NHLPA Press conference called for 7:45pm ET

[NYIsles1*]

The offer today by Bettman was not an acceptable offer, but the NHLPA is only interested in it's free market. No triggers, no ceiling, no cap.

The owners can pay the luxury tax (how nice of Goodenow) and compete in a open market, that will be the only acceptable plan to Goodenow. Owners pay, players get paid and go where they like in open bidding.

Goodenow wants no part of looking out for the business, it's not his problem. His
job is to make money as possible for his players. Big corporations willing to lose tens of millions can continue to drive the market is what he wants and would roll back almost a hundred percent of salaries of exsisting contracts to keep that system because it works for his players.

We are not going to see another offer from Goodenow.

 

[jcab2000]

If that is true, make it blatantly obvious. In hugeass bold type. If payrolls are within X% and 0 teams lose money we will keep the NHLPAs system. If they aren't interested in agreeing to such terms they clearly have no interest in the league being healthy. It should be screamed from the tops of buildings.

The triggers can be negotiated, but the players weren't interested. That pretty much says to me that it's blatantly obvious that the players don't care about the teams' financial stability. They want the teams to lose money.

 

[Greschner4]

If that is true, make it blatantly obvious. In hugeass bold type. If payrolls are within X% and 0 teams lose money we will keep the NHLPAs system. If they aren't interested in agreeing to such terms they clearly have no interest in the league being healthy. It should be screamed from the tops of buildings.

The players aren't interested in the league, they're interested only in money. The best scenario for them is owner pays them money he doesn't have, gets sick of it, and sells to new naive sucker. Naive sucker wants to make big first impression, pays money he doesn't have, gets sick of it, sells to next wide-eyed sucker.

Rinse, repeat.

There's your NHL business history 1990-2005 in a nutshell.

The owners now realize the ponzi scheme won't work anymore, the players don't and so here we are.

 

[Greschner4]

Sadly, whatever eye you read them with doesn't change the facts.

The players never offered triggers or cap restrictions in their proposal.

There is no contradiction.

There've been dozens of statements saying the players would take a cap if their system didn't work.

Goodenow completely de-linked the two today ... twice.

Guess the dozens of statements weren't really true.

 

[txomisc]

The triggers can be negotiated, but the players weren't interested. That pretty much says to me that it's blatantly obvious that the players don't care about the teams' financial stability. They want the teams to lose money.

Well to you, yes. But the NHL should make it blatantly obvious to everyone I mean prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. To casual fans, to hardcore PA supporters.
Hell If I were bettman I'd toss in another small bone. Give them a choice. If the tigger is hit the PA can choose to
A) Pick ANY NHL proposal to implement
B) Keep their current framework but add a hard salary cap at X million dollars

 

[Morbo]

There've been dozens of statements saying the players would take a cap if their system didn't work.

But not that they'd take a cap if their system didn't work under caplike triggers.

 

[txomisc]

Another thing I might toss in there is if ANY team whos payroll is X% below the leagues highest payroll loses money then the cap is triggered. That way if a team has a 50 million dollar payroll and is losing money the cap wouldn't be triggered. Make it so it only triggers if a low payroll, frugal kind of team is losing money.

 

[Trottier]

The players aren't interested in any triggers, so it doesn't matter much what they are.

Well then, the players are going to eventually have to compromise.

There. I said it.

It won't happen on the timeframe of many fans, nor does it make the NHLPA "stupid," but compromise is, indeed, a two-way street.

More liberal trigger points, it would seem, are a logical "common ground" here.

 

[X0ssbar]

Yeah, well, the public is pretty damn stupid.

Not as stupid as said comment.

 

[Greschner4]

But not that they'd take a cap if their system didn't work under caplike triggers.

How else are you going to measure if their system "worked" if not by criteria similar to the ones in the league's proposal which I agree are way too tight?

 

[NYIsles1*]

The triggers can be negotiated, but the players weren't interested. That pretty much says to me that it's blatantly obvious that the players don't care about the teams' financial stability. They want the teams to lose money.

In the end it's not their problem nor will Goodenow box in his clients with ANYTHING that will cap or restrict his open market or at least not to this point.

I do not think he is not accepting ANY cap, not at 60-70 million or whatever the amount. He would rather take things to the courts and if teams fold to keep the market as is he likely is serving the better interest of the majority of his clients which is his job.

I'm not going to endorse Bettman's offer today or last week because it takes away legimate gains the NHLPA made over decades but someone has to explain to me why a soft cap with a ceiling of 50 million with a tax is not reasonable for a business that overall has the so-called large markets losing the revenue both Levitt's report and Forbes estimate do confirm at different levels? No report can spin the television ratings or what the new television contract is.

If Bettman wants a season that should be his final offer.

The league had revenue sharing and a luxury tax in the offer, they suggest both sides select someone to look at the books in the offer and severe penalties for
non-disclosure.

 

[likea]

There've been dozens of statements saying the players would take a cap if their system didn't work.

Goodenow completely de-linked the two today ... twice.

