There will be a strike

[Jovocop]

The negotiation does not look good...

David Pagnotta‏@TheFourthPeriod

Remember two days ago when everyone was talking all positively... Yeah, that's gone now.

Dan adater‏@adater

Owners furious about Fehr's stalling, mediation ploy. He's a "suicide bomber" one from mgmt aisle put it

Bob McKenzie‏@TSNBobMcKenzie

No NHL owners in today's negotiating session with NHLPA. Some have gone home, some still around but "owner-player" train left station.

[Strangelove]

Do I have to be Asian to bag me some of dat? Do I have to be Jewish to tap the Torah?

You are what you eat

.... and once you go kosher you never go back!

(or so I hear)

[Strangelove]

Merry Christmas HW, or for the people going to hell Happy Holidays.

(Now I did it)

Yup, you’ll burn for that one Reef.

[Strangelove]

Hey Jovocop, cheer up!

Elliotte Friedman ‏@FriedgeHNIC
We proposed max 8 year length. on variability: 7yrs or longer contract -- lowest year of contract had to be at least 25 per cent of highest

Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun
Fehr says players proposed 8-year CBA with opt-out after Year 6

Elliotte Friedman ‏@FriedgeHNIC
As a result of discussions we believe we have a pension agreement and a transition agreement

Elliotte Friedman ‏@FriedgeHNIC
Where does that put us? But for any transition issues, we think there's an agreement on dollars

Jesse Spector ‏@jessespector
Fehr reiterates: “Complete agreement on dollars.” That is the most important thing, after all.

[Benjo]

Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Fehr says right now it doesn't appear labor impasse will be resolved soon
Expand
23s Ian Mendes Ian Mendes ‏@ian_mendes

NHLPA says this was communicated to them via voicemail.
Expand
31s Harrison Mooney Harrison Mooney ‏@HarrisonMooney

Fehr: "It looks like this is not going to be resolved in the immediate future."
Expand
32s Elliotte Friedman Elliotte Friedman ‏@FriedgeHNIC

This will not be resolved in immediate future
Expand
37s Pierre LeBrun Pierre LeBrun ‏@Real_ESPNLeBrun

Fehr says NHL left a voicemail message saying NHLPA counter wasn't acceptable. No need to stick around today or Friday. Talks broken for now
Expand
46s Ian Mendes Ian Mendes ‏@ian_mendes

Meetings called off for today and tomorrow. NHLPA says "this does not look like this will get resolved in the near future."
Expand
53s Elliotte Friedman Elliotte Friedman ‏@FriedgeHNIC

No reasons for meeting today or tomorrow, and something (he couldn't understand what on voicemail) was not acceptable
Expand
1m Jason Botchford Jason Botchford ‏@botchford

Fehr: we were advised that moves were not acceptable
Expand
1m Ian Mendes Ian Mendes ‏@ian_mendes

Donald Fehr just announced that things have taken a negative turn.

[Benjo]

Nice PR work by Fehr, announces both sides are in agreement on many things and there's no reason a deal can't be made. 10 minutes later he calls all the press back to say the NHL has left a voicemail saying that terms are unacceptable and there is no reason to meet.

[ukcanuck]

C'mon Jerry (blob) this stuff is GOLD Baby!

Lol how can you not love the theatrics, next big ticket item I buy I'm gonna try some of these gems I swear

[Lancer]

Nice PR work by Fehr

As a PR guy, the PA has been doing a much better job on the PR/media/public opinion front than the league. Not that public opinion matters much when talking dollars and sense in a negotiation room, but in terms of shaping what the rest of the hockey and sports world (ie-players, agents, GMs, etc) understand of the process, he's done a much better job than Buttman. The whole bit about the voicemail - as opposed to an actual phone call or a face-to-face response - tells you just how much the league's heart is in a deal at this time. The image presented is the players doing all the work and doing all the give and the owners letting them eat cake. Buttman may keep his job out of all this, but you'd better believe there's a lot less goodwill towards the league from the likes of sponsors, etc than before. You better believe the sponsors and broadcasters are pissed, and what they see so far is a league that is more concerned about putting the screws to the players than the game. Buttman may spin his own story, but everybody else is seeing a different picture.

On another note, one thing that concerned me listening to the TSN guys talk about what Fehr had to say was the penalties associated with 'back-diving' contracts where Luongo's contract qualifies? Does whatever puntiive system that gets agreed to make Luongo untradeable? What do the Canucks' options become in a scenario where whoever holds his contract is on for the penalty if he doesn't play the whole 15 years? What happens if the Canucks are on the hook regardless? I've always assumed that the league's stance would screw Gillis and Co. because a) they play to the cap b) they've played the cap rules like a virtuoso to stay under the cap - which no doubt infuriated Bill Daly and Co. and c) Luongo's contract. Gillman is going to have to work some more miracles if the Canucks are going to be able to stay competitive with whatever CBA comes out.

