DEFIANT MEEHAN DENIES CHARGES,calls critics "slime-balls"

[RangerBoy]

One of Shelia Block's targets is Don Meehan.They might even try to decertify Meehan for his agency's alleged run around of Bob Goodenow

"I have worked very hard to be a success in this business and I know that there are people in the industry who have an insatiable desire to take me down, but this is the most ludicrous and despicable effort they've come up with to date," a furious Meehan told Slap Shots. "There is nothing to these charges whatsoever; nothing.

"This is absolute nonsense. There is no truth to this at all. I had no contact with Gary Bettman, Bill Daly or any other league negotiator during the lockout. I never advised any one of my clients to undermine Bob Goodenow. These whispers are disgraceful.

"Who are these slime-balls who are trying to ruin my reputation? Why don't they crawl out from under their rocks and show their faces? Let me tell you something, if anyone wants to file charges against me, let them. If anyone has the [guts] to make this claim against me, I'll sue their [butt] off."

http://www.nypost.com/seven/03182007/sports/defiant_meehan_denies_charges_sports_larry_brooks.htm

Block wants to see Meehan's phone records and Meehan said they can have them.They won't find anything

Click to read more...

 

[Fugu]

The strength of Meehan's response leads me to believe he feels he's pretty confident of his position. Yet Brooks isn't backing down either. I wonder who is making the allegations then?

 

[Resolute]

Brooks vs. Meehan. If either one takes a fall, hockey fans win.

 

[GSC2k2*]

The strength of Meehan's response leads me to believe he feels he's pretty confident of his position. Yet Brooks isn't backing down either. I wonder who is making the allegations then?

That would almost surely be Rich Winter and Anton Thun, the guys who are REALLY the ones leading this (I haven't forgotten that I owe you an answer on what the "real issues" are, fugu. That is coming, but it will probably be a typical lengthy gsc2002 rant).

It is not Brooks vs. Meehan. Brooks is merely an undiscerning mouthpiece for his sources - same as he has always been.

 

[Timmy]

Brooks is merely an undiscerning mouthpiece for his sources - same as he has always been.

I've always seen Brooks as more of a codpiece, myself.

 

[Resolute]

Brooks may only be the mouthpiece, but he will also be the one to take the fall, one should have to occur. More often than not, it is the messenger that gets shot.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Disposable pre-paid cell phones??????

 

[Fugu]

Or a lunch in an airport cafe.

Time to cut your losses...

 

[GSC2k2*]

I've always seen Brooks as more of a codpiece, myself.

He could be both. It would make a heck of a Venn diagram.

 

[hillbillypriest]

I know agents have to be certified by the NHLPA, but what obligation does an agent have to the NHLPA during the lockout period? If an agent gives a client who happens to be an NHLPA members the benefit of his opinions about possible CBA outcomes during the negotiation period, does that constitute breaching his duties to the NHLPA as a certified agent?

I know the agents would be highly incented to "stay quiet" if they believed that giving the NHLPA agent certification powers would be in the new CBA, but is there any case legally for Meehan or Morris to be decertified in this case?

Just wondering what the issue is here. Doesn't sound like much of a case to me. If it was my livelihood that was being called into question, I think I would fight back pretty hard too.

 

[Weary]

I know agents have to be certified by the NHLPA, but what obligation does an agent have to the NHLPA during the lockout period?

An agent's obligation is to his clients, not to the NHLPA.

If an agent gives a client who happens to be an NHLPA members the benefit of his opinions about possible CBA outcomes during the negotiation period, does that constitute breaching his duties to the NHLPA as a certified agent?

No. Agents are free to offer opinions to clients and they also owe no obligation to the NHLPA not to do so.

I know the agents would be highly incented to "stay quiet" if they believed that giving the NHLPA agent certification powers would be in the new CBA, but is there any case legally for Meehan or Morris to be decertified in this case?

Agents should have incentive to stay quiet because they are agents. Disclosure of confidential business information by an agent is an ethical and legal no-no.

Just wondering what the issue is here. Doesn't sound like much of a case to me. If it was my livelihood that was being called into question, I think I would fight back pretty hard too.

We'll probably have to wait until Sheila Block's report materializes before the strength of the case is known. But as we've seen recently with Saskin, just because you issue what appears to be a strong denial doesn't mean you didn't do it. Of course, it doesn't mean you did, either.

