Bruins owner Jeremey Jacobs: article

[Buffaloed]

Jacobs envisions an NHL that works
http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20050226/1067215.asp
Jacobs says any new proposal must be linked to revenues and called the NHL's last proposal risky. There's some strong hints that replacement players may be used in the future. He also says that the longer the work stoppage lasts the more it hurts for the players than it does for the owners.

Click to read more...

 

[ladybugblue]

Glad an owner has admitted that it was the owners responsiblity for the state of the game. But he is also right that they are trying to fix it. Don't know if it will work but...

 

[jratelle19]

I could be wrong here, but didn't Bettman reimpose the gag order on the owners after the season was cancelled?

Interesting article, by the way.

Thanks.

 

[Weary]

Well at least Jacobs comes close to admitting that the league is ready to ditch its old fans in the chase for new ones:

We'll have hockey, and it's up to the commissioner to describe what it's going to look like (on the ice). It may be quite different than what we've seen before, and it may have a different constituency.

 

[Mess]

Well at least Jacobs comes close to admitting that the league is ready to ditch its old fans in the chase for new ones:

I thought he was talking about different Players more so then Different Fans in all this .. as he believes a bunch of NHLers will not be back ..

 

[Buffaloed]

I could be wrong here, but didn't Bettman reimpose the gag order on the owners after the season was cancelled?

Interesting article, by the way.

Thanks.

There is a gag order and owners may be fined at the discretion of the commissioner. The gag order doesn't mean they can't comment. Only that if they do so, they risk being fined. The fines are used suppress public dissention by owners who disagree with the NHL's official position which weakens the NHL's leverage in negotiations, and those which can be used to show the NHL is bargaining in bad faith. Jacobs couched all his statements carefully. It's extremely unlikely he'd be fined.

 

[labatt50]

I don't believe he was talking about the fans. He was talking about the players, but also about the look of the game, with some changes.

 

[BAdvocate]

Glad an owner has admitted that it was the owners responsiblity for the state of the game. But he is also right that they are trying to fix it. Don't know if it will work but...

He admitted the responsibility 'started' with the owners. This isn't the first time that an owner or Bettman for that matter has accepted responsibility. Not once have the players ever shared in this responsibility which is why I am totally on the owners side. How many holdouts, arbitration cases, & 110% minimum salary increases does it take before they are held accountable.

At least when owners spend irresponsibly they are doing it for the good of the team, the city, & the fans. When players holdout for more money, or take a team to arbitration they are doing it for their own selfish reasons. Usually at the expense of their teammates, their team, their city, & their fans.

My viewpoint of the Bruins ownership has totally changed over the course of the last year or so. I used to consider them one of the cheapest based on the fact that they had so many player holdouts, & would walk away from arbitration awards they felt they could not afford. Now I understand that they were basically the only team that had the balls to stand up for themselves & not allow the players & the expired CBA to force them to overspend. It's pretty easy to see why they were one of the only teams to be making a profit in previous years.

When the NHL returns, I will be right there to support the league & the teams. With the exception of the few players who had enough guts to publicly state their willingness to play under a cap system (even if they retracted their comments), I doubt that I will ever care to support the current NHL players who have either publicly backed the NHLPA's stance or just kept their mouths shut and allowed themselves to be led down the path of oblivion.

They might as well take the names of the players off of the jerseys as far as I'm concerned.

 

[GirardIsStupid]

He's a petty owner in a big market and now he's put forth some fightin' words to further anger the players (though he has just reiterated what Gary has been saying all along). He and Hicks have to be two of the dumbest owners in pro sports. They willingly spend lavishly on certain players and are now crying "Help me! Help me! I'm poor! And don't forget the viagra too!" I have no empathy for one guy who signed a 1/4 billion dollar deal with a baseball player and the other who spends 5 mill/year for a hockey player that isn't truly dominating.

 

[GirardIsStupid]

When the NHL returns, I will be right there to support the league & the teams. With the exception of the few players who had enough guts to publicly state their willingness to play under a cap system (even if they retracted their comments), I doubt that I will ever care to support the current NHL players who have either publicly backed the NHLPA's stance or just kept their mouths shut and allowed themselves to be led down the path of oblivion.

They might as well take the names of the players off of the jerseys as far as I'm concerned.

