Owners Backing off replacements?

[Timmy]

I was responding to the point that the NHL owners know what they are doing.

So what does "History is on the side of the players," mean?

I don't get it.

Timmah!

 

[Mess]

It would not be the first time pro sports owners have badly miscalculated - see the failed MLB experiment with replacement players for example.

In the NFL case the NFLPA simply did an end around, decertified and won what they sought using anti-trust law.

In the case of the NBA, the NBAPA simply threatened decertification and the NBA backed down.

History is on the side of the players.

Also when you have bluffed once and been called on it, forcing you into backtracking and double talking to try to explain it .. It lends uncertainty to future bluff attempts now as this will have credibility issues in the future. I can also guess a few owners that do not support Bettman's new stance that the season will be delayed and that exists on both ends of the spectrum, both teams that made money under the Old CBA system and those that are using up their war chest money quickly.

I also thought that the NHL really started second guessing IMPASSE strategies .. The NHL have done many questionable things during this dispute that if they did declare it, would give fuel to the NHLPA in the courts that question the intention in bargaining issues.. Also without the courts questioning the Financial figures the NHL can continue to claim the Levitt Review was accurate ..

 

[hockeytown9321]

Declaring an impasse only is an issue if you are intending to use replacement players and the NHL has apparently conluded that is not a viable option.

But it'd be real funny if the league declared impasse and still didn't play.

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

Also once you have bluffed once and been called on it, forcing you into backtracking and double talking to try to explain it .. It lends uncertainty to future bluffs attempts now as this will have credibility issues in the future. I also thought that the NHL really started second guessing IMPASSE strategies .. The NHL have done many questionable things during this dispute that if they did declare it, would give fuel to the NHLPA in the courts that question the intention in bargaining issues.. Also without the courts questioning the Financial figures the NHL can continue to claim the Levitt Review was accurate ..

Kind of like players talking about joining the fabulous WHA..

 

[Gee Wally]

But it'd be real funny if the league declared impasse and still didn't play.

at this stage even that wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Mess]

Kind of like players talking about joining the fabulous WHA..

While that certainly could be viewed that way ..

It also effects the possible success of the WHA .. Now that players do not see the Replacement oportunity it lets the WHA plan better and recruit players for its league, now that the smoke has cleared a little..

 

[Timmy]

Also when you have bluffed once and been called on it, forcing you into backtracking and double talking to try to explain it .. It lends uncertainty to future bluff attempts now as this will have credibility issues in the future. I can also guess a few owners that do not support Bettman's new stance that the season will be delayed and that exists on both ends of the spectrum, both teams that made money under the Old CBA system and those that are using up their war chest money quickly.

I also thought that the NHL really started second guessing IMPASSE strategies .. The NHL have done many questionable things during this dispute that if they did declare it, would give fuel to the NHLPA in the courts that question the intention in bargaining issues.. Also without the courts questioning the Financial figures the NHL can continue to claim the Levitt Review was accurate ..

So do you think that the NHLPA has the NHL by the hairs, and should now be able to drive home a favourable deal for the players now that this option isn't available?

Are the owners on the ropes, in your opinion?

And, I am clearly an idiot today, but I thought Forbes had the league losing money too. If the players "win" this now that they've called the NHL's bluff and forced them to negotiate on players' terms, will the league survive?

If they were losing money before the players won, what's the future hold for my favourite sport? Should I adopt baseball as my new sport, if hockey's future is in doubt?

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

While that certainly could be viewed that way ..

It also effects the possible success of the WHA .. Now that players do not see the Replacement oportunity it lets the WHA plan better and recruit players for its league, now that the smoke has cleared a little..

Somewhere, in the midst of an incoherent diatribe about reporters ruining everything, Bobby Hull just snapped to attention.

Sorry, I'm really trying not to be too sarcastic, but when is the world going to realize that there is no such thing as the WHA??

 

[Wetcoaster]

What range of appealing options do the players have?? Given the number of outright failures in the "NHLPA invades the Euro leagues" fiasco, and that they face another year of lower earnings, I'm not sure things look much rosier from the players' perspective than they did a year ago. If an owner loses less by not playing, how do you assume the players have any greater bargaining position than before last season?? I would say the general consensus is that the large portion of players who are in their peak or last few earnings years are going to be getting pretty damned antsy to return to what's left of their goldmine contracts of yesteryear.