 

[hillbillypriest]

Thanks for your reply. Some questions:

Agents should have incentive to stay quiet because they are agents. Disclosure of confidential business information by an agent is an ethical and legal no-no.

Is there any inference of disclosure of confidential information? The beef, such as I understand it is that Meehan's agency may have lobbied to get a deal done either indirectly through players represented on the executive committee or more directly to representatives of the NHL. If it's the former, I don't think there is any reasonable basis for decertification. If it's the later, the only possible breach would be if priviledged information about the negotiations adverse to the position of the NHLPA was provided to the NHL side. If it is just lobbying, I don't get why a sports agency would be bound to stay quiet on their opinions.

We'll probably have to wait until Sheila Block's report materializes before the strength of the case is known. But as we've seen recently with Saskin, just because you issue what appears to be a strong denial doesn't mean you didn't do it. Of course, it doesn't mean you did, either.

Even if something had been done that a certified agent would not be allowed to do under the NHLPA bylaws, would the certification of agents even be binding on the agents while the lockout was going on after the last CBA had expired? Is the NHLPA's agent certification independent of the CBA or something that's only possible because of the CBA?

 

[Wetcoaster]

Thanks for your reply. Some questions:



Is there any inference of disclosure of confidential information? The beef, such as I understand it is that Meehan's agency may have lobbied to get a deal done either indirectly through players represented on the executive committee or more directly to representatives of the NHL. If it's the former, I don't think there is any reasonable basis for decertification. If it's the later, the only possible breach would be if priviledged information about the negotiations adverse to the position of the NHLPA was provided to the NHL side. If it is just lobbying, I don't get why a sports agency would be bound to stay quiet on their opinions.



Even if something had been done that a certified agent would not be allowed to do under the NHLPA bylaws, would the certification of agents even be binding on the agents while the lockout was going on after the last CBA had expired? Is the NHLPA's agent certification independent of the CBA or something that's only possible because of the CBA?

General labour law rule is that the expired CBA continues for those purposes not directly related to the work stoppage.

 

[Weary]

Is there any inference of disclosure of confidential information? The beef, such as I understand it is that Meehan's agency may have lobbied to get a deal done either indirectly through players represented on the executive committee or more directly to representatives of the NHL. If it's the former, I don't think there is any reasonable basis for decertification. If it's the later, the only possible breach would be if priviledged information about the negotiations adverse to the position of the NHLPA was provided to the NHL side. If it is just lobbying, I don't get why a sports agency would be bound to stay quiet on their opinions.

From Brooks's article:

And now that Block is investigating all PA business affairs beginning Jan. 1, 2004, there is expectation her inquiry will lay the groundwork for charges by union members against Meehan that he and his office - which also notably includes agent Pat Morris - conspired with the NHL to undermine Bob Goodenow's anti-cap negotiating posture via both direct communications with league negotiators and instructions to his clients to do so.​

So some believe that Meehan or others in his group were in contact with the NHL. Whether or not that is true remains to be seen.

 

[Jumptheshark]

man--the nhlpa and it's agents arelooking more and more like a joke

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Pity he is denying it - I'd give Meehan a big thumbs up if its true!

Remember the TRUE rot in the NHLPA was Goodenow and his kool-ade drinkers, not the people who were working to END the lockout. It's quite possible that Chelios and company will use this to try for round 3 once this CBA is done.

 

[Larionov]

It's quite possible that Chelios and company will use this to try for round 3 once this CBA is done.

I'm not too worried about that. A union has to be united in order to head into a labour fight, and this union won't be healed and united for an awfully long time. The memories of being out for a year, and having absolutely nothing to show for it, will last for an awfully long time amongst players. Expect a relationship more like the NFL and the NFLPA now have, where the battles, such as they are, are over the draft, working conditions, medical benefits and the like rather than the cap and linkage. That genie is now out of the bottle, and isn't going back in anytime soon.

 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

I'm not too worried about that. A union has to be united in order to head into a labour fight, and this union won't be healed and united for an awfully long time. The memories of being out for a year, and having absolutely nothing to show for it, will last for an awfully long time amongst players. Expect a relationship more like the NFL and the NFLPA now have, where the battles, such as they are, are over the draft, working conditions, medical benefits and the like rather than the cap and linkage. That genie is now out of the bottle, and isn't going back in anytime soon.

