• For users coming over from tmlfans.ca your username will remain the same but you will need to use the password reset feature (check your spam folder) on the login page in order to set your password. If you encounter issues, email Rick couchmanrick@gmail.com

The Brian Burke Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
Highlander said:
Hi Tim and Tigger,
What is the capped amount for 3 years.  $500K or plus per year?  You make a million or a million and a half in 3 years and see what life becomes. I am not mixing up unions with entertainment. I am just an individualist whom believes everyman should negotiate for himself based on ability. If a Sundin goes to Leaf management and demands 10 Million a year and they do not want to pay, someone else will. Tim, you are naturally in agreement with me to some extent, as I too stopped watching baseball and subsequently basketball because of the strikes and although Hockey is on a different scale completely to me, I still feel the fans have a right in this negotiation, a trinity so to speak as we are part of the equation, we are actually the biggest factor in this equation for without us there is no "Them".  If we could launch a petition for our rights in this negotiation with the bargaining tool being we turn our back on their interests (if they strike for the year) by saying no thanks for the 13-14 season. no tickets, no caps etc.  It will never happen but if it did it would be interesting to watch it play out.
Click to expand...

I think we've gotten way off-topic here so I apologize but let me just try to understand.

What you are saying is you don't believe there should be a union at all in hockey or any pro-sports? You say that and then get upset that rookies are making $1.5M in their first 3 years. If there was no union and those no CBA they would be making a ton more than that and they would be staying at the Chateau Laurier whenever they felt like it.

Personally, I feel we have no rights in this equation. If the players and the owners want to fight each other and have a lockout or a strike then go ahead. It is not my livelihood on the line. Just like I don't think Claude Giroux cares if I go to my boss and ask for a raise. Or threaten to quit and go to another company.

At the end of the day it is just a game that I enjoy watching. It is not the be all or end all of anything for me. If it isn't around in October I'll find something else to do or something else to watch.

So I don't think we are in agreement on much of anything on this.



 
Potvin29 said:
Based on how they allocated the draft picks last time, and assuming they did the same again, wouldn't we have the best shot at 1st overall?  I know Pittsburgh would get it, but at least on paper I think we'd have the best odds.
Click to expand...

Oh no, its going to Phoenix, no matter what.
 
hockeyfan1 said:
To be fair, writers, directors, actors, actresses, even musicians, are far more creative than any sports jock can be.  :)
Click to expand...

And most poets are more creative than investment bankers. How much someone should get paid isn't a measure of their creativity.
 
Highlander said:
Nik, again you miss the point, yes a man can negotiate the best deal for himself, but unions change all that and protect the weak.
Click to expand...

I don't miss anything. You think that somehow you're entitled to have NHL hockey as a consumer. You seem bitter and jealous about what players make.

If there was no PA, there'd be no way to have a draft. There'd be no way to have any sort of restrictions on free agency. There'd be no way to ensure any sort of standards across a league. The things that have been negotiated for players, like some of the perks you mention and the minimum salary, are a result of agreeing to things like that. Without a PA and collective bargaining the sport could barely exist.

Highlander said:
The reason I don't watch the Raptors anymore is the same reason I won't watch hockey for a year if they strike is the same reason.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between a lockout and a strike and it's not a semantic one. The players have already said they'll play under current terms until a new deal can be reached. If there's a labour stoppage it's entirely because the owners have locked players out.
 
I am the last one to be jealous of anything or what anybody makes as I make a damn good living myself, and I negotiate my deals for myself. If a young man can make a million in 3 years then fantastic. However we are part of the equation as we do pay for the NHL and all other team sports. They do not exist without us. I off course am not a big fan of unions but granted there must be a players association to protect the interests of the players.  However like everything else there has been a teeter toter effect and perhaps the players have a lot to be thankful for. There are many teams in this league losing  money like crazy. 
The essence of what I am saying is that in no case should there be a lockout of any sort and the game should continue, even if these cases are arbitrated by a higher entity agreed on by both parties.
But to say we are not part of this is completely wrong and we do have power if we only learn to exercise it....Ghandi proved this with the British and we if we all agreed (which again will never happen) would have the power.
 
