There will be a strike

[Topper]

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

That Bettman/Daly presser this evening was a stake through the heart of the PA. A c-hair away from lacing them up and someone in the PA decided to push....one........more............time.

You can bet your ass there is a strong contingent of players who are asking themselves, what the hell just happened and looking for a modern day Trevor.

Gary drove it home with his "October 11th, was the drop dead date".

Burkle, Tanenbaum, Vinik and Chipman were the players best bet. They offered a velvet glove and the PA tossed a gauntlet at them. Watch for Jacobs and Snider to take the reins and not spare the crop. Maybe our local wops have a cello player.......

So, they figured if the deal was done this week, there would be something less than 60, greater than 50 games for the season. Gary said less than the '94-'95 lockout 48 would be pointless. You do the math.

[Hockey Widow]

OK really I am on my way to the airport in less than an hour so I wanted to get my last two cents in.

There are two ways of looking at the negotiation and the start point.

1) Is the NHl saying that the start point, ground zero if you will, is the expired CBA? That that should be the template to work off of?

2) Or is the NHL saying that the slate is clean and lets negotiate the whole thing?

The reason I put it this way is because to me the distinction is the centre of who is right or who is wrong.

If the template is the old expired CBA then look at it realistically. The players have done ALL the giving, 100%. The owners have come in and basically said OK we start here and now we chop. The players are saying, wait, if we give up something what do we get in return. The owners say, you get to give up more. The owners make it sound like they have given something by tabling another 100 million when in reality they are just giving back what they previously wanted to take away.


Now if scenario 2 is accurate that ground zero is a clean slate then the NHL should be starting by saying what they want to accomplish and then build another template to accomplish that. Keep linkage, keep 50-50 but the whole CBA needs to be re-negotiated piece by piece.

My anger is at both parties but I really believe Fehr was a master at PR they way he handled today, all BS pure and simple, but, they have done all the giving. The whole thing was handled wrong from day one. I get all the greedy player talk and how lucky they are etc etc etc but they are the show. And as things stand right now they are being asked to keep giving off an old CBA that was basically rammed down their throats last time around. I have vacillated back and forth between who I blame but when I take my fan's hat off and look at this as a negotiation I see the players side more and more. So I guess today I am on the players side


It seems to me that the owners want their cake and want to eat it to.

[SKYO]

Master post HW,

Seriously though, the owners and Bettman/Daly have been always been trying to portray that they have budged for what the #NHLPA has provided/offered, when clearly the owners of the NHL always wanted to milk every cent from the #NHLPA.

dejavu

OK really I am on my way to the airport in less than an hour so I wanted to get my last two cents in.

There are two ways of looking at the negotiation and the start point.

1) Is the NHl saying that the start point, ground zero if you will, is the expired CBA? That that should be the template to work off of?

2) Or is the NHL saying that the slate is clean and lets negotiate the whole thing?

The reason I put it this way is because to me the distinction is the centre of who is right or who is wrong.

If the template is the old expired CBA then look at it realistically. The players have done ALL the giving, 100%. The owners have come in and basically said OK we start here and now we chop. The players are saying, wait, if we give up something what do we get in return. The owners say, you get to give up more. The owners make it sound like they have given something by tabling another 100 million when in reality they are just giving back what they previously wanted to take away.


Now if scenario 2 is accurate that ground zero is a clean slate then the NHL should be starting by saying what they want to accomplish and then build another template to accomplish that. Keep linkage, keep 50-50 but the whole CBA needs to be re-negotiated piece by piece.

My anger is at both parties but I really believe Fehr was a master at PR they way he handled today, all BS pure and simple, but, they have done all the giving. The whole thing was handled wrong from day one. I get all the greedy player talk and how lucky they are etc etc etc but they are the show. And as things stand right now they are being asked to keep giving off an old CBA that was basically rammed down their throats last time around. I have vacillated back and forth between who I blame but when I take my fan's hat off and look at this as a negotiation I see the players side more and more. So I guess today I am on the players side


It seems to me that the owners want their cake and want to eat it to.