FYI, AHL level hockey is quite a lot to stomach. The last one I went to was so boring I almost fell asleep!

 

[Weary]

I thought he was talking about different Players more so then Different Fans in all this .. as he believes a bunch of NHLers will not be back ..

Although he said he expected a bunch of players not to return, that's not what he was talking about in the quote I provided. That quotation was pulled from the section of the article dealing with the league's relationship with its fans.

What he said indicates that the league is willing to alienate long-time fans in order to chase after new ones. It would make no sense in the context of the article if it had anything to do with the players.

 

[BAdvocate]

He's a petty owner in a big market and now he's put forth some fightin' words to further anger the players (though he has just reiterated what Gary has been saying all along). He and Hicks have to be two of the dumbest owners in pro sports. They willingly spend lavishly on certain players and are now crying "Help me! Help me! I'm poor! And don't forget the viagra too!" I have no empathy for one guy who signed a 1/4 billion dollar deal with a baseball player and the other who spends 5 mill/year for a hockey player that isn't truly dominating.

Did you actually say "willingly spend lavishly"? You obviously have not followed the Bruins & their contract negotiations. You couldn't be more wrong. I'm curious what he said that 'angered the players'???

I don't know how or why you brought Hicks into this conversation, but I agree with your comments about him. He falls into the minority of owners who screwed the small market teams with his foolish spending.

 

[Prof_it]

What he said indicates that the league is willing to alienate long-time fans in order to chase after new ones.

If this attitude is symbolic of the league's future marketing strategy, the NHL really is in trouble. While it's comforting that the owners publicly take responsibility for their mistakes of the past, they don't seem to have learned from them. Over-expansion, watered down hockey in an attempt to lure the US TV audience failed. Instead of returning to its roots when the lockout is settled, it will continue with a flawed strategy???

The lockout, for both the owners and players, is all about a cash grab. It's hard for me to see how anyone supports either side with such fervor. They aren't doing this for me, for you, for the fans, for rebuilding the sanctity of the sport...it's all about grabbing as much money for yourself as possible.

 

[nyrmessier011]

one of the greediest owners in sports...i refuse to read it

 

[chriss_co]

one of the greediest owners in sports...i refuse to read it

Is an owner greedy if he sticks with his budget no matter how small it is?

 

[Jag68Sid87]

Whether or not Jacobs is greedy is probably open to debate. Whether or not he's a bad owner is not. 1972, anyone?

The other end of the spectrum (owners who spent like drunken sailors such as Hicks or Dolan) is very responsible for the mess the NHL has created, but owners such as Jacobs should share part of the blame. His cheapskate ways are one thing, and if he ALWAYS did it that way he probably wouldn't have garnered the bad rep he currently holds. However, that Martin Lapointe signing a few years back, reportedly signed out of spite and perhaps even jealousy vis-a-vis Mike Ilitch in Detroit, was inconsistent of Jacobs' spending habits and also a major curve ball for the rest of the league. It did a LOT of damage.

That said, I still support the owners in this dispute 100 per cent. After all, it's about the majority and not about one idiotic minority owner. Unlike Bob Goodenow, who is all about the minority (those precious few star players that can keep his average yearly salary at a great level) and not the majority of his constituents (whom I would suspect would love to get back on the ice, for the most part).

 

[Wetcoaster]

Jacobs envisions an NHL that works
http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20050226/1067215.asp
Jacobs says any new proposal must be linked to revenues and called the NHL's last proposal risky. There's some strong hints that replacement players may be used in the future. He also says that the longer the work stoppage lasts the more it hurts for the players than it does for the owners.

Hilarious

I loved his comment about opening the books - the NHL has yet to offer to open all the books of the teams and their related entities. The URO's do not cut it.

It is also quite ironic as Jacobs has just been nailed by the state of Massachussetts for tax evasion for concealing broadcast revenues as reported by Russ Conway. What do you think the chances are that he would hide them from the state who can penalize him (and even jail him) while disclosing them in a voluntarynunaudited URO. Back taxes were assessed at around $3 million and given the Massachussetts tax rate is about 9.5% that is almost 30 million over a two year period in concealed revenues.

The Bruins were one of the teams (along with Montreal, LA and Buffalo) the NHLPA reviewed in 1999 and 2000 when they discovered $52 million in undeclared revenues.