[RoyalDude]

On another note, one thing that concerned me listening to the TSN guys talk about what Fehr had to say was the penalties associated with 'back-diving' contracts where Luongo's contract qualifies? Does whatever puntiive system that gets agreed to make Luongo untradeable? What do the Canucks' options become in a scenario where whoever holds his contract is on for the penalty if he doesn't play the whole 15 years? What happens if the Canucks are on the hook regardless? I've always assumed that the league's stance would screw Gillis and Co. because a) they play to the cap b) they've played the cap rules like a virtuoso to stay under the cap - which no doubt infuriated Bill Daly and Co. and c) Luongo's contract. Gillman is going to have to work some more miracles if the Canucks are going to be able to stay competitive with whatever CBA comes out.

But according to everyone around here, the Gills (Gillis and Gilman) are MoneyBall fucking geniuses. So, what's to worry? They must have had a plan b in place right? One would think that with the MoneyBall brains they have, Risk Management would be 2nd nature to them and that all previously negotiated contracts were negotiated with this current collective bargaining agreement in mind. Am I right?

[ukcanuck]

Nice PR work by Fehr

On another note, one thing that concerned me listening to the TSN guys talk about what Fehr had to say was the penalties associated with 'back-diving' contracts where Luongo's contract qualifies? Does whatever puntiive system that gets agreed to make Luongo untradeable? What do the Canucks' options become in a scenario where whoever holds his contract is on for the penalty if he doesn't play the whole 15 years? What happens if the Canucks are on the hook regardless? I've always assumed that the league's stance would screw Gillis and Co. because a) they play to the cap b) they've played the cap rules like a virtuoso to stay under the cap - which no doubt infuriated Bill Daly and Co. and c) Luongo's contract. Gillman is going to have to work some more miracles if the Canucks are going to be able to stay competitive with whatever CBA comes out.

That is a little unnerving from a trade standpoint, and a clip I saw used Luongo as an example, basically that if the Canucks traded Luongo to florida and he retired with four years left on his contract the cap hit in each year would revert back to the Canucks...However, that would be a tad unfair to Vancouver as the Canucks had no idea of this consequence when signing the original contract...I am assuming that the "transition phase" would take care of that by building in some kind of protection for existing contracts negotiated under the old deal...
if not really is that much of an impediment to trade/ it wont affect the team taking on Luongo's contract, in fact it makes it more attractive as they are off the hook if he retires and maybe someone could correct me but aren't the last years throw away anyway? not enough to keep the old bastard from showing up to collect his money??

[Fred]

I actually laughed at the spin today. IMO how do you negotiate with any one when you tell them, here's what we can do, well give you and extra $100 million for the transition but we want a 10 year deal. The reply comes back yes we'll take you $100million but we can't give you your 10 year deal... we can give u an 8 year deal. I'm thinking, oh yeah, tell you what send $20 million back then. They want the NHL to bargain against themselves. If this is an indicator of how things are going then the season is over. Fehr must think Betteman and the League are stupid

[Topper]

Once again the PA believed the League to be bluffing, raised the ante and called. Once again, the League wasn't bluffing.

The look on Sid's face as Fehr announced the league rejected the players counter offer was priceless. I bet he'll have the same look when he finds out Playboy centre folds are airbrushed.

[ukcanuck]

Once again the PA believed the League to be bluffing, raised the ante and called. Once again, the League wasn't bluffing.

The look on Sid's face as Fehr announced the league rejected the players counter offer was priceless. I bet he'll have the same look when he finds out Playboy centre folds are airbrushed.

Playboy centre folds are Airbrushed !?

yeah you know, I kinda thought maybe Fehr had overplayed his hand today but then I wondered if the whole thing was a ploy by Fehr to get Bettman's goat...

kinda seemed a bit set up, telling the world about how great the proposal was and how they were there on the money and blah blah... then five minutes later, its off everyones heading home etc.

once again leaves Bettman holding the bag and defensive about two years and quibbles..

[Strangelove]

From deep inside players side: "We were ready to play again. But Don came in (Wed.) and told us we could get more and to hold out"

That deep-inside-players quote came from depth player. They want to play, but top players still in Fehr camp. Could explode soon
Expand
17m adater adater ‏@adaterv

That depth player was not on the Avalanche, FYI. That's all I have on this
Expand
13m adater adater ‏@adater

Fehr did not hold a player-wide conference call in saying that, important to note. Came from top down, trickle-down
Expand
13m adater adater ‏@adater

Bottom line here: Players say they are unified, but not what I'm hearing from this depth player. They'll deny that publicly, but...
Expand
11m adater adater ‏@adater

....privately, they are feeling powerless as the Ryan Millers and Brad Richards of the world pretend this is a sacrifice for them
Expand
8m adater adater ‏@adater

adater ‏@adater
This depth player is wicked smart though. May put his name to comments soon. Sorry for anonymous tilt to this. not my style
Expand
7m adater adater ‏@adater


"I Blew Up The Union Real Good" - by Gary Bettman

[BurningBeard]

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/sports/penguins/burkle-releases-statement-after-nhl-talks-break-down-665264

""We were therefore surprised when the Fehrs made a unilateral and 'non-negotiable' decision -- which is their right, to end the player/owner process that has moved us farther in two days than we moved at any time in the past months."

That's from Burkle, one of the "dove" owners.

http://mapleleafs.nhl.com/club/news.htm?id=647183

"I question whether the union is interested in making an agreement. I am very disappointed and disillusioned. Had I not experienced this process myself, I might not have believed it."

From Tanenbaum, another dove.

And the players are starting to crack. Does not look good on Fehr.