Highlander said:
The essence of what I am saying is that in no case should there be a lockout of any sort and the game should continue
Click to expand...

So, logically, shouldn't you be on the side that isn't threatening a lockout? The side that has said they'll keep playing under the terms of the existing agreement until a new one is reached? You can't have it both ways. You can't be spitting mad about the idea of a lockout and then take great issue with the side who are also opposed to a lockout.

Highlander said:
But to say we are not part of this is completely wrong and we do have power if we only learn to exercise it....Ghandi proved this with the British and we if we all agreed (which again will never happen) would have the power.
Click to expand...

Yes, well, I can see it was my mistake to say you weren't keeping the issue in its proper perspective.
 
Nik, the Ghandi thing was about the power of what people can do....not to equate what happens in Hockey with a nations rise to freedom.  I was unaware that the players have said they will keep playing until this thing get sorted....so in fact I was speaking from ignorance....so again I learn a lesson.
As I said I am on the road and this board is a good amusement. I have not read a sports page in a week.
 
Nik? said:
hockeyfan1 said:
To be fair, writers, directors, actors, actresses, even musicians, are far more creative than any sports jock can be.  :)
Click to expand...

And most poets are more creative than investment bankers. How much someone should get paid isn't a measure of their creativity.
Click to expand...

There are those who already know that.  Of course, it depends on what the market pays for the particular profession. 
 
What any of this has to do with the Brian Burke thread is beyond me.

Speaking of Burke, once this team settles to the bottom whenever NHL is next played, does John Davidson's name start getting noised around as a replacement? 
 
KW Sluggo said:
Wahta ny of this has to do with the Brian Burke thread is beyond me.

Speaking of Burke, once this team settles to the bottom whenever NHL is next played, does John Davidson's name start getting noised around as a replacement?
Click to expand...

I should think.  That is, if he gets any credit for STL's recent rise.  Some would probably lay it all the doorstep of Hitch.
 
Zanzibar Buck-Buck McFate said:
KW Sluggo said:
What any of this has to do with the Brian Burke thread is beyond me.

Speaking of Burke, once this team settles to the bottom whenever NHL is next played, does John Davidson's name start getting noised around as a replacement?
Click to expand...

I should think.  That is, if he gets any credit for STL's recent rise.  Some would probably lay it all the doorstep of Hitch.
Click to expand...
I agree.

Really I just wanted to get this thread away from the lockout. I am tired of that topic and it has its own thread...must it be everywhere?

Still, Davidson was part of the decision to bring in Hitchcock which is a better move than has been made by the local management team
 
Boston Leaf said:
anyone listen? Did he say anything worth listening too?
Click to expand...

Not especially. He talked a bit about some charity work he was doing with Covenant House, talked a little bit about how he's spending his time(placating corporate sponsors/scouting mainly) and said that while he couldn't talk about any specifics re: the CBA he said that based on past CBA's he assumed that if the Cap does drop sharply in year one that there would be a mechanism for teams to get under it.
 
Rob L said:
Boston Leaf said:
anyone listen? Did he say anything worth listening too?
Click to expand...

He said Luongo ain't happening. Has had zero conversations with Gillis about him or any other player on his roster.
Click to expand...

So it's happening..... :P  I realize Burke can't say anything about a player under contract but "ain't happening" means "not right now as it can't without a new CBA" and "zero conversations with Gillis" means not in the last hour/day/week/month - you choose. And that's BS anyway as Burke has never talked to Gillis about Luongo?  That's a poor GM then - or perhaps it was the Asst GM to Asst GM... :P
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

About Us

This website is NOT associated with the Toronto Maple Leafs or the NHL.


It is operated by Rick Couchman and Jeff Lewis.
Back
Top