Bettman on the FAN today.

[EJsens1]

Oh, there is no doubt that fans tend to lean towards the owners in the polls. What makes me laugh is his bs that he's getting encouraging e-mails from a lot of fans. Can't expect much from a ******* lawyer. Oh, sorry. I didn't mean to blast your hero.

How is it BS??? Have you seen his email account lately???

The NBC statement was a lot of bull. Let me know how HD is going to keep up the fans' interest when the product on the ice is crap. It has been crap for at least 7 years and the league hasn't done a damned thing about it. Yet, there willing to risk it all over cost certainty. Oops, I didn't mean to ***** about your buddy, Bettman.

Bettman has said they will make changes to the on-ice game. Whether it pans remains to be seen. I think they are more concerned with about off-ice issues at the exact moment then the on-ice, which isn't even occurring. Its too early to speculate on how 'bad' the NBC deal is.

And if you think that the last offer by the league was a real proposal, then there's no use in me saying another word. That was an absolute joke.

Subscribing to the Al Strachan school of bargaining hardly makes your position, which is clearly anti-NHL and Gary Bettman, any more credible. The absolute joke was taking a proposal, rejecting it after 2 hours and then crying to the media about how lousy it was. That's what was an absolute joke!!!

 

[jratelle19]

Bettman has said they will make changes to the on-ice game. Whether it pans remains to be seen. I think they are more concerned with about off-ice issues at the exact moment then the on-ice, which isn't even occurring.

Yeah, like he promised that the refs would have a zero-tolerance stand on the obstruction. Well, we know how long that lasted. This problem has been going on for years, and your buddy did NOTHING about it. If he had put as much energy into fixing the on-ice product as he is putting into this lockout, we probably wouldn't have this joke TV contract.

Subscribing to the Al Strachan school of bargaining hardly makes your position, which is clearly anti-NHL and Gary Bettman, any more credible. The absolute joke was taking a proposal, rejecting it after 2 hours and then crying to the media about how lousy it was.

They took the players' rollback portion of the offer, twisted it to their liking and conceded nothing from the league's previous offer. You call that a proposal? You call that bargaining in good faith? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! :lol

I don't need Al Strachan to think for me, thank you. Perhaps you might need someone to do your thinking for you, but I sure don't. And, not surprisingly, you are way off in evaluating me as solely and strictly anti-NHL. I feel that both sides are at fault for where we are now, but the league is certainly more at fault. As a matter of fact, I feel that the players will have no choice but to accept a cap. The owners have more leverage in this lockout, especially since your buddy has the preposterous luxury of needing only 8 owners approval to keep the lockout going. Then, when Bettman gets his way, you can go celebrate with him on a little honeymoon getaway.

 

[thinkwild]

When Bettman announced the owners last kick in the teeth to the players that they pretended was an offer, and everyone was amazed that the players didnt walk out after 5 minutes which was about the average in the betting pool if the owners put forth a hard cap to the players significant concessions, he said the fan support they had received was inspirational. Yay Gary, lock the game out even longer. Knowing that Karmanos is losing money just ruins the whole game for me, I cant watch.


I remember noticing in that game where they always show the clips of Bob and Gary sitting together at a game last year eating pizza, Bob actually was watching the game. I wonder if bettman even knew the score.

Bettman and the owners have worked hard in the last few years to demarket the game and build up their losses for this year. It was important in order to win fan support for a long lockout.

NBC has a good chance to give a good time slot that will reach a wider audience than ABC. And television execs have been involved in a lot of discussion lately. Its hard to see who is on the ice all time, there is room for improvement here. I thikn the NBC profit sharing could be very profitable for the owners. Although the players may have tough time getting a fair percentage of it.

 

[The Maltais Falcon]

Did I mention you?

Your post followed mine.

 

[ScottyBowman]

In case people are holding out hope for the nbc tv deal, here are the details


The revenue sharing agreement calls for NBC, beginning in January 2005, to televise seven regular season games and six Stanley Cup playoff games in regular Saturday afternoon timeslots. In addition, NBC will broadcast Games 3-7 of the Stanley Cup Finals in primetime.

http://www2.nhl.com/onthefly/news/2004/05/213094.html

How anyone can say this deal is better or even on par with a $600 mil contract is insane. Nobody is going to spend their Saturday afternoon in April/May/June to watch hockey. Anyway, this sounds like the same exact ABC deal.

