-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
NHL Lockout With Your Cock Out |OT|
- Thread starter Marvie_3
- Start date
Best bit of that article.. "It's that kind of sincere dedication to the National Hockey League that's made Sergei Kostitsyn a star. Or the younger, marginally more talented sibling of an inconsequential forward who may have had ties to organized crime. One of the two."
KernelPanic
Member
Ovie's IQ conveniently matches the number on his Capitals jersey, I'm sure the IIHF will stop you from playing anywhere including Sochi if you bail on your NHL contract.
Dubbedinenglish
Banned
If they are UFA sure why not. RFA or contracted fuck them. They agreed to terms and want to bail?
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
I originally assumed this was without Fehr but then I realized that would probably be too good to be true.
Rodeo Clown
All aboard! The Love train!
Meetings with a ton of ancillary people in the room never go anywhere. Stay home, guys.
Ovie comes to the NHL, becomes a star, earns shitloads of money, signs massive contract, then wants to bail on a contract he signed to play in Russia? That's not just ungrateful, that should be punished.
brucewaynegretzky
Member
Yeah they agreed to a dollar amount they're now being told they won't get.... yet they're the ones violating the contract?
I'm not even going to get into the "efficient breach" stuff where we expect people to breach contracts when it makes sense.
NHL needs to realize it isn't entitled to these players.
I personally want a league that has the best players in the world, but if the league isn't going to pay I'm not about to fault a guy for going to make more money somewhere else. I don't blame Jagr for going to Dallas despite claiming he really liked Philly. That makes perfect sense.
Players are part of the NHLPA, if they didn't agree with being part of that union and following whatever decisions the union makes, they shouldn't have signed a contract under the union in the first place. You can't sign a contract within the union and then if the union makes a decision you don't like, just bail on the union. That's not how life works.
brucewaynegretzky
Member
Um, they signed deals with the teams under the assumption that it couldn't be decreased. NHL is basically asking for retroactive amendments to those deals.
And actually just leaving a job for another is EXACTLY how life works.
KernelPanic
Member
Due to escrow the players haven't been getting the exact amounts on their contract since the last CBA started after the lockout.
It's wrong but it's not a new concept.
wsoxfan1214
Banned
What a fucking pass.
SAUCE
They signed contracts with teams under the umbrella of the NHLPA. If the NHLPA now negotiates a new agreement that might or might not involve salary cuts, players are still under that umbrella. Again, if they didn't agree with being in the NHLPA, they shouldn't have come in the first place.
And if you think you can bail on your contract without repercussions, then have fun not playing in Sochi.
KingHenrik30
Member
KHL isn't going to violate the transfer pact it has with the NHL.
KernelPanic
Member
I heard it's not much of a pact but more of an understanding which they can cancel at anytime.
Although the IIHF would step in if any funny business were to occur.
More cracks appearing in the union ?
Coldnoodle
Member
Backstrom looking sexy today.
...and when we're talking about the biggest Russian star player in the game, they'd likely be awfully tempted to say "fuck the agreement".
Missing paychecks tend to do that.
Devils are going to struggle to win games over the next 6 weeks now.
sazabirules
Unconfirmed Member
Kypreos said WSH offered a 1st + roster player for Kadri. Thank God that didn't happen.
KernelPanic
Member
Their meager salaries won't hold them for much longer.
A lost season is basically a 100% pay cut for that year of the contract. It's a 25% pay cut if your deal is 4 years. Unless you've got a really long term deal, you're likely going to be losing money as a result of an extended lockout, regardless of its outcome.
That article might as well have been written by Fehr himself. And I'm sure the author is being fed lines by players (used to be one himself).
One question: According to the owners, escrow would work in the same way that it did before. So why the abject reaction suggesting it's some underhanded, deceptive ploy? I must be missing something?
alexthekid
Member
RFA? So if you sign an entry league contract you are morally obligated to not to anything else after it is over? That is just insane. And even contracts that are signed, how valid are they for you morally if the terms you agreed to are changed?
Escrow isn´t the problem, using Escrow as a way significantly pay out less money than you agreed to is.
Exactly. If the players were smarter, they'd realize this.
KernelPanic
Member
I can't wait til they reference Eklund's articles for PR.
Escrow is designed to ensure that players get their 57% of HRR. Since that number isn't known til the season is over, players give up 5-10% of their salary into escrow with the expectation they get most of it back once the final accounting is done. It's a lot easier to mail refund checks to players rather than chase them all down and have them write a check in case they got overpaid.
If the NHL lowers their %, they'll be giving up a lot more in escrow and they most likely will not be getting it back since they're now entitled to a smaller %. It's a kind of devious way to do a paycut without calling it a pay cut. Of course if league revenues climb they'll give up less over time, it's not a fixed % cut (like an actual rollback would be). The amount they lose would vary year to year, the better the NHL does, the less they give up.
alexthekid
Member
Sometimes you have to go together as a group and try to say no, even though it will hurt you potentially. If they just agreed to the first offer every time, cause they would loose money. There is no reason what so ever for the owners to not constantly try to lower the players percentage every time the percentage is up.
As a union, even though you know that you will have to agree on lower terms it is vital how much lower and that it also costs money for the owners for trying to lower it.
KernelPanic
Member
http://blogs.edmontonjournal.com/2012/10/22/nhl-owners-are-not-cheaters-jaromir-jagr-says/
Interesting comments from Jagr since he's a team owner as well so he knows the story.
Compare to David Kerjci:
http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/...gary-bettman-treats-the-players-like-animals/
Interesting comments from Jagr since he's a team owner as well so he knows the story.
Compare to David Kerjci:
http://prohockeytalk.nbcsports.com/...gary-bettman-treats-the-players-like-animals/
I get that. I guess I was just surprised that (for example) the author on one day was saying the NHLPA should accept the proposal (with some minor adjustments) and then two days later writes another article saying 'after you read through the fine print'.... how did he not understand the implications? Or was he just slapped on the wrist for writing the initial article that requested the NHLPA compromise?
At least they didn't compare themselves to slaves like Adrian Peterson did during the NFL lockout.
SpectreFire
Member
alexthekid
Member
Is it possible to play NHL 13 on PS3 online against someone in NA if you are in EU? If so anyone want to take a game or two someday?
Milly will pay you 100.
I don't have any horns
I don't have any horns
Not every type of goat has horns. I doubt he would mind.
SuperSonic1305
Member
Won't somebody think of the millionaires?!
Coldnoodle
Member
/avatarquote