Lockout

Forum for Pittsburgh Penguins-related messages.

Moderators: Three Stars, dagny, pfim, netwolf

Re: Lockout

Postby Gaucho on Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:01 pm

joopen wrote:
Gaucho wrote:There's never been a lockout or strike in the NBA, NFL, or MLB?


Not 3 consecutive work stoppages at the end of 3 consecutive CBA expirations


True.




*sniffle*
Gaucho
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 41,557
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2006 10:22 am
Location: The Onyx Club

Re: Lockout

Postby KG on Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:06 pm

Gaucho wrote:
joopen wrote:
Gaucho wrote:There's never been a lockout or strike in the NBA, NFL, or MLB?


Not 3 consecutive work stoppages at the end of 3 consecutive CBA expirations


True.




*sniffle*


That's the issue. All parties can't just default to a lockout/strike whenever the CBA expires. Not the best for business. Although it apparently doesn't matter as the NHL has consistently increased revenues post strike, lockout(s)....
KG
NHL Healthy Scratch
NHL Healthy Scratch
 
Posts: 11,979
Joined: Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:53 am
Location: NY

Re: Lockout

Postby no name on Wed Nov 21, 2012 8:16 pm

newarenanow wrote:Does anyone else think the Fehr brothers feel like they are taking on a different animal with the NHL vs MLB?


Right on the nose, Baseball is run by a few select rich clubs. Make them happy you can pass a deal. Hockey is run by the mid to lower clubs make them happy you got a deal.
no name
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,054
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:19 pm

Re: Lockout

Postby pens_srq on Wed Nov 21, 2012 9:09 pm

The entire concept of "Make Whole" is ludicrous. ALL contracts under the current CBA are subject to being scaled as a percentage of the salary cap.

What happened is the NHL wants to lower the cap (which is effectively the player's percentage). The players are then acting like because the cap was higher they should get the money they lose, but that was never the league's idea.

The NHL's idea is that the players were making more than the financial situations of the clubs allows for under this system. It is a new system and the owners need it to be adjusted.

So the players are saying you can have your adjustment but don't adjust it pay us what you would if it wasn't adjusted. Now they said okay we'll take the deal and everyone after us can deal with it, just show us the money now as payments over next four years. Then the league said make the payments tied to revenues somehow so that we don't pay as much if we can't afford it. Apparently the last deal has done that, but says you can't fix the salary cap circumvention bs that has everyone unhappy with ridiculous contract lengths and values all designed to circumvent the spirit of the cap and drive player salaries up.

I'd say that's a pretty big hole that the league wanted to fix in this CBA, it must be fixed or this deal isn't going anywhere.

Anyone pretending that the NHL is the only one guilty of stalling here is kidding themselves. The players can see the problems as clearly as we can, and they are fighting to keep at least some of them in the game.
pens_srq
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 1,505
Joined: Sun May 24, 2009 11:33 am
Location: my garage, running a hockey league

Re: Lockout

Postby no name on Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:01 pm

I got a feeling this season might be over. Seems like this deal was the same things the players wanted from all their last proposals, it was just worded different. I was hoping for a fair agreement to be reached. Now i hope the owners get the better of the deal.
no name
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,054
Joined: Fri Feb 09, 2007 4:19 pm

Re: Lockout

Postby bhaw on Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:04 pm

My guess is that even though the $182M is a big number, that's not the sticking point anymore. They will probably negotiate it down a bit and settle somewhere between the NHL and the PA proposals on the make whole.

Things business owners won't accept:
1. Guaranteeing cap values and HRR won't go down
2. Having all secondary issues rejected

#1 is probably the biggest sticking point in the proposal... no owner is going to be cool with that given the current economic climate.
bhaw
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 27,003
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:00 pm
Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell

Re: Lockout

Postby bhaw on Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:06 pm

no name wrote:I got a feeling this season might be over. Seems like this deal was the same things the players wanted from all their last proposals, it was just worded different. I was hoping for a fair agreement to be reached. Now i hope the owners get the better of the deal.