The only thing that could to the union's favour is if they decide to decertify. The current CBA then no longer has any jurisdiction over the decertified players and players would essentially negotiate items for themselves without having to answer to the union. Decertification could make things really ugly should they choose to go that route. I think that's what it looks like they'll do and then maybe rebuild a new player's union. It's really sad what it's become though. It just goes to show how Goodenow really divided everyone in the union.

 

[GSC2k2*]

The only thing that could to the union's favour is if they decide to decertify. The current CBA then no longer has any jurisdiction over the decertified players and players would essentially negotiate items for themselves without having to answer to the union. Decertification could make things really ugly should they choose to go that route. I think that's what it looks like they'll do and then maybe rebuild a new player's union. It's really sad what it's become though. It just goes to show how Goodenow really divided everyone in the union.

Decertification would be a colossal disaster for all but a very few players. There is zero chance of that happening, IMO.

 

[Hawker14]

Some of the rumours/innuendo I'd like to see addressed by Sheila Block:

**Iginla and Pronger using back channels to announce NHLPA's intentions to accept a cap with the NHL, undermining Goodenow in the process. If these conversations did take place, were they done with Meehan's and/or Linden's knowledge.
**Linden doing a complete 360, and switching negotiation strategy to include a salary cap and appointing Saskin as lead negotiator, without the full knowledge of the negotiating and/or executive committees and/or player reps.
**Linden signing Saskin to a new contract, without following the provisions of the NHLPA constitution.
**Meehan pulling the strings behind the scenes by using his clients, Linden, Iginla, and Pronger to undermine Goodenow and the NHLPA's negotiating process. Also what influence or conversations Meehan may have had with Linden regarding Saskin's promotion to executive director and contract.
**Whether Goodenow and/or Saskin authorized, participated in, or were aware of the viewing of players' email correspondence, and when.


Meehan certainly is an influential agent, and it will be interesting to see how this plays out. Only time will tell but it sure is an interesting soap opera.

 

[Hawker14]

Brooks may only be the mouthpiece, but he will also be the one to take the fall, one should have to occur. More often than not, it is the messenger that gets shot.

Brooks does have solid connections to the old guard of the PA though, so who knows, there could be some fire there. I give alot of credit to Chelios for being tenacious, at the very least.

 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

Decertification would be a colossal disaster for all but a very few players. There is zero chance of that happening, IMO.

Not really. If anything, decertification would be a disaster for the owners. Do you really think owners would try to replace the best players in the world with scrubs? Do you really think owners would continue to try to sell the game in the U.S. with less than adequate players? No way. Let's face it. The bottom is line dollars. This is a business and everyone wants to make money. Money can't be made if the owners are trying to sell the game without the best players.

Would you pay $50 for a ticket so you can watch Mike Maneluk play NHL hockey? Doubt it. That's what would become of the league if the owners tried to sign scrubs to replace the stars. The owners have zero leverage in terms of decertification. The players would have all the leverage working for them.

With that being said, it's in everyone's best interest to resolve this quickly. This really makes the league look like the joke that it is to some in the U.S. It's clear though that the more details that are leaked out, the uglier this is going to become. The NHLPA really needs a legit person in there to really clean this mess up. There was talk about Bobby Orr coming in to be the new NHLPA rep. Personally, I think a guy like Orr or someone a little younger (Mike Richter?) will get in and get this mess organized.

 

[GSC2k2*]

Not really. If anything, decertification would be a disaster for the owners. Do you really think owners would try to replace the best players in the world with scrubs? Do you really think owners would continue to try to sell the game in the U.S. with less than adequate players? No way. Let's face it. The bottom is line dollars. This is a business and everyone wants to make money. Money can't be made if the owners are trying to sell the game without the best players.

Would you pay $50 for a ticket so you can watch Mike Maneluk play NHL hockey? Doubt it. That's what would become of the league if the owners tried to sign scrubs to replace the stars. The owners have zero leverage in terms of decertification. The players would have all the leverage working for them.

With that being said, it's in everyone's best interest to resolve this quickly. This really makes the league look like the joke that it is to some in the U.S. It's clear though that the more details that are leaked out, the uglier this is going to become. The NHLPA really needs a legit person in there to really clean this mess up. There was talk about Bobby Orr coming in to be the new NHLPA rep. Personally, I think a guy like Orr or someone a little younger (Mike Richter?) will get in and get this mess organized.

