Legace attacks union leadership

Status
Not open for further replies.

R0CKET

Registered User
Jul 2, 2004
320
0
arnie said:
This is more idiotic 20-20 hindsight. If the NHLPA ownership had known a year ago that the nHL wouldn't cave, they would have made a deal then. But they looked at history and thought that there NHL had caved every other time, so they would this time too. They were wrong but that doesn't mean that they were stupid.

That, my freind, IS the definition of being stupid and it all started with the PA's refusal to consider some attempt at a win-win plan.

They stuck to their win-lose agenda and the consequence was a loss of 1.5 Billion. Goody had what we refer to in mysiness as a "success oriented plan"...that means they had no consideration for other options to minimze or eliminate the risk. Does ANY smart person do ANYTHING without some kind of a risk mitigation or back-up plan? Certainly not a $ 1.5 BILLION PLAN, people entrusted to manage decsions of that economic magnitude are expected to create or find options not force a losing option to succede in the obvious face of failure. That's how you end up losing allot of money.

If they had approached their employers on some more accepted common ground plan, where they both could claim a partnership, then this cluster-f*** would have never happened and everyone would have been better served, starting with the players.

Legace has a right to be PO'd cuz he lost millions as a payment to the leadership he employed to get them the best deal that they could. Since Goodenow ended up being Johnny One Note who couldn't begin to think of win-win ideas for those he was leading he squarly will bear the brunt of the repercussiond of those who employed him. Goodenow has always been and always will be about the win-lose approach. Hopefully they can dispatch with him and he kind and seek a leadership that reaches out to partner with the League.
 
Last edited:

A Good Flying Bird*

Guest
Oilhitch said:
Nothing is guaranteed, but the owners resolve from the beginning was very strong.

True. But everyone has resolve in the beginning.
 

sveiglar

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
8,585
4
Newsguyone said:
True. But everyone has resolve in the beginning.

Resolve is one thing. The ability to defeat any unfavoured deal with such a small number of owners is another. Bettman had near unilateral power; it's pretty hard to play divide and conquer when you're facing a single opponent.
 

SuperUnknown

Registered User
Mar 14, 2002
4,890
0
Visit site
Legace is absolutely right all the way. He says before last season's start that a cap might not been too bad an idea. He thought the players should negociate. BG chastised him for what he thought. He's unhappy that he lost over $1M because of that.

The NHLPA couldn't take a hardliner stance since they were the ones that had the more to lose. Take a look at attrition labour wars, the union hardly ever wins when it lasts a long time (a year or more).
 

SuperUnknown

Registered User
Mar 14, 2002
4,890
0
Visit site
sveiglar said:
Resolve is one thing. The ability to defeat any unfavoured deal with such a small number of owners is another. Bettman had near unilateral power; it's pretty hard to play divide and conquer when you're facing a single opponent.

Not only that, but the vast majority of owners had nothing to lose. As well the influx of owners the past 5 years all said from the start (their team acquisition) that they were getting into hockey because there would be a cap.
 

Psycho Papa Joe

Porkchop Hoser
Feb 27, 2002
23,347
17
Cesspool, Ontario
Visit site
Where were these voices in December, January and February? Where were their voices when the Union leaders slapped Gretz and Mario in the face in February? Where were their voices when Roenick and others did an end around on the Union leadership to get a deal done? They have nobody to blame but themselves for the crappy deal they are about to get.
 

SuperUnknown

Registered User
Mar 14, 2002
4,890
0
Visit site
Psycho Joe said:
Where were these voices in December, January and February? Where were their voices when the Union leaders slapped Gretz and Mario in the face in February? Where were their voices when Roenick and others did an end around on the Union leadership to get a deal done? They have nobody to blame but themselves for the crappy deal they are about to get.

They were getting chastised by Bob Goodenow and his speed dial cell technique.
 