[Tciso]

Why doesn't Bettman just come out and say it. "Here is our line in the sand. Our FInal Offer. We as owners are willing to let 2 seasons get flushed away. So, NHLPA, the sooner you accept this offer, the sooner you can collect pay checks."

And, I wouldn't even be mad if Bettman did come out and say it just that blunt. But, this back and forth negotiating is going no-where. Let the players vote on Bettman's last crappy offer, and get on with it. The players must know that they will cave to all of the owners demands. The only question is when?

[ukcanuck]

Why doesn't Bettman just come out and say it. "Here is our line in the sand. Our FInal Offer. We as owners are willing to let 2 seasons get flushed away. So, NHLPA, the sooner you accept this offer, the sooner you can collect pay checks."

And, I wouldn't even be mad if Bettman did come out and say it just that blunt. But, this back and forth negotiating is going no-where. Let the players vote on Bettman's last crappy offer, and get on with it. The players must know that they will cave to all of the owners demands. The only question is when?

cause bettmen wants more than his bottom line and so does Fehr, nether one can afford to let the other side know what they will settle for until the absolute last second. They are playing chicken and the whole charade played out last night is all part of the game. The moderate owners coming in and running out with their hands in the air is all part of the owners attempt to shake the unions faith. Fehr's grandstand was his attempt to deflect the criticism and to anger his players and counter the owners ploy...

you know bettmans best offer is tied to the drop dead date as he refused over and over to name the date, and as much said he would not give that card away till its time to play it...

here is what I think...If the mob were to kidnap both Bettman and Fehr and put them in separate rooms and started cutting off fingers until they each spat out a CBA that would work for both sides, they would each individually come up with the same contract in about 30 seconds... they both knew what they wanted, what the other wanted, and what the final CBA would look like going in but you still have to dance the dance in hopes of getting one more nut than the other guy...

[dbr]

If the league came out with an offer that was well below what the players were willing to accept and publicly stated they were willing to lose two seasons to get it, they would firstly have a pretty big PR blowback on their hands (and it would seem that they care greatly about PR in this).

Secondly it would be awfully tempting for the PA - if they could keep it together themselves - to attempt to see just how willing the owners are to follow through on a threat like that.

By those Forbes numbers there are 18 teams in this league that gross over $100m and 13 who net more than $9m a season (7 get more than $15m and 4 get more than $30m).

How many of those owners are going to be committed to another lost season when they've already lost that amount, are staring in the face of another similar loss and could take half a decade just to get back to where they were?

I don't often buy the doom and gloom of people talking about this mess but two lost seasons would be a catastrophe for the league. If Elliotte Friedman is to be believed owners are already pissed they will not be able to play 75% of this regular season as that is the threshold for a lot of sponsorship money apparently.

[Topper]

I disagree HW. The League is trying to plug a couple of holes in the last CBA that they see as a detriment to the game.

The players say they gave up so much in the last CBA that they are now owed something back for that. Hogwash. Owners, players and the league all did well under the previous CBA. Refusing to fix a few holes in that agreement is undoing a lot of those gains. Fans and sponsors are leaving and will need to be wooed back into the fold.

We heard last night "the hill we die on". The League hates long term back diving contracts. They are a hole in the last CBA exploited by both GM's and players/agents that the league see's as a long term detriment to the game. They corralled the Kovalchuck deal in the making because it pushed the extreme. The cry was that these deals would only go to the elite of the game, but when guys like Ehrhoff get front loaded long term deals, the League has decided enough is enough.

You can't blame GM's and owners for signing these deals. The structure was permitted under the old CBA and teams can not collude not to sign these deals.

The League wants these out of the game. I can not understand why they haven't also gone after signing bonus money. Maybe that is their concession to the NHLPA for eliminating long term deals.