 

[nyr7andcounting]

Sheesh ... the guy can't win. When Bettman set the (now cancelled) Jan. 14 BOG meeting, players and pro-PA people griped that he was setting a drop-dead date in hopes it would cause them to cave. When he cancelled it, they complained that he wasn't trying to get anything done and his tactics were a failure.
Now he's getting ripped for not publicly stating a drop-dead date.
Maybe, just maybe, that's because he hasn't set a drop dead date.

I didn't rip on Bettman for setting the meeting. I ripped on him for cancelling it. We would have been better off if the meeting was held and if at that meeting they set a date at which the season could no longer be saved.

Also, I don't expect him to publicly state a drop dead date on a radio show. None the less, if he is asked about a drop dead date he could atleast give a general timeframe. Rather, he completely ignored the question. The league hasn't even thought about a drop dead date yet? Come on, you can't tell me you can believe that. It just shows that Bettman cares very little for the fans and doesn't care to tell them even in general terms where the league stands.

 

[i am dave]

The last offer was BS and you know it. It's time for the NHL to make an offer that's actually palatable and rumours suggest it seems like they could be doing that. The hot potato is in Bettman's hand right now.

While you are entitled to your opinion that the NHL proposal was "BS" as you say, to me it seemed like a perfectly reasonable deal to negotiate with.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/feature.asp?fid=10074

When the PA offered their proposal, the League at least waited more than 2.5 hours to reject it. While all the pro-PA people cried that the NHL blatantly rejected the 24% rollback, they failed to discuss how the League proposal simply restructured the roll-back to benefit the lower-salaried players. Only 65 players out of over 700 would have been negatively affected by this.

The League offered basically the same rookie-contract scenario. They proposed to end arbitration, which, quite frankly, is a GOOD thing.

It came down to salary cap vs. luxury tax. So if you say that the League's proposal of a salary cap (which they've always been for) is "BS," then why is the PA's proposal of a luxury tax (which THEY'VE always been for) not also "BS?"

 

[GKJ]

Bettman says that calling Goodenow to meet might send mixed signals and the puck is in Goodenow's end.

I'm glad Bettman has his priorities in the right place. instead of doing what he can to get a deal done, he wants to sit around because it isn't his turn.



Any owner who thinks Bettman knows what he is doing should be taken behind the woodshed with Bettman.

 

[CarlRacki]

I didn't rip on Bettman for setting the meeting. I ripped on him for cancelling it. We would have been better off if the meeting was held and if at that meeting they set a date at which the season could no longer be saved.

Also, I don't expect him to publicly state a drop dead date on a radio show. None the less, if he is asked about a drop dead date he could atleast give a general timeframe. Rather, he completely ignored the question. The league hasn't even thought about a drop dead date yet? Come on, you can't tell me you can believe that. It just shows that Bettman cares very little for the fans and doesn't care to tell them even in general terms where the league stands.

If you don't expect him to tell you the date, why would you expect a "general time frame"? What's the difference? And, more importantly, what difference would it make? Frankly, only a developmentally challenged chimp (and I'm not placing you in that category) lacks the marbles to know the season is just about done.
Also, he didn't ignore the question. He gave an answer. The fact you found the answer unsatisfying doesn't mean he did not give one.
Lastly, let's not start debating who cares about the fans. I think there's plenty of evidence to indicate neither side cares for the fans.

 

[djhn579]

I'm glad Bettman has his priorities in the right place. instead of doing what he can to get a deal done, he wants to sit around because it isn't his turn.



Any owner who thinks Bettman knows what he is doing should be taken behind the woodshed with Bettman.

Is that any better than Goodenow's priorities? I didn't like their last proposal, so it's still their turn....

 

[The Maltais Falcon]

Bettman's playing a waiting game because his side is the one with the loaded hand. The owners are the ones who can afford to sit and wait indefinitely: a.) their sources of supplemental income are much better than those of the players; b.) most of the owners were going to lose money by playing anyways.

