Bettman on 1130 WDFN Detroit

[TruGr1t]

OK, let's try this again:

The commissioner of the National Hockey League said yesterday that the 2004-05 season had to be canceled because there wasn't a deal done and because there wasn't enough time left for a legitimate season.

If there was a deal struck today, how the hell could there be a hockey season? The NHL would be crucified for attempting a season it already claimed would be illegitimate.

I think this is BS. Bettman (and now Daly apparently) has insinuated numerous times that if the players come back in the next few days and agree to the 42.5 million dollar figure he would entertain the idea of starting the season. As another poster has already said, how in the hell do you go from being able to have a 28 game season YESTERDAY to being able to have no season, or 20 game season max, TODAY. This makes zero sense, obviously the leagues plan can still come into effect, the players probably have till the end of this weekend. Bettman said in his press conference (and repeated in in subsequent interviews, he is now also backed by Daly on this) he would not mind the 'embarassment' of coming back to the podium in the next few hours/days after the cancellation to lift it, and he did admit it would be embarrassing for the league. As for being crucified --- you are overreacting, I gaurantee the average fan would not boycott the game or be any less happy the season was on because they cancelled the cancellation.

Now I don't think any of this ground swell 'mutiny' mumbo jumbo is necessarily true. But this idiotic, they already cancelled the season is a dumb argument over the semantics of the word 'cancelled' and really has no bearing in my mind. The NHL would love even 28 games and playoffs if just to make up for the huge amount of revenue lost during this stupid lockout. If the 28 game season plan the NHL has is still applicable, it is in everyone's best interest to see it through.

 

[417]

OK, let's try this again:

The commissioner of the National Hockey League said yesterday that the 2004-05 season had to be canceled because there wasn't a deal done and because there wasn't enough time left for a legitimate season.

If there was a deal struck today, how the hell could there be a hockey season? The NHL would be crucified for attempting a season it already claimed would be illegitimate.

So what your telling me is...

The league had a deadline yesterday to get a deal done at 1pm..it passed, season got cancelled...let's just say hypothetically that by some type of miracle, the season is saved by 10 pm tonight...your trying to tell me that because of 48 hours that passed, it's too late for them to put forth that 28 game schedule in place?

That doesn't make sense, i;m not saying it's going to happen, but if both sides were able to reach a deal within the next 24 to 48 hours, you better believe a season can still take place, the start date was March 5th...there's still time...but it won't happen though....

in a ideal world, they get a deal done asap...play some kind of tournament to thank their fans for sticking by them when they had every reason to turn their back, in that tournament they can try to implement any rule changes to better the game...then they raise the draft age 1 year to avoid the Sidney Crosby problem that will arise...

 

[NJD Jester]

That doesn't make sense, i;m not saying it's going to happen, but if both sides were able to reach a deal within the next 24 to 48 hours, you better believe a season can still take place, the start date was March 5th...there's still time...but it won't happen though....

You just heard the majority of the mainstream media thanking Bettman for killing what would have been an abortion of a season. The general sentiment among many fans is that a 28-20 game season or some sort of round-robin tournament for the Cup is not as positive a move as simply shutting things down and starting fresh.

Coming back now doesn't help hockey after canceling the season.

 

[SuperUnknown]

Why not have a slightly longer season then a 3 out of 5 playoff format, with the Stanley Cup final being 4 out of 7? That would leave enough time for about 30 games starting March 7th with playoffs ending around June 30th.

 

[nikolai19]

If the players cave and make it public that some of the high profile guys like Iginla, Pronger, Roenick, were involved in making a proposal that was accepted by the league, they will come out smelling like roses.

They make the deal with the league, hire someone to replace Goodenow, and they will look like champs. It's the best thing they can do is try to negotiate their own deal. How is it that guys like McKee and Linden are brainwashed by Goodenow and make less than $3million but guys like Roenick, Iginla, and other guys making more money are willing to accept a deal and just start playing?

 

[me2]

The owners were obviously willing to take a risk that revenues wouldn't plummet when they took linkage off the table. I agree #7 is too friendly to the players, but under the owner's proposal, it's a fixed $42.5 cap for all six seasons. If revenues all of a sudden double around year 3 (i.e. go up to $4 billion - hey, who knows, it could happen) then doesn't seem right that the cap should be stuck at $42.5 billion. Maybe they should alter this #7 clause so that it only kicks in when revenue is back above $2.1 billion.

And if the revenue goes down does the cap go down? When the players asked for no linkage it was because they didn't want to gamble on revenue fluctuations. They can't have the best of both worlds. They are out (no linkage) or they are in (linkage).