Remember when the NHL said the jersey ads wouldn't be on merchandise sold to fans?

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

I've read the book, by Jonathan Gatehouse.

You seem to be misremembering the content if you think it somehow tells the story of Bettman controlling the Board of Directors. I'm sure this collection of billionaires often take their marching orders from one of their employees.

If people in this thread want to pretend that Gary Betteman runs the league and the Board of Directors follow him, rather than vice versa, you are are certainly entitled to do so, but it doesn't make any of it remotely true.

If that's your take I'm skeptical you actually read it because your characterization is patently false.

I couldn't find portions of the book online to quote but even in a quick book review by Hockey Writers there is just one of the endless examples of Bettman's role. Heck if you even bother to read any of the blurb's about the book, they contradict your depiction of the NHL commissioner.

After reading The Instigator, there should be no doubt left that many of the things we’ve heard about Bettman are true. Unlike past presidents of the league, he has, as Gatehouse points out, ‘succeeded in transforming (the NHL) as a business.’ While he does represent the NHL’s owners, he is not simply a passive figurehead. Gary Bettman has an active vision around which everything revolves.

Reviewing The Instigator: How Gary Bettman Remade the NHL and Changed the Game Forever

Gary Bettman fought for the future of the NHL and hockey in Canada. Hockey fans alike owe a debt of gratitiude to Mr. Bettman.

thehockeywriters.com

Bettman's job is to provide vision and direction for the league and get the 32 owners on board, not the other way around. He was specifically brought in to transform the NHL and he has. Obviously they participate but when necessary he gets the owners in line through cajoling, tradeoffs, sweet-talking, political strong-arming, and more than anything the promise of greater profit. Your argument is akin to saying a CEO only does what the board of directors tell him to because they pay his salary. It's simply incorrect.

 

[Machinehead]

Hey at least we aren't as brainwashed as soccer fans, who think it would look weird if the teams logo was on the crest instead of the advertiser.

That's because soccer logos were never on the crest whether there's ads or not.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Let me put it another way. If the ADS are not there? They are not official jersies

I totally get what you're saying and I agree.

I'm also saying it's a selling point to the advertisers. They're not gonna want to have ads on just the players jerseys and not on the ones fans are buying.

 

[Coffey]

That's because soccer logos were never on the crest whether there's ads or not.

That's true.
Doesn't make it ok.

 

[CTHabsfan]

So everytime a sponsor changes it invalidates the officiality?

Exactly! I can't believe you have a jersey with a Dunkin' ad, it's all about Chevrolet now! Get with the times!

 

[Craig Button]

As any good libertarian will tell you, if you don’t like it, then why don’t you just go ahead and start your own 32 team hockey league bruh!

Actually they would say if you don’t like it don’t buy it

 

[TrufleShufle]

I more specifically remember fans laughing at people getting mad about helmet ads because they are just this little sticker and if you think they will eventually put them on jerseys you are just being hysterical.

We knew this was coming way back when they came out with the untuck rule. Now it's just a matter of time until they need to randomly start enforcing it again and it only being a coincidence.

 

[FerrisRox]

If that's your take I'm skeptical you actually read it because your characterization is patently false.

I don't know what to tell you. I've read the book, read it when it first came out.

Nothing - and let me be crystal clear here - NOTHING in that book, or in reality, contradicts anything I've said.

I don't know why you're pointing out that Bettman advises the BoD. No shit. Do you think anybody is unaware of that?

What I said - and I assure you, it's 100 percent true despite your absurd claims to the contrary - is that Gary Bettman doesn't have a vote on *anything.*

It's his job to make sure the Board of Directors have all of the relevant information so that they can make an informed decision.

But Gary Bettman has *no say.*

If you think that Gary Bettman could put advertisements on the sweaters, because thats what he wants, and the league would then do it, because Gary said so, you're absolutely clueless.

If you think that the owners could desperately want to move the Arizona Coyotes, and Gary Bettman could say, nah, their staying, you're absolutely clueless.

