Makes sense....But oh wait you are currently in school as a Business Major. Just curious if any of these boneheads you are arguing with have any sort of education, not to mention one that is relevant to the argument such as BUSINESS???
- ruttager17

Well I'm doing business, but I'll be honest, there's a hell of a lot of stuff I don't know... Every business/industry/environment is different, so it's hard to say, "this is the way it is and that's it"... All of this stuff is constantly changing, that's the frustrating part. Anyone who claims to know most of this stuff (or know what will happen in industry x) is either overconfident or crazy.

What you don't get is the terms of those contracts were only as good as the CBA that they were signed under. That CBA is over. This is where we sit now. Sure you signed a contract, but the NHL also has a right to lock the players out. What does this mean... NO PAY! Is it a poopty thing to do... sign a contract knowing that you "might" not have to pay its full value? Absolutely. But I am sure the smart cockroaches that we call agents knew that at the time as well. What NHLPA players need to understand is your contracts don't mean crap as long as your locked out. I agree with 50/50 and make whole based on a shortened season. That means you don't get your full contract, you get it based on the number of game played. What the players seem to think is because they are agreeing to this, they shouldn't have to negotiate anything else. Just plain stupide considered they have moved on any matter since the lockout started.
- TSTER

It is true that the players don't get paid while they're locked out. But that and the expired CBA doesn't make those contracts null and void. They still exist. And the players have a right to have those honored in my opinion. Your logic is false.
And your also incorrect in stating that the players don't want to negotiate anything else. The reason talks broke off is because the Owners wouldn't negotiate the contract issues. The players are the only side that has moved on anything.

The PA has plainly stated that there are 3 issues left to be solved. The split of money, player contract rights and who pays for the damage caused by the lockout.

Bottom line is that your math was based on 1 Season. Which clearly showed a lack of understanding of what is going on.
- MJL

Your insistence that it is over 1B shows you are ignorant of anything that does not conform to what you want. The deal HAS to be over 4 years. The league HAS to grow at a certain rate...many many variables exist that derail your insistence on what the players will lose...further proving to the fact you are ignorant as to what is actually happening in these negotiations.

If you understand what is going on, you know why the Pa made that offer. And it has to do with the contract concession issue.
- MJL

So the league needs to consider the players in making proposals...but the players only need think of the players in negotiation...I see...

The issue though is keeping honoring contracts at 50/50 right away is not possible. And if you allow owners to adjust contracts post signing then there will be serious consequences. Contract is a contract.
- Boosinicka

I think it is possible. Low-end revenue growth projections were 5% per year over the next 6 years... If the NHL hit those low-end projections, honoring those contracts shouldn't be an issue. If they did go over, a luxury tax for slightly going over the cap could have been implemented.

I don't have it backwards at all. Go back and look at what you said. You are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

The players/agents are supposed to get the best deal is what you said and said it with the intonation that this is a good thing, yet when you attribute it to the owners it is not a positive statement.





fixed






Then do not reply to others that are doing such. Otherwise you are just a hypocrite. We are all giving opinion. Many of us don't talk like it is fact.
- OilHorse

Your insistence that it is over 1B shows you are ignorant of anything that does not conform to what you want. The deal HAS to be over 4 years. The league HAS to grow at a certain rate...many many variables exist that derail your insistence on what the players will lose...further proving to the fact you are ignorant as to what is actually happening in these negotiations.
- OilHorse

Seriously. Let's go back to the post. What I clearly said is that it could, with could being the key word. Add up to a billion dollars or more over the life of the deal. All based on the unknown of how revenue grows. You responded with a math formula dealing with one Season. But I'm ignorant as to what is actually happening! Pretty funny.

So the league needs to consider the players in making proposals...but the players only need think of the players in negotiation...I see...
- OilHorse

That is not what is being said. Not even close.

It is true that the players don't get paid while they're locked out. But that and the expired CBA doesn't make those contracts null and void. They still exist. And the players have a right to have those honored in my opinion. Your logic is false.
And your also incorrect in stating that the players don't want to negotiate anything else. The reason talks broke off is because the Owners wouldn't negotiate the contract issues. The players are the only side that has moved on anything.

The PA has plainly stated that there are 3 issues left to be solved. The split of money, player contract rights and who pays for the damage caused by the lockout.
- MJL

lets face MJL... Iginilas contract expires after the 2013 season. Does he have have a contract for this year... yes. will he get paid if the season is cancelled.... no... Call it what you want. All signed contracts are null and void until such time as a new CBA is signed.

Not sure where you get you info from but every sport network is saying that the players refuse to budge much on the remaining issue since the believe they gave to much on the 50/50 split.

Well now your changing your tune.
- MJL

No, in my original post, I said "shut down the league"

It is true that the players don't get paid while they're locked out. But that and the expired CBA doesn't make those contracts null and void. They still exist. And the players have a right to have those honored in my opinion. Your logic is false.
And your also incorrect in stating that the players don't want to negotiate anything else. The reason talks broke off is because the Owners wouldn't negotiate the contract issues. The players are the only side that has moved on anything.

The PA has plainly stated that there are 3 issues left to be solved. The split of money, player contract rights and who pays for the damage caused by the lockout.
- MJL

WRONG.

The league had 2 things they were not willing to budge on...apparently. there are other issues the players can still negotiate on, but they choose not to. With the PA not willing to work off of the NHL's proposal why should the owners waste their time.

The PA is going to run out of time. The season will be canceled the players will lose all their play. The owners have more luxury to hold out than the players. Soon (relatively) it is the majority of the players that don't make the piles and piles of money that will be putting pressure on the PA to make a deal.

