Goodenow Statement

[Randall Graves*]

Exactly. IMO the NHL is saying all the right things, and is playing the NHLPA's cards before the NHLPA can do so. After watching all of Bettman's conference, and this is coming from a guy who absolutely despises Gary Bettman, I'm a lot more convinced that the owners know what they are doing. For right or wrong, they seem to be at the stage where they admit mistakes and are looking to the future. The NHLPA, however, has yet to give me that impression. They refuse to deal with the details of this dispute and instead sit there and regurgitate their "no salary cap" ideal over and over.

The NHL has continually addressed in the media and to the fans exactly what their views are and then they showed us the numbers and figures to back it up. Whether you believe the numbers or not is another thing, but I ask where are the players numbers to refute these claims? I haven't seen one verifiable claim coming out of the players. Instead, they have simply said that they want a free market, which means no salary cap. Again, I'm not trying to argue which side is in the right, I'm just saying from where I sit, the NHL has done a MUCH better job of presenting their position.

The NHL is just trying to get good PR and pin all the blame on the players, Funny Bettman didn't say anything in 99 when he re-newed the CBA and went on to add teams.

Bettman sucks, Goodenow sucks but the players atleast took a week to review the NHL's 6 proposals...the owners immediately rejected what the players offered.

Both sides are at fault but a 2nd lockout in 10 years means we need new leadership.

 

[jpsharkfan]

Bettman sucks, Goodenow sucks but the players atleast took a week to review the NHL's 6 proposals...the owners immediately rejected what the players offered.

The owners rejected it immediately because it was almost the same offer they put on the table 15 months ago. The only differance was that the NHLPA was now offering less than what they had originally. It was not a real offer; it was a move by the NHLPA to attempt to look like the good guy by having their offer be the last one refused before the shutdown.

If the NHLPA was truly trying to negotiate in good faith they would not have wasted the last 15 months. They assume because the owners gave in last time they will give in again. Instead it is exactly the opposite. Because the owners gave in last time the league is in such a bad financial position they have no choice but to lock the players out until a new deal is reached.

 

[Randall Graves*]

oh yes.. and the players made HUGE concessions.

The NHL isn't the one having to make concessions here, you forget that the players are fine and dandy with the NHL and the way it is right now. It's the owners that want the players to concede and the players have not been willing to do so. The NHL is not claiming that it is poor -- they're saying that they lose $300million year, that's not healthy for any business. This is not propaganda. Did you not read the Levitt report?

As for the cap, it's not only to stop the owners from making stupid signings as you say but also to put teams like Vancouver and Colorado on a level playin field. The Canadian dollar comes into play here as well. Even if Vancouver manages its money correctly and has a $45 million payroll, Colorado can easily afford 60-70 million. Meanwhile some teams can barely scrape up $20 million...

The NHL isn't negotiating, they won't settle for anything less than a hard cap. The NHLPA is willing to make concessions in order to get a luxury tax, the players won't budge because they can go elsewhere to play.

Whats interesting is the NHLPA had to sign a confidentiality agreement pertaining to the books..what does the NHL have to hide?

i've tried to stay in the middle as much as possible but Bettman and the NHL are making it difficult with some of the BS they throw at the wall.

 

[jpsharkfan]

The NHL isn't negotiating, they won't settle for anything less than a hard cap. The NHLPA is willing to make concessions in order to get a luxury tax, the players won't budge because they can go elsewhere to play.

Where else are the players going to go? Yes, a few can go to Europe. That leaves the other 90% of the players with no where to play. What kind of job is the average NHLer going to get in the real world? Most have never held a job outside of hockey. What a wake up call to the players when they see what "regular" jobs earn.

I thought the idea of a union was to make sure employees had safe working conditions, health insurance benefits, and a wage that kept the employees family fed and sheltered. I did not realize a union was to insure all of its members earned a minimum of close to $1 million in the first two years.

From my screen name I am obviosly a Sharks fan. This is a quote from our color commentator:
"Fix the Problem not the Blame" - an old business saying.

