And is there any other business on this planet, outside of sports, that drafts it's employees and denies them the freedom to switch jobs and go to a rival company?

Sports, and hockey, are unique. Dont be comparing to other businesses.
- systemtool

drafts it's employees = campus recruitment for businesses

denies them the freedom to switch jobs and go to a rival company = players can leave their current company (NHL), and go play in another professional sports company (i.e., KHL) whenever they want

Logic has no home here.
- burn

Sadly, neither does an NHL season.

Thank goodness for a worthy Marlies team, just at the best possible time. Ill be following that team closely, and attending games should be affordable.

Logic has no home here.
- burn

His statement is flawed beyond saving. Why am I not surprised you gravitated towards him though.

And is there any other business on this planet, outside of sports, that drafts it's employees and denies them the freedom to switch jobs and go to a rival company?

Sports, and hockey, are unique. Dont be comparing to other businesses.
- systemtool

Lots of companies have competition clauses in their contracts that prevent you from switching jobs for a rival company.

drafts it's employees = campus recruitment for businesses

denies them the freedom to switch jobs and go to a rival company = players can leave their current company (NHL), and go play in another professional sports company (i.e., KHL) whenever they want
- Pen15

Recruiting is a completely different ball game than drafting.

For example, Tavares had no choice but to go to the Islanders. A person being recruited is given a variety of options in which they have the choice.

Until recently, players didnt have the option of going NHL to KHL and vice versa. If they even do.

Lots of companies have competition clauses in their contracts that prevent you from switching jobs for a rival company.
- robin_steele264

He's using the wrong metaphor anyway.

players switching teams does not equate to an employee leaving a company.

The proper comparison one should draw is:

player can't move to another team because of contract = employee can't move to another department within the company because they've signed a 3 year contract

player can move to another league anytime they wish = employee can move to another company anytime they wish

Lots of companies have competition clauses in their contracts that prevent you from switching jobs for a rival company.
- robin_steele264

To certain companies. Not all.

My point is that employees in those companies are not viewed as RFA or UFA.

Recruiting is a completely different ball game than drafting.

For example, Tavares had no choice but to go to the Islanders. A person being recruited is given a variety of options in which they have the choice.

Until recently, players didnt have the option of going NHL to KHL and vice versa. If they even do.
- systemtool

Well we're dealing in 2012 terms...so recently applies.

And although you make somewhat of a valid argument re: drafting, Tavares could've easily refused to play in NY. We've seen it plenty of times in sports history....eli manning, eric lindros just to name a couple.

He's using the wrong metaphor anyway.

players switching teams does not equate to an employee leaving a company.

The proper comparison one should draw is:

player can't move to another team because of contract = employee can't move to another department within the company because they've signed a 3 year contract

player can move to another league anytime they wish = employee can move to another company anytime they wish
- Pen15

Wrong.

An RFA is controlles by a team and cannot go anywhere if they dont want that player to. See Nashville and Weber.

In addition, there are only 30 teams in a hockey players working world. Not so in the real world.

To certain companies. Not all.

My point is that employees in those companies are not viewed as RFA or UFA.
- systemtool

Yes they are. If I sign a 3 year contract to work in the same department, I become a UFA after 3 years. And within 2 years, my department head would probably let me go elsewhere if it helps benefit synergies between departments.

To certain companies. Not all.

My point is that employees in those companies are not viewed as RFA or UFA.
- systemtool

Yeah well, it doesnt matter much anyway.

I think the players are gonna take what the owners give them in the end, and they will regret showing all this 'resolve' when they lose out on way more money than they needed too.

Well we're dealing in 2012 terms...so recently applies.

And although you make somewhat of a valid argument re: drafting, Tavares could've easily refused to play in NY. We've seen it plenty of times in sports history....eli manning, eric lindros just to name a couple.
- Pen15

That is the exception and not the norm. The point is that if Quebec didnt want to trade Lindros, they didnt have to. They chose to avoid the drama, but they were not obligated to. Lindros was obligated. Big difference.

