Note to the mis(un)informed

I’m kind of at a loss. For the life of me I cannot decipher why the majority of public opinion continues to not only favour the owners, but their support continues to grow. I, literally, spend at least an hour a day continually checking for updates on the lockout, albeit there’s been little to be updated on recently, just ask Mr.Bettman. I frequent probably 10 or 15 websites, message boards and newspapers from a pretty broad spectrum of north America and from what i gather there is a RIDICULOUSLY disproportionate number of people supporting the owners, whether this is due stictly to ignorance I’m not sure but I cannot fathom how an informed person who objectively views and researches the history, views, and proposals of each side of the fence can have sympathy for the rich owners, who made their millions before purchasing a franchise and who will continue to be millionaires hockey or no, and accuse the players, who play for a living, of being greedy. Case in point: it is the OWNERS holding out for more money, not the players, hence the term “lockout.”

Anyone who knows anything about the lockout is quick to admit that many clubs are hemmoraging money, including myself, where the conflict lies is exactly how and why they’re losing money. Why is the easier of the two so I’ll tackle that one. I think the problem with many owners is that they’re businessmen by nature, they think in terms of return on investment et al. They think that if they invest 100 mill in alexei yashin or 20 mill on marty lapointe they’ll get equal return on their investment. Note that it was the owners that pushed for these deals, not the gm’s. A few more examples of owners irresponsibility would be paul kariya’s second contract and the hurricanes offer to sergei fedorov when he was a rfa. If you were to research the recent history of notoriously bad contracts, you would see that the vast majority of these were initiated by the owners themselves, the same owners who parade the now famous bettman rhetoric of “cost certainty,” complain of outrageous contracts and escalating salaries.

Many people claim that arbitration is the reason for the rise in salaries. This is true to an extent. Arbitration in effect sets the market for certain types of players, for instance john leclairs landmark awarding of a 7 million/year in arbitration paved the way for jarome iginla and bill guerin to reel in comparable contracts. But the reason for this is simple, if Philadelphia had simply not accepted the arbitrators award, and other owners in turn realized that 7 million a year is too much for an aging power forward, that precedent is never set. I’ll be honest, when ya get down to the nuts and bolts of the lockout, i really couldn’t care less that bobby holik makes 9 million dollars a year or that jeremy jacobs won’t be happy no matter how much money he makes. I care when someone robs me of something i love, cap or no cap you can bet your beukeboom i’ll be back when the nhl resumes because a true hockey fan can never fill that void with anything else. Thank god for forums like these, it’s hard to find a soapbox that supports your own weight these days.

67 Responses to Note to the mis(un)informed

  1. Aetherial says:

    My point is not whether or not the players *could* exploit or do any of the above mentioned things.

    My point was simple…

    There were upward pressures on salaries that were out of the owner’s control.

    It is not like owners just decided one day to overpay everyone. Yet, everyone feels free to simply say it is the owner’s fault we are in the current mess.

    How perfectly self-serving for the players to work the system as much as they possibly can, even unto holding teams hostage by simply not playing..

    and then turn around and blame the owners for everything.

    I am sorry you are incapable of seeing that.

  2. Aetherial says:

    Grow up Einstein.

    Half my points support the player’s stance because I recognize the culpability of both sides in this and am honest in my opinions.

    My arguement… since you apparently have limited cognitive ability, or simply no reading comprehension skills whatsoever, is that some people blindly accept it ias “fact” that the mess is the owners fault.

    You have yet, especially in your dumb-ass response to me below, to properly discount upward pressures on salaries that were NOT the owners fault.

    Sure they made bad decisions sometimes, but that is not the whole story.

    For you, and others, to behave like it IS the whole story, shows a complete inability to form an original thought.

  3. Aetherial says:

    Actually, yeah as a collective group, I would blame them.

    They were told 5 years ago that the owners were being bled by the CBA.

    The players wanted no part of discussing it at all. They had no interest in partnership whatsoever. The system was giving them ridiculous rewards and they were all to ready to take those rewards… regardless of what it cost.

    Now… suddenly they want the owner’s to negotiate?


    It wouldn’t surprise me at all if what the owners *really* were doing here was laying a smackdown in direct response to the players previous, blind, stupid, greed.

  4. Aetherial says:

    There is some element of truth to what you say.

    I think the owners are dishing payback and their stance is malicious.

    They seem bent on a salary cap or no game.