Where did you get the notion that I was referring to the use of replacement players? Decertification of the union does not lead to the use of replacement players. It leads to a completely free market with no minimum salaries, no standard players contract, no guaranteed contracts, no arbitration rights, no grievance rights, no guaranteed perks like moving expenses, training camp expenses, health/life/dental plans, no specified set of working conditions, no pension, no guaranteed right to free agency at a certain point (players could be signed to an endless series of one-year contracts with the team holding the option), no nothing for the players. There is a misperception as to what the CBA is about. It is about a ton more than simply dollars and cents.The top players would get otherworldly salaries in excess of what they currently get, and the rest of the players would be hustling for nickels and dimes. Those guys currently making the NHL minimum would be lucky to make anything.

"The players have all the leverage"? You must be joking. The only leverage the players have is collectively. Superstars have leverage. Everyone else has jack squat.

There was talk about Bobby Orr coming in to be the new NHLPA rep. Personally, I think a guy like Orr or someone a little younger (Mike Richter?) will get in and get this mess organized.

The only talk I have heard of about Orr is on HF. With all due respect, I don't really think a high school graduate is very suited to a position of this nature.

 

[BobbyClarkeFan16]

The only talk I have heard of about Orr is on HF. With all due respect, I don't really think a high school graduate is very suited to a position of this nature.

The Orr talk has been all over the place. It's been mentioned on here, yes. However, TSN has brought up the name Bobby Orr, the Score has brought up the name Bobby Orr, Sportsnet has brought up the name Bobby Orr. Even CNNSI.com has brought up Bobby Orr's name. As for having a high school diploma, what's your point? Orr is one of the best player agents going and knows the CBA and NHLPA inside out. To think he wouldn't be a capable replacement for Saskin and Goodenow is completely assinine.

As for decertification, players would indeed hold all the leverage. It's about absolute power between the two entities and right now, the players union is on the verge of imploding. If decertification happens, and it has happened with other leagues in the past, it makes the CBA null and void. That's what the dissidents want. And if the dissidents get what they want, they win. We might not view it as a win, but they certainly do because it means that the market place will once again set salaries, not the salary cap. Do I agree with decertification? No, absolutely not. However, it is a more than viable option for the players union at this point and don't be surprised that after the whole Sheila Block investigation is complete, Chelios and the rest of the dissidents start the selling process of decertification.

 

[kdb209]

As for decertification, players would indeed hold all the leverage. It's about absolute power between the two entities and right now, the players union is on the verge of imploding. If decertification happens, and it has happened with other leagues in the past, it makes the CBA null and void. That's what the dissidents want. And if the dissidents get what they want, they win. We might not view it as a win, but they certainly do because it means that the market place will once again set salaries, not the salary cap. Do I agree with decertification? No, absolutely not. However, it is a more than viable option for the players union at this point and don't be surprised that after the whole Sheila Block investigation is complete, Chelios and the rest of the dissidents start the selling process of decertification.

The only instance of a major professional sports league union decertifying was the NFLPA in 1987. It did not result in an era of unrestricted laissez faire capitalism. The league is still free to do what it wants until the players sue under anti trust law and win. In the case of the NFL, that took until 1992. The court held that the league's Plan B was a violation of anti trust law, but also concluded that some restrictions on players would indeed be legal. The NFLPA voted to recertify in 1993.

Decertification would only benefit the stars - the only players with individual leverage. The bulk of the NHLPA's rank and file membership, the journeyman and minimum salary player, would gain little or no benefit from decertification and would lose a lot - see gsc2k2's laundry list above.

Try selling decertification to the players, when the first thing they lose is guaranteed contracts - it ain't gonna happen.

Also, it is my understanding that a union cannot vote to decertify until it's current collective bargaining agreement expires, so the earliest it could happen is Sept 15, 2009 if the NHLPA excercises it's early termination option.

edit: The only other attempt at decertification was in the NBA in 1996. After the NBPA and the NBA came to a new CBA agreement, a dissident group of stars (led by Michael Jordan and Patrick Ewing) pushed for decertification, got a vote and lost 226-134. A few days later, the NBPA voted overwhelmingly to accept a deal