Guess the dozens of statements weren't really true.

lets see proof of this from the NHLPA

 

[Russian Fan]

lets see proof of this from the NHLPA

There's no proof to be made, the NHLPA is still consistent about not having linkage to payrolls.

Also people are so blind about ''Goodnenow is refusing his own deal'' that they just say how good & happy the owners are.

You JUST can't say let's try your deal but with 4 conditions & like even TSN : THE SOURCE OF THE NHL said, already 1 condition would be triggered.

It's like saying , we want partnership with you guys but we'll give you 24 hours to prove. Otherwise we'll try our way.

JUST RIDICULOUS !!!

The positive side of this is that there's place for negociations now. A 2-3 years tryout of the NHLPA systems to give a SUBSTANTIAL TIME FRAME to work their system & if it's not working , let's make a deal about a hard cap without linkage if it goes wrong because those POOR GM's can't control themselves.

 

[Sammy*]

There's no proof to be made, the NHLPA is still consistent about not having linkage to payrolls.

Also people are so blind about ''Goodnenow is refusing his own deal'' that they just say how good & happy the owners are.

You JUST can't say let's try your deal but with 4 conditions & like even TSN : THE SOURCE OF THE NHL said, already 1 condition would be triggered.

It's like saying , we want partnership with you guys but we'll give you 24 hours to prove. Otherwise we'll try our way.

JUST RIDICULOUS !!!

The positive side of this is that there's place for negociations now. A 2-3 years tryout of the NHLPA systems to give a SUBSTANTIAL TIME FRAME to work their system & if it's not working , let's make a deal about a hard cap without linkage if it goes wrong because those POOR GM's can't control themselves.

I have yet to see the NHLPA in any way shape or form, offer any linkage or cap, under any circumstances..

 

[Russian Fan]

I have yet to see the NHLPA in any way shape or form, offer any linkage or cap, under any circumstances..

The last point was more wishes on my side. If what's being told on TV that they offer 3 years with their system & 3 years with a cap, that's what I was suggested for.

 

[Sammy*]

The last point was more wishes on my side. If what's being told on TV that they offer 3 years with their system & 3 years with a cap, that's what I was suggested for.

Part of my frustration with the NHLPA is they have not made any concession (publically anyways) that they are prepared to do anything other than their one time offer. Frankly, if I was Bettmen & Co I would not be making any more offers at all (as they are simply negotiating against themselves when they do), & I would advise that if whatever my latest offer was, if not accepted it only gets worse 6 months later or whenever.

 

[thrash27]

The NHPA said their proposal was foolproof. In this offer Betman is saying if your proposal is foolproof why don’t we try it out and see if it works. When the NHPA says foolproof they mean that spending will be restricted with the weak tax and the other small adjustments. Now the triggers that Betman put out were two tight. But those are negotiable. The triggers are there to judge whether the proposal works or not. Betman says if it does not work we will go on my proposal.

 

[shakes]

The NHPA said their proposal was foolproof. In this offer Betman is saying if your proposal is foolproof why don’t we try it out and see if it works. When the NHPA says foolproof they mean that spending will be restricted with the weak tax and the other small adjustments. Now the triggers that Betman put out were two tight. But those are negotiable. The triggers are there to judge whether the proposal works or not. Betman says if it does not work we will go on my proposal.

As has been said, one of the triggers is already active, so they want to give it ...what... till the ink dries on the contract?

 

[Marconius]

It is up to the onwers soleley to determine if it "worked" and they have control

How so? The players are PERFECTLY within their rights to ask for less salary to ensure the triggers aren't setoff.

Actually, I think this is an interesting situation, basically playing the players against eachother. Suddenly an outrageously high contract not only affects the owners, but affects the players as well...

 

[Marconius]

Yeah, well, the public is pretty damn stupid.

Unfortunately, it's the public who pay the bills. A lot of people seem to discount public opinion as simply an uninportant part of the whole thing. I think the triggers have to be negotiated, but after the NHLPA's absolutely PATHETIC attempt at a pr ploy with the whole 24% rollback, I hope they were taking notes. Bettman just showed how to masterfully play the public. Despite the technicalities of the offer, for better or worse, I have a feeling that the majority of fans are only going to see this as Goodenow rejecting his own offer.

 

[Marconius]

Nah, I would say the public is stupider than the players

You sure? I don't know a lot of John Q Publics who would be throwing away their prime earning years in a short career for something that is almost fate at this point (the cap, I mean)

 

[Marconius]

There've been dozens of statements saying the players would take a cap if their system didn't work.

Goodenow completely de-linked the two today ... twice.

Guess the dozens of statements weren't really true.

misquoted, taken out of context or misunderstood the question

 

[ScottyBowman]

You sure? I don't know a lot of John Q Publics who would be throwing away their prime earning years in a short career for something that is almost fate at this point (the cap, I mean)

You demonstrated his point.

 

[Marconius]

You demonstrated his point.

huh?

 

[GKJ]

Beautiful! Bettman calls Goodenow on his proposal and Goodenow turns tail and runs. Brilliant! Absolutely brilliant! How can anyone back the NHLPA is beyond me?

The same reasons why you would blindly back the owners.