You are assuming that the majority of teams actually lost money.

IMHO when the entire business picture is taken into account many teams were making, not losing, money.

Take the Canucks as an example. Forbes Magazine pegged their profit for the past two seasons at $.7 million and $2 million based upon publicly verifiable information. According to the Canucks themselves they made profits of $20 million and $25 million respectively. The candian teams were profitable.

So was Philadelphia in spite of Snider's claim to the contrary.

For many teams the loss of hockey affects their cable tv companies and packages and real estate deals as well as any number of interlocking businesses.

Also by not playing the team values (which had been climbing for the most teams with steady if not spectacular growth over the last decade) are taking significant hits and that directly impacts their financing and their line of credit rates. Like 1994 the bankers are getting very nervous not to mention the the broadcasters. The ability of the teams to charge the top end advertising dollars they had become used to will not survive another year of lockout

While many NHL teams could take a one year hit, two years is too much to bear.

Would the players prefer to earn NHL salaries - sure but they can get by on what is available in Europe. Also this time around there is last year's experience for the Euro teams to draw upon and they are not stupid. They will have learned how better to maximize the NHL players this time around.

IMHO the owners cannot say the same. YMMV

 

[Bring Back Bucky]

You are assuming that the majority of teams actually lost money.

IMHO when the entire business picture is taken into account many teams were making, not losing, money.

Take the Canucks as an example. Forbes Magazine pegged their profit for the past two seasons at $.7 million and $2 million based upon publicly verifiable information. According to the Canucks themselves they made profits of $20 million and $25 million respectively. The candian teams were profitable.

So was Philadelphia in spite of Snider's claim to the contrary.

For many teams the loss of hockey affects their cable tv companies and packages and real estate deals as well as any number of interlocking businesses.

Also by not playing the team values (which had been climbing for the most teams with steady if not spectacular growth over the last decade) are taking significant hits and that directly impacts their financing and their line of credit rates. Like 1994 the bankers are getting very nervous not to mention the the broadcasters. The ability of the teams to charge the top end advertising dollars they had become used to will not survive another year of lockout

While many NHL teams could take a one year hit, two years is too much to bear.

Would the players prefer to earn NHL salaries - sure but they can get by on what is available in Europe. Also this time around there is last year's experience for the Euro teams to draw upon and they are not stupid. They will have learned how better to maximize the NHL players this time around.IMHO the owners cannot say the same. YMMV

I think the prospect of his last chance to earn 3 million dollars in a year means an awful lot more to Brendan Shanahan than it does to Mike Illitch...

As per the European leagues better maximizing NHLers, I have no doubt the braintrust of some lucky Euro team is rubbing their hands with glee at discovering the perfect way to complete his club with proper utilization of Brian McCabe.

 

[Mess]

at this stage even that wouldn't surprise me.

Not sure what that would accomplish though !!!..

The NHLPA would just sit there, wouldn't need to negotiate, with a IMPASSE CBA in place. Wouldn't have to worry about even a few players returning as the league would have no Replacements to play games.. . and if the NHL did it long-term then they are the ones perceived I would imagine as not willing to negotiate.

Also in order to declare an IMPASSE the NHL would have to drop the Lockout .. The NHLPA could then adopt the Strike position .. and players like Yashin and Holik and others could show up on owners doors saying here I am, pay me my guaranteed contract, not playing games that is not my concern.

The NHLPA would probably support that stance .. NO hockey but players getting paid ..

 

[Timmy]

You are assuming that the majority of teams actually lost money.

IMHO when the entire business picture is taken into account many teams were making, not losing, money.

Take the Canucks as an example. Forbes Magazine pegged their profit for the past two seasons at $.7 million and $2 million based upon publicly verifiable information. According to the Canucks themselves they made profits of $20 million and $25 million respectively. The candian teams were profitable.

So was Philadelphia in spite of Snider's claim to the contrary.

For many teams the loss of hockey affects their cable tv companies and packages and real estate deals as well as any number of interlocking businesses.

