2012 CBA Negotiations Thread

[Kin]

The offer of last week was not really better than 2 weeks ago. While it increased the amount of make whole money it also had longer time to pay this money and longer agreement which may or may not benefit players.

The details of the most recent make whole offer haven't been released so I'm not sure where you're getting that it would have been paid out over a longer period of time. More than that you're ignoring the pension contribution that had been worked out, the changes in UFA and salary arbitration eligibility and the difference between the flat five year maximum on contracts and the new 5/7 split. All of those represent significant gains on previous offers.

 

[skippy]

Lets hope they both aren't as stupid as they come across right now, and that cooler heads can still prevail.

I think that's silly. Neither side comes off as stupid right now and Fehr especially doesn't come off as hot-headed. Like CF said, he couldn't have seemed calmer or collected on Thursday or in press conference on Saturday. He's a seasoned negotiator who's been here before. He's not freaking out or "smelling blood in the water". He's negotiating a major CBA and the process is at a critical junction. This is what he's good at, probably the best in the world. There's a reason the players are paying him millions of bucks to do this.

There no arguing that Fehr has a calming public demeanor, but he's also pushing this thing to the brink, and still hoping to win this (if you can call what the players will end up with when this gets settled a win). He's obviously telling the players that the owners will give more when he's really not sure they will. Educated gamble? Call it what you will, but I'm not sure he can wring out much more, and he's now cost the players another 2 weeks of hockey with his calculation. I hope he's not telling the players that the owners will cave at the last minute here, but it must be something along those lines or they would have taken the offer that was on the table last week, that many players seemed to have been ok with. Either way the deal ain't getting much better for the players, time is running out fast, and there is still a chance that Fehrs persistence on more and more from the owners will blow up in his face.

This is true. The players, as a whole, are going to lose no matter what way you look at it. They may hold out for some concessions and get them, but it doesn't take away from the fact that they are losing a lot of money each day this drags on.
God, and Fehr talking to the CAW just makes them look worse. You really want to align yourself with unskilled workers who helped kill an industry?

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

@adater reported last week that players had wanted to vote on nhl's latest offer and we're told by Fehr to wait and he could get them more. Adater reported this story as it was relayed to him by a player.

And multiple players have refuted that stance, and actually put their names to it.

 

[Bates]

Players stand in line because of the fallout of speaking up. Hamrlik was crapped on by a few for speaking his mind. Players are free to talk all they want, we all know that. They just have to tow the company line. My response earlier was that no one has ever said Fehr told the players what to do and according to adater he most certainly did.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Players stand in line because of the fallout of speaking up. Hamrlik was crapped on by a few for speaking his mind. Players are free to talk all they want, we all know that. They just have to tow the company line. My response earlier was that no one has ever said Fehr told the players what to do and according to adater he most certainly did.

Here's the thing Bates. If the players wanted to vote...They would of voted. Like it's been said, a union leader advises, he doesn't decide. He advised them they could get better/or should make a counter offer, they obviously took his advice. He's there to educate and lead them in the right direction.
And like I've said, that's chosen to be ignored. It's about the long term health of the union, not about the money you've lost in one pay cheque(all that would of been lost between now and 2 weeks ago.)

 

[Redleaf]

There no arguing that Fehr has a calming public demeanor, but he's also pushing this thing to the brink, and still hoping to win this (if you can call what the players will end up with when this gets settled a win). He's obviously telling the players that the owners will give more when he's really not sure they will.

That just comes off as more dime store psychology on your part without having inside knowledge either of Fehr or the proceedings. There's no history on Fehr's part of being driven by any personal need to "win" or "telling" players anything so definitive. Like I said above, relying on default analogies of winning and losing may be comforting to a sports fan but it's not all that illustrative of what's going on here. This is, at root, a dispute between the BoG and the players. Not Fehr and Bettman.

Either way the deal ain't getting much better for the players, time is running out fast, and there is still a chance that Fehrs persistence on more and more from the owners will blow up in his face.

Like I said before, people have been saying essentially the exact same thing since October and every time the owners have come back to the table with an offer that was better for the players.

Warming up for the beginning of the season I see....

 

[bustaheims]

Here's the thing Bates. If the players wanted to vote...They would of voted. Like it's been said, a union leader advises, he doesn't decide. He advised them they could get better/or should make a counter offer, they obviously took his advice. He's there to educate and lead them in the right direction.
And like I've said, that's chosen to be ignored. It's about the long term health of the union, not about the money you've lost in one pay cheque(all that would of been lost between now and 2 weeks ago.)

That's not necessarily true. In order for there to be a general vote, the negotiating committee has to agree to it. So, there very well could be a significant contingent of players that would like to vote, but either they haven't convinced the negotiating committee to let them or the negotiating committee doesn't feel now is the time to.

 

[Kin]

So, there very well could be a significant contingent of players that would like to vote, but either they haven't convinced the negotiating committee to let them or the negotiating committee doesn't feel now is the time to.

