NHL lockout?

[JayByrd]

theyeti, the fact that you do not watch or care about hockey is shining through. The NHL isn't trying to compete with other sports, they are simply trying to do the best they can for themselves.

You started this thread as a way to taunt the hockey fans on the forums, but now it's turned into an actual discussion, and you seem to be struggling to find your place in it. The only possible reason you're still posting on this is that you're trolling.

[theyeti]

i started this thread to see what ppl thought about the lockout .. i gave my opinion ..
thank u for adding to the debate this would not be any fun if everyone agreed with everyone else ..

as for the lockout let it keep going the players need to earn a paycheck eventually so ill be willing to bet salaries r gonna be going down seeing as how the players really bring nothing to the table ...

these r just my thoughts on the matter ... dont get to upset im not out to get u

[JayByrd]

The players won't cave. They did last time, and now the owners have come back asking for more. Not too many of us would accommodate our employers that way twice in a row.

All the players knew this was coming, and they all prepared for it financially. Hell, I even prepared for it in my yahoo keeper league. The players also just received their 2011/12 escrow payments. They're not going to go broke, and even if they do, most can find employment elsewhere if they want it.

[butcher99]

so ill be willing to bet salaries r gonna be going down seeing as how the players really bring nothing to the table ...

these r just my thoughts on the matter ... dont get to upset im not out to get u

bring nothing to the table except a skill set that no one else has? The owners are the ones bringing nothing to the table except a pocket full of money. If the owners were to pull out a new league would start up pretty fast. If the players pull out there is no one to replace them.
The players have already agreed to take a pay cut. It is just how the cut happens. The players agreed to the pay cut but not the implementation of it. The players want all current deals left intact. From this point on all new deals would fall under the new agreement. That does not sit well with the owners because they signed a whack of players just before the lockout in expectations of having a pay cut on all current salaries. So a lot of deals were signed expecting at least a 20% cut off what they agreed to pay. The Weber deal comes to mind to start with but a lot more were signed.

The players expect all signed contracts to be honoured. The owners want them all discounted. And there we sit. The players are not getting paid and the owners are paying out money with no income. Lets hope they get a resolution soon.

[jaz301]

bring nothing to the table except a skill set that no one else has? The owners are the ones bringing nothing to the table except a pocket full of money. If the owners were to pull out a new league would start up pretty fast. If the players pull out there is no one to replace them.
The players have already agreed to take a pay cut. It is just how the cut happens. The players agreed to the pay cut but not the implementation of it. The players want all current deals left intact. From this point on all new deals would fall under the new agreement. That does not sit well with the owners because they signed a whack of players just before the lockout in expectations of having a pay cut on all current salaries. So a lot of deals were signed expecting at least a 20% cut off what they agreed to pay. The Weber deal comes to mind to start with but a lot more were signed.

The players expect all signed contracts to be honoured. The owners want them all discounted. And there we sit. The players are not getting paid and the owners are paying out money with no income. Lets hope they get a resolution soon.

Well the owners have no one to blame, but themselves for being so stupid. I am in the middle between the two sides, but if I was the players I would want my contract honored to every last cent. Why would the owners think the players would take a pay cut from a contract they just signed? Like you said the players will agree to take pay cuts on future contracts as long as the contracts they have now are meet. All those deals just before the lockout should have never been signed. Now we are in dead lock because of that and will most likely lose another full NHL season.

[bigchef]

Here's my 2 bits: Both sides are a bunch of greedy *bleep*. This is what I think should happen. The owners(or the NHLPA, whoever decides these things) drop the minimum salary to $50k and cap it at $500,000. Run out the contracts of all these players that aren't worth a fraction of what they are getting paid and continue signing players at the lower salaries. Players will still come running for a $250,000 a year salary it's true.

In exchange, the owners will reduce the price of tickets and refreshments over the years until all players are at a reasonable level of play, people can once again afford to go to a game without spending their mortgage money, and some integrity is brought back to hockey.

And if they really want to make it interesting, they could include bonus pay for playoff games and even more for the finals and a bucketload for the SC champion. Because, after all, the playoffs are basically a licence to print money.