The problem is that the players are earning 75% of revenue. The blame is on the Owners and they do not deny it. Who is to blame makes no differance because it does not change the problem or solve it. If this was going on in any other business the owner would either close its doors for good, do drastic salary reductions, or fire all of its current employees and start over with lower priced employees. Hockey is a business, and like any other kind of business it cannot continue to operate in the red or it will die. If hockey dies there will be a lot of ex players who will be looking for jobs that pay in the 5 digit range not the 6 to 7 digit range they are used to. Sometimes you do not know how good you have it till it is gone. I hope the players are smarter than that.

 

[ArtG]

I never said the players made HUGE concessions. I said they made some, should they make more? Yes. At some point will they make more? Yes, but not until the owners make some concessions, which right now stands at zero.

I read the Levitt report, and the only thing the Levitt report says is that the NHL lost a load of money. This isn't soley because of player salaries, it is also because of poor business decisions, terrible arena leases and not having a supportive fan base that generates income. Minnesota has a supportive fan base, thus they are arguably the healthiest franchise in the league.

How is Vancouver and Colorado not on a level playing field? Vancouver manages its money well. Vancouver is one of the model franchises in the league. Vancouver made between $20-25 million this past season. If Colorado can afford $60-70M on its payroll than more power to them, which brings in the luxury tax and revenue sharing.

So please tell me what exactly are the owners conceding thus far?

You're comparing two different things. I'm saying with the current system, Vancouver can't afford to pay their players more than 45 million, while Colorado can afford to pay their players 60 million and buffalo can barely afford 20. How are these teams on a balanced playing field? The luxury tax is a proposal which could potentially work. But with the plan the NHLPA put forward, they admitted themselves that 15 teams would still be losing money. What would happen to Canadian teams in 10 years?

IMO, a hard cap or a very firm luxury tax is needed for the NHL to stay viable. The players so far don't agree to either. I don't see why the owners need to give in. The league simply won't survive if the owners concede..

 

[X8oD]

"The salary cap is a mechanism whereby the owners would pay the players less than they otherwise would receive."

Quote from Bob Goodenow.

http://www.canada.com/sports/story.html?id=10EB0BC5-3F36-4DC0-BD86-44584B0466C5

He's as sharp as George W. Bush.

rofl, i need to use that quote as a sig!

 

[me2]

"Yes, players do make a lot of money," Goodenow told reporters in Toronto. "Players deserve what the owners decide that they're worth.

The owners have looked at the finances and decided that players are worth an average of $1.3m. THE OWNERS HAVE DECIDED. The players refuse to accept the decision because they don't like it.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

Nobody thinks the NHL is poor. Who cares why the NHL wants a salary cap? At the end of the day - with a cap - the NHL will have 30 teams all able to compete with the same amount of money to spend on players. That's what counts.

But it doesn;t address the big problem in the NHL, and thats a disparity in revenues. What does a 31 million dollar hard cap do for a franchise who can only afford a 20 million dollar payroll?

 

[triggrman]

But it doesn;t address the big problem in the NHL, and thats a disparity in revenues. What does a 31 million dollar hard cap do for a franchise who can only afford a 20 million dollar payroll?

Supply and demand. With less teams able to go out and spend huge amounts on free agents, less huge contracts would be given out, lower the cost of every player.

A lot of the teams in the 20M price range don't compete regularly for the playoffs with teams that are spending 65+, thus hurting their fan support thus hurting their gate revenue, hurting their bottom line. A team with a 20M payroll will have a much better chance competing with a team that has a 31M payroll, increasing the odds that they'll make the playoffs, increasing the revenue and eventually increasing the payroll. See how it works?

 

[me2]

But it doesn;t address the big problem in the NHL, and thats a disparity in revenues. What does a 31 million dollar hard cap do for a franchise who can only afford a 20 million dollar payroll?

What is better
a $20m team full of AHL level talent in a league with $60m, $70m and $80m dollar teams.
or
a $20m team full of solid NHLers (light on stars) in a league with $31m teams.

