I don't think Bettman wanted to make a deal.

[Brewleaguer]

It was increased $2.5-million . . .

"We attempted to reach out to you with yesterday's offer of a team maximum cap of $42.2MM ($40MM in salary and $2.2MM in benefits) which was not linked to League-wide revenues."

<<<snipped l letter >>>

We are increasing our offer of yesterday by increasing the maximum individual team cap to $44.7MM ($42.5MM in salary and $2.2MM in benefits).​

Timeline of events:
Feb. 2, 2005 NHL Offers: individual team payroll range between $32 and $42-million
Feb. 14, 2005 NHLPA Offers: a deal that included a $52 million US salary cap
Feb. 15, 2005 NHL Offers: a take-it-or-leave-it offer to the Players' Association, upping its salary cap offer to $42.5 million, The NHLPA counters with a $49 million US cap
Feb. 16, 2005: NHL season was formally extinguished

 

[HockeyCritter]

Timeline of events:
Feb. 2, 2005 NHL Offers: individual team payroll range between $32 and $42-million
Feb. 14, 2005 NHLPA Offers: a deal that included a $52 million US salary cap
Feb. 15, 2005 NHL Offers: a take-it-or-leave-it offer to the Players' Association, upping its salary cap offer to $42.5 million, The NHLPA counters with a $49 million US cap
Feb. 16, 2005: NHL season was formally extinguished

You missed the first offer of $40-,illion

 

[chiavsfan]

The NHLPA counters with a $49 million US cap

With item #7 (loophole) that ruined the deal...

 

[marcel snapshot]

I am angry with the fact that the owners could have and full well knew they could have made a 45 cap work. But instead chose to cancel the season knowing they could get a better offer. But yet the players are greedy.

Agree with the basic thrust of your sentiment, but as I see it the owners were greedy (for not offering a deal at 45 with no upward adjustment -- that's a huge improvement from where they've been and a good foundation for the future but they, apparently, want a deal that will undo as many of their mistakes from the last 10 years as possible) and the players were stupid (for not realizing how weak their hand was). And if the players didn't know how weak their hand was, that's on Goodenow for not managing their expectations. And that's probably why so many players are pissed right now.

 

[Riddarn]

I don't see how people actually believe that it was like it was only a 6.5 million difference between the two sides.

Owners offers a 42.5 million hard cap.
Players offers a 49 million soft cap with two 10% (thats an additional 5 mill) exceptions over the six years. Additionally there was the infamous #7 clause which certainly wasn't good diplomacy now that they got the Owners to move off linkage.

The way I see it they were 11.5 million apart and still miles apart ideologically. If Bettman truly meant business with all his retoric he would never have caved to anything like those exceptions or the #7 clause. And he proved that he meant business.

 

[Brewleaguer]

You missed the first offer of $40-,illion

Thats a step backwards, you need to look at forward progress here

 

[Brewleaguer]

With item #7 (loophole) that ruined the deal...

We are talking bottom line here. So dismiss #7

 

[chiavsfan]

You can't just dismiss it...it was the thing that ruined the deal...the thing that proved the PA was in it for greed and money...the thing that would have made the cap pointless, and would have put the league back into the same financial toilet it is in now

 

[AH]

Great post.

The PA offers were not designed to be the basis for a deal, but merely to hedge on the impasse front and try to force movement out of ownership.

It was fun to watch the look on Bob's face as his plan backfired.

It was PRICELESS !!! I loved it.

However, I must agree to some degree that Bettman did not want to make a deal after he saw a PA cap on the table. Bettman smelled blood and so did a lot of the owners. The stories about players revolting and being p-off at Goodenow are just starting. Larry Brooks article this morning pretty much nails what is happening inside the PA.

It wasn't easy for Bettman to give up so much playoff revenue (the owner's gravy train) for 2005, but he had to do it. What it does is show the players that the owners are serious this time.

As far as I am concerned, the NHLPA is finished.

RIP NHLPA 1957-2005.

 

[GKJ]

I think this statement just through salt into the wounds of the players. They all felt that it was turn to counter offer and chose to cancel the season.

Last time I checked, Gary Bettman canceled the season, not Bob Goodenow.

Larry Brooks article this morning pretty much nails what is happening inside the PA.

Are you sure?

 

[DropThePuck]

That is the kind of thinking that got the NHL into this mess. The details are the important part not the bottom line. I could write a great CBA with a cap of $30, but with enough loopholes to get teams to the $50, $60, even $70 million range. Your argument makes no sense to me. If you believe this I would love to make a deal with you for anything.