GKJ

Global Moderator
Feb 27, 2002
185,633
37,428
Psycho Joe said:
Where were these voices in December, January and February? Where were their voices when the Union leaders slapped Gretz and Mario in the face in February? Where were their voices when Roenick and others did an end around on the Union leadership to get a deal done? They have nobody to blame but themselves for the crappy deal they are about to get.


Oh so true
 

Beukeboom Fan

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
15,390
1,189
Chicago, IL
Visit site
Psycho Joe said:
Where were these voices in December, January and February? Where were their voices when the Union leaders slapped Gretz and Mario in the face in February? Where were their voices when Roenick and others did an end around on the Union leadership to get a deal done? They have nobody to blame but themselves for the crappy deal they are about to get.

Great post!

This is the thing that I never understood. Goodenow had the power to refuse to negotiate because none of the PA stuck to their guns when saying they would play with a cap. I know it's a team sport, and no one wants to stand up and be the guy to buck the vocal minority. It just seems that if the players had been pro-active and been vocal internally, the leadership group would have known they should start negotiating earlier.

If Legace (or any player) would have paid attention when when BG said "expect not to play for a year or two", they could of done something about it. Either the players were told that BG's statement was rhetoric to show the owners the PA is serious, or BG told the PA that they would be able to avoid a cap. If the former is true, then BG should have been negoatiating last summer, so I don't think that's the case. I think that BG sold the PA that he'd be able to face down the owners again, and they bought it hook line and sinker.

If the "cap is possible" guys had organized at that point, they could of done something about it. Now they just come accross like sore losers.
 

Jaded-Fan

Registered User
Mar 18, 2004
52,446
14,304
Pittsburgh
Smail said:
Not only that, but the vast majority of owners had nothing to lose. As well the influx of owners the past 5 years all said from the start (their team acquisition) that they were getting into hockey because there would be a cap.

Yup, this lockout was over when Bettman was given the power to drive what he wanted through with only 8 owners backing him. Then add in the war chest built up. The only question was what date it would end, which was controlled by Goodenow, not the final outcome.

Most battles are won or lost in the planning stages. This certainly falls into that catagory.
 

Jarqui

Registered User
Jul 8, 2003
1,966
83
Visit site
Beaten and downtrodden, the PA turn on each other searching for blame as they can't understand what happened ... but the answer probably is that they didn't really understand or appreciate the important issues or facts when it all started.
 

Digger12

Gold Fever
Feb 27, 2002
18,313
990
Back o' beyond
I keep waiting for the run-ins by Tom Benjamin, Wetcoaster and Vanlady to set everyone straight and clue us in on the NHLPA master plan.

Have to say, haven't heard 'boo' from them lately...
 

mackdogs*

Guest
Psycho Joe said:
Where were these voices in December, January and February? Where were their voices when the Union leaders slapped Gretz and Mario in the face in February? Where were their voices when Roenick and others did an end around on the Union leadership to get a deal done? They have nobody to blame but themselves for the crappy deal they are about to get.
I've said all along that the rank-and-file members were never happy with the way this is going. It's nice to see some of them coming forward and saying so. To your questions, I can only imagine like most unions they were bullied into keeping their mouths shut through threats.. violence, monetary (no monthly payments?), de-certification who knows. 700 people blindly following anyone is pretty hard to believe. The good news seems to be that BG will be out on his ass immediately after this is settled.
 

kdb209

Registered User
Jan 26, 2005
14,870
6
arnie said:
This is more idiotic 20-20 hindsight. If the NHLPA ownership had known a year ago that the nHL wouldn't cave, they would have made a deal then. But they looked at history and thought that there NHL had caved every other time, so they would this time too. They were wrong but that doesn't mean that they were stupid.

It's real easy for idiots like Legace to open their mouths after the fact. Where was he a year ago? Why wasn't he whining about making a deal then? You get real sick of back seat drivers like Legace who only open their mouths a year later. In contrast,Jagr merely observed that the NHLPA took a chance and was wrong. He didn't whine like Legace, even though he stands to lose a lot more money. Who'd of thought that Jagr could be mature?

