PDA

View Full Version : The owners are insane



averymustgo
09-01-2012, 07:11 AM
They want a 57% cut to 43%. Mind boggling. Not to mention making the UFA 31 when players are old and many are close to retirement. Basically, they want to spit in the players faces and expect them to take it. I love how Bettman tries to make it seem like the players aren't being reasonable. Get a clue Gary. It won't work this time. The owners greed is absurd. People actually are supporting the players and don't buy into the crap you are spewing.

NYY09
09-01-2012, 09:38 AM
Yes, the first proposal calls for 57/43 but thats what it is, a first proposal in negotiation and not all owners are on the same page. I understand how people can get frustrated during this process but its not like selling a car, especially when you're talking about the kind of money that's on the line here. The NHL is a business and this is how these things go, take you fan hat off for a second and try to understand the other side of this thing. If you can.

njnets
09-01-2012, 12:38 PM
^ exactly.

this number is not there goal. if they start out this high though, they will most likely get their goal, which is somewhere in the middle (50 ish).

if they start out at 50, the players will eventually get it down to the high 40s, which is not what the owners want.

some people look at this as people taking advantage of others, some look at it as smart.

these teams are a business for these owners. they will fight to the death to get a good deal.

Garden Faithful
09-03-2012, 11:07 AM
It's funny to see that the owners are being blamed in a sport where a little over half of the teams in the league lose money every year.

Claude28Giroux
09-03-2012, 11:18 AM
They want a 57% cut to 43%. Mind boggling. Not to mention making the UFA 31 when players are old and many are close to retirement. Basically, they want to spit in the players faces and expect them to take it. I love how Bettman tries to make it seem like the players aren't being reasonable. Get a clue Gary. It won't work this time. The owners greed is absurd. People actually are supporting the players and don't buy into the crap you are spewing.

It always amazes me how self absorbed these owners are with their ****ing money.

players play because they love the game(or should anyway) the money is just a HUGE added bonus

Garden Faithful
09-03-2012, 12:08 PM
It always amazes me how self absorbed these owners are with their ****ing money.

players play because they love the game(or should anyway) the money is just a HUGE added bonus

Explain to me how not wanting to lose money every year which is something that, according to forbes and other financial evaluators, up to 18 teams do every year is being greedy. And don't pretend like the players only play because they love the game because that's horseshit. While there are plenty of players who realize how lucky they are to do what they do there are also a lot of players who treat it as simply a job like everyone else does. If they didn't care about the money then the issue of a lockout wouldn't be a problem. I'm not saying it's all on the players but Mr. Fehr is probably the reason we won't have hockey this season because he still thinks he's dealing with MLB salaries and he's not. Financially speaking the owners are in the right here and unfortunately most players don't understand what it costs to own and operate a sports franchise because all they have to do is play hockey.

averymustgo
09-03-2012, 12:12 PM
Is it possible you can ever post without being a miserable person? Doubtful.

averymustgo
09-03-2012, 12:15 PM
Good thing I just added you to my ignore list. Great feature.

ccugrad1
09-03-2012, 12:17 PM
I have never understood how anyone thinks that the owners should NOT be getting AT LEAST 50% of the profits when it comes to a professional sports franchise?

averymustgo
09-03-2012, 12:20 PM
Usually I agree with that but since hockey players end up without half their teeth not to mention multiple scars, I would say they should get more than that. Any owner of a business only makes money because of the product. If your product has the crap beaten out of it for 10 to 15 years, I think the owners can take the less.

Garden Faithful
09-03-2012, 04:36 PM
I <3 u averymustgo!!!

And business owners only make money when they have a product that's working. Funny thing about that product is they're the ones paying for it. By the way I'm never a miserable person I'm always happy. :up:

By the way who limits what they read or hear, killing your own right to free speech which includes your ability to hear those who think differently than you or those who think like minded as you.