Also by not playing the team values (which had been climbing for the most teams with steady if not spectacular growth over the last decade) are taking significant hits and that directly impacts their financing and their line of credit rates. Like 1994 the bankers are getting very nervous not to mention the the broadcasters. The ability of the teams to charge the top end advertising dollars they had become used to will not survive another year of lockout

While many NHL teams could take a one year hit, two years is too much to bear.
Would the players prefer to earn NHL salaries - sure but they can get by on what is available in Europe. Also this time around there is last year's experience for the Euro teams to draw upon and they are not stupid. They will have learned how better to maximize the NHL players this time around.

IMHO the owners cannot say the same. YMMV

So, do you think we'll lose the teams that can't make money under the players' new CBA?

Or, do you think that teams aren't really losing money, and that they're just crying wolf?

Alternatively, do you think that the owners are in fact losing money but will govern themselves and not make stupid moves like giving in to holdout players by signing or trading them, and they won't need a CBA with a cap to do so?

 

[nyr7andcounting]

Next stop, Impasseville!

You are lost. Completely.

Anyway, this is definetly good news. This leaves less options for BOTH sides and gives incentive to BOTH sides to get to the table now, and make a deal now. Replacements would never have worked anyway and I'm glad the owners have realized that.

Ruling out replacements, combined with the fact that there has obviously been some sort of progress in the last couple of weeks, is a good sign.

 

[Ol' Dirty Chinaman*]

You are lost. Completely.

Anyway, this is definetly good news. This leaves less options for BOTH sides and gives incentive to BOTH sides to get to the table now, and make a deal now. Replacements would never have worked anyway and I'm glad the owners have realized that.

Ruling out replacements, combined with the fact that there has obviously been some sort of progress in the last couple of weeks, is a good sign.

I don't know about you but I'd rather watch replacement than deal with another year of no hockey.

 

[PecaFan]

Take the Canucks as an example. Forbes Magazine pegged their profit for the past two seasons at $.7 million and $2 million based upon publicly verifiable information. According to the Canucks themselves they made profits of $20 million and $25 million respectively.

You know Wetcoaster's back when the same old unsubtantiated claims come out.

The Canucks have *never* released any profit figures under the current regime. Yet you continue to toss this media speculation out as "fact".

 

[SuperUnknown]

I'm disapppointed about the replacement players issue... Imo, replacement players NHL is better than no NHL.

 

[mr gib]

Looks to me that way

will be the smartest thing they ever decided NOT to do.


http://tsn.ca/nhl

no lie - now of course the owners - jacobs especially - are all bubbly and positive -

 

[Mess]

So do you think that the NHLPA has the NHL by the hairs, and should now be able to drive home a favourable deal for the players now that this option isn't available?

Are the owners on the ropes, in your opinion?

Not by a long shot ..

Everyone new this was going to be a give back CBA from the start by the NHLPA and that will happen unless the Owners completely fall apart and turn on each other.

The off season by its nature reduces the pressure on the players to sign now and gives them a little leverage as the Owners are antsy to get going on season ticket drives and sponsors etc.

Without the threat of Replacements now, it does take away the earlier strategy to divide the NHLPA "the old divide and concur plan" .. Now the NHLPA can remain unified because there is no other option present.

Also lots of posturing on both sides in the proposals given and actions taking made on both sides to either move towards or counter IMPASSE .. Now the pressure is off the NHLPA as they just have to listen to and respond to NHL requests to meet but never have to make any proposals or even decrease the current gap, and can wait now and be a bit more patient for a better deal then is currently being offered.

So I would say that everything that happens gives a little leverage to one side or the other .. While no CBA exists both sides lose, however the NHL is in full control of this dispute .. This is a lockout and they decide when we play hockey again, and are holding most of the cards, as NHL careers for players and Owner's teams are vastly different ..

However I would guess that this event today might get the NHLPA a little more favourable CBA as some options by the NHL are no longer present at the moment. We are speculating that IMPASSE is a dead issue and that Replacements are a no go, but based on the info the NHL has reagarding this may still play this card in the long run and hopes perhaps that he NHLPA drops their guard a little now that the threat is removed.. The NHL could be hoping this leads the NHLPA to make a mistake in negotiating that later favours the NHL in court in front of the NLRB.

Common sense would suggest that if the NHL continues to offer lower and lower Hard Cap proposals the players will not sign them ,they are all but assuring no Hockey in October. If that is the case then they might as well have continued the Replacement planning and bluffing IMO, even if it was just a bluff..

