Friday, October 19, 2012

Hypocrisy Is Thy Name, NHLPA

There was a glimmer of hope that the NHL Lockout might be in it's last stages when the league moved off it's draconian cuts in salary and proposed a 50/50 split.  I understand that the players union wouldn't accept the proposal as is, but let's get real here.  A 57/43 split for the players is ludicrous.  But I thought that the proposal might get the two sides to start negotiating and hammer out a deal.  Boy was I wrong.  And you will never guess the main sticking point from the player's side of the deadlock. 

From Jonathan Toews of the Chicago Blackhawks:

Toews, who went to Toronto for today’s negotiations, told the media “we want the league to honor current contracts. That’s pretty much all we’re asking.”
Sorry for the strong words, but what damn planet does Johnathan Toews live on?  Or more precisely, where in hell has his words been over the past 5 years when the players don't honor the contracts that they have signed?  Where has the NHLPA been saying to the people in their union, that you signed the contract and we expect for you to play under the terms of that contract?

The NHLPA is arguing that a contract is a contract.  Fine, but then it goes both ways.  After all, there are two people that sign the contracts,not just one.  The players that are going to get hurt because of the NHLPA's insistance that the current contracts be honored from the league side aren't those that are the superstars, it is the rank and file.  Those that are the third line players or the fifth and sixth defenseman on a team.  I am sure that Mr. Toews is willing to share some of his fortune with those teammates that will fall on hard times if the league and the NHLPA continue their petty game of chicken.  He will, won't he?


Zebster said...

A contract is a contract; it does go both ways. I never side with a player who sits out when he's under contract. It's hard for me to sympathize with the owners when they agreed to this split in the old deal and when they reward players for sitting out when they're under contract. The owners in all of these leagues are always their own worst enemies; that's why they collude on occasion to keep themselves from doiong stupid shit. I don't blame the players for not wanting to go backwards from what they bargained for in good faith, which was a deal after we lost a season that was supposed to and seemingly did save the league.
Great writing as always, Brent.

Brent said...

It is hard to sympathize with the owners. But since half of the teams lose money each year and the only way that teams can satisfy their fans is to win now, they have to pay through the nose for free agents. And the free agents aren't going to play in Columbus. They aren't going to go play in Calgary. They aren't going to sign with the Islanders. They aren't going to look at Winnipeg, Carolina, Florida, Nashville, and other teams. So the owners have to back up the brinks truck.

So you either contract 6 to 10 teams or keep fighting this fight because the players keep telling us that they are willing to play for only certain teams and to hell with the rest.
We need a hard salary cap of $74 Million. Maximum salary for each player of $10 Million. Revenue Sharing of $150 Million per team. Minimum salary of a 5-year veteran of $1 million. Free agency after 5 years of NHL experience or 27 years old.