Did you actually bother to read the article. Legace did open his mouth a year ago and was beaten down by BG's gestapo.

When Legace suggested months before the lockout began that a salary cap might not be the evil union officials were portraying it to be, NHLPA executive director Bob Goodenow privately chastised him for undermining the union's efforts.

Another interesting quote. Ah, yes a union responsive to its members.

Lack of communication between union hierarchy and the rank and file has been a contentious issue since the lockout began on Sept. 15. It took a turn for the worse in recent weeks, after Legace said the union shut down its secured Web site for players because of ``too many leaks.''
 

Crazy_Ike

Cookin' with fire.
Mar 29, 2005
9,081
0
Can fully support Legace in this since he was one of the ones who had tried to enable the NHLPA to some kind of intelligence back in the past. He got swatted down by those in charge, and they are the ones who are to blame and will take the fall for this unmitigated disaster for the union.

There were probably a number of players who privately - outside of the media eye - worked to move the union towards intelligence, but failed due to whatever reason, and we just don't know about it.

How I would love to get a glimpse of the PA website and message board....

One thing is for sure - Goodenow and his cronies have completely, utterly, and totally failed. Failed their constituents, failed the NHL, failed the fans, and failed hockey in general. They should never work in the business again.
 

misterjaggers

Registered User
Sep 7, 2003
14,284
0
The Duke City
arnie said:
This is more idiotic 20-20 hindsight. If the NHLPA ownership had known a year ago that the nHL wouldn't cave, they would have made a deal then. But they looked at history and thought that there NHL had caved every other time, so they would this time too. They were wrong but that doesn't mean that they were stupid...
History demonstrates that preparing to fight the last war is a myopic strategy. Most of the hardcore fans posting here knew the NHL wouldn't cave so, yes, the NHLPA's leadership was stupid.
 

misterjaggers

Registered User
Sep 7, 2003
14,284
0
The Duke City
Digger12 said:
I keep waiting for the run-ins by Tom Benjamin, Wetcoaster and Vanlady to set everyone straight and clue us in on the NHLPA master plan.

Have to say, haven't heard 'boo' from them lately...
They avoid this forum because hey don't like the taste of crow.
:biglaugh:
 

Resolute

Registered User
Mar 4, 2005
4,125
0
AB
I think Wetcoaster has fallen completely off the internet...

Two points:

First, Isnt Legace a player rep? While he wasnt a part of the bargaining committee itself, he is being incredibly hypocritical in bashing union leadership for "making a mistake" when he is a member of the union leadership. Doubly so given his comments earlier in the lockout.

Second: The owners resolve appeared strong in the first weeks of the 1994 lockout as well. The players were smart to test the owners resolve, but they failed to properly assess when it would be clear that the owners wouldnt cave. For me, the union lost this battle when their 24% rollback offer was rejected, corrupted and dumped back onto the union without even so much as a blink from the owners. The overwhelming rejection of that offer should have signalled the union leadership that it was time to accept reality and negotiate properly.
 

Crazy_Ike

Cookin' with fire.
Mar 29, 2005
9,081
0
Maybe they thought if they sold that offer to Al Strachan the owners would follow!

Poor Al is still shilling for it even now.
 

Timmy

Registered User
Feb 2, 2005
10,691
26
Crazy_Ike said:
Maybe they thought if they sold that offer to Al Strachan the owners would follow!

Poor Al is still shilling for it even now.

I think you guys are way out of line.

First of all, the deal hasn't even been announced yet, and you're all proclaiming an owner victory, when it will be clear in five years the players actually won this one, just like in 95.

They got a cap over $30 million per team, which is simply huge.

They finally go the linkage they've been demanding for years.

They got qualifying offers to, um, not go down.

They got the minimum salary up to $400k, so that nobody has to go hungry.

They only had to take a 24% paycut on negotiated salaries - and they wanted to give this back to the league from the beginning.


A clear, clear victory for the players.