Claude28Giroux
09-03-2012, 05:26 PM
Explain to me how not wanting to lose money every year which is something that, according to forbes and other financial evaluators, up to 18 teams do every year is being greedy. And don't pretend like the players only play because they love the game because that's horseshit. While there are plenty of players who realize how lucky they are to do what they do there are also a lot of players who treat it as simply a job like everyone else does. If they didn't care about the money then the issue of a lockout wouldn't be a problem. I'm not saying it's all on the players but Mr. Fehr is probably the reason we won't have hockey this season because he still thinks he's dealing with MLB salaries and he's not. Financially speaking the owners are in the right here and unfortunately most players don't understand what it costs to own and operate a sports franchise because all they have to do is play hockey.

you saw the "or they should anyway" right? I know it a job but I think the players enjoy their job right?

Claude28Giroux
09-03-2012, 05:28 PM
Usually I agree with that but since hockey players end up without half their teeth not to mention multiple scars, I would say they should get more than that. Any owner of a business only makes money because of the product. If your product has the crap beaten out of it for 10 to 15 years, I think the owners can take the less.

:clap:
this

bsi
09-03-2012, 06:40 PM
They're all making too much money which in turn drives ticket prices, parking, concessions, cable bills etc etc up and slams the door in the face of the people that appreciate the game, the middle class. Watching a game with a bunch of suits is frustrating, and half the time they don't even show up and the rink is empty. The problem starts and ends with greed. I am not taking any sides on this but I wish they'd get it figured out for the people that rely on the jobs at the arena's and businesses surrounding them get back to work. Shutting the season down so a bunch of millionaires can bicker over who gets what is shameful when there's people at the bottom trying to feed their families being shut out of their job, I could care less about the players or the owners. Even a low paying NHL salary is about 15 years work for the average Joe working in most of those arena's. The league and it's players should have had this deal done in July at which time it should have went to an arbitrator if not.

ShadyOne
09-04-2012, 10:37 AM
If so many teams are having financial trouble, then why do the owners continue to offer obscene contracts to players. Can't blame anyone but the owners here, as even mid-level role players are getting huge offers. Forget about what the star guys are getting...

Now they are trying to fix the mess they got into. Shame, as we are likely all going to suffer...

jomota
09-04-2012, 01:10 PM
Show me the last player that lost $$$$ in hockey.

fingerbang
09-04-2012, 01:35 PM
If so many teams are having financial trouble, then why do the owners continue to offer obscene contracts to players. Can't blame anyone but the owners here, as even mid-level role players are getting huge offers. Forget about what the star guys are getting...

Now they are trying to fix the mess they got into. Shame, as we are likely all going to suffer...

They offer obscene contracts because:

1. The NHLPA got a good deal last time.

2. You have to invest money into players if you want people to buy tickets or turn on the game...

runnermjr1296
09-04-2012, 05:29 PM
They're all making too much money which in turn drives ticket prices, parking, concessions, cable bills etc etc up and slams the door in the face of the people that appreciate the game, the middle class. Watching a game with a bunch of suits is frustrating, and half the time they don't even show up and the rink is empty. The problem starts and ends with greed. I am not taking any sides on this but I wish they'd get it figured out for the people that rely on the jobs at the arena's and businesses surrounding them get back to work. Shutting the season down so a bunch of millionaires can bicker over who gets what is shameful when there's people at the bottom trying to feed their families being shut out of their job, I could care less about the players or the owners. Even a low paying NHL salary is about 15 years work for the average Joe working in most of those arena's. The league and it's players should have had this deal done in July at which time it should have went to an arbitrator if not.
as usual you are the voice of reason

averymustgo
09-04-2012, 08:20 PM
It's idiots like the Flyers owners who offer morons like Simmonds 4+ million over 6 years at 22 years old when they have control that ruin the pay scale. They could have offered Simmonds 4 years at 2.5 and he would have gladly taken it. He had one good, offensive year. He had no leverage.

notoriousbig21
09-04-2012, 08:46 PM
Cant believe this season is probably gonna be severely shortened and at the worst cancelled.