But, of course, this would probably be to easy.

[theyeti]

amen to that !

[kumazatheef]

Here's my 2 bits: Both sides are a bunch of greedy *bleep*. This is what I think should happen. ....

I'm guessing you don't run your own business, do you?

Run out the contracts of all these players that aren't worth a fraction of what they are getting paid

The very fact they are getting paid these salaries means that they were worth them at the time they signed the contract. Don't confuse price, worth, and value.

In exchange, the owners will reduce the price of tickets and refreshments over the years until all players are at a reasonable level of play, people can once again afford to go to a game without spending their mortgage money, and some integrity is brought back to hockey.

Um, the fact people are going to games implies they can afford the prices.

And if they really want to make it interesting, they could include bonus pay for playoff games and even more for the finals and a bucketload for the SC champion. Because, after all, the playoffs are basically a licence to print money.

Who's "they"? A number of players and teams have some terms worked into their contracts that can pay them a bonus. Why would the league pay extra money for something they'd get anyway. Ultimately the irony of your statement here is that you're now actually making money the focal point of the play-offs rather than the Stanley Cup itself. After your whole lead up of how both sides are greedy and it's all about money, you've sabotaged your points by suggesting players will play harder for money.

[bigchef]

Like I said, just my 2 bits. I still don't think any of them are worth what they get paid. Obviously some do.

[kumazatheef]

Like I said, just my 2 bits. I still don't think any of them are worth what they get paid. Obviously some do.

~ slow clap ~

I'm sure there are some people in the world who think minimum-paying jobs in Canada aren't worth what they get paid either ...

[JayByrd]

Like I said, just my 2 bits. I still don't think any of them are worth what they get paid. Obviously some do.

All but five NHL teams had at least 80 million dollars in revenue last year. The lowest was 63 million. This is done on the backs of the players' work, and in a way, the players *are* the product. Oh and a couple of times a year, one of them gets one too many bonks on the head and is never heard from again. Under your proposed system, the players better not spend any of that money until they retire.

NHL hockey players can legitimately claim to be the best in the world in their profession. The top doctors, lawyers, film actors, musicians, and CEO's of the world, all make millions each year. And they all get it the same way NHL players do...they negotiate a deal with someone who's willing to pay what they're asking. If the people paying them weren't benefitting from their services, they wouldn't shell out the big bucks to get them.

That's the thing about money though...everyone wants more of it, even rich people. That's why they call it money.

[theyeti]

on the backs of the players work lol

made my day pal

[kumazatheef]

on the backs of the players work lol

made my day pal

Who else is on the ice? Oh, you mean the referees?

[jaz301]

All but five NHL teams had at least 80 million dollars in revenue last year.

That is true, but what you did not mention is the operating income (which is earning before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization). If you look at this (http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/#p_1_s_a6_) 18 teams did not make any money and I am sure that after all the taxes and stuff there is probably a few more teams that did not make money. So you have like anywhere from 18-24 teams that did not make any money.

...They all get it the same way NHL players do...they negotiate a deal with someone who's willing to pay what they're asking. If the people paying them weren't benefiting from their services, they wouldn't shell out the big bucks to get them.

The problem is that most teams cant really afford to pay what the players want, but they have no choice. They either pay what the players wants or they lose that player to a team that can afford to pay that much. I have mentioned this before, but its a perfect example. Look at the shea weber deal. $110 million US over 14 years. with a cap hit of 7.8mil per year (full contract here http://www.capgeek.com/player/1042). Looking at that link I posted earlier Nashville lost 7.5mil last season. Looking at that it does not look like they can afford shea weber, but they didn't have a choice. They either matched the proposal that the Flyers gave him or they would have lost one of there best players.

If all teams made money it would not matter because all teams could pay the players what they ask (even if the wages are a bit ridiculous). The problem is though is that not all teams are making money. So you get the teams that are making money paying there players more money and the other teams that are not making money paying the players the same or they will end up losing there star players to other teams.

[kumazatheef]

The problem is that most teams cant really afford to pay what the players want, but they have no choice.

They always have a choice.