However If they start loosening their HARD LINE stance and giving a little then they may get a negotiated CBA after all.

Today's events should be considered nothing more then a little moral victory for the NHLPA in this battle, however the war is long from over ...

 

[FLYLine27*]

BEST NEWS since the lockout started. Now GARY and company must focus on NEGOTIATING and quit with the antics involving an impasse. Im 100% they will come to an agreement now by Oct.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

ODC, I couldn't disagree more.

Replacements is a easily achieved target with a clear exit strategy for the PA. Not going to replacements iliminates this target and ensures that the only way an agreement will be reached is if the players negotiate a setlement. Not agreeing to anything is no longer an option for the players.

Agreed this was the best move by the owners. It still gives them the hammer. Replacement players, left the hammer up to the fans.

 

[kdb209]

Somewhere, in the midst of an incoherent diatribe about reporters ruining everything, Bobby Hull just snapped to attention.

Sorry, I'm really trying not to be too sarcastic, but when is the world going to realize that there is no such thing as the WHA??

But, but, but, they have this website and everything, ...

 

[Crazy_Ike]

Agreed this was the best move by the owners. It still gives them the hammer. Replacement players, left the hammer up to the fans.

Yep. This news, that impasse is going off the table, is actually the worst possible news for the NHLPA. If true, now they know they'll have to actually come to an agreement with a league who has already decided where their minimum possible offer lies. They can never and will never get better than that and the owners will let them sit until they figure that out.

The one person who wanted replacements was Bob Goodenow. Once again, he's been outmaneuvored by the league. What does he have left? Wrecking yet another set of NHLPA members' careers over principles the union has already caved on just won't happen.

The NHLPA has had the rug yanked out from under them again, and though it may take some time for them to realize it (witness how many people here think they are actually in better shape), their position is even worse now than it was two days ago.

Much worse.

So much for Bob's stalling tactics.

 

[nyr7andcounting]

I don't know about you but I'd rather watch replacement than deal with another year of no hockey.

They aren't going to let it go past September. They have all summer to negotiate and now neither side has any way out but to agree to a deal.

 

[thinkwild]

It doesnt seem that significant an announcement to me either, nor does it really take much pressure off the players. If this lockout is going to last the 2 or 3 years they have threatened, then its just another intermediate tactic that can change. Maybe its a nice PR move. I guess this summer will be the good cop negotiating strategy. Please, pretty please, capitulate, please.

The philsophical cap divide is no longer present now that Goodenow has conceded it. This is where Bettman wanted discussion to start last year. This is his biggest nah nah point in the press lately, they accepted a cap finally. Now he is where he wanted to be to start negotiating. He seems to say, there is room in the framework for an unlinked system. Although Im skeptical. If there is room for it though, it seems impossible to believe there is anything standing in the way of a creative solution now that the philisophical divide is broachable. If Bettman can somehow create the right group dynamic amongst the owners to accept it. Dont see how a worse offer from them will work this year if they want a season.

 

[Mess]

Yep. This news, that impasse is going off the table, is actually the worst possible news for the NHLPA. If true, now they know they'll have to actually come to an agreement with a league who has already decided where their minimum possible offer lies. They can never and will never get better than that and the owners will let them sit until they figure that out.

The one person who wanted replacements was Bob Goodenow. Once again, he's been outmaneuvored by the league. What does he have left? Wrecking yet another set of NHLPA members' careers over principles the union has already caved on just won't happen.

The NHLPA has had the rug yanked out from under them again, and though it may take some time for them to realize it (witness how many people here think they are actually in better shape), their position is even worse now than it was two days ago.

Much worse.

So much for Bob's stalling tactics.

Strange take on today's events ..

The NHL could have taken this exact position "LOCKOUT CONTINUES INDEFINITELY" from day one without a single thing the NHLPA could do to oppose it, but somehow you have twisted it by bouncing around back and forth on the issue of replacements, suddenly Goodenow has been outmanoeuvred.. In fact the NHL should have taken this approach all along, because its a stronger position for the NHL, as many believe replacements would have failed miserably if attempted ..

What happens to the NHLPA if the NHL revisits Replacements in the Future again ..

Does the NHL outmanoeuvre Goodenow again then ??.