It's the PA that needs to be making noises about getting back to the bargaining table. They need the NHL more than the owners do. It sucks for fans but that's a simple truth in negotiations - the onus to try to strike a deal is on the side that needs the deal most.

 

[EJsens1]

Yeah, like he promised that the refs would have a zero-tolerance stand on the obstruction. Well, we know how long that lasted. This problem has been going on for years, and your buddy did NOTHING about it. If he had put as much energy into fixing the on-ice product as he is putting into this lockout, we probably wouldn't have this joke TV contract.

I'm not denying that things are far from perfect. I've had enough of everyone trashing this game at any chance they can get. I'm trying to get the message of moving forward. Its very evident that you want to only ***** about the past. If you don't like Gary Bettman and the state of the game, don't watch it, the NHL will go on just fine without you.

They took the players' rollback portion of the offer, twisted it to their liking and conceded nothing from the league's previous offer. You call that a proposal? You call that bargaining in good faith? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! :lol

I think its a good deal for the NHL. So, because the NHLPA doesn't like it, that means its bad??? But wait, when the NHLPA makes an offer, its considered a good offer and in the best interest of the game, right skip???

I don't need Al Strachan to think for me, thank you. Perhaps you might need someone to do your thinking for you, but I sure don't. And, not surprisingly, you are way off in evaluating me as solely and strictly anti-NHL. I feel that both sides are at fault for where we are now, but the league is certainly more at fault. As a matter of fact, I feel that the players will have no choice but to accept a cap. The owners have more leverage in this lockout, especially since your buddy has the preposterous luxury of needing only 8 owners approval to keep the lockout going. Then, when Bettman gets his way, you can go celebrate with him on a little honeymoon getaway.

I didn't say you were strictly anti-NHL, but you sure don't suggest here that you support any of their moves. I'm sure you'll say I'm making this up and mis-representing what you are 'actually' saying. When we are on our little 'honeymoon getaway' as you put it, I'll be sure to yell out you're name pal!!!

 

[vanlady]

Bettman's playing a waiting game because his side is the one with the loaded hand. The owners are the ones who can afford to sit and wait indefinitely: a.) their sources of supplemental income are much better than those of the players; b.) most of the owners were going to lose money by playing anyways.

It's the PA that needs to be making noises about getting back to the bargaining table. They need the NHL more than the owners do. It sucks for fans but that's a simple truth in negotiations - the onus to try to strike a deal is on the side that needs the deal most.

By suggesting that the owners have other sources of income, are you suggesting that they use these sources to support there hockey clubs? Cause that is how the Sabres ended up bankrupt and Rigas ended up in jail. Playing five card monte with his assets in the last lockout is also how Bruce McNall ended up in jail.

Oh one other thought, the owners were betting on only a 30-40% reduction in merchandising revenue during the lockout. The reality is an 80% drop over 2003.

 

[SENSible1*]

I'm glad Bettman has his priorities in the right place. instead of doing what he can to get a deal done, he wants to sit around because it isn't his turn.



Any owner who thinks Bettman knows what he is doing should be taken behind the woodshed with Bettman.

The owners should be ecstatic at how badly Bettman is outmanouvering Goodenow. This whole negotiation has been a complete whitewash for Gary over Bob.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

The owners should be ecstatic at how badly Bettman is outmanouvering Goodenow. This whole negotiation has been a complete whitewash for Gary over Bob.

Quite the opposite. Bob Goodenow has shown remarkable resilience, patience and resourcefulness under very difficult circumstances. I applaud his pluck.

 

[The Maltais Falcon]

By suggesting that the owners have other sources of income, are you suggesting that they use these sources to support there hockey clubs?

No, I'm suggesting the vast majority of them don't need their NHL clubs to continue living the lifestyles they're accustomed to.

Cause that is how the Sabres ended up bankrupt and Rigas ended up in jail. Playing five card monte with his assets in the last lockout is also how Bruce McNall ended up in jail.

Did the respective clubs have anything to do with those men going to jail? I know Rigas ended up in jail for looting his own company but it had nothing to do with the Sabres. I know McNall went to jail for defrauding banks, but I don't remember how that related to the Kings, if at all.