The other thing the League is demanding is 50/50 HRR split. Ownership remembers the $0.65US Canuck buck and what it did to Canadian teams. It is the very reason we now have revenue sharing. We heard Bettman last night talk of real dollars, compensating for the varying US$/CDN$ exchange rates, and its effect on HRR. Even when politics rounds off the fiscal cliff, it does nothing to correct the uncertain and bleak long term economic outlook in the US. All the NHLPA proposals to date are tied to increasing HRR. Completely blind to economic reality.

Incidentally, a ten year deal fits nicely with the NBC/Comcast (hello Mr Snider) term.

For reference.
Expiring in 2021
Di Pietro
Ehrhoff
Hossa
Zetterberg
Ovechkin

Expiring in 2022
Luongo
J. Carter

Expiring in 2023
Keith
Ruutu

Expiring in 2025
Crosby
Kovalchuk
Parise
Suter

Expiring in 2026
Weber

[Tciso]

Why doesn't Bettman just come out and say it. "Here is our line in the sand. Our FInal Offer. We as owners are willing to let 2 seasons get flushed away. So, NHLPA, the sooner you accept this offer, the sooner you can collect pay checks."

And, I wouldn't even be mad if Bettman did come out and say it just that blunt. But, this back and forth negotiating is going no-where. Let the players vote on Bettman's last crappy offer, and get on with it. The players must know that they will cave to all of the owners demands. The only question is when?

cause bettmen wants more than his bottom line

That makes no sense. Bettman just needs to say what they are willing to go with, and then, get a nice comfy recliner on a beach til September of 2013 or 2014

here is what I think...If the mob were to kidnap both Bettman and Fehr and put them in separate rooms and started cutting off fingers until they each spat out a CBA that would work for both sides, they would each individually come up with the same contract in about 30 seconds... they both knew what they wanted, what the other wanted, and what the final CBA would look like going in but you still have to dance the dance in hopes of getting one more nut than the other guy...

I think Bettman would lose a whole hand before giving in. The bastard is not going to flinch. Fehr et. al. better figute that out.

[Arachnid]

Fack'n greedy bassturds....give us back our hookee!

[ukcanuck]

I disagree HW. The League is trying to plug a couple of holes in the last CBA that that they see as a detriment to the game.

Are you sure this statement isn't a little to much an over-simplification?
In retrospect, perhaps we should not have been surprised that this was always going to be a battle royale.

It seems to me that after this last week, with Fehr ( perhaps) over reaching on the "concessions" given up by the moderates; the players are getting their money's worth.

The players say they gave up so much in the last CBA that they are now owed something back for that. Hogwash. Owners, player and the league all did well under the previous CBA.

I think listening to the players position what they have been saying is they do not want to give up what they got in return for what gave up in the last CBA.

Or to flip it around: having got what they wanted last time, the owners are trying to claw back what they had to give up to get a deal last time.

Refusing to fix a few holes in that agreement is undoing a lot of those gains. Fans and sponsors are leaving and will need to be wooed back into the fold.

Again you make it sound so simple and put the onus on the players, is there no nod here to the fact that its the owners who drive the bus? They could get their needs met without a shotgun to the head.

Or maybe not? Maybe it is all about the heavy handed tactics from the last time around. Not the cap or the linkage, but the 24% roll back that even Bettman mentioned in his presser...

anyway,


I agree that this is doing damage but its also awesome drama and no press is bad press, so what the final tab for this shindig will shake out to, might not be as bad as all that.

We heard last night "the hill we die on". The League hates long term back diving contracts. They are a hole in the last CBA exploited by both GM's and players/agents that the league see's as a long term detriment to the game. They corralled the Kovalchuck deal in the making because it pushed the extreme. The cry was that these deals would only go to the elite of the game, but when guys like Ehrhoff get front loaded long term deals, the League has decided enough is enough.

You can't blame GM's and owners for signing these deals. The structure was permitted under the old CBA and teams can not collude not to sign these deals. The League wants these out of the game. I can not understand why they haven't also gone after signing bonus money. Maybe that is their concession to the NHLPA for eliminating long term deals.