Especially since we just had our best year in the last 15 and signed a superstar like Nash.

fingerbang
09-04-2012, 11:31 PM
It's idiots like the Flyers owners who offer morons like Simmonds 4+ million over 6 years at 22 years old when they have control that ruin the pay scale. They could have offered Simmonds 4 years at 2.5 and he would have gladly taken it. He had one good, offensive year. He had no leverage.

You can read minds now, too?

NYY09
09-05-2012, 08:37 AM
They offer obscene contracts because:

1. The NHLPA got a good deal last time.

2. You have to invest money into players if you want people to buy tickets or turn on the game...


They caved when it came to a salary cap so I'm not sure how "good" the deal was for them per se...


You can read minds now, too?

Thats just him, trolling along.... Pay no mind

ShadyOne
09-05-2012, 10:16 AM
They offer obscene contracts because:

1. The NHLPA got a good deal last time.

2. You have to invest money into players if you want people to buy tickets or turn on the game...

Yes, you have to invest in the team to make money...

But noone forced them to hand out huge contracts like candy on halloween. Seems that even mid-level talents get minimum 4-5M per season now. Forget about the all-stars/elite players. Like, for example, those matching deals for Parise and Suter. Which then set up the ridiculous deal for Weber. Which then sets the market for any other stars who are due contracts.

Like, for example, if he continues on the upward trend, Giroux, or even scarier, Malkin. If you compare Malkin to Parise, Malkin is younger, much bigger, and has more 100+ point seasons than Parise has point-per-game seasons. So Malkin would be likely looking for 130M or more on the market.

fingerbang
09-05-2012, 01:12 PM
Yes, you have to invest in the team to make money...

But noone forced them to hand out huge contracts like candy on halloween. Seems that even mid-level talents get minimum 4-5M per season now. Forget about the all-stars/elite players. Like, for example, those matching deals for Parise and Suter. Which then set up the ridiculous deal for Weber. Which then sets the market for any other stars who are due contracts.

Like, for example, if he continues on the upward trend, Giroux, or even scarier, Malkin. If you compare Malkin to Parise, Malkin is younger, much bigger, and has more 100+ point seasons than Parise has point-per-game seasons. So Malkin would be likely looking for 130M or more on the market.

You do realize this is all dependent on the owner/player split. The fact that the NHLPA got a great deal is the exact reason why mid level talent gets paid that much. You lower the cap, you lower the cap hits owners give out.

Basically, if an owner can spend it, he might just to compete. Look at Buffalo, Doan's not worth all that money but they have the cap room to spare so they'll throw it at him.

ShadyOne
09-05-2012, 03:32 PM
You do realize this is all dependent on the owner/player split. The fact that the NHLPA got a great deal is the exact reason why mid level talent gets paid that much. You lower the cap, you lower the cap hits owners give out.

Basically, if an owner can spend it, he might just to compete. Look at Buffalo, Doan's not worth all that money but they have the cap room to spare so they'll throw it at him.

But that really has no relevance on what I'm saying...

So what if a team has cap room. If they are losing money, then why continue to spend foolishly? Don't need to max out your cap, and definitely don't need to waste millions on guys who aren't worth it. Build smart, draft well, grow your business, and your fan base, and stop crying about it. Then you have the cash, and you spend it..

And then all the owners are going to contend that they can't afford to pay these salaries, and then lock out the season, they then basically put themselves into this position.

I am honestly not sure of Buffalo's financial situation, but I'd wager they aren't one of the franchises that are relatively profitable. So honestly, is paying Shane Doan 30M smart? Not making them that much more of a draw, or that much better. So what do they accomplish by totally blowing the salary structure out of whack? Nothing except driving other contracts for similar level free agents way up.

Noone is forcing these owners to hand out terrible contracts, it's all up to them. They have the money, and the power to do with it whatever they want. So now, they want to lock out the season, and pretty much strike a finishing blow to any hope this league had of gaining a reasonable level of popularity. Some more smart business decisions from people I would have assumed knew at least a little something about business...