 

[jratelle19]

If you don't like Gary Bettman and the state of the game, don't watch it, the NHL will go on just fine without you.

Uh, not really. If you have noticed the US television ratings the last 5 years, the NHL needs what few fans they have left.

I think its a good deal for the NHL. So, because the NHLPA doesn't like it, that means its bad??? But wait, when the NHLPA makes an offer, its considered a good offer and in the best interest of the game, right skip???

You are so off base. When the NHLPA made their offer in September, I thought it was quite weak and just a posturing move, in my opinion. The NHL's proposal then was no better. I accepted it as a starting point and knew it would be a struggle. However, the offer made by the NHLPA in December included huge concessions on the players' part, to their credit. The NHL made hardly any concessions on their "counter-offer". That is where my gripe is. I felt that the players' proposal, though not perfect, would be a great starting point for trying to find middle ground. The NHL, on the other hand, with that joke of a counter-proposal, showed that they were not interested in middle ground, but in winning it all. Had the NHL come back with a cap proposal with a little less bite, then maybe I could see the NHL making an effort to concede a bit in order to reach that middle ground. Oh, and by the way, my name's not skip, Dorothy!!!

I didn't say you were strictly anti-NHL, but you sure don't suggest here that you support any of their moves.

Again, I would support their moves if they showed that they wanted to compromise. I can say that one of the players' offers showed me a willingness to compromise a bit. That's one more than any of the NHL's proposals. I still feel that the NHL has won this war, and the players will have to accept a cap. It's just a matter of how much they can get the NHL to conced in other areas (arbitration, UFA minimum age, cap limit, etc.) if a cap is accepted.

When we are on our little 'honeymoon getaway' as you put it, I'll be sure to yell out you're name pal!!!

Are you trying to make Gary jealous? I don't think he'd appreciate you calling out my name when he's on top of you.

 

[SENSible1*]

Quite the opposite. Bob Goodenow has shown remarkable resilience, patience and resourcefulness under very difficult circumstances. I applaud his pluck.

Really?

What did the most successful PA leader in the history of pro sport have to say about his performance?

Players' proposal blasted
Labour maverick calls it `terrible'

KEN CAMPBELL
SPORTS REPORTER

The most influential union leader in the history of professional sports said he was shocked when he opened his New York Times yesterday morning and learned of the lengths the players are willing to go to end the NHL lockout.

Marvin Miller, who was hired by the Major League Baseball Players' Association in 1966 and made groundbreaking and legendary gains for baseball players during his 18-year tenure, called the NHL Players' Association's 24 per cent rollback on salaries "irresponsible" and said it sets a bad precedent, not only for hockey, but for other professional sports.

"It means either a terrible weakness on the part of the union and its members or terrible foolishness," said the 87-year-old Miller. "It's nothing in between."

Miller, who made a career out of overmatching baseball owners both at the bargaining table and in the courts, said the players should have either made their drastic proposal early in the process or not at all.

"There's nothing more disastrous for the future of a labour organization and its members than enduring a long stoppage, then folding," Miller said.

"You can take almost anything except that because you lose on both fronts."

Miller said the proposal is "ominous for the future," particularly in basketball where the players face the possibility of a lockout next season.

"I feel it's irresponsible to do that in terms of your own members' interests," Miller said, "to say nothing of the derivative effects when the owners in the other sports take a look at this."

Too bad no one asked him for a follow up after Bettman and co had taken the Goodenow's 24% and used it in the capped counter-proposal. I'm sure he would have had some interesting insights.

 

[SuperUnknown]

You are so off base. When the NHLPA made their offer in September, I thought it was quite weak and just a posturing move, in my opinion. The NHL's proposal then was no better. I accepted it as a starting point and knew it would be a struggle. However, the offer made by the NHLPA in December included huge concessions on the players' part, to their credit. The NHL made hardly any concessions on their "counter-offer". That is where my gripe is.

The NHL proposal offered over $150M more than their previous offer to the players. I don't think that's nothing...

 

[quat]

Quite the opposite. Bob Goodenow has shown remarkable resilience, patience and resourcefulness under very difficult circumstances. I applaud his pluck.

That's a mighty small boat you're rowing.