I think that collusion is a red herring, no owner has to collude to not bite on stupid long term deals, and almost all long term deals are stupid.
28 teams walked away from Kovalchuk and even Luongo's deal is a cautionary tale for future signings.
Having said that though, there needs to be a damper on such deals as Bettman pointed out that there was one big deal in 2004 and now there are 90 ... Reflected in your list below..

The other thing the League is demanding is 50/50 HRR split. Ownership remembers the $0.65US Canuck buck and what it did to Canadian teams. It is the very reason we now have revenue sharing. We heard Bettman last night talk of real dollars, compensating for the varying US$/CDN$ exchange rates, and its effect on HRR. Even when politics rounds off the fiscal cliff, it does nothing to correct the uncertain and bleak long term economic outlook in the US. All the NHLPA proposals to date are tied to increasing HRR. Completely blind to economic reality.

Time and again this argument is presented on here without anyone (to my knowledge) acknowledging that revenues have gone steadily up through the worst global economic times since the Great Depression, with markets collapsing in all over the place and oil and fuel prices at all time highs, with no end in sight, people are still paying top dollar for hockey tickets. So what's wrong with planning for revenue to continue especially when the players proposal work out to roughly the same dollars?
Could it be that my suspicion is correct and that actual HRR and reported HRR are not the same thing and that's why there is no agreement?
At the very least something is not coming out in the wash here...

Incidentally, a ten year deal fits nicely with the NBC/Comcast (hello Mr Snider) term.

That's cool an all, but did you notice the way Bettman commented on how he was selling the extra 100 million in the make whole provision to his owners "In effect its buying a couple of extra years?"

Sounds to me like the salary savings on a ten year deal instead of an 8 year deal makes up on the 100 million so the players are paying for the broken contracts out of their own pocket,

Or in other words, the pea is under the other shell and that's why Fehr went all fuck you yesterday.

[Per]

Ryan O'Reilly just signed a two year contract with Metallurg Magnetotorsk in the KHL.

Wouldn't it be a great kick in the nuts for the owners if a whole bunch of the NHL's up and coming talent decided to sign long term contracts elsewhere? I mean, somewhere where there is a league in which you actually do play games...

[BurningBeard]

You can't blame GM's and owners for signing these deals. The structure was permitted under the old CBA and teams can not collude not to sign these deals.

Isn't the bigger issue with those deals insurance coverage? I think the insurance is becoming a major issue for some of these teams. If they're having to insure contracts at 5% of value and not past a certain amount of years, that is a huge expense and potential liability.

[Fred]

It seems to me that after this last week, with Fehr ( perhaps) over reaching on the "concessions" given up by the moderates; the players are getting their money's worth.

I have to say that sounds funny They're getting their monies worth. They've done nothing but loose money since this negotiation began. Union dues ( not chump change )plus loss of salary and who know, many will never reap it back and will be retired before the next CBA ends. I'm betting maybe 50% of the current NHLPA will never catch up. If there was a vote tomorrow amongst players, if they are smart they'd have to look long and hard and what they're loosing. Mind you many of them would not have chosen rocket science as their plan B for a career so who knows


On the other hand the players did get some drama for their money, which frankly looked stupid. Fehr leave the stage left, but tell the players to hang in and then magically returns, was this supposed to be a surprise ?? he tell the players to stay and suddenly burst back when a text miraculously appears on his machine. Talk about playing the moment, seems like arrogance and disdain for the intelligence of Press and public. Fehr you can do better than that

[Jovocop]

Ryan O'Reilly just signed a two year contract with Metallurg Magnetotorsk in the KHL.

Wouldn't it be a great kick in the nuts for the owners if a whole bunch of the NHL's up and coming talent decided to sign long term contracts elsewhere? I mean, somewhere where there is a league in which you actually do play games...

Only if they don't worry about "traveling" in the KHL... or getting chased by dogs...

[dbr]

One thing I don't get is the owners claim today that the players are moving the goalposts.. is it just me or is one of their three "must haves" (a 10 year CBA) completely new? They made a proposal earlier this fall for a six year deal..