I've been very pro-owner up to this point. This proposal is different in that the financials worked off of the owners' proposal. They just need to negotiate the Make Whole number and all will be good. The owners already conceded that the 50/50 split will have a "yeah but" by offering the make whole.

As I said above... I think the sticking point will be the players wanting to guarantee the HRR and cap will never go down. The owners won't go for that.
bhaw
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 27,003
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2007 5:00 pm
Location: From Hockey Siberia to Hockey Hell

Re: Lockout

Postby tfrizz on Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:19 pm

pens_srq wrote:The entire concept of "Make Whole" is ludicrous. ALL contracts under the current CBA are subject to being scaled as a percentage of the salary cap.

What happened is the NHL wants to lower the cap (which is effectively the player's percentage). The players are then acting like because the cap was higher they should get the money they lose, but that was never the league's idea.

The NHL's idea is that the players were making more than the financial situations of the clubs allows for under this system. It is a new system and the owners need it to be adjusted.

So the players are saying you can have your adjustment but don't adjust it pay us what you would if it wasn't adjusted. Now they said okay we'll take the deal and everyone after us can deal with it, just show us the money now as payments over next four years. Then the league said make the payments tied to revenues somehow so that we don't pay as much if we can't afford it. Apparently the last deal has done that, but says you can't fix the salary cap circumvention bs that has everyone unhappy with ridiculous contract lengths and values all designed to circumvent the spirit of the cap and drive player salaries up.

I'd say that's a pretty big hole that the league wanted to fix in this CBA, it must be fixed or this deal isn't going anywhere.

Anyone pretending that the NHL is the only one guilty of stalling here is kidding themselves. The players can see the problems as clearly as we can, and they are fighting to keep at least some of them in the game.


Here's the thing. Even at a 50/50 split of HRR there will still be 10 teams losing money (based off Forbes' numbers for 2010-11) - including one of the NHL's "poster teams", the Washington Capitals. The profitable teams will become more profitable on a larger scale (such as Toronto pulling in over $13.5-million in additional revenue) while the poor teams will still struggle (for instance, Phoenix would only reduce their losses from $25-million to $20-million).
tfrizz
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,315
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:49 am
Location: Freddy Beach

Re: Lockout

Postby tfrizz on Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:21 pm

bhaw wrote:
no name wrote:I got a feeling this season might be over. Seems like this deal was the same things the players wanted from all their last proposals, it was just worded different. I was hoping for a fair agreement to be reached. Now i hope the owners get the better of the deal.


I've been very pro-owner up to this point. This proposal is different in that the financials worked off of the owners' proposal. They just need to negotiate the Make Whole number and all will be good. The owners already conceded that the 50/50 split will have a "yeah but" by offering the make whole.

As I said above... I think the sticking point will be the players wanting to guarantee the HRR and cap will never go down. The owners won't go for that.


Yup. They explicitly say in their proposal that they agree to the terms proposed by the NHL, then go into the "but we don't want our share to ever go down". The stipulations won't fly, but I get the feeling the 50/50 + Make Whole ($393-million) are probably generally seen as agreeable by the league/owners.
tfrizz
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,315
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:49 am
Location: Freddy Beach

Re: Lockout

Postby Tim Thomasen on Wed Nov 21, 2012 11:22 pm

I guess Ed Snider's wishes are falling on deaf ears.
Tim Thomasen
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 977
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 1:33 pm
Location: You know, it's just not death with dignity if there's an Estevez in the room

Re: Lockout

Postby Godric on Thu Nov 22, 2012 12:35 am

I'm pro owner as well
Godric
AHL All-Star
AHL All-Star
 
Posts: 6,240
Joined: Mon Jun 07, 2010 10:19 am
Location: Switch the style up and if they hate, let em hate and watch the money pile up

Re: Lockout

Postby BigMcK on Thu Nov 22, 2012 2:19 am

Bettman is having a nice Thanksgiving spread. So are the owners. They have other means of income.

