Thread: The Official CBA Negotiations/Lockout Super Thread

Originally Posted by sonnyboy11

It's late so I'll probably wake up thinking "why the hell did I post this?" But I want you to consider something, USC

First, having a problem with the players and their actions is an immediate response that only looks at day to day effect and impact on the sport. The players could quickly cave to the owners demands. But then, they could always do that- cave in and accept any offer the owners throw out there. And not just now, but for years to come. Where is the line?

On the other side, the owners are expected to be strategic in their vision for this sport. The players, in this case, are your tactical folks. The day to day folks. And while the NHLPA is also expected to be strategic on behalf of the players, the owners are truly the ones who can decide how this sport plays out in 3 years, 5 years, 10 years. NOT the players. The owners.

I am happy to assign immediate blame to both parties. But the owners have the burden on them of developing a long term strategy that creates a healthy and profitable league that rewards players and fans alike, and keeps the sport humming along with revenue and exposure to a broad audience. Does it seem like they (the owners) are doing that here to you? Cause I gotta tell ya, it sure doesn't look that way to me. Especially when considering the last, recent lock out and the course this whole thing has taken recently.

If you go through this behemoth of a thread, you'll see a few things from me. 1. That I do believe the owners are "more at fault" here, and that 2. Both sides are 100% within their rights to be negotiating the best possible deal for themselves. Billions of dollars are on the line, and neither side should make major concessions just because the fans are cranky that there isn't hockey. A fair compromise should be found, and I didn't think that either side (especially the players) should fold just to make sure hockey is back on time for us.

The thing is, I'm respecting both sides' concerns as an adult. As heart-broken as I am that my favorite sport and pastime is gone, I can appreciate the concerns and needs on both sides and understand them trying to work out a deal that everyone can agree on.

The lockout process is the ugly byproduct of these necessary negotiations. Could a lockout have been avoided? Of course. But it would have taken both sides cutting the crap and posturing, and I don't think either side ever had the intention of doing so until (apparently) some time in December.

So far, just a few gems from the NHLPA:

1. "We'll play hockey under the Current CBA if we can't come to an agreement!"

They know damn well that no negotiating would ever get done if there wasn't a lockout deadline. And what's to stop them from going on strike right before the playoffs to screw the owners out of tons of money? Also, what happens the following year, do we just keep playing without a CBA? This was unrealistic and stupid. Without a CBA in place, there couldn't and shouldn't be NHL hockey. Both sides know that, and while the NHL was setting the date, the NHLPA was trying to spin it like they had no choice.

2. "We wanted to negotiate today (last day before the lockout) but the owners won't let us. :("

Again, really? You are hundreds of millions of dollars apart and haven't even begun to scratch the surface on many smaller issues because of the huge money and ideological gaps. But the season can be saved in a 24 hour period? Complete nonsense designed again just to make idiots believe the league is being the "bad guy"

3. This obnoxious video: "We love hockey and love you fans. We know you are the ones suffering the most. Why do the owners keep doing this too us? :("

This video is complete propaganda garbage. It is a ****ing embarrassment. And that is why I made my initial post that you responded to. Instead of saying "we know this sucks for the fans, and we are sorry, but we have to stand up for what we believe in", it's this "Bettman is so mean we just want to help everyone and compromise" bull**** that is treating us fans like we are ****ing idiots.

BOTH SIDES want what is best for THEM. That doesn't bother me, that's human nature. What bothers me is that only one side is trying desperately to hide it.

Originally Posted by bigfan3

Players did not get ****ed the last time. Look at the growth of their salaries within that period and compare it to any other business or company in America! 50% gain in salaries and you feel ****ed? that's crazy.

You as an owner would've not signed Jonathan Quick to the extension he got? we as fans would've been happy with that? after winning a cup?

The Kopitars, Quicks and Doughtys of this world are not the problem, the Bissonnettes of this world are the problem. The guy makes $750,000 for the next 2 seasons, why? because the cap and floor keep increasing with the revenue increasing.

When a company does well, the owner should be able to rip the bulk of the benefits, instead they have to take less and to remain competitive or within the rules they have to fork out more money. Some teams have to signed players to contracts they don't deserve or trade for players they don't even want to stay above the floor minimum.

I mean, making $750,000 to play the way Bissonnette plays and the kind of minutes and impact he can have in the playoffs is crazy. The NHLPA did that and the current structure will keep allowing that. They did not loose, they won. You draft, develop and then shortly after if there is any "possible" future you better pay "market" value or loose your investment to a higher bitter.

You sit behind that desk and try to run a team. Make decisions on a daily basis trying to stay competitive and cap smart. NOT EASY. Sure there are some crazy owners but some just cannot keep up. "The League" revenue went up but your team revenue did not, now the CBA tells you you have to spend more even though you lost a ton of money as it is, do I sell and run or what?

Since the last CBA roughly 30% of the teams have new ownership, why do you think that is? that means 30% of the owners are here negotiating for the first time. Do you think that, depending on their market, they may have some interest in better their possible return on investment. Do you think they may want to get their initial investment back just a bit quicker, say 4 years instead of 8 or 10 years.

Two words; salary cap. And it wasn't the players who circumvented the cap.

Fehr HAS to know that the owners aren't going to blink anytime soon. They are more than willing to wait until mid-december to finally decide to negotiate, then toss the players a bone and everyone will celebrate with 24/7, the Winter Classic and the ASG. A true leader would try to cut the December deal now so his clients don't lose money they will never get back. But I'm afraid that's not Fehr's style, Brinkmanship is, and that's bad news for everyone, especially us fans.

Originally Posted by LOSTcauseZERO

Two words; salary cap. And it wasn't the players who circumvented the cap.

You've established in this thread that you are 100% anti-owners and you won't even entertain the idea that the players are remotely at fault. That's fine, but in turn I will politely decline getting into this discussion further with you.

Originally Posted by KHenry14

Fehr HAS to know that the owners aren't going to blink anytime soon. They are more than willing to wait until mid-december to finally decide to negotiate, then toss the players a bone and everyone will celebrate with 24/7, the Winter Classic and the ASG. A true leader would try to cut the December deal now so his clients don't lose money they will never get back. But I'm afraid that's not Fehr's style, Brinkmanship is, and that's bad news for everyone, especially us fans.

Exactly what I just told the wife, it's now a case off who is going to blink first, the billionaires or the millionaires.

Stupidest poll ever seen on LGK


(and, yes, I get the sarcasm/irreverence)

Originally Posted by USCKingsFan31

You've established in this thread that you are 100% anti-owners and you won't even entertain the idea that the players are remotely at fault. That's fine, but in turn I will politely decline getting into this discussion further with you.

There's PLENTY of blame to go around, and as usual it's us, the fans, who have to grab our ankles and take it.

why is a free market system beautiful and wonderful when businesses profit from it, but when workers do the system is broken?

why is an organized group of workers called a union but not an organized group of business owners?

for that matter, why do we support without question business entities coming together to form trade organizations, business associations, and chambers of commerce to protect their interests, but find the idea of workers joining forces to protect their interests abhorrent?

why is it that when owners seek to maximize profits they may be considered greedy but justifiably so, but when workers do the same they are illegitimately greedy?

ok, which side will piss down our backs and tell us it's raining today?