owners making more money than they ever should. I see players making more money than they ever should.

I see the rest of the US and Canada being told they have to "cut-back" and do more with less. Being told to work harder, for less pay.

These rich idiots are all living in their own little world. The owners need to stop giving out such BS contracts. The players need to realise they will ALWAYS make amazing money.

The players will always have growth in the amount of money that comes their way.

Take the damn deal, and be more socially concious. I used to look up to these guys when I was younger. I was hoping my kids would have had the chance to do the same. Now I do not.

Again though, I am a simple guy.