There will be a strike

[Per]

I believe in the free market. The problem is that the NHL is not about free market capitalism, it's about collussion.

We keep using the word "collusion" improperly. The NHL is made up of 1 league, with 30 franchises. The NHL itself is a monopolistic structure. Collusion can only exist in an oligopoly. It would be akin to accusing all of the MacDonalds franchises of "fixing" the wages of employees at minimum wage, which is just a company policy (probably unwritten too).

The free market in hockey exists, where players are allowed to play in any league in the world that they choose. Most just happen to choose the one with the highest paying jobs.

Collusion would be if all the leagues got together to "fix" wages. The SEL and KHL would laugh at such an attempt.

But just as the US govt forced Standard Oil to split into the seven sisters to protect the customers, something should be done against the NHL price fixing.

As I said before, European courts do not accept that the teams in a league collude to fix prices. I just think the North American courts have been asleep at the wheel here. In a similar spirit the Swedish competition agency declared the SEL agreement to not hire Lockout players to be collussion. Each team must make their own decisions based on what's in their best interest. When the teams sit down together and agree on who to hire or not hire, that's collussion. And basically, that's what the NHL is all about. I'd love to see the US courts go all anti-trust on their collective ass (aka Bettman).

[Aaronp18]

Are we there yet?

Are we there yet?

Are we there yet?

Are we there yet?

Are we there yet?

Are we there yet?

Are we there yet?

Are we there yet?

[Mondi]

Your faith in free markets and unrestrained capitalism means you're an owners guy

It's a tad more complicated than that Vizzini.

One could argue that it's the players who are pushing for "free markets and unrestrained capitalism" in this story.

But, for the thoughtful folk out there, there is a deal that would make both sides happy and wouldn't require the mindset that one side has the crush the other.

Don't mistake the game-faces on the gamers for must-crush mindsets.

Neither side is out to crush the other in this go-around, as they were last lockout.

So you don't count me among the "thoughtful folk" in regards to a potential deal?

Ummmm a few days ago I posted this:

Here is what Fehr will do within a few days imo: Accept the – 50-50 split + linkage + make whole + revenue-sharing + 5% max on back-diving contracts - that the owners have on the table. Just say ‘no’ to the other proposed player contract rules. Drop his silly “who covers the cost of the lockout?” BS.

The owners will sign on the dotted line.

Actually he’ll probably try for more bucks in the ‘make whole’ package, but therein lies the deal.

Suck on THAT Vizzini!

And sorry, but Bettman is at least a thousand times smarter than you, and a much better negotiator....

As for Friedman:

"Friedman was The Great Liberator... any honest Democrat will admit that we are now all Friedmanites."

- Lawrence Summers former President of Harvard, US Secretary of Treasury, Director of the US Economic Council, and noted hard-core US Democrat Party member

How do you judge a successful negotiation? Let me guess, whoever ends up with the most money, regardless of the on-going relationship?

So no, I don't find you overly thoughtful.

Though you are conservative. Which means the world is simple for you, either you're with us or with the child pornographers. Right Vic...er...I mean SL.

I never claimed to be a better negotiator than Gary, only a more humble one. As for our intelligence levels...who knows. Gary is certainly more experienced at his craft and wealthier than I. But of course, I don't view wealth as an indicator of intelligence.

The players are seeking not to go backwards in contracts and CB rights they have already secured, which is certainly a form of free market capitalism. But the owners, they are (or have been) bargaining in bad faith. In my view, there is little worse than someone who does not keep a promise (or perform a duly signed contract).

Neither side deserves support, but enough with the Bettman is brilliant talk.

[Hoss]

this is just all too clear to me...UKcanuck and Per are hell bent on creating a socialist monster out of the NHL...we can call it the ESHL(European Socialist Hockey League)...these two are out for world domination...hide your assets capitalists as its all happening before our eyes on this board...

This is too effing good! +10.

Per, I think you missed the joke on this one.

I vote Obama as first commish of the ESHL!

[Strangelove]

I never claimed to be a better negotiator than Gary, only a more humble one.

Ahh but YOU claimed a “more humble” negotiator equates to a "better negotiator"

… and YOU claimed a “more humble” negotiator is a “smarter “ negotiator:

Mondi: “If Bettman was truly a smart guy, he'd have brokered a deal a long time ago using collaborative techniques so that both sides walked away from the table happy with the outcome.”

Obviously then you have been claiming to be smarter than the great Gary Bettman!

Like I say, wake up, Bettman is much smarter than you could ever dream to be!!

As for our intelligence levels...who knows.

Ummm you called him “an idiot” straight out.

Are you now stating it’s possible YOU are less intelligent than an idiot??

Neither side deserves support, but enough with the Bettman is brilliant talk.