Garden Faithful
09-05-2012, 05:07 PM
If so many teams are having financial trouble, then why do the owners continue to offer obscene contracts to players. Can't blame anyone but the owners here, as even mid-level role players are getting huge offers. Forget about what the star guys are getting...

Now they are trying to fix the mess they got into. Shame, as we are likely all going to suffer...

Simple economics you have to spend money to make money and while sometimes it is ill spent those owners believe they are going to benefit from spending in the short term in order to facilitate long term stability and income. If you are going to blame anyone for player salaries it is the players association because they drive the price of their product up since they are there to benefit their constituency. While the owners sign the contracts they are left with no choice seeing as how the market price is set by the NHLPA in the CBA. The players receive a large portion of the revenue sharing agreement and as a result inflate their market value, consequently mid level players seem to be getting paid what many believe to be over-payments and in some cases gross over-payments. Now I understand the animosity towards the owners because it appears as though they are the mean greedy barons of the league which could be true to an extent but to put all the blame on them seems unfair to me since they have done things such as give a majority of the money from the NBC deal to the players in the form of compensation in the future as well as their pensions. Many owners are in the precarious situation of being forced to spend money they don't want to, or in some cases don't have available for that area of their finances, on their teams in order to have the potential at success in the league as well as monetarily. I think they are both at fault, the players more so IMO and I see Mr. Fehr being a very big problem for the NHL, and of course as you and everyone else stated earlier we are truly the ones that suffer unfortunately.


you saw the "or they should anyway" right? I know it a job but I think the players enjoy their job right?

I did and I apologize for glossing over that but the reality, albeit hockey players for the most part seem to be more humble than other athletes, is that it is a job and while they should, as many do, enjoy their jobs they're are trying to get as much of the revenue as they can whether warranted or not. We all want more money for what we do but they are doing it to the detriment of their own futures and the future of the league. They make more of a percentage than any other league and they have more owners losing money than any other league. So I hope that clears that up if not we can continue this, I'm always up for a discussion.

fingerbang
09-05-2012, 05:59 PM
But that really has no relevance on what I'm saying...

So what if a team has cap room. If they are losing money, then why continue to spend foolishly? Don't need to max out your cap, and definitely don't need to waste millions on guys who aren't worth it. Build smart, draft well, grow your business, and your fan base, and stop crying about it. Then you have the cash, and you spend it..

And then all the owners are going to contend that they can't afford to pay these salaries, and then lock out the season, they then basically put themselves into this position.

I am honestly not sure of Buffalo's financial situation, but I'd wager they aren't one of the franchises that are relatively profitable. So honestly, is paying Shane Doan 30M smart? Not making them that much more of a draw, or that much better. So what do they accomplish by totally blowing the salary structure out of whack? Nothing except driving other contracts for similar level free agents way up.

Noone is forcing these owners to hand out terrible contracts, it's all up to them. They have the money, and the power to do with it whatever they want. So now, they want to lock out the season, and pretty much strike a finishing blow to any hope this league had of gaining a reasonable level of popularity. Some more smart business decisions from people I would have assumed knew at least a little something about business...

The league itself forces you to hand out those contracts. You need players to fill seats. You're not going to profit with a bad team unless you're in a great market.

In Minnesota, the GM obviously feels that adding Parise and Suter will increase revenues enough to justify their contracts.

A lower cap means a small market team has to spend less to stay competitive.

bsi
09-05-2012, 06:05 PM
The only problem is that you can't hand out a big contract and then beg for money. In the case of Holmgren he just offered up 110 million dollars to someone and will claim they can't make money. I'm sure the Flyers will be profitable next year with or without Weber, the same goes for most teams in the league. The problem is that they want to sign these players to ridiculous contracts and now they want to go back on the contract that they signed and cut a percentage off of it. IMO any contract that was signed before this CBA should be honored as it was signed.

fingerbang
09-05-2012, 06:12 PM
The only problem is that you can't hand out a big contract and then beg for money. In the case of Holmgren he just offered up 110 million dollars to someone and will claim they can't make money. I'm sure the Flyers will be profitable next year with or without Weber, the same goes for most teams in the league. The problem is that they want to sign these players to ridiculous contracts and now they want to go back on the contract that they signed and cut a percentage off of it. IMO any contract that was signed before this CBA should be honored as it was signed.