 

[rwilson99]

Quite the opposite. Bob Goodenow has shown remarkable resilience, patience and resourcefulness under very difficult circumstances. I applaud his pluck.

Well, I guess someone could applaud Mr. Goodenow's leadership. Unfortunately, it resembles an old Far Side cartoon featuring lemmings and a cliff.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

Really?

What did the most successful PA leader in the history of pro sport have to say about his performance?

Bob Goodenow won't get into a war of words with Marvin Miller out of personal respect, which speaks volumes about his professionalism. Goodenow has been quite successful in the past taking the heat on behalf of his membership. Criticism is water off a duck's back to him, really.

 

[SENSible1*]

Bob Goodenow won't get into a war of words with Marvin Miller out of personal respect, which speaks volumes about his professionalism. Goodenow has been quite successful in the past taking the heat on behalf of his membership. Criticism is water off a duck's back to him, really.

I'm sure it hurts Bob to have his idol rip him a new one in public, but the reason he didn't respond is because he knows Miller is right.

If you have a weak hand and you know you are going to lose, settle early, get the best deal possible and live to fight another day.

If Bob had done this two years ago, he could have had the luxury tax system he now is touting. Instead he chose to piss off the owners further and is in the midst of watching his constituents pay the price for his complete misread of the situation.

"There's nothing more disastrous for the future of a labour organization and its members than enduring a long stoppage, then folding," Miller said.

"You can take almost anything except that because you lose on both fronts."

 

[Johnnybegood13]

Well, that started out objectively. I think I know where this is going.



Why should he announce that on a radio show, and at this date? Greedenow (see, we can all play the name game) has historically been an 11th hour negotiator. By not announcing the drop dead date that ability is taken from him and the NHLPA.



OVERWHELMING support from the fans. I have yet to see a single poll that has not been at least 70% behind the owners. I'm not sure how you can call BS on it, but that's the sad facts. The players, and their supporters, are in the huge minority.



The potential is there. The promise from NBC is to use HD technology and develop a vehicle for the NHL with the similar appeal of Monday Night Football. If the NHL can get a regular "game of the week" slot and be broadcast in high definition, I see no reason why the sport should not catch on and the contract prove to be a profitable one. It is no where near the cash cow up front, but in the long run a partnership with a major American broadcaster could prove to be even more successful.



That's true. The NHL did make the last proposal and the NHLPA took a cursory glance and flatly turned it down. You may not have liked the offer, similar to the feeling of those from the pro-NHL side in regards to the NHLPA's offer that included the rollback, but the fact was that the NHL made an offer that was built from the PA's offer.



That is true as well. The NHL was the last one to make an offer. Whether they liked the offer or not, the ball is in the NHLPA's court to counter. The NHL is not required to make the next offer. In fact it makes no sense for the NHL to make the next offer as they would appear to be negotiating against themselves. The puck is in the NHLPA's end. They are the ones who have the onus on them. Bargaining practices dictate so.



This is getting so old. A guy has been working for the league for over a decade and has been involved in many aspects of the game it is hard to fathom that he has not become a fan of the game. You don't pour so much effort into somethng if you don't enjoy what you are doing. Or are you suggesting that Greedenow doesn't like hockey either and that he is just sponging off of the game too?



And that is his right to say that.



You mean not like the same rhetoric we are hearing from the NHLPA, or have their membership hand fed when they say something other than exactly what comes out of Greedenow's mouth?

What did you expect? A capitulation and an annoucement of games starting tomorrow night?

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Most people on the owners' side, and I'd wager this includes Iconoclast, wholeheartedly agree that the state the league is in is the result of the owners' throwing cash at the players and allowing their personal competetiveness cloud their business judgment.

so how come the owners representitive wont admit it ...

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=110435&hubName=
""Let's be clear on where the responsibility lies for where we find ourselves today: it lies exclusively at the feet of union leadership who, despite numerous and repeated approaches by the league over many years, utterly ignored - and, in some cases, knowingly exacerbated - the financial distress the league was experiencing," Bill Daly, the NHL's executive vice-president and chief legal officer, told The Canadian Press via e-mail from New York"

nope, doesnt seem the owners believe this has anything to do with them at all.

dr