I never said Bettman is “brilliant”.

I merely said he is at least a thousand times smarter than you are!

[Blob Mckenzie]

I believe in the free market. The problem is that the NHL is not about free market capitalism, it's about collussion.
The courts in Europe ruled decades ago that a team cannot claim to own a player they have not signed to a contract. In the NHL they still do that. If any player, regardless of age etc, not under contract was considered a free agent, then we get a free market where players and owners can negotiate the terms on equal footing.

What we have today is a contorted market where the owners collude so that only one team will negotiate with any given player (apart from those considered free agents). This gives the owners an unfair advantage, since the players have very little choice but to accept whatever they are offered. In the real world, if you're not happy with the offer you get, you look for employment elsewhere. In hockey, so far, there's not really been another option for a star player than the NHL.

Anyone believing in free markets should oppose what Bettman and his ilk are doing. The NHL system is actually more related to serfdom or slavery. And yes, they are fortunate slaves, that can lead a far better life than either of us, but they're still not free. The teams own them. Whether they sign that contract or not.

Soooo...... i'm guessing you could care less about the franchises in Alberta, the Senators, the Jets, potentially the Nordiques. You would have no problem with the Canucks being a farm team for the Rangers, Flyers, Leafs, Bruins, Wings etc. ????

A free market is not the answer. The rich teams eat the poor and you have a league where there is no parity whatsoever.

I have long been a proponent of a luxury tax with teeth . Set the limit at 75 mill at the top and let teams pay 50 % for the first ten million over, 100 % for the next ten million over and 200% for anything over that. Let the Leafs go over the payroll to 100 mill and they pay 25 million to the small market teams in luxury tax. yes it's a rough guess and would need to be modified a fair bit but to me i don't like the cap and I believe a luxury tax system works far better especially if teams are allowed to eat a salary/ or part of one when they trade a guy like they can in baseball.

[Fred]

If the NHL was a truly market system there would likely be 5 teams less than there is currently, maybe more, which means a hundred less job for players and a definate reduction in salaries. A good chnace the Wings/Rangers/Flyers would win the cup each year and result in less fans and a general decline in the sport.

[Strangelove]

I'd love to see the US courts go all anti-trust on their collective ass (aka Bettman).

From what I understand the process would take years (5, 6, 7??) during which time the players would be locked out. And seeing as how the average NHL career is 4 years....

Also, no doubt many teams would fold in the process, meaning less jobs for players in the end.

Hey, player salaries will always be naturally linked one-way-or-another to revenue anyway, so a little less percentage of a bigger healthier pie makes more sense, no?

Y'know.... one could argue the players are a buncha commies for NOT decertifying, signing up instead to CBAs which ensure more money for the fringe players and less for the stars! In a free market Crosby prolly gets $20Mil... and Volpatti/Weise/Raymond/etc get what... $50K?

Just sayin.

Butt seriously, the present "partnership" system works for both sides, just get it done says I...

[Southern_Canuck]

I wonder if the players read this?

Winnipeg Free Press

excerpt:
"the long-term consequences of not having the right agreement, are more difficult to deal with than short term consequences."

I get that der Fehr is pursuing the only angle he has - not negotiating off of what will inevitably be the basis for the final deal in order to cause delay in the owners getting revenue from the season, and continuing the lockout as long as he can to force perhaps impatient owners to budge - it's all he can do, really, from a position of little leverage.

I don't know, the owners may concede some of their contractual asks, or change the linked percentages, or even more unlikely - unlink the CBA... however I don't think that will happen.

Instead, I think that the owners will stick to a linked CBA, and also stick to most of their contractual changes. Perhaps the season will be canceled.

I mean really, it's not like there are competitive leagues that the players (on average) can earn anywhere near what they earn in the NHL - it's a laughable notion that the players "deserve" any more than they can earn in Europe.

S_C

[Boston Canucker]

If the NHL really wants to move beyond 4th sport (at best) status in the US, beyond a niche sport that will always, always, struggle for relevance, it should consider something more radical, like an English soccer league division system. Have a top EPL like division with no or a very high cap, then a 2nd division with a lower cap and so on, allow teams to move up and down based upon results, which would also encourage those in the bottom divisions to enhance revenue to compete in the top divisions rather than rely on just getting by etc. Bring the stars and best players up to a top division with only 10 teams. A superstar like league all season, which then puts pressure on lower division teams to step up, and if they don't still provides a legitimate league for their play. Then, have a Stanley Cup Tourney like the FA cup, or some such, to decide the big trophy.

It won't happen, I know, but the present way we're going is just going to keep repeating itself. The NHL is a punch line in the US. I expect the same nonsense will keep up for decades to come, stupid lockouts every 6-8 years from a sport few in the US have reason to care about...until, say, soccer gets big enough here that the NHL becomes the 5th sport...and don't believe for a second it won't happen. The answer to the long term future is not a 50/50 split or revenue sharing, it is radically rethinking how the league is structured, and finding a way to get the best players to be the show (like the Olympics)...Pittsburgh playing Vancouver (or pick your marquee East and West teams) once a year ain't doing it...time to get way way way outside the freaking box. If only there was some actually creative, bold leadership in this sport.

[Island Nucklehead]

I have long been a proponent of a luxury tax with teeth . Set the limit at 75 mill at the top and let teams pay 50 % for the first ten million over, 100 % for the next ten million over and 200% for anything over that. Let the Leafs go over the payroll to 100 mill and they pay 25 million to the small market teams in luxury tax. yes it's a rough guess and would need to be modified a fair bit but to me i don't like the cap and I believe a luxury tax system works far better especially if teams are allowed to eat a salary/ or part of one when they trade a guy like they can in baseball.

This. Quit pretending that teams like Columbus and Phoenix should compete equally with teams like Toronto and New York. These are unreasonable expectations. Hockey isn't basketball. It's still hard to buy championships when you can't have Ovechkin and Crosby on the ice for 40 minutes/night. Let the big spenders spend big money. Let the stars go to markets that will increase media attention (ie $$$$$), and let the weak sisters of the league (which neither PA or league want gone) stick around and not lose shit-piles of money. In effect they become farm teams for the big boys, but hockey is more system-based than baseball and requires more players than basketball.

If Toronto wants to offer Shane Doan $10M/year, let them! Phoenix (and other weak sisters) will see the benefit when they get their luxury tax pay out, and when they don't pay Shane Doan $10M/year.

[Blob Mckenzie]

If the NHL really wants to move beyond 4th sport (at best) status in the US, beyond a niche sport that will always, always, struggle for relevance, it should consider something more radical, like an English soccer league division system. Have a top EPL like division with no or a very high cap, then a 2nd division with a lower cap and so on, allow teams to move up and down based upon results, which would also encourage those in the bottom divisions to enhance revenue to compete in the top divisions rather than rely on just getting by etc. Bring the stars and best players up to a top division with only 10 teams. A superstar like league all season, which then puts pressure on lower division teams to step up, and if they don't still provides a legitimate league for their play. Then, have a Stanley Cup Tourney like the FA cup, or some such, to decide the big trophy.

It won't happen, I know, but the present way we're going is just going to keep repeating itself. The NHL is a punch line in the US. I expect the same nonsense will keep up for decades to come, stupid lockouts every 6-8 years from a sport few in the US have reason to care about...until, say, soccer gets big enough here that the NHL becomes the 5th sport...and don't believe for a second it won't happen. The answer to the long term future is not a 50/50 split or revenue sharing, it is radically rethinking how the league is structured, and finding a way to get the best players to be the show (like the Olympics)...Pittsburgh playing Vancouver (or pick your marquee East and West teams) once a year ain't doing it...time to get way way way outside the freaking box. If only there was some actually creative, bold leadership in this sport.

You act as though the NHL was once relevant in the US. Going to an English Soccer League style is a horrible idea. Sure you may have your ten or twelve high end teams. As soon as a few hockey markets spent a few years straight playing for the shit cup of the 2nd or 3rd div, those teams would fold or move. The league for the most part has done pretty well over the last century, but it would be asinine to go to a tiered system. Try explaining that logic to passionate hockey fans. Just because it works in Europe doesn't mean it needs to happen here. None of the other pro league here have a system like that.

Funny how many people who are complaining about the poor players and the way they are treated. I wonder what league these people would watch if the NHL folded. For myself I can say the KHL is awful hockey and the AHL while ok could not hold my attention long term. But hey , all the proponents of the players can talk about a rival competitive league. Right or wrong there is not another hockey league in the world that will pay even close to the dollars that the NHL owners will for these clowns to play a niche sport.

For the record I would like to see ratman go at the end of this mess. Three lockouts on his watch is ridiculous.

[Tiger]

I believe in the free market. The problem is that the NHL is not about free market capitalism, it's about collussion.
The courts in Europe ruled decades ago that a team cannot claim to own a player they have not signed to a contract. In the NHL they still do that. If any player, regardless of age etc, not under contract was considered a free agent, then we get a free market where players and owners can negotiate the terms on equal footing.

What we have today is a contorted market where the owners collude so that only one team will negotiate with any given player (apart from those considered free agents). This gives the owners an unfair advantage, since the players have very little choice but to accept whatever they are offered. In the real world, if you're not happy with the offer you get, you look for employment elsewhere. In hockey, so far, there's not really been another option for a star player than the NHL.

Anyone believing in free markets should oppose what Bettman and his ilk are doing. The NHL system is actually more related to serfdom or slavery. And yes, they are fortunate slaves, that can lead a far better life than either of us, but they're still not free. The teams own them. Whether they sign that contract or not.

And the KHL has a cap system too... and a draft.. The other leagues pay peanuts.. Open bidding for players would mean only the very rich clubs.. Rangers, Laffs etc.. would be viable contenders and most of the other teams would fold.. Is that what you want??

actually the KHL cap is about 40 + million and the NHL wants what 50 something? sounds like if they get what they want the NHL will not necessarily be where you will find ALL the best players... And the KHL plays a much shorter schedule.. so per game its about even money..

Do you want a stanley cup championship that may or may not be the best team in the world??

Love to see a KhL / NHL 7 game series for the Stanley

[ukcanuck]

If the NHL really wants to move beyond 4th sport (at best) status in the US, beyond a niche sport that will always, always, struggle for relevance, it should consider something more radical, like an English soccer league division system. Have a top EPL like division with no or a very high cap, then a 2nd division with a lower cap and so on, allow teams to move up and down based upon results, which would also encourage those in the bottom divisions to enhance revenue to compete in the top divisions rather than rely on just getting by etc. Bring the stars and best players up to a top division with only 10 teams. A superstar like league all season, which then puts pressure on lower division teams to step up, and if they don't still provides a legitimate league for their play. Then, have a Stanley Cup Tourney like the FA cup, or some such, to decide the big trophy.

It won't happen, I know, but the present way we're going is just going to keep repeating itself. The NHL is a punch line in the US. I expect the same nonsense will keep up for decades to come, stupid lockouts every 6-8 years from a sport few in the US have reason to care about...until, say, soccer gets big enough here that the NHL becomes the 5th sport...and don't believe for a second it won't happen. The answer to the long term future is not a 50/50 split or revenue sharing, it is radically rethinking how the league is structured, and finding a way to get the best players to be the show (like the Olympics)...Pittsburgh playing Vancouver (or pick your marquee East and West teams) once a year ain't doing it...time to get way way way outside the freaking box. If only there was some actually creative, bold leadership in this sport.

never happen I'm sure, but perhaps the sport of hockey needs a set up like soccer, where there is a champions league where the major global hockey cities play each other based on their standings in their own leagues?

Something that gets more games between major cities and generates more excitement than Columbus vs Phoenix...

It just seems to me that of the big four only Hockey is a truly global sport and thats not really being taken advantage of. I know basketball is a global game and Baseball a bit too, but there isnt the same level of international competition like in hockey.


Just thinking outside the box but if this keeps up and Bettman keeps this culture of lockouts and downward pressure of salaries and contract over the long term, he's risking the relevance of the NHL as a force in the sport.

I guess for Canada that would probably mean that Toronto Montreal and Vancouver could manage to avoid relegation and the rest of the country would have to make do with the American league but the A would be a much better league than now and like in the UK it doesnt matter what league your home town team is in the fans are just a rabid... maybe a little too rabid

the payoff would be games and series between cities like
New york
Stockholm
Moscow
Detroit
Chicago
Kiev
Helsinki
Vancouver
Toronto
Berlin
Montreal
Boston
Philly
etc
Pure free markets the best players go to the best teams, water finds its own level, perhaps that would bring the game and health of the sport up to a more equal footing?

[Boston Canucker]

never happen I'm sure, but perhaps the sport of hockey needs a set up like soccer, where there is a champions league where the major global hockey cities play each other based on their standings in their own leagues?

......

I agree, it won't happen, as I said in my post, at least not any time soon. But looking 30-40 years out, yes, I think it is highly likely that the league will be composed of teams from Europe. In my lifetime the NHL has gone from 6 to 30 teams (yes, I'm that old) and looking 3 to 4 decades down the line the next frontier for major north american sports leagues is definitely the international front. NBA is very international, and they're likely to take a shot at it. The NHL has always been a 4th sport in US, but a truly visionary leadership could see the long term benefit of having teams in Moscow, Stockholm etc. Not now, not in 10 years, but over the long haul, yes, I'd bet this is where the league will go....bigger, major cities across the hockey globe, and yes, tiered divisions or some such with those that can keep up keeping up and those that can't slotting in at a different level. The NHL now doesn't look much like it did in 1967 and in 2052 it won't look much like it does now, and the clear direction is a more global presence. Until then, we'll plod along with, I would bet, lockouts every 7-8 years until someone develops a more creative vision for things. In truth, I don't care how this lockout is settled, I'd just like to see hockey soon, but I also think the long term status of the league will not be determined with this CBA, it'll just kick the can down the road some more...same old same old.