$20m will still struggle against $31 but it will be closer and they will get more bang for their buck. That $20m might buy you the same quality of team that Calgary had last season, playoff longshots but capable of an upset. That's better than the Penguins which is what $20m gets you now.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

Supply and demand. With less teams able to go out and spend huge amounts on free agents, less huge contracts would be given out, lower the cost of every player.

A lot of the teams in the 20M price range don't compete regularly for the playoffs with teams that are spending 65+, thus hurting their fan support thus hurting their gate revenue, hurting their bottom line. A team with a 20M payroll will have a much better chance competing with a team that has a 31M payroll, increasing the odds that they'll make the playoffs, increasing the revenue and eventually increasing the payroll. See how it works?

It does help some, but they are still at an disadvantage. Jus think what they could do with that extra revenue. If you havew a smart GM compares to alot of the incompetent GM and extra revenue can go along way.

And i dont buy your attendence arguement. Nashvillie is a playoff team, same with Boston and the Lightning, how thier attendence? The Rangers, Wild, BlueJackets weren't even close to being playoff teams, yet drew great attendence.

 

[BLONG7]

The NHL is just trying to get good PR and pin all the blame on the players, Funny Bettman didn't say anything in 99 when he re-newed the CBA and went on to add teams.

Bettman sucks, Goodenow sucks but the players atleast took a week to review the NHL's 6 proposals...the owners immediately rejected what the players offered.

Both sides are at fault but a 2nd lockout in 10 years means we need new leadership.

Bang on!!! Bettman and Knob Goodenow haven't been able to get it done... fire 'em both and replace them with people who care about the game.

 

[triggrman]

It does help some, but they are still at an disadvantage. Jus think what they could do with that extra revenue. If you havew a smart GM compares to alot of the incompetent GM and extra revenue can go along way.

And i dont buy your attendence arguement. Nashvillie is a playoff team, same with Boston and the Lightning, how thier attendence? The Rangers, Wild, BlueJackets weren't even close to being playoff teams, yet drew great attendence.

Nashville's season ticket sales grew more this off season than they have since season one. Why? We made the playoffs. Nashville's fan support has been hurt by not making the playoff, even after the "Play-off Pledge" was issued. Nashville's first 3 years, they had no problem with attendance.

Boston has fallen victim to loosing it's top players and not producing a winner. How would wings' fans fill if Lidstrom left to go play for Colorado so he'd have a shot at the cup?

 

[me2]

Nashvillie is a playoff team, same with Boston and the Lightning, how thier attendence?

Fans were disgruntled with Boston when it took a hard line on ludicrous salaries such as letting Guerin walk or shipping Allison because he wanted too much. This team did exactly what you suggested by showing fiscal restraint on these two cases. The fans didn't like losing stars and viewed the owners as tightwads. Randomly standing up doesn't help, all the owners need to make the stand together otherwise the Bruins are seen as losers and non-triers.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

Nashville's season ticket sales grew more this off season than they have since season one. Why? We made the playoffs. Nashville's fan support has been hurt by not making the playoff, even after the "Play-off Pledge" was issued. Nashville's first 3 years, they had no problem with attendance.

Boston has fallen victim to loosing it's top players and not producing a winner. How would wings' fans fill if Lidstrom left to go play for Colorado so he'd have a shot at the cup?

You mean like when Fedorov left. Boston hasn't produced a winner for decade with or without star players. Do Bostons fans really think Bill Guerin and Jason Allison were worth what they got from other teams? I think what get them is they were willing to vastly overpay a guy like Lapointe and other and not keep their stars.

 

[triggrman]

You mean like when Fedorov left.

No, Feds had problems with the Wings coach, he did't leave for a better shot at the cup. I'm talking about Ray Bourque.

Boston hasn't produced a winner for decade with or without star players. Do Bostons fans really think Bill Guerin and Jason Allison were worth what they got from other teams?

No, but it's better than just letting them walk and getting nothing.