Players are having to come to grips that the league is closed due to 'construction'. Players are soon going to realize that the union boss is high on ego and make a true offer without him to get the park open.
BigMcK
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 2,134
Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2010 4:23 pm
Location: Are you there, yet?

Re: Lockout

Postby pekkasteele on Thu Nov 22, 2012 5:49 am

pekkasteele
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2006 11:30 am
Location: Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Lockout

Postby Tim Thomasen on Thu Nov 22, 2012 6:49 am

pekkasteele wrote:http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2012/11/21/3677456/nhl-lockout-2012-roman-hamrlik-nhlpa

From now on I will like Hamrlik.


http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=410028

Erik Cole counters by saying Hamrlik is "selfish"
Tim Thomasen
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 977
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 1:33 pm
Location: You know, it's just not death with dignity if there's an Estevez in the room

Re: Lockout

Postby Tim Thomasen on Thu Nov 22, 2012 6:56 am

joopen wrote:
Gaucho wrote:There's never been a lockout or strike in the NBA, NFL, or MLB?


Not 3 consecutive work stoppages at the end of 3 consecutive CBA expirations


Four if you want to count the short strike of 1992 that ousted NHL President John Ziegler from office.
Tim Thomasen
ECHL'er
ECHL'er
 
Posts: 977
Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 1:33 pm
Location: You know, it's just not death with dignity if there's an Estevez in the room

Re: Lockout

Postby firepower on Thu Nov 22, 2012 8:34 am

Godric wrote:I'm pro owner as well


I'm pro HOCKEY. Get this **** over with. Go WB.
firepower
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 249
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2010 2:26 pm

Re: Lockout

Postby tfrizz on Thu Nov 22, 2012 9:26 am

joopen wrote:
Gaucho wrote:There's never been a lockout or strike in the NBA, NFL, or MLB?


Not 3 consecutive work stoppages at the end of 3 consecutive CBA expirations


And it'll be 4 consecutive stoppages in just a few years.
tfrizz
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,315
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:49 am
Location: Freddy Beach

Re: Lockout

Postby tfrizz on Thu Nov 22, 2012 9:29 am

http://www.thestar.com/sports/hockey/ar ... ockout-cox

Seven years ago, the NHL and the NHL Players’ Association finally eased that embarrassing pension burden by establishing a supplemental Senior Benefit Plan for players 65 years of age and older.

But when the current collective bargaining agreement with the league expired Sept. 15, so too did the Senior Benefit. Now, with the next payment due in January and no end in sight to the current lockout, more than 300 vulnerable former NHLers or their surviving widows have been left in limbo.


Schmidt, just six weeks younger than former Montreal star Elmer Lach, the oldest former NHL player, lives in a Boston-area seniors home and receives a pension of $357 a month. On top of that, for the past seven years he has received $12,000 annually through the Senior Benefit Plan.

“I can use it, although I’m doing OK,” said Schmidt. “But I also know there are players who can use it a lot more.”
tfrizz
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,315
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:49 am
Location: Freddy Beach

Re: Lockout

Postby tfrizz on Thu Nov 22, 2012 9:36 am

NHLPA’s hard-liners hint at decertification after latest offer rejected

The two sides are now only $182-million apart over the life of a new five-year agreement, although several contracting issues remain outstanding and may be the largest impediments to a deal.

“I think it’s frustrating for everybody and disappointing for everybody that it’s taken this long and we’re still far apart,” Bettman said.

Bettman said the league was losing up to $20-million a day.


So they're $182-million apart and the league is losing $20-million a day. That means as of Dec 1 the league will have given up an additional $200-million by rejecting an over that was $182-million from what they want.

If players voted to decertify, the NHLPA would no longer serve as a bargaining unit, and the lockout would either end or have its legality challenged in an antitrust lawsuit.

In the spring of 2011, NFL players did just that when they dissolved their union and pursued an antitrust lawsuit before their lockout had even begun. That fall, after a lockout that lasted more than four months, the National Basketball Players’ Association followed suit.

Both leagues eventually came to an agreement through negotiations, with the decertification and legal action (or potential legal action) believed to have helped force the two sides into a deal.

In the case of the NBA, the players had a new deal 12 days after their decertification vote went through.

The value of professional athletes having a union has become a subject of debate in sports law circles the past few years, as owners have used labour stoppages to shrink players’ share of revenues.

Without a union to negotiate with, a league couldn’t have a collective agreement, which would mean basic elements of the league, such as the salary cap, could be challenged under antitrust laws.


Why do I get the feeling the Rangers and Leafs will be whispering in players' ears?
tfrizz
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,315
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:49 am
Location: Freddy Beach

Re: Lockout

Postby champeen on Thu Nov 22, 2012 9:53 am

the league is losing 20 mil. per day in REVENUE. they're probably saving as much in expense every day. the $182 million they are 'off' in the make-whole number is not 'lost' in the next 9 days.
champeen
Junior 'A'
Junior 'A'
 
Posts: 342
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 8:29 pm
Location: Austin, TX

Re: Lockout

Postby shmenguin on Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:42 am

Tim Thomasen wrote:
pekkasteele wrote:http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2012/11/21/3677456/nhl-lockout-2012-roman-hamrlik-nhlpa

From now on I will like Hamrlik.


http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=410028

Erik Cole counters by saying Hamrlik is "selfish"


For him to come out and say this, it's the most selfish thing I've heard during the lockout. Without a doubt. It's just disappointing. You'd think the veteran guys are the guys who'd take more pride in what other veteran guys sacrificed in the last lockout, how we all benefited from that as a group. Some guys never played again


wait - what?

is Cole's premise here that the players benefited from holding out and missing a year? is that what i'm reading?
shmenguin
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,837
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:34 pm

Re: Lockout

Postby columbia on Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:45 am

That appears to be what he is saying.
columbia
NHL Third Liner
NHL Third Liner
 
Posts: 47,399
Joined: Wed Feb 20, 2008 12:13 am
Location: If you don't have a seat at the table, you're probably on the menu.

Re: Lockout

Postby tfrizz on Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:49 am

http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/2012 ... e-lockout/

Things, though, changed in 2011 when the NFL Union was dissolved and the players filed an antitrust lawsuit against the league to block the lockout. The Court of Appeal ruled that despite the Union dissolving itself, the CBA still protected the NFL from the antitrust lawsuit. That was a game changer for leagues.

As a result, antitrust litigation and decertification has become a far less effective tool for players in CBA negotiations. That means it’s highly unlikely that NHL players will decertify the Union. So don’t expect to see it.
tfrizz
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,315
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:49 am
Location: Freddy Beach

Re: Lockout

Postby shmenguin on Thu Nov 22, 2012 10:52 am

1) lose hundreds of millions of dollars in income
2) cave to the owners' demands anyways
3) ???
4) profit
shmenguin
NHL Fourth Liner
NHL Fourth Liner
 
Posts: 22,837
Joined: Mon Nov 06, 2006 11:34 pm

Re: Lockout

Postby tfrizz on Thu Nov 22, 2012 11:25 am

shmenguin wrote:1) lose hundreds of millions of dollars in income
2) cave to the owners' demands anyways
3) ???
4) profit


I've seen projections having the average NHL salary dropping by as much as $2-million under the owners' proposal... so, at the end of the day, there's not going to be a great deal of profit going on. NHL players will simply become even more poorly paid in comparison with the other major pro leagues (NFL, NBA, MLB).
tfrizz
AHL Hall of Famer
AHL Hall of Famer
 
Posts: 8,315
Joined: Wed Oct 21, 2009 9:49 am
Location: Freddy Beach

PreviousNext

Return to Pittsburgh Penguins

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Admin, dodint, farnham16, Hugo Stiglitz and 22 guests


e-mail