Reading between the lines

[Millhouse]

I will admit that I want hockey back so this may be wishful thinking. But something has me puzzled. What does Fehr's comment "the union has things to consider" mean? I still believe there will be hockey come December and it has to do with the TV deal the NHL has with NBC. If I am not mistaken, one day after the US Thanksgiving the NBC TV deal may be in jeopardy with no hockey. Yes this puts pressure on the owners, but losing this deal reduces HRR as well. This affects the players as well, thus the comment "things to consider". I believe Fehr is just waiting (stalling) as long as he can and trying to get the best possible deal. Plus I have heard over and over that in the case with Fehr it is not so much winning as it is getting the best possible deal. I just thought the comments made were interesting or maybe I am just hoping.

[DuklaNation]

When you're arguing over basically 2% per yr over 7 yrs, losing a whole yr's income is ludicrous. Thats basically what the union has to consider. I think the union has become greedy and not interested in sacrificing to help build the crappier markets. They want the fans in the good markets to subsidize their salaries there. And some of these markets have mcuh lower tax rates then we do. Think about that one.

[daggeg]

Originally Posted by DuklaNation

When you're arguing over basically 2% per ySur over 7 yrs, losing a whole yr's income is ludicrous. Thats basically what the union has to consider. I think the union has become greedy and not interested in sacrificing to help build the crappier markets. They want the fans in the good markets to subsidize their salaries there. And some of these markets have mcuh lower tax rates then we do. Think about that one.

Subsidies make sense when dealing with such a framework the owners implemented last time around. What pisses me off the most is not the HHR issue, it's the contracting rights. The owners' obviously see the players as their serfs.