Gary Bettman talks an Olympics dis, expansion rumors and whether we're going to see another lockout

Llama19

Registered User
Jan 19, 2013
7,202
1,007
Outside GZ
To quote:

"On if the NHL would return to the Olympics in the future: "Two responses. One: [IOC President] Thomas Bach said if you don't go to Korea, you can't come to Beijing. Well, OK. Thank you. The second is, if the Winter Olympics comes back to North America, I'm not saying we'd go, but it's a different equation."

On adding a team to the Western Conference to balance the conferences with 16 teams each: "You don't expand just to be symmetrical."

On if there's a shortlist of potential cities: "We're not considering anybody. There are places that on an ongoing basis that express an interest in having a team. We listen, but we're not doing anything with it."

"I don't like work stoppages, but you do what you've got to do. You look at the way the game is being played -- competitive balance, the health of the league, how much players are making -- we needed a new system. I'm always quizzical of why a work stoppage gets laid at management. At the end of the day, the players, 12 years ago, 13 years ago, whatever it was, got what they would've gotten without the work stoppage. At the end of the day, we had to have a new system. As Arthur Levitt, who studied our economics at the time said, we were on the treadmill to oblivion."

Source: www.espn.com/nhl/story/_/id/21400777
 

gstommylee

Registered User
Jan 31, 2012
14,400
2,742
eh of course the NHL is going expand to get it to be 16/16 teams once they are ready to expand.
 

Spartachat

Registered User
Aug 2, 2016
2,154
2,136
Ottawa
Response three: We will use the Olympics as a bargaining chip in the next round of contract negotiations with the NHLPA.
 

sandysan

Registered User
Dec 7, 2011
24,834
6,388
This. That is why the NHLPA should use the All Star game and the 2020 WCoH as bargaining chips as well.

The PA gets paid by the All star game and the WCoH. If the owners got paid for allowing their players under contract to enrich the IOC, we wouldn't be in this mess. But as they say, if you aunt had balls..........

If the PA ( and not just those who would participate) want the opportunity to represent their country for no money, they don't have to convince the owners. They have to convince their non olympic caliber teamates that they should be making concessions on their contracts so that a minority of memebrs get to do what they want.

Good luck with that.
 

JETZZZ

Registered User
Oct 27, 2010
747
455
Winnipeg Manitoba
The PA gets paid by the All star game and the WCoH. If the owners got paid for allowing their players under contract to enrich the IOC, we wouldn't be in this mess. But as they say, if you aunt had balls..........

If the PA ( and not just those who would participate) want the opportunity to represent their country for no money, they don't have to convince the owners. They have to convince their non olympic caliber teamates that they should be making concessions on their contracts so that a minority of memebrs get to do what they want.

Good luck with that.
Im curious how much extra the average NHL player takes home from each All Star game. I imagine if the NHLPA had their own annual All Star game where they keep 100% of the revenue would benefit them more.
 

JETZZZ

Registered User
Oct 27, 2010
747
455
Winnipeg Manitoba
Or an NHLPA+IIHF WCoH during the NHL offseason...

They could actually use REAL national teams and hold a consistent best-on-best tournament and everything. They couldn't do any worse that the NHLs attempt in 2016. Its almost like running international competitions is the IIHFs specialty or something...
 

Nalens Oga

Registered User
Jan 5, 2010
16,780
1,053
Canada
Oh wow I was expecting there to be another lockout but for him to come out and say it and start the NHL PR machine or propaganda or whatever early is quite suggestive that they may be planning for one.

You look at the way the game is being played -- competitive balance, the health of the league, how much players are making -- we needed a new system.

First, bullshit, second, yikes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Glacial and Killion

McRpro

Cont. without supporting.
Aug 18, 2006
9,969
6,954
Clown World
Oh wow I was expecting there to be another lockout but for him to come out and say it and start the NHL PR machine or propaganda or whatever early is quite suggestive that they may be planning for one.



First, bull****, second, yikes.

You don't agree that the NHL needed a salary cap? Everyone knew it was going to happen. Blame the PA for that lost season, not the owners.
 