Dealer: Sure I'll bottom line the car for you. We will sell it for $10,000.
You: Wow that is a great bottom line. $10,000 below sticker.
Dealer: Yep, what a deal. Now let's discuss your trade. We will give you $10 for your trade and your interest rate is 50%, but the bottom line is great right.

 

[sheed36]

Kris Draper doesn't think Bettman wanted a deal either,but he is a bitter player and he is suppose to say that.
Draper said. "Maybe this man never wanted to get a deal done. The only thing we asked for was a fair number, and he couldn't even come up with that. He low-balls us and has no intention to negotiate a cap that the union can accept. How he can sit there and say he is trying to create a partnership is mind-boggling."

http://www.freep.com/sports/redwings/wings17e_20050217.htm

These guys actually believe their last offer was fair. They are in a no win situation IMO.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

IMO item 7 was a ploy by Goodenow to negotiate. He'd give that up for something else. (ie 45 million dollar cap) My problem with bettman is he offered his final offer 16 hours or so before his deadline. He owe it to the fans to work on a deal to the very last minute. Same with goodenow.


Lets be frank, they both acted like a couple of jackasses in their letter writing campaign. Seemed to me Goodenow got pissed at Bettman 1st letter and like a child took the bait. Foolish pride by BOTH of them cost us a season. They went back to using the press to negotiate instead of talking about it like grown men. It's disgusting and whats more disgusting is defending any one of their actions.

 

[Lorenzo1000]

I believe that Bettman wanted to make a deal. The players just presented the league with a no brainer. The cost of their $49 million (sometimes $53.9 million) cap would have been more than the salary costs the league had in previous years with far less revenue coming in. There's no way the league could afford any more than the $42.5 + $2.2 in benefits that they offered.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

I remember when you were one of the most respected posters at Hockeysfuture.

Funny you say that about Vlad. I happen to think he's still one of the most respected poster on this sight, which is a hell of a lot more than I can say about you.

I haven't seen anybody mention how the players "cap" at $49M would be indexed to next year's revenue stream. So if the league ever got back to their current revenue level ($2.1B), the hard cap limit would be up to anywhere between $60-75M depending on how much damage is done for 2005-2006. So when the league gets back to where they are today, the big spenders would be limited to right were they are spending currently. That's a great long term solution!

 

[SENSible1*]

Thats a step backwards, you need to look at forward progress here

UMMM...the 42 top end was WITH LINKAGE. The $40 M was WITHOUT LINKAGE.

(thought I'd try "all caps" to see if I could get you to stop ignoring the obvious facts just because they don't support your position.)

 

[SENSible1*]

We are talking bottom line here. So dismiss #7

Sure thing...dismiss the most important inflationary aspect of the PA's offer, not even to mention that they still were 4 to 6.5 M per team too high.

Your arguments certainly are a little more convincing when you ignore all those nasty facts that just get in the way of your bias.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

We are talking bottom line here. So dismiss #7

What the hell are you talking about? The devil is in the details.

This was exactly the same sort of the tactics the owners tried with the famous "triggers". Any moron knows there is going to be SUBSTANTIAL damage to the league next year, which becomes the baseline, so the players get the advantage of the recovery, without taking any of the pain. It was absolutely a DEAL KILLER right from the get go.

Maybe if the PA had made the offer sooner than 36 hours before the drop dead date, that could of negotiated out, but there just wasn't time.

 

[richardn]

Kris Draper doesn't think Bettman wanted a deal either,but he is a bitter player and he is suppose to say that.
Draper said. "Maybe this man never wanted to get a deal done. The only thing we asked for was a fair number, and he couldn't even come up with that. He low-balls us and has no intention to negotiate a cap that the union can accept. How he can sit there and say he is trying to create a partnership is mind-boggling."

http://www.freep.com/sports/redwings/wings17e_20050217.htm

These guys actually believe their last offer was fair. They are in a no win situation IMO.

Their last offer may have been high but it was fair and when originally offered it was used as a means for the NHL to come back with a better offer to meet the players half way. I don't think the NHLPA ever expected the NHL to take the 49 just at least talk about it. If Gary really wanted to save the season he would have negotiated right down to the minute with a deal so close. Goodnow should have picked up the phone as well but I believe they all felt the ball was in the NHL's court and they chose to cancel the season rather then negotiate.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

I remember when you were one of the most respected posters at Hockeysfuture.

What was wrong with what Vlad said? I don't always agree with everything that he says, but usually it is well put. In this case it also was well said, and oddly enough I agreed with every word. Goodenow totally misread the owners and amazingly ignored the owners allowing only 8 to veto a deal that Bettman brought to them which should have clued him from the start how serious the owners were and that they were willing to lose the season if the numbers did not add up. Goodenow played hardball and lost. I say hardball because everyone on this board even knew that $52 million was too high, but then to come back with $49 million but to sneak in linkage only if revenues go up, not down, was sheer idiocy. In any event, the owners set their limit, $42 million and were not budging. Many owners are happy that the the players did not accept as there was no linkage. Goodenow has not served his employers, the players, well in my opinion as he did not read the owners correctly and did not get the players the best deal possible for them. Next year they will be lucky to get $42 million even with linkage.