I don't know what these rookies like Jagr et al are spouting off about - what do they know. I'm with the posters who are saying "Hey, don't count Bob out yet, he'll get some stuff in there that will be inflationary and kill the league -- err, help the players for sure."


The reason you aren't seeing the pro PA types as much is, quite simply, they don't want to gloat.
 

Bruwinz37

Registered User
Feb 27, 2002
27,429
1
Timmy said:
I think you guys are way out of line.

First of all, the deal hasn't even been announced yet, and you're all proclaiming an owner victory, when it will be clear in five years the players actually won this one, just like in 95.

They got a cap over $30 million per team, which is simply huge.

They finally go the linkage they've been demanding for years.

They got qualifying offers to, um, not go down.

They got the minimum salary up to $400k, so that nobody has to go hungry.

They only had to take a 24% paycut on negotiated salaries - and they wanted to give this back to the league from the beginning.


A clear, clear victory for the players.

I don't know what these rookies like Jagr et al are spouting off about - what do they know. I'm with the posters who are saying "Hey, don't count Bob out yet, he'll get some stuff in there that will be inflationary and kill the league -- err, help the players for sure."


The reason you aren't seeing the pro PA types as much is, quite simply, they don't want to gloat.


Please say this is sarcasm.
 

GSC2k2*

Guest
Timmy said:
I think you guys are way out of line.

First of all, the deal hasn't even been announced yet, and you're all proclaiming an owner victory, when it will be clear in five years the players actually won this one, just like in 95.

They got a cap over $30 million per team, which is simply huge.

They finally go the linkage they've been demanding for years.

They got qualifying offers to, um, not go down.

They got the minimum salary up to $400k, so that nobody has to go hungry.

They only had to take a 24% paycut on negotiated salaries - and they wanted to give this back to the league from the beginning.


A clear, clear victory for the players.

I don't know what these rookies like Jagr et al are spouting off about - what do they know. I'm with the posters who are saying "Hey, don't count Bob out yet, he'll get some stuff in there that will be inflationary and kill the league -- err, help the players for sure."


The reason you aren't seeing the pro PA types as much is, quite simply, they don't want to gloat.

You are bang on, of course. The only problem was that you failed to fully capture the immensity of the player victories. To wit:

1. NOT A SINGLE PLAYER is required to wash the car of any owner;

2. All players will now be permitted to wear skates when playing;

3. All players other than those with vowels or consonants in their name will receive 100% raises;

And, most importantly ....

4. Contracts will continue to be guaranteed!!!!!!!!!
 

SuperUnknown

Registered User
Mar 14, 2002
4,890
0
Visit site
Resolute said:
I think Wetcoaster has fallen completely off the internet...

Two points:

First, Isnt Legace a player rep? While he wasnt a part of the bargaining committee itself, he is being incredibly hypocritical in bashing union leadership for "making a mistake" when he is a member of the union leadership. Doubly so given his comments earlier in the lockout.

Second: The owners resolve appeared strong in the first weeks of the 1994 lockout as well. The players were smart to test the owners resolve, but they failed to properly assess when it would be clear that the owners wouldnt cave. For me, the union lost this battle when their 24% rollback offer was rejected, corrupted and dumped back onto the union without even so much as a blink from the owners. The overwhelming rejection of that offer should have signalled the union leadership that it was time to accept reality and negotiate properly.

Legace points his finger at the NHLPA's negociating committee and Bob Goodenow. As a player rep, he expressed before the lockout that he might be willing to listen to a cap, just to be shut down by Bob Goodenow (who chastized him).

As to the difference between the 1994 and this year's lockout, the owners back then had a lot to lose: the NHL was a hot property (after NYR's win in the SC finals), there were big revenues expected from the expansion, national tv contract etc. In other words, the NHL was growing and the money was coming in. In 2005, the NHL was a cold property, revenues were expected to go down, national tv contract was/is going to be weaker, etc. Add to this: in 1994, franchise prices were soaring. In 2005, franchise prices were going down fast.

Quite easy to see why the owner's resolve in 2005 was a lot stronger than in 1994.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->