A major reason why those contracts are ridiculous is a direct result of the owner/player split from the last CBA. The CBA is a direct influence on what those contracts look like. By calling those contacts crazy, you're actually arguing in support of the owners.

bsi
09-05-2012, 07:16 PM
A major reason why those contracts are ridiculous is a direct result of the owner/player split from the last CBA. The CBA is a direct influence on what those contracts look like. By calling those contacts crazy, you're actually arguing in support of the owners.

Except it was the owners who signed those contracts and the owners that signed the last CBA. If a person signs a 6 million dollar contract under the last CBA, then I'd expect that contract to be honored under that CBA and not reduced afterwards because the owners aren't happy with a deal they signed. The NHLPA didn't create the last CBA on their own, both sides signed and agreed to it and now it seems as though the league doesn't want to honour those contracts that they themselves signed under that CBA. Like I said before I'm not taking sides but the one thing I agree with the players on is that it's ridiculous to ask players to reduce their salaries because the teams are overspending, especially when they have a contract that was signed under the last CBA.

NYRFan76
09-07-2012, 12:22 PM
I say get rid of the owners!? Let the league own the NHL teams? I am sure the League can produce enough money. The owners just waste money like crazy instead of re-building the league the way it should be built. Put money back into the league not your pockets.

If they get into another lock out, its going to hurt the NHL. They will lose even more fans. It took a long time since the last lock out to get back to where it needed to be now.

In any sport, lets be honest do these players really earn the right to all that money they ask for every year they play? No...! When a player is a free agent their new contract should start out low then grow higher if they earn it. Its like earning respect? You don't get respect unless you earn it and work hard for it. Its the owners who get greedy and want to lock these players in for good so no one else signs them. You can sign players without a ridiculous amount of money. Heck I'd be happy making $1 million a year.

jomota
09-11-2012, 08:17 PM
Show me the last player that lost $$$$ in hockey.

So I guess no one could.

SLY WILLIAMS
09-12-2012, 12:57 PM
It always amazes me how self absorbed these owners are with their ****ing money.

players play because they love the game(or should anyway) the money is just a HUGE added bonus

If players only played for the love of the game this would not even be an issue. There is no reason any team owner franchise should take a loss. The #1 cost is labor by far. The #1 revenue is ticket sales. So they have 3 choices.

1. Lower labor costs (Players salaries)
2. Raise revenue (Ticket prices)
3. Put a team on the ice that can not compete

To me the best choice is to ask the players to accept still crazy high but more reasonable salaries. Back in the 50's-60's players had off season jobs. They didn't make 2-9 million dollars a year.

So you are the owner of a franchise losing money. What do you do? Do you raise ticket prices? Do you put a team on the ice that has no chance to compete? Or do you try to get the players to agree to keep player salaries at a more reasonable level?

bsi
09-13-2012, 04:29 PM
If players only played for the love of the game this would not even be an issue. There is no reason any team owner franchise should take a loss. The #1 cost is labor by far. The #1 revenue is ticket sales. So they have 3 choices.

1. Lower labor costs (Players salaries)
2. Raise revenue (Ticket prices)
3. Put a team on the ice that can not compete

To me the best choice is to ask the players to accept still crazy high but more reasonable salaries. Back in the 50's-60's players had off season jobs. They didn't make 2-9 million dollars a year.

So you are the owner of a franchise losing money. What do you do? Do you raise ticket prices? Do you put a team on the ice that has no chance to compete? Or do you try to get the players to agree to keep player salaries at a more reasonable level?