That is not what is being said. Not even close.
- MJL

Than what. Speak up and present fact not opinion.

Seriously. Let's go back to the post. What I clearly said is that it could, with could being the key word. Add up to a billion dollars or more over the life of the deal. All based on the unknown of how revenue grows. You responded with a math formula dealing with one Season. But I'm ignorant as to what is actually happening! Pretty funny.
- MJL

yeah you are ignorant. it could be less than 10M.

~ 50/50 revenue split

~ Honor current contracts

~ Luxury tax for going over the cap (to be shared among financially challenged teams).

~ The other crap should be negotiated in a day or two.

WRONG.

The league had 2 things they were not willing to budge on...apparently. there are other issues the players can still negotiate on, but they choose not to. With the PA not willing to work off of the NHL's proposal why should the owners waste their time.

The PA is going to run out of time. The season will be canceled the players will lose all their play. The owners have more luxury to hold out than the players. Soon (relatively) it is the majority of the players that don't make the piles and piles of money that will be putting pressure on the PA to make a deal.
- OilHorse

According to the PA, the League has told them they were not willing to give any concessions on the contract issues, and gave them preconditions to continuing to talk. The League says they are willing to negotiate on the contract concessions. Why do the players have to negotiate off of the NHL's proposal. By the NHL doing that, they are not negotiating. They are trying to dictate to the players. Which is what they've tried to do through this entire process.

I believe there will be a Season.

I think it is possible. Low-end revenue growth projections were 5% per year over the next 6 years... If the NHL hit those low-end projections, honoring those contracts shouldn't be an issue. If they did go over, a luxury tax for slightly going over the cap could have been implemented.
- laughs2907

From what I understand that is something the have come close to agreeing too. So with that out of the way, contractual issues seem to be the focal point. Not sure why the players would ever agree to what the NHL is proposing. Not sure if I'm correct on this but with those limitations the players would also get less money, and by giving up 7% on HRR they are giving up even more money. I agree that contracts should have some sort way of eliminating the circumventing but NHL's way is very drastic.

Than what. Speak up and present fact not opinion.
- OilHorse

I'll present whatever I choose to present.

yeah you are ignorant. it could be less than 10M.
- OilHorse

It could be, but it's not likely. The players agreeing to take a lesser percentage is a major concession. It's really the only concession being given by either side in my opinion.

~ 50/50 revenue split

~ Honor current contracts

~ Luxury tax for going over the cap (to be shared among financially challenged teams).

~ The other crap should be negotiated in a day or two.
- laughs2907

You can't go to an immediate 50/50 revenue split and honor current contracts.

Well I'm doing business, but I'll be honest, there's a hell of a lot of stuff I don't know... Every business/industry/environment is different, so it's hard to say, "this is the way it is and that's it"... All of this stuff is constantly changing, that's the frustrating part. Anyone who claims to know most of this stuff (or know what will happen in industry x) is either overconfident or crazy.
- laughs2907

And you admit you don't know it all, quite an objective approach to this over the subjective BS most are spewing fourth, helps also to have an understanding of how these things work rather than just trying to sort out what you have read in the news.
The owners should give the players their contractual rights in the CBA, let em have contracts be as long as they choose. Then the NHL should get together with all the owners and all sign a document agreeing amongst themselves that no team shall offer a contract longer than 5 years. Players get what they want, and owners get what they want. That issue is solved

It's all opinions from all of us, some issues are more important to others and that is where things get murky. I personally am on the players side and it's more like 65-35. People who are %100 on the owners side I don't think are looking at the whole picture. I enjoy the points people are making form the owners side as I gain more perspective, but I haven't seen anything yet to fully sway me to the other side. Partially because I do not trust a billionaire businessman compared to 650 players who are all together on this issue.
- Boosinicka

I trust 30 people who have proven themselves to be smart businessmen by acquiring enough wealth to purchase an NHL team, over 650 people, the majority of which never graduated college; when it comes to designing a successful business model. I'm not sure why people are avid in their hoping to avoid discrimination based on race, gender, or sexual preference, but so perfectly happy to discriminate based on income. Being rich doesn't make someone anymore untrustworthy, greedy, or evil than someone who is poor. But only one side in these negotiations have proven themselves to be competent business wise.

But that is all you do...state your opinion, treat it as fact, and when others do the same you call them out for not having facts.
- OilHorse

it's comical really.

his MO stands at "uve got it backwards". or "u dont understand what's going on"

I trust 30 people who have proven themselves to be smart businessmen by acquiring enough wealth to purchase an NHL team, over 650 people, the majority of which never graduated college; when it comes to designing a successful business model. I'm not sure why people are avid in their hoping to avoid discrimination based on race, gender, or sexual preference, but so perfectly happy to discriminate based on income. Being rich doesn't make someone anymore untrustworthy, greedy, or evil than someone who is poor. But only one side in these negotiations have proven themselves to be competent business wise.
- Antilles

very well said sir. People think it is ok to pick and choose who and what they discriminate against.

This is one of the issues I have with putting full faith in that owners require a better deal.

http://blogs.edmontonjour...ng-teams-that-lose-money/

And you admit you don't know it all, quite an objective approach to this over the subjective BS most are spewing fourth, helps also to have an understanding of how these things work rather than just trying to sort out what you have read in the news.
The owners should give the players their contractual rights in the CBA, let em have contracts be as long as they choose. Then the NHL should get together with all the owners and all sign a document agreeing amongst themselves that no team shall offer a contract longer than 5 years. Players get what they want, and owners get what they want. That issue is solved
- ruttager17

collusion