Yeah well, it doesnt matter much anyway.

I think the players are gonna take what the owners give them in the end, and they will regret showing all this 'resolve' when they lose out on way more money than they needed too.
- robin_steele264

agreed

His statement is flawed beyond saving. Why am I not surprised you gravitated towards him though.
- Pen15

Your rebuttal was flawless though. good for you, you're on a roll.

Wrong.

An RFA is controlles by a team and cannot go anywhere if they dont want that player to. See Nashville and Weber.

In addition, there are only 30 teams in a hockey players working world. Not so in the real world.
- systemtool

And RFA in banking for example, would be someone who has served for 2 out of a 3 year contract. That individual would be let go if it benefits their existing department. This is defacto the exact same way the NHL works. No surprise....it's a business.

And in 2012, 30 teams are not the hockey players working world. Ever since the KHL started awarding players massive contracts, the landscape of hockey has changed/is changing.

GO MARLIES GO

Yes they are. If I sign a 3 year contract to work in the same department, I become a UFA after 3 years. And within 2 years, my department head would probably let me go elsewhere if it helps benefit synergies between departments.
- Pen15

Wrong again.

NHL players cannot become unrestricted, as per NHL rules, until a certain time frame. Somewhere between 5-7 years. Where you get this 3 year crap is beyong me.


Your employer does not own your rights even before you sign a contract, as opposed to the NHL who owns a players rights for years...whether they sign a contract or not.

Your rebuttal was flawless though. good for you, you're on a roll.
- burn

That is the exception and not the norm. The point is that if Quebec didnt want to trade Lindros, they didnt have to. They chose to avoid the drama, but they were not obligated to. Lindros was obligated. Big difference.
- systemtool

The only reason its the exception is because of the persona it places on the player. But that point is irrelevant. My point is that (just like any employee), the player has options. They can hold out and not work, work in a completely different company, or seek another career.

These are all choices each of us makes/has made.

And RFA in banking for example, would be someone who has served for 2 out of a 3 year contract. That individual would be let go if it benefits their existing department. This is defacto the exact same way the NHL works. No surprise....it's a business.

And in 2012, 30 teams are not the hockey players working world. Ever since the KHL started awarding players massive contracts, the landscape of hockey has changed/is changing.
- Pen15

Are you on drugs? Serious question.

How exactly do you grandfather a rollback?
- Two_For_Truth

Players who had their salaries rolled back 24% in the last CBA will have it happen again.

It's a weird demand, but I think Bettman is just trying to confuse Fehr.

And RFA in banking for example, would be someone who has served for 2 out of a 3 year contract. That individual would be let go if it benefits their existing department. This is defacto the exact same way the NHL works. No surprise....it's a business.

And in 2012, 30 teams are not the hockey players working world. Ever since the KHL started awarding players massive contracts, the landscape of hockey has changed/is changing.
- Pen15

The only reason its the exception is because of the persona it places on the player. But that point is irrelevant. My point is that (just like any employee), the player has options. They can hold out and not work, work in a completely different company, or seek another career.

These are all choices each of us makes/has made.
- Pen15

No, thats not true.

Coke cant stop you from working for Pepsi.

The Nordiques could have stopped Lindros from playing for any other team. These players all worked to play in the NHL. The goal isnt any other league.

Are you on drugs? Serious question.
- systemtool

Only the ones that make him talk slower.

Wrong again.

NHL players cannot become unrestricted, as per NHL rules, until a certain time frame. Somewhere between 5-7 years. Where you get this 3 year crap is beyong me.


Your employer does not own your rights even before you sign a contract, as opposed to the NHL who owns a players rights for years...whether they sign a contract or not.
- systemtool

I'm only using the 3 years because the company I work for in particular has that rule. Different corporations have different terms, but the principle is the same.

And yes....my employer doesn't own my rights before I sign a contract, just like the NHL doesn't own the players rights before they enter into the draft.

The fact you don't see these correlations is beyond me.