NHL CBA Talk

shabbs wrote:

tim1_2 wrote:

shabbs wrote:Can't see Fehr agreeing to Gary's idea of the players negotiating directly with the owners. I'm curious as to why Gary even suggested that.

Fehr has no choice but to ask the players if they want to meet separately with the owners. Fehr won't make this call, the players will. And after all the flak from players about how the sides must continue to meet, they damn well better accept the invitation.

I'm sure he'll prep them. It won't be a negotiating session, so no decisions would come out but more of a "let's talk and hear your concerns and talk about the issues".

I would hope they have a ref in there... it could get heated.

Who knows? It could result in them coming away further apart than they've ever been...but I think it's a good idea at this point. Kinda a last ditch effort to save the season.

The "hail mary" pass before the season is done...

May as well try anything at this point...

Mediators gave up after only 2 days. Jeezus Diddle.

You shouldn't diddle Hay-Zeus.

"Why do you keep calling my Hay-Zeus?"

"That guy back there said Hayzeus."

"He wasn't saying HayZeus, he was saying 'Hey, Zeus!"

Macramalla: If NHLPA wants to dissolve, my guess is that it elects to disclaim interest since almost instantly allows them to file antitrust lawsuit

https://twitter.com/EricOnSportsLaw/status/274580690622894081

I guess it will depend on how fast the NHLPA wants to move on this.

Hoags wrote:

shabbs wrote:Can't see Fehr agreeing to Gary's idea of the players negotiating directly with the owners. I'm curious as to why Gary even suggested that.

Just a tactic to cause friction with the union. I am sure there's a raging debate going on whether meeting the owners is a good idea or not.

Absolutely agree. It's actually a very clever tactic. It basically forces the players to accept, since the optics would be terrible if they don't. Further, it puts more pressure on any rifts that are already developing.

shabbs wrote:Macramalla: If NHLPA wants to dissolve, my guess is that it elects to disclaim interest since almost instantly allows them to file antitrust lawsuit

I'd imagine their first move would be to file a suit to declare the lockout illegal.

I bet they won't even be able to agree to the "ground rules" for this players-owners only meeting and it won't happen.

Players to decide on the owners-players only meeting by Sat...

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=410675

It's Saturday. Have they decided?

Sounds like PK will have a spot in sports beyond his playing career:

Ian Mendes ‏@ian_mendes wrote:

Some athletes are flat when they make the switch to TV. Not @PKSubban1 -- he was dynamite in his debut with us on Sportsnet.

Anyone else starting to think that Fehr's real end-game is to abolish the cap? I'm starting to have a feeling that this is what he's gunning for.

wprager wrote:It's Saturday. Have they decided?

It seems they will accept, under certain conditions...

http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/rangers/nhl_may_try_new_tack_in_talks_ZiAbEvKV6BRRqVoy8YyTZK

Not a negotiation, more of a conversation.

shabbs wrote:Anyone else starting to think that Fehr's real end-game is to abolish the cap? I'm starting to have a feeling that this is what he's gunning for.

I think either the NHL accepts a proposal on HIS terms or he will take on the system through the courts.

I do think the players have been driving the bus though(the last proposal supposedly was from the more moderate players) but he's worked up the players emotions and backed negotiations into a corner where the players feel they have no choice but to decertify and take legal action against the cap because accepting anything from the NHL would be "caving in".

I still think he will destroy the league as we know it, you only have to look at what he did with baseball so what he is capable of. He's not just negotiating a CBA here, there's a long term goal.

The players just got $10K from the NHLPA. That's not going to last very long for some of them. But are guys playing in the AHL eligible? If not, I'd be they are pissed off.

Fehr didn't destroy baseball, but it took baseball a decade to fully recover. And baseball is like, well, like baseball and apple pie in the US. If hockey is set back 10 years in Canada, how far will it fall in the US? Enrollment in hockey in Canada is down -- cost is the prime factor. Soccer is on the way up. If Canada cannot dominate on the world stage like they used to, will interest continue to drop off?

shabbs wrote:Anyone else starting to think that Fehr's real end-game is to abolish the cap? I'm starting to have a feeling that this is what he's gunning for.

I also believe that. He probably told the NHLPA he could win -- get rid of the Cap -- and have labour peace in the NHL.

Now tell me.. how many teams will be able to survive on what would be about 30 or 40% of HRR... as without a cap... teams will overpay and the players again will be getting 70% of HRR just like they did before 2004 lockout.

Fehr doesn't understand hockey at all. He and the NHLPA really don't care what happens to the game.

If they lose the Cap.. the big market rich teams will have all the star players and the other teams get what's left. Parity would be gone and so would revenue growth. They could be down to a 15 team league with no way to get back to 3 billion dollars... and about half of the current NHLPA won't have jobs. But Crosby, Stamkos et al will be okay... It's the role players who will be out of a job.

I can't see where the players think no Cap is good for the game... unless the superstars see themselves with a chance to win most of the time... and the rest never having that chance.

Don't they have a brain? Can't they figure that out? No way the Cap goes away.. IF they tried that.. there would be no NHL hockey for probably 3 yrs..