 

[Sotnos]

And i dont buy your attendence arguement. Nashvillie is a playoff team, same with Boston and the Lightning, how thier attendence?

Tampa's attendance has been going up for the past 6 years, why?

 

[Licentia]

But it doesn;t address the big problem in the NHL, and thats a disparity in revenues. What does a 31 million dollar hard cap do for a franchise who can only afford a 20 million dollar payroll?

Then let's drop the cap to 20 million! Don't worry there will be revenue sharing.

 

[Gary]

I never said the players made HUGE concessions. I said they made some, should they make more? Yes. At some point will they make more? Yes, but not until the owners make some concessions, which right now stands at zero.

The NHL wants drastic change because salaries have increased at a PHENOMINAL rate the last 10 years and the last CBA did NOTHING to improve that...The NHL overpaid for players for years, and IMO it's time for the players to take the hit this time around.

 

[Gary]

"Yes, players do make a lot of money," Goodenow told reporters in Toronto. "Players deserve what the owners decide that they're worth."

The owners have looked at the finances and decided that players are worth an average of $1.3m. THE OWNERS HAVE DECIDED. The players refuse to accept the decision because they don't like it.

The top quote is'nt in sync with what Goodenow has been saying. What he actually means is "Yes, players do make a lot of money," Goodenow told reporters in Toronto. "Players deserve what the owners decide that they're worth (in a Free Market)"

 

[me2]

"Yes, players do make a lot of money," Goodenow told reporters in Toronto. "Players deserve what the owners decide that they're worth."



The top quote is'nt in sync with what Goodenow has been saying. What he actually means is "Yes, players do make a lot of money," Goodenow told reporters in Toronto. "Players deserve what the owners decide that they're worth (in a Free Market)"

Well the old CBA wasn't a free market. Only UFA participated in the free market. A $31m cap and every player a UFA, no draft: thats a freer market.

 

[Licentia]

Well the old CBA wasn't a free market. Only UFA participated in the free market. A $31m cap and every player a UFA, no draft: thats a freer market.

NHLPA fans should want no UFAs at all. That's because they say that no team will be able to afford to keep the players it drafts under a salary cap. If there is UFA at an early age, then there would be even more player movement, which is what NHLPA fans have been saying they are fighting against.

 

[me2]

NHLPA fans should want no UFAs at all. That's because they say that no team will be able to afford to keep the players it drafts under a salary cap. If there is UFA at an early age, then there would be even more player movement, which is what NHLPA fans have been saying they are fighting against.

we want a free market so players can't earn what they are worth
we don't want a free market cause the players will leave
we want a free market so players can't earn what they are worth
we don't want a free market cause the players will leave
we want a free market so players can't earn what they are worth
we don't want a free market cause the players will leave

I wish they would decide

 

[habitual_hab]

Well the old CBA wasn't a free market. Only UFA participated in the free market. A $31m cap and every player a UFA, no draft: thats a freer market.

The old CBA wasn't a free market - but it did give fair market value. And that's the word Goodenow has been using. And for those who wish to bash Goodenow, at least he played the game professionally while Bettman's just a hired gun with no background in hockey.

As has been discussed in another thread in "The Business of Hockey" no NHLPA, no draft and every player a UFA means that there will also be no cap.

It is illegal for owners to (collude to) restrict the salaries and benefits of players without the collective blessing of the players.

 

[me2]

The old CBA wasn't a free market - but it did give fair market value. And that's the word Goodenow has been using. And for those who wish to bash Goodenow, at least he played the game professionally while Bettman's just a hired gun with no background in hockey.

As has been discussed in another thread in "The Business of Hockey" no NHLPA, no draft and every player a UFA means that there will also be no cap.

It is illegal for owners to (collude to) restrict the salaries and benefits of players without the collective blessing of the players.

I don't think it was fair. Plenty of geriatric players were cashing in while players in their mid-20s were playing twice as well and getting half as much. Thats doesn't seem fair or marketplace driven. If it was a true market price would Roenick get more than Thornton? etc