Likewise, there could be a significant contingent of owners who would have liked to have taken the players last offer. No one, however, should probably form too strong an opinion on the various "could bes" of the situation.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Likewise, there could be a significant contingent of owners who would have liked to have taken the players last offer but instead were treated with a dancing clown in front of podium.

Fixed. ;D

 

[Kin]

Players stand in line because of the fallout of speaking up. Hamrlik was crapped on by a few for speaking his mind. Players are free to talk all they want, we all know that. They just have to tow the company line. My response earlier was that no one has ever said Fehr told the players what to do and according to adater he most certainly did.

Leaving aside the laughable notion that it's the players who stifle dissent(did Hamrlik get hit with a 250,000 dollar fine?) you're not really making your point. Fehr has no authority to tell the players to do anything. Even if that anonymous sourced quote is true if Fehr "tells" players not to accept an offer the players can tell Fehr to shove it. Telling players that he thinks they can do better is advice, not an order.

 

[OldTimeHockey]

Players stand in line because of the fallout of speaking up. Hamrlik was crapped on by a few for speaking his mind. Players are free to talk all they want, we all know that. They just have to tow the company line. My response earlier was that no one has ever said Fehr told the players what to do and according to adater he most certainly did.

Leaving aside the laughable notion that it's the players who stifle dissent(did Hamrlik get hit with a 250,000 dollar fine?) you're not really making your point. Fehr has no authority to tell the players to do anything. Even if that anonymous sourced quote is true if Fehr "tells" players not to accept an offer the players can tell Fehr to shove it. Telling players that he thinks they can do better is advice, not an order.

Which was my point above just said more eloquently.

 

[Bates]

Thanks for noticing my irony Nik. The players have tweeted and talked constantly about wanting to hear from the owner's and about the owners not being allowed to talk. Yet as soon as one of the players speaks out against Fehr it's an all out attack on him.

 

[Rebel_1812]

I like how the media spins this that it is all Don's fault.  Yet you have Bettman you has had 3 lockouts so far, had personal problems with Goodnow, Basille and now Fehr.  Basically, Bettman demands his way or the highway, and started out with a ridiculous offer.  Yet no one calls him out as the problem with getting a deal done.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

Thanks for noticing my irony Nik. The players have tweeted and talked constantly about wanting to hear from the owner's and about the owners not being allowed to talk. Yet as soon as one of the players speaks out against Fehr it's an all out attack on him.

But Nik's point was that the player's are still allowed to speak out without being levied a fine in the hundreds of thousands for doing so. 

 

[Bates]

Yeah they sure are "allowed" to speak out.  Try telling that to Hamrlik who was called many things by his so-called brothers.  I hnow Nik's point.  One is paid back with fines, the other verbally and maybe physically when they return to ice. 

 

[Kin]

Yeah they sure are "allowed" to speak out.  Try telling that to Hamrlik who was called many things by his so-called brothers.  I hnow Nik's point.  One is paid back with fines, the other verbally and maybe physically when they return to ice.

You can't have it both ways. Hamrlik is free to say he's unhappy, Cole is free to say he thinks Hamrlik is a moron.

Either way you're jumping around and not making a coherent point. The public dialog between NHLPA members doesn't refute the basic fact that Fehr doesn't decide on whether or not a vote takes place.

 

[hockeyfan1]

Yeah they sure are "allowed" to speak out.  Try telling that to Hamrlik who was called many things by his so-called brothers.  I hnow Nik's point.  One is paid back with fines, the other verbally and maybe physically when they return to ice.
 

That I wouldn't doubt.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

So?  The point is he is allowed to say what he wants without a threat of punitive measures being taken against him.  If you're trying to stifle dissent, you impose penalties for speaking out.  I don't recall him being called many things other than misinformed by the other players, or in a different position in his career than others. 

"Maybe some people they took it too personal," said Hamrlik, who just returned from his native Czech Republic last week. "It's nothing against Don [Fehr] or some other people and the NHLPA. I'm behind them and I always was and I always will be.

"Everybody has different opinions and I think we should have started talking a bit earlier, that was my biggest point."

"I talked to some players back home, some guys disagree and some guys agree with me," he said. "We are in the same situation, we are in the same boat, everybody is together and I'm 100 percent behind the players.

"When you look back it's not about what I said, or what he said, or what they said. It's all about making a solution quickly and hopefully bringing a good solution to the table and start playing."

 

[Bates]

Fehr is running the show for the players.  He has an inner circle that makes the call on whether a vote will be taken.  They obviously made the call not to vote on last offer as a vote was not taken.  A player relayed that info to adater.  I have not heard of a players poll for or against vote so someone made the call not to hold one.  I believe that to be the inner circle at the advice of Fehr.

 

[Bates]

He sute has nothing to fear and must feel really free to get his opinion out!


?If he were sitting in a dressing room across from me tonight?? Cole said, the rest of that sentence off the record. ?I?d be all over him on the ice. I?m pissed at him. If that?s his opinion, then he should just stay over there (in the Czech Republic).