 

[dakota]

Is an owner greedy if he sticks with his budget no matter how small it is?

this is the reason why the owners have to "save themselves" as the NHLPA is apt to say... if you dont spend them money you are greedy... if you do spend you are stupid... this type of "marketing of the NHL" is going to stop with the next CBA... unless of course fans and media complain when an owner does not spend to the maximum cap level possible...

 

[dakota]

Hilarious

I loved his comment about opening the books - the NHL has yet to offer to open all the books of the teams and their related entities. The URO's do not cut it.

It is also quite ironic as Jacobs has just been nailed by the state of Massachussetts for tax evasion for concealing broadcast revenues as reported by Russ Conway. What do you think the chances are that he would hide them from the state who can penalize him (and even jail him) while disclosing them in a voluntarynunaudited URO. Back taxes were assessed at around $3 million and given the Massachussetts tax rate is about 9.5% that is almost 30 million over a two year period in concealed revenues.

The Bruins were one of the teams (along with Montreal, LA and Buffalo) the NHLPA reviewed in 1999 and 2000 when they discovered $52 million in undeclared revenues.

Yes but the court upheld some of his claims

http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=63593&format=

In a case that dates to the early 1990s, team executives argued state officials erred when taxing the hockey franchise for income earned outside of Massachusetts. That dispute covered everything from games played out of state to the team's broadcast revenue.

The Supreme Judicial Court yesterday largely upheld earlier rulings against the team, while granting some concessions.

 

[Weary]

unless of course fans and media complain when an owner does not spend to the maximum cap level possible...

Well if the fans complained about owners not spending money before, why would they stop now?

And if that causes a salary cap to act as a magnet, then it was highly irresponsible for Gary Bettman to insist on having one.

 

[Buffaloed]

What he said indicates that the league is willing to alienate long-time fans in order to chase after new ones.

It doesn't indicate that at all. The different consituency Jacobs is referring it to is the one they hope to build by improving the on ice product by changing the rules to empasize speed and skill. A different consituency can most definitely include long-time fans. I know I won't be alienated if they eliminate the clutching and grabbing to make the game more offensively oriented.

 

[dakota]

Hilarious

I loved his comment about opening the books - the NHL has yet to offer to open all the books of the teams and their related entities. The URO's do not cut it.

Why doesnt the PA take Melnyk up on his offer? He said he would open the books for both the Senators and the Corel Centre...

also Bettman has stated repeatedly that the PA has been offered the books by their teams but they refuse to look at them... I believe they themselves only looked at 4 teams ... its hard to base your whole strategy on 4 teams when there are 30 teams... ill bet they looked at Toronto, Philadelphia, Detroit and Colorado... which 4 teams did the NHLPA look at does anyone know?

why wont they look at all 30 teams?

 

[dakota]

Well if the fans complained about owners not spending money before, why would they stop now?

And if that causes a salary cap to act as a magnet, then it was highly irresponsible for Gary Bettman to insist on having one.

hes insisting on one, but one that the league can afford... remember he doesnt care if they all spend the money... as long as the league can afford it that is fine... i dont think anyone has a problem with this... so its not irresponsible its actually being responsible to insist on a cap that the league can afford.

 

[Munchausen]

which 4 teams did the NHLPA look at does anyone know?

Los Angeles, Boston, Montreal, Buffalo.

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

However, that Martin Lapointe signing a few years back, reportedly signed out of spite and perhaps even jealousy vis-a-vis Mike Ilitch in Detroit, was inconsistent of Jacobs' spending habits and also a major curve ball for the rest of the league. It did a LOT of damage.

What I find amazing, looking at the last six or seven years, is that it is the Hawkish owners who made so many of the ridiculous contracts that put the NHL into this miss.
Yes, the Red WIngs, Avs and Leafs seem willing to pay the rate for just about any NHL star.
But it is quite often the Hurricanes and Bruins who are offering the deals which really set the rates up flying.

Hurricanes' offer to Fedorov
Bruins to Lapointe
Stars to Guerin
Islanders to Yashin
Capitals to Jagr
And of course, Rangers to Holik

Yes, the increase in salaries is systematic and gradual. But these contracts, IMO, really screwed up the league