If you think that the Gary Bettman can decide to change the playoff format, and the owners just have to go along with it, you're absolutely clueless.

The commissioner doesn't make *any* of these decisions, the owners do. Nothing happens in this league that the majority of the owners don't okay.

Gary Bettman can tell them what he thinks is the right choice in all of these scenarios, and he can provide them with the data to understand why he thinks that, but when it comes to voting, Gary leaves the room.

If you want to pretend that *any* of what I've said here is "patently false" you're quite simply wrong.

And I suggest you re-read the book that you claim I haven't read, because if you think the book suggests anything different than what I've just laid out for you, I think you might want to give it another look.

This will be my final response on this topic. It's pointless to have a conversation with someone that thinks "facts" are open to debate. They are not.

 

[Golden_Jet]

I don't know what to tell you. I've read the book, read it when it first came out.

Nothing - and let me be crystal clear here - NOTHING in that book, or in reality, contradicts anything I've said.

I don't know why you're pointing out that Bettman advises the BoD. No shit. Do you think anybody is unaware of that?

What I said - and I assure you, it's 100 percent true despite your absurd claims to the contrary - is that Gary Bettman doesn't have a vote on *anything.*

It's his job to make sure the Board of Directors have all of the relevant information so that they can make an informed decision.

But Gary Bettman has *no say.*

If you think that Gary Bettman could put advertisements on the sweaters, because thats what he wants, and the league would then do it, because Gary said so, you're absolutely clueless.

If you think that the owners could desperately want to move the Arizona Coyotes, and Gary Bettman could say, nah, their staying, you're absolutely clueless.

If you think that the Gary Bettman can decide to change the playoff format, and the owners just have to go along with it, you're absolutely clueless.

The commissioner doesn't make *any* of these decisions, the owners do. Nothing happens in this league that the majority of the owners don't okay.

Gary Bettman can tell them what he thinks is the right choice in all of these scenarios, and he can provide them with the data to understand why he thinks that, but when it comes to voting, Gary leaves the room.

If you want to pretend that *any* of what I've said here is "patently false" you're quite simply wrong.

And I suggest you re-read the book that you claim I haven't read, because if you think the book suggests anything different than what I've just laid out for you, I think you might want to give it another look.

This will be my final response on this topic. It's pointless to have a conversation with someone that thinks "facts" are open to debate. They are not.

Not sure why you keep saying Board of directors, never heard that in NHL.
All I’ve ever heard is board of governors.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

I don't know what to tell you. I've read the book, read it when it first came out.

Nothing - and let me be crystal clear here - NOTHING in that book, or in reality, contradicts anything I've said.

I don't know why you're pointing out that Bettman advises the BoD. No shit. Do you think anybody is unaware of that?

What I said - and I assure you, it's 100 percent true despite your absurd claims to the contrary - is that Gary Bettman doesn't have a vote on *anything.*

It's his job to make sure the Board of Directors have all of the relevant information so that they can make an informed decision.

But Gary Bettman has *no say.*

If you think that Gary Bettman could put advertisements on the sweaters, because thats what he wants, and the league would then do it, because Gary said so, you're absolutely clueless.

If you think that the owners could desperately want to move the Arizona Coyotes, and Gary Bettman could say, nah, their staying, you're absolutely clueless.

If you think that the Gary Bettman can decide to change the playoff format, and the owners just have to go along with it, you're absolutely clueless.

The commissioner doesn't make *any* of these decisions, the owners do. Nothing happens in this league that the majority of the owners don't okay.

Gary Bettman can tell them what he thinks is the right choice in all of these scenarios, and he can provide them with the data to understand why he thinks that, but when it comes to voting, Gary leaves the room.

If you want to pretend that *any* of what I've said here is "patently false" you're quite simply wrong.

And I suggest you re-read the book that you claim I haven't read, because if you think the book suggests anything different than what I've just laid out for you, I think you might want to give it another look.

This will be my final response on this topic. It's pointless to have a conversation with someone that thinks "facts" