PDA

View Full Version : Even bigger than PSU?



Pages : [1] 2

Osorojo
07-14-2012, 03:06 PM
Do you think the NHL's newly proposed CBA could have an impact upon college hockey?

jnacc
07-14-2012, 05:00 PM
Are you referring to the 5 year entry contracts??

Happy
07-15-2012, 02:21 AM
Yes, because with that proposal, there will not be a NHL season this winter.

Osorojo
07-15-2012, 11:05 AM
Are you referring to the 5 year entry contracts??

The 5 year entry contracts are one component of the NHL owners' CBA proposal, but I agree with Happy that overall this proposal all but dares NHL players to go on strike. I suspect the owners' stance will have an immediate and significant impact upon the rosters and recruits of college hockey programs, some more than others.

J.D.
07-15-2012, 12:17 PM
It doesn't dare them to go on strike. This happens all the time. One side starts off negotiations with an obvious low-ball starting offer. The players will come back with a just as ridiculous counter offer and we go from there...

giwan
07-15-2012, 03:38 PM
It doesn't dare them to go on strike. This happens all the time. One side starts off negotiations with an obvious low-ball starting offer. The players will come back with a just as ridiculous counter offer and we go from there...

They seem hell bent on destroying the season.

J.D.
07-15-2012, 03:54 PM
Who is they? Nobody associated with this wants to lose a season. That doesn't mean both sides won't try their best to get a sweetheart deal. The biggest problem with all of this is the addition of Donald Fehr, unfortunately.

giwan
07-15-2012, 05:19 PM
Who is they? Nobody associated with this wants to lose a season. That doesn't mean both sides won't try their best to get a sweetheart deal. The biggest problem with all of this is the addition of Donald Fehr, unfortunately.

I think the owners wouldn't blink about a locked out season. That is they.

UMLFan
07-15-2012, 05:45 PM
It wasn't even a decade ago that they had a full-year locked out. And they're threatening not playing again, when they've finally started getting people back.

Idiots.

J.D.
07-15-2012, 05:47 PM
...which is exactly why I don't think anybody wants to lose the season. Of course both sides want drastic changes in their favor, that's to be expected.

KnowItAll
07-15-2012, 06:27 PM
It wasn't even a decade ago that they had a full-year locked out. And they're threatening not playing again, when they've finally started getting people back.

Idiots.

I have to assume that in the business world, you are more successful than the average NHL team owner, you are calling them idiots.

wow

i believe that whatever those idiots did, they are making more money than they did 10 years ago, crap economy notwithstanding....

was it just dumb luck?

UVM Cat in Texas
07-15-2012, 06:32 PM
Who is they? Nobody associated with this wants to lose a season. That doesn't mean both sides won't try their best to get a sweetheart deal. The biggest problem with all of this is the addition of Donald Fehr, unfortunately.
Oh no, are you kidding? Donald Fehr has his hand in hockey now too? That's one guy that won't mind losing an entire season. I wonder if Girgensons ever thought about that?

Wildpantswilly
07-15-2012, 09:58 PM
Who is they? Nobody associated with this wants to lose a season. That doesn't mean both sides won't try their best to get a sweetheart deal. The biggest problem with all of this is the addition of Donald Fehr, unfortunately.

You're joking right?

Gary Bettman is the absolute worst. The owners are almost as bad. Leading up to free-agency, the owner of the Minnesota Wild said this:

"We're not making money, and that's one reason we need to fix our system. We need to fix how much we're spending right now. [The Wild's] revenues are fine. We're down a little bit in attendance, but we're up in sponsorships, we're up in TV revenue. And so the revenue that we're generating is not the issue as much as our expenses. And [the Wild's] biggest expense by far is player salaries"

He then signed two players to almost $200 million worth of deals....

Regardless of whether you think the ludicrous offer made by the owners is gamesmanship, or just an average negotiating technique, it's hard to imagine it being a good starting point. This is especially true because the last go-round resulted in the players taking a cut from revenues, and the 11% cut proposed in the current proposal is completely contradictory to everything Bettman has said about the last CBA being successful. In fact, revenues have risen around 7% annually during that period.

My question is, why is Bettman looking to completely overhaul the system considering how well it has worked? Why not just change some small things like how contracts are scored (eliminating bonuses as an option for payment so the cap is a real cap) and a couple other small things? It seems like pure greediness IMO.

Rant over. However, I did put together a blog piece about this if anyone cares to read any further.

http://citizenweber.wordpress.com/2012/07/14/gary-bettman-thinks-youre-stupid/

J.D.
07-16-2012, 11:02 AM
You're joking right?

Gary Bettman is the absolute worst. The owners are almost as bad. Leading up to free-agency, the owner of the Minnesota Wild said this:

"We're not making money, and that's one reason we need to fix our system. We need to fix how much we're spending right now. [The Wild's] revenues are fine. We're down a little bit in attendance, but we're up in sponsorships, we're up in TV revenue. And so the revenue that we're generating is not the issue as much as our expenses. And [the Wild's] biggest expense by far is player salaries"

He then signed two players to almost $200 million worth of deals....

Regardless of whether you think the ludicrous offer made by the owners is gamesmanship, or just an average negotiating technique, it's hard to imagine it being a good starting point. This is especially true because the last go-round resulted in the players taking a cut from revenues, and the 11% cut proposed in the current proposal is completely contradictory to everything Bettman has said about the last CBA being successful. In fact, revenues have risen around 7% annually during that period.

My question is, why is Bettman looking to completely overhaul the system considering how well it has worked? Why not just change some small things like how contracts are scored (eliminating bonuses as an option for payment so the cap is a real cap) and a couple other small things? It seems like pure greediness IMO.


Nope, not joking. Are you? Jesus Christ. Try being at least a little bit specific next time if you're gonna come at me like that. I never said Bettman was a great commissioner or that the owners are great. I expected a ridiculous offer and I expect an equally ridiculous counter offer from the players. That's how this works. If all of these situations always started with good starting points, there'd never be any talk of lockouts. They always start far apart.

As a fan, I like where the game is considering where it was and see opportunities to keep growing. Are there things I would change? Absolutely. I'm not an owner nor am I defending them. But what we've seen so far is par for the course in all CBA negotiations. Both sides are equally greedy, especially when you now have someone like Donald Fehr in charge of the players. I really didn't say a whole lot in my original post to warrant this "rant".

Osorojo
07-16-2012, 12:04 PM
The Minnesota Wild may be losing money and Arizona certainly is, but Los Angeles isn't, and wait until next year. Other NHL franchises in major metropolitan areas are reaping a tidy profit. The issue is whether the "Professional" in Professional Hockey means money rules, period. [Some call this "capitalism".] In simple terms, the highest bidder gets the player. Without salary caps and other regulations the NHL will quickly evolve into a Harlem Globetrotters vs. Washington Generals spectacle; a "haves" versus the "have nots." Does this sound familiar? Precisely the same issues influence college hockey, compounded by those pesky demands for education.

Handyman
07-16-2012, 12:20 PM
I am pretty sure Leipold wasnt saying he himself or his team (the Wild) are losing money but that the OWNERS are as a group. There are a lot of teams in crisis

mnstate0fhockey
07-16-2012, 12:27 PM
I think the owners wouldn't blink about a locked out season. That is they.

I sincerely doubt they want to miss out on a Winter Classic. If they have a lockout, it goes no later than December IMO.

mnstate0fhockey
07-16-2012, 12:33 PM
You're joking right?

Gary Bettman is the absolute worst. The owners are almost as bad. Leading up to free-agency, the owner of the Minnesota Wild said this:

"We're not making money, and that's one reason we need to fix our system. We need to fix how much we're spending right now. [The Wild's] revenues are fine. We're down a little bit in attendance, but we're up in sponsorships, we're up in TV revenue. And so the revenue that we're generating is not the issue as much as our expenses. And [the Wild's] biggest expense by far is player salaries"

He then signed two players to almost $200 million worth of deals....

Regardless of whether you think the ludicrous offer made by the owners is gamesmanship, or just an average negotiating technique, it's hard to imagine it being a good starting point. This is especially true because the last go-round resulted in the players taking a cut from revenues, and the 11% cut proposed in the current proposal is completely contradictory to everything Bettman has said about the last CBA being successful. In fact, revenues have risen around 7% annually during that period.

My question is, why is Bettman looking to completely overhaul the system considering how well it has worked? Why not just change some small things like how contracts are scored (eliminating bonuses as an option for payment so the cap is a real cap) and a couple other small things? It seems like pure greediness IMO.

Rant over. However, I did put together a blog piece about this if anyone cares to read any further.

http://citizenweber.wordpress.com/2012/07/14/gary-bettman-thinks-youre-stupid/

The Wild are losing $$. A lot of teams are. Just because an owner hands out $200 million in contracts doesn't mean the team isn't losing money.

You do realize the Minnesota Wild are not his only source of income, right? His wife is the head of SC Johnson - A multi-billion dollar company. They aren't dependent upon income earned from the Wild to put food on the table, but that doesn't mean they want to continue to operate the team at a loss either. It is a business.

If the Wild didn't hand out those contracts, another team would have. And that would have meant a continuation of the same old losing ways for the Wild, which wouldn't be good for their bottom line either.

I don't think it is hypocritical at all. The Wild ownership played by the rules as they are now to try and make their team better. That doesn't mean they can't lobby to have the rules changed so they don't have to write such a huge check with non-hockey money in the future to land free agents.

giwan
07-16-2012, 12:39 PM
I sincerely doubt they want to miss out on a Winter Classic. If they have a lockout, it goes no later than December IMO.

Yeah that's it the winter classic of course, who would want to miss that. Especially this one with the great site lines.

Handyman
07-16-2012, 03:35 PM
If the Wild are losing money than the NHL is doomed. I dont buy for a second that they are in the red seeing as last year they had a revenue of $97 million. (source (http://www.hockeybuzz.com/blog/Alan-Bass/Minnesotas-Crazy-Wild-Finances/167/45554))

Are they making as much as they should be...no. Are they losing money...NOT A CHANCE!