2025-2026 NHL Offseason

polaris_x

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu ... --nhl.html

"Near the end of the meeting, Don [Fehr] said to Gary [Bettman]: 'Let me get this straight. Even if the players agree to every single component of the league's economic plan, we still don't have a deal unless we also agree to every one of your proposed changes to player contract rights?' "

To which, both of our sources reported, "Gary said: 'Yes.'"

DS1119

Does anyone know what is going to happen with player's contracts if the season is cancelled? Meaning I understand the players won't get paid but does a year come off of their contracts?

polaris_x

DS1119 wrote:

Does anyone know what is going to happen with player's contracts if the season is cancelled? Meaning I understand the players won't get paid but does a year come off of their contracts?

i suspect it would be part of the new collective bargaining agreement if and when one is ratified ...

polaris_x

http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu ... --nhl.html

madtowndave

At least I might be saving my fantasy hockey league entry fee, and the full season Open Ice package fee. Other than that, I miss watching my Predators!!

DS1119

Things aren't going well for the Rangers.



http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/86223 ... simulation

BLACK35

got a little hockey fix last night. TSN was showing the 2002 Olympic Gold Medal game, was an awesome game and the good guys won

MayDay10

DS1119 wrote:

Does anyone know what is going to happen with player's contracts if the season is cancelled? Meaning I understand the players won't get paid but does a year come off of their contracts?

they all lose a year. This years pay and term are both gone.

DS1119

MayDay10 wrote:

DS1119 wrote:

Does anyone know what is going to happen with player's contracts if the season is cancelled? Meaning I understand the players won't get paid but does a year come off of their contracts?

they all lose a year. This years pay and term are both gone.

Thanks.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

this is such a fucking joke.

and I haven't read this thread, so maybe I'll get flamed for this, but it's all the player's fault.

Indifference71

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

this is such a fucking joke.

and I haven't read this thread, so maybe I'll get flamed for this, but it's all the player's fault.

I completely agree with your first statement.

Both sides are at fault. A bunch of millionaires/billionaires acting like petulant children.

MayDay10

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

this is such a fucking joke.

and I haven't read this thread, so maybe I'll get flamed for this, but it's all the player's fault.

I feel the players are at much more fault.

They fired Paul Kelly who was prepared to speak and negotiate with the NHL in good faith well before the deadline. It was conceivable there wouldnt be any stoppage and the league/NHLPA would forge a better partnership.

However, a small minority of the NHLPA, led by Eric Lindros was prominently responsible for undermining Paul Kelly late in the game and hiring the shrewd hard line negotiator with an ego Donald Fehr. Some of these guys feel they were "beaten" last time around and their egos cant take it. Once hired, there were no talks or movement because Fehr had to 'learn the ropes' of the sport, system, and parties involved. Fehr has done nothing to advance the bargaining IMO, and is doing the players a disservice. I think they will be giving up more with lost wages than they make up in the CBA negotiations (again).
The best play was to hit the NHL early and get what they can and forge a partnership. It would have been better for all 3 parties (NHL, NHLPA, and fans).

The NHL is much smaller scale then NFL, MLB, NBA. 2/3 of the teams lose money. The higher the players go, the longer we will see bankrupcies, teams for sale with Bettman travelling around trying (unsuccessfully) to talk people into buying teams, etc. If all or most of the teams make a profit, then people will want to invest in the league and the thing will be overall better and more profitable than ever. There arent enough "hockey markets" to just move Phoenix, Tampa, Dallas, Miami, etc, it also hurts the "US footprint". Contraction is also an option where nobody wins.
I was once against these southern markets, but Nashville has changed my opinion somewhat... (I do think we can lose Miami/Florida).

I think it very telling that any former player who speaks publicly, comes out against the players and strongly urges them to take the deal. Most recently was Mark Recchi.