Tawnos

A guy with a bass
Sep 10, 2004
28,816
10,387
Charlotte, NC
Well that’s just a bunch of statements begging to be misinterpreted.

“You don’t expand to be symmetrical” is not the same as being willing to create further asymmetry through expansion.

He mixes up his tenses when talking about the lockout. He’s not saying they need a new system now. He’s saying they needed it in 2004.

I’m relatively sure the “not considering anybody” spiel was exactly what they said the day before it leaked they were going to announce an expansion process. It didn’t mean anything then and it doesn’t now.

And you know what? It sounds to me like he has no plans to reopen the CBA. First “I don’t get why management gets blamed.” The “we will see who reopens it and who doesn’t.” It sounds like he’s relishing the idea that a potential lockout would be blamed on the players for opening themselves up to it.
 

mouser

Business of Hockey
Jul 13, 2006
29,284
12,583
South Mountain
And you know what? It sounds to me like he has no plans to reopen the CBA. First “I don’t get why management gets blamed.” The “we will see who reopens it and who doesn’t.” It sounds like he’s relishing the idea that a potential lockout would be blamed on the players for opening themselves up to it.

That might be the most interesting takeaway to me. The NHL doesn't have everything they want in the current CBA, nor of course does the PA. That's just natural to how collective bargaining works.

I still believe the NHL is relatively content with the current CBA and would prefer that it runs the full term without an early opt-out by either side.
 

Nalens Oga

Registered User
Jan 5, 2010
16,780
1,053
Canada
You don't agree that the NHL needed a salary cap? Everyone knew it was going to happen. Blame the PA for that lost season, not the owners.

My mistake....sorta. The article is poorly written and I thought he was talking about it in the context of the upcoming lockout as the thread title suggests. The three quotes before it say "on if the NHL will return to the Olympics..., on balancing conferences..., on potential cities..." and then the final one has a sudden change in tone without warning to past events.
 

ottawah

Registered User
Jan 7, 2011
3,469
605
Response three: We will use the Olympics as a bargaining chip in the next round of contract negotiations with the NHLPA.

It was already used last year. The owners offered to let the players go in return for a one year extension to the CBA and a dropping of the opt out in 2019.

NHLPA rejects NHL’s offer of Olympics for CBA extension

Oh wow I was expecting there to be another lockout but for him to come out and say it and start the NHL PR machine or propaganda or whatever early is quite suggestive that they may be planning for one.

I put the chance of a lockout at 90% the minute the above news came out last year. Simply put the players really want to go to the olympics, so the only reason for them to reject this offer is if they plan, with pretty much 100% certainty, to terminate the CBA in 2019, no other scenario makes a lot of sense. Combine that with the fact they would not terminate it unless they want something noticeably better, and the fact thats not likely to happen given the owners have shown their resolve, and that Fehr will not negotiate until the last minute .... well a lockout in 2019 seems all but guaranteed.
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
the lockout was the nhlpa's fault.

the current CBA works for everyone, including the players.

if the nhlpa tries to change the system back, there will be another lockout, and it will be the nhlpa's fault again.
 

KingsFan7824

Registered User
Dec 4, 2003
19,356
7,445
Visit site
Of course there's going to be a lockout. Ever since the PA got rid of Eagleson, it's been contentious. Clearly there's a reason why that is, but whether you're talking about Lindros not going to Quebec, or the whole Stevens to NJ thing, or the PA going on strike, or the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd lockouts, it's been contentious. While the NHL does still make a lot of money, relative to their competition in the sports world, it's almost nothing. So two sides that don't like each other, fighting over a smaller pool of resources. Yes, there's most likely going to be another battle.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tom ServoMST3K

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
the lockout was the nhlpa's fault.

the current CBA works for everyone, including the players.

if the nhlpa tries to change the system back, there will be another lockout, and it will be the nhlpa's fault again.
It does not.

-It's killed trade deadline day
-Canadian teams are still on NTCs/NMCs all the time.
-Small market teams in the SCF finals = low ratings (ask NBC)
-Still no large TV contract despite the "parity"
-"Parity" has made the game mediocre, I doubt the scoring spike lasts this year.