    I truly hope they can stick to that position.

  5. Kraut182 says:

    People everywhere need to stop comparing the NHL luxury tax offer to the luxury tax of MLB. Baseball’s luxury tax is set far higher (comparitively) than the one the NHLPA proposed. Baseball’s luxury tax is a sham, the NHL’s wouldn’t have to be.

  6. cgolding says:

    the players tax would have been meaningful if it was a higher %. twenty cents to the dollar accomplishes not that much at all.

  7. Aetherial says:


    If I had to say there was one area to negotiate then I would say it would be on the amount and threshold of the tax.

    Of course, we ALL know that. The fans have ALL known this all along. We ALL buy into this as a workable solution.

    I guess the owners are bent on breaking the players wills (if not the union entirely) and I think they want to punish the players.

    For the player’s part, the fact that they continue to call there 24% rollback a significant concession just tells me that they are not at all serious about negotiating. Their offer was a complete joke.

    The owner’s counter-offer was an even worse joke… obviously neither side is interested in really negotiating.

  8. EmptyNetter says:

    $6 million per year being cut to $4 million per year doesn’t mean you have to take a second job to make ends meet. $15 per hour cut to $10 per hour does. It’s a silly comparison. Silly silly silly. Sounds like the argument used by the NHLPA.

    Personally, I hope that the NHL owners get the cap they’ve been fighting for and it will have a ripple effect on pro baseball and the film industry. Overpaying one star is no guarantee of success.

  9. cgolding says:

    i would question how much the average NHL player understands the history of salary escalation and all that. if all you really know is that you are giving up 24% of your paycheck, then it is indeed a significant hit… god knows i have zero interest in giving up a quarter of my pay (obviously i make significantly less to start with).

    so the question is, how much do players really understand about the long-term effect of their salary offer?

  10. Aetherial says:

    INtersting, I never considered that.

    I think though that they would be aware of things like 40% of current contracts end in June of this year?

    Then again, maybe they don’t even know THAT? Maybe only the team reps really know anything? I wonder.

  11. Aetherial says:

    Well there was one additional problem with ths thread…

    The original poster makes it clear that people who disagree with his premise that this is the owner’s fault are uninformed.

    Not true.

  12. aafiv says:

    Emotional reactions are irrational – just like your painting the players as THE greedy party here.

    Maybe you’re not misinformed, but you’re still wrong.

  13. Kraut182 says:

    I think it was fairly understood that the %, and perhaps level also, of the tax was open to negotiation. The players put this out there to see if there was a potential for negotiations on this point. They couldn’t give a higher/thier best offer, as if it was open to negotiate they would have no where to move. I agree that if they wouldn’t negotiate on the % that it accomplishes nothing, but I do not believe this was the case.

  14. Habfanforever says:

    That’s why they have what is called a union. If you’re part of a union, your boss has to think twice before cutting from 15$/hour to 10$/hour. Now the players HAVE shown some intentions on reducing their salaries already. It is now up to Bettman to come up with an offer for both sides to work on. If we have no hockey this year, we can’t say its because the players didn’t do (or try to) anything.

  15. rojoke says:

    I think the whole idea of the NHLPA “certifying” agents is both unnecessary and ridiculous. Take a look at the agent who was suspended recently because he allegedly gave a reporter access to the NHLPA’s internal website. Yet a guy like David Frost, who has been reported to have some controversial relationships with the players he represents, continues to be an agent. The PA basically says that teams “cannot” negotiate with a non-certified agent. If a player wishes to just hire a lawyer to help negotiate a contract with a team, he should be perfectly within his rights to do so. And just what is the certification process entail?

  16. Redline91 says:

    I agree wholeheartedly with your first statement, the only reason the pa requires certification is for control, a perfect example would be the one you mentioned of the agent that showed the website to the reporter…the only requirement should be a passing score on a bar exam.

  17. hock3yfan says:

    shhh…just shhh

    take it like a man when you lose.

    Your posts are so comical I can only think you a are devil’s advocate trying to keep discussions going…no one in their right mind could REALLY believe the garbage that spews from your posts.

    Dumb-ass responses aside, where in Toronto do you work? …maybe we could get together for a cold one on your lunch hour sometime and discuss our differences like men…if you are a man…for all I know you could be a woman, either way. But if you are a woman I would like to know…actually it makes sense if you are a woman because women say the craziest things.


Leave a Reply