The NHL owners arent innocents by any stretch though.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

I don't give a shit if the players are the product. the owners own the business, and they dictate how much their staff get paid. and yes, make no mistake, the players are the employees.

players thinking they should get MORE than their bosses is absurd. unfortunately, the owners are somewhat at fault for letting it get to this point.

but the players are acting like spoiled little brats, and all the shithead Crosbys that are making millions are only hurting the lower level players that don't make enough to last them through the rest of their lives.

of course, if Bettman wasn't obsessed with trying to market an ice sport in the desert, maybe they'd all be making enough to satisfy everybody. But I doubt it. They'd just be squabbling over more money than they are now.

drivingrl

No matter who's to blame, as fans we lose. I almost don't want to hear any more about talks on my Twitter feed, because it doesn't seem to matter. The problems don't seem to be getting fixed.

I feel especially bad for those that are financially dependent on the NHL season, like restaurants, pubs, etc.

I really wish I liked another sport. :(

JC29856

i dont think a player will ever earn more than the owner, if this is the case somewhere please advise.

simplistically: as an employee, if i can quantify that by me being employed i directly bring $1M dollars of revenue to the business, whats wrong with me asking for $350k of it?

Hugh Freaking Dillon

JC29856 wrote:

i dont think a player will ever earn more than the owner, if this is the case somewhere please advise.

simplistically: as an employee, if i can quantify that by me being employed i directly bring $1M dollars of revenue to the business, whats wrong with me asking for $350k of it?

as a group, that's what they wanted. 57% of profits. that's preposterous.

but how does one quantify how much money a player brings in? that's impossible. in Canada, 95% of the fans would go no matter who's on the ice. they just want to go see pro hockey. big stars add some icing, but all they want is cake.

Hugh Freaking Dillon

drivingrl wrote:

No matter who's to blame, as fans we lose. I almost don't want to hear any more about talks on my Twitter feed, because it doesn't seem to matter. The problems don't seem to be getting fixed.

I feel especially bad for those that are financially dependent on the NHL season, like restaurants, pubs, etc.

I really wish I liked another sport. :(

yeah, especially in Winnipeg. a bunch of new business popped up when we got the Jets back capitalizing on the surge of people downtown. A good friend of mine is a freelance photographer, and one of her biggest gigs last year was the Jets. So now she's suffering.

MayDay10

JC29856 wrote:

i dont think a player will ever earn more than the owner, if this is the case somewhere please advise.

simplistically: as an employee, if i can quantify that by me being employed i directly bring $1M dollars of revenue to the business, whats wrong with me asking for $350k of it?

They were making about 75% of the revenue, then they fought and missed a season and the cap was put in place.

Now they get 57% (plus). Also remember the owners have to pay all the overhead such as employees, rent, heating, cooling, marketing, etc. 50% sounds like that can do it. As it is now, a lot of teams are submerged in the red every season, even teams that sell out the arena every game.

Its easy to say "well dont spend it". In that case, teams become irrelevant and people stop showing up. As a whole, that hurts the owners and the players (and fans outside of maybe 5-6 teams).

fife

Hugh Freaking Dillon wrote:

I don't give a shit if the players are the product. the owners own the business, and they dictate how much their staff get paid. and yes, make no mistake, the players are the employees.

players thinking they should get MORE than their bosses is absurd. unfortunately, the owners are somewhat at fault for letting it get to this point.

but the players are acting like spoiled little brats, and all the shithead Crosbys that are making millions are only hurting the lower level players that don't make enough to last them through the rest of their lives.

of course, if Bettman wasn't obsessed with trying to market an ice sport in the desert, maybe they'd all be making enough to satisfy everybody. But I doubt it. They'd just be squabbling over more money than they are now.

first off the owners do dictate what their staff get paid. They offer the contracts to the players. bettman screwed the NHL badly. their biggest mistake was the cap. All the cap did was make the rich teams even richer and made the poor teams poorer.

Why you ask? cause of the cap floor. teams that before the last lock out had a pay roll of 20 million have to pay 50 million.

the 2nd issue is that Bettman only needs 7 teams to pass anything he wants. do you really think the small market teams don't want to play right away? of course they do. Nashville is going broke in paying Weber signing bonuses when they have no money coming in.

DS1119

Just another reason unions should be done away with.