All the cap has done is give cost certainty to the owners. And allowed Chicago and LA to win.
 

zeke

The Dube Abides
Mar 14, 2005
66,937
36,957
It does not.

-It's killed trade deadline day
-Canadian teams are still on NTCs/NMCs all the time.
-Small market teams in the SCF finals = low ratings (ask NBC)
-Still no large TV contract despite the "parity"
-"Parity" has made the game mediocre, I doubt the scoring spike lasts this year.

All the cap has done is give cost certainty to the owners. And allowed Chicago and LA to win.

All the cap has done is save half the franchises in the league from extinction, you mean.

Meanwhile, the players make more than ever.


The NHLPA has done a disservice to its players, and to fans, by being really, really stupid. The owners simply cannot afford to not have a cap. In this scenario, they have no choice but to lockout the players until they agree to a cap. If the NHLPA stupidly tries to open up this can of worms again, the owners won't have any choice but to lock them out again.
 

lomiller1

Registered User
Jan 13, 2015
6,409
2,966
The NHL has no real choice but to lock the players out if there is no labour agreement in place. Too much of how it operates depends on having an agreement.

IMO a lockout will come down to escrow, which is really just an extension of player/team revenue share. If the players insist on getting rid of escrow with nothing to replace it, there would no longer be a 50% split of revenue and there will be a lockout until some mechanism to achieve that can be implemented. The best change to not have a lockout is to keep the cap from growing, or at least grow it more slowly then revenue. The PA needs to stop using the escalator and the formula for arriving at the cap needs to be modified because it currently underestimates how many teams spend to the cap.

Personally I think Fehr wants another lockout so he’ll do everything to keep the cap going up so he can use the escrow issue to galvanize the players to accept a lockout.

Wrt the Olympics, I don’t want the NHL there unless the IOC is willing to pay the costs. The last thing I want is this money to come from the national federations because that money should be used for development. Hockey is expensive enough as it is and diverting grass root development $ to the Olympics could seriously damage the game in a lot of place.
 

lomiller1

Registered User
Jan 13, 2015
6,409
2,966
It does not.

It’s given a reason to have a 31 team league instead of a 4 team league no one in the world has any interest in.

All the cap has done is give cost certainty to the owners. And allowed Chicago and LA to win.
Chicago is probably in the 3rd tier of teams to go by-by without a cap, LA is probably in the second.

At the end of the day the NHL is a gate driven league. Without a cap teams that lose can't draw the fans they need to remain in existence and winning is zero sum; for someone the win someone else needs to lose. This means that without a cap half you teams will always be on deathwatch. If the league contracts half the remaining teams still end up on a deathwatch because at the end of the day someone has to lose games and the teams that do end up in trouble.
 

Melrose Munch

Registered User
Mar 18, 2007
23,546
2,006
All the cap has done is save half the franchises in the league from extinction, you mean.

Meanwhile, the players make more than ever.


The NHLPA has done a disservice to its players, and to fans, by being really, really stupid. The owners simply cannot afford to not have a cap. In this scenario, they have no choice but to lockout the players until they agree to a cap. If the NHLPA stupidly tries to open up this can of worms again, the owners won't have any choice but to lock them out again.

It’s given a reason to have a 31 team league instead of a 4 team league no one in the world has any interest in.


Chicago is probably in the 3rd tier of teams to go by-by without a cap, LA is probably in the second.

At the end of the day the NHL is a gate driven league. Without a cap teams that lose can't draw the fans they need to remain in existence and winning is zero sum; for someone the win someone else needs to lose. This means that without a cap half you teams will always be on deathwatch. If the league contracts half the remaining teams still end up on a deathwatch because at the end of the day someone has to lose games and the teams that do end up in trouble.
The NHL survived without a cap for 87 years until they made some ill advised business decisions in the south and south west. It shouldn't matter how many teams this league has because until we have the big tv contract, that means nothing. That should be the goal of everyone involved. Having 15 or 30 teams shouldn't impact the enjoyment of the sport.
I would claim that "in the world" teams like the 90s Red Wings and Avs were more appealing than any of the current products.
Exactly. That pens team that won last year had the worst defense of any cup winnder since 2000.
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->