The problem with that theory is that the league got the deal they wanted last time and ticket prices continued to rise as they continue to throw higher and longer contracts at their players even though there's no guarantee that to win you have to spend. The Calgary Flames have the third highest cap and where has that got them? Montreal, Toronto and Tampa are all in the top 10 as well so there's no reason to think you have to spend to be competitive, Nashville, Florida, ST.LOUIS, Ottawa, and Phoenix were all in the bottom 10 in cap space last year. Secondly the league continues to leave teams in places like Phoenix that continue to cost the entire league money. If they were truly using a business model then that team would have been somewhere else years ago along with a host of other teams that are "losing" money. But the league keeps them around to make it look like they aren't making as much money as they are on the whole for contract negotiations. It all comes down to greed. I've never seen a decent franchise have to search for owners, and that's because they are money makers, even now with Phoenix telling everyone they are a money losing team there's people that wanna buy it and why is that? Because they aren't REALLLY losing money, they might be on paper but people that can afford an NHL franchise didn't get to this point in their life by making bad business decisions. This is all about greed. I guarantee the owners in NY, Toronto, Montreal, Detroit, Boston, Calgary, Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Chicago, Pitsburgh etc don't want a lock out, they'll lose millions of dollars a day. I see them going past the deadline but the season will start in October IMO.
The one thing I would like is that the two sides just go work on a deal and stop trying to manipulate the media and the press into thinking one way or the other, it doesn't matter who the bad guy is here, just get the players back on the ice.

Isca92
10-05-2012, 06:43 PM
I still cant believe they havent signed a CBA at this point, this is absurd. Heres my problem, the current CBA is flawed, but its still producing record breaking revenue. Its a deal that the league already cancelled a season because to get. There could be a majority of owners wanting to do something off of the PA's proposal, but it only takes 8 of them (really 7 because the NHL still owns Phoenix) to reject the deal and its no deal.

Heres what I think needs to change. First remove the cap floor, no reason for mid range players to get overpaid on a team cause they need to get to the cap floor. It drives salaries up. Make the cap hit the amount of money (signing bonus or salary), that a player makes over the course of July 1- June 30, that players cap hit. This will cut out the stupid contracts. The idea of average for the cap hit was a great idea to allow for sliding contracts but they ruined that, punished one team for it and then the next season teams figure away around that. Have a set team salary cap for the next CBA, with each years ceiling noted, and not have it rise with the revenue.

Bsi, its been said by many the Jacobs (Bruins owner) is one of the driving forces in the lockout. I'm sure his stance is something along the lines of why should I give up part of my revenue to one of these teams that cant build a strong franchise thats not my fault.

Sly, while I get what your saying about the amount of money any athlete makes but I dont have as much blame on the players side of the deal. I agree their HRR split of 57% is high, but its not 57% of revenue its actually 57% of profit. There is also money taken out for what type of facilty (single/multi), they play in. The players have said offered lower percentages, but they want the money to go to the teams that need it. Plus if the owners had such a huge problem with the CBA, why were all those players signed this summer, especially with contracts that had signing bonus's instead of salary? If they cared that much about them losing money or not making as much of it they wouldnt have signed contracts that have money paid to them regardless of if there is a season or not. If the there is a full season lock out, the Wild would have to pay Parise and Suter each $20 million before the following season puck drop. $40 million dollars knowing there is chance of basically no revenue coming in. Thats just bad business. Struggling teams need be better with their finances, not just spend whatever the cap allows them and hope they will be compete.

I agree that both sides need to stop looking for sympathy through the media, even though the PA is making the owners look awful. Split the HRR 50/50, keep salary arbitration, make entry level contracts 4 years, and make an age for UFA status, not years of service. Years of service will kill what strength the US College leagues have developed. If it goes 10 years, going to college for 3 years will not allow you to become unrestricted until 31. Whereas you can sign a contract at 18 go to juniors and eat up those years of service.

Sandman
10-05-2012, 09:40 PM
I think its the league's fault for over-expansion into certain areas.

There should be a rule. If there's an NHL player from your state, you can have a hockey team.