 

[Nightslyr]

Their last offer may have been high but it was fair and when originally offered it was used as a means for the NHL to come back with a better offer to meet the players half way. I don't think the NHLPA ever expected the NHL to take the 49 just at least talk about it. If Gary really wanted to save the season he would have negotiated right down to the minute with a deal so close. Goodnow should have picked up the phone as well but I believe they all felt the ball was in the NHL's court and they chose to cancel the season rather then negotiate.

You have to take into account item 7 in the PA's counter-proposal. It basically nullified the cap. The PA wasn't negotiating in good faith considering they didn't want the league's version of linkage, but wanted their own version which only rewarded the players. It was, quite frankly, insulting.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Their last offer may have been high but it was fair and when originally offered it was used as a means for the NHL to come back with a better offer to meet the players half way. I don't think the NHLPA ever expected the NHL to take the 49 just at least talk about it. If Gary really wanted to save the season he would have negotiated right down to the minute with a deal so close. Goodnow should have picked up the phone as well but I believe they all felt the ball was in the NHL's court and they chose to cancel the season rather then negotiate.

What in Bettman's past made Goodenow, or you, think that when he said 'final offer' he meant something else. You do not use those words in negotiations lightly, but when you do, unless you are a real novice negotiator, you can not back down or you undermine yourselves in all future negotiations. Bettman never struck me as a novice at his job. Hate him if you like, but he has shown himself to be a hell of a negotiator for the owners.

 

[marcel snapshot]

What in Bettman's past made Goodenow, or you, think that when he said 'final offer' he meant something else.

If it was Bettman's final offer, why didn't his letter response to the 49 counter stress that, and why didn't he reinforce it yesterday when asked about whether 44 or 45 might have worked, and why did he say everything we heard was that the PA needed to be in the high 40s and we couldn't be there.

There was a little more to be got by the PA than 42.5, but it wasn't 49 and it wasn't with item 7.

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

Their last offer may have been high but it was fair and when originally offered it was used as a means for the NHL to come back with a better offer to meet the players half way. I don't think the NHLPA ever expected the NHL to take the 49 just at least talk about it. If Gary really wanted to save the season he would have negotiated right down to the minute with a deal so close. Goodnow should have picked up the phone as well but I believe they all felt the ball was in the NHL's court and they chose to cancel the season rather then negotiate.

First, I'm not trying to be a smart-ass.

Do you live at home, or do you support yourself? I assume it's the former, but I might be wrong.

Let's say you bring home $1,000 per month to pay the rent, and feed yourself. You are looking for an apartment. You see one you really like, that hasn't been rented in a LONG time, and the owner is asking for $1,200 per month. You start negotiating, and offer $800 per month, knowing that's all you can afford and still feed yourself. The landlord, who has no other options to rent out the apartment, tells you it's $1,000 per month, take it or leave it. In this case, you have to leave it because if you pay the rent, you're starving.

Do you get my point. The owners decided that it was more important to be able to eat (using my example above), than take the players deal. The players decided it's better to earn 10% of what they could in a capped NHL playing in Europe.

Everyone is giving Bettman a hard time for not going up to $45M or higher to get a deal done. I agree that the owners wouldn't let him go higher. But look at it differently. Assume there are 6 teams that would spend the extra money going from $42.5 to $49M. That's a total of $39M that the NHLPA would be collecting. Divide that by 690 players in the NHL, and it comes out to about $56,500 per year per player. The players shot down the deal that would have them earn an average of $1.3M per year over $56,500? The players career would have to be over 23 years long to make up missing one year's paycheck. Unless you're name is Mark Messier or Chris Chelios - it's a losing deal to not have taken their offer.

(I realize that you could also look at it from the owners standpoint - but it's all about what the small market owners were willing to have the discrepency between what they can afford, and what the cap limit was.)

 

[A Good Flying Bird*]

You can't just dismiss it...it was the thing that ruined the deal...the thing that proved the PA was in it for greed and money...the thing that would have made the cap pointless, and would have put the league back into the same financial toilet it is in now

Who isn't in it for greed and money?
The owners? The players? The vendors? The zamboni drivers? The t-shirt makers? The stick manufacturers?

And you're going to have to explain how the cap was pointless and it would have put it back into the "same financial toilet."

Because a 49 to 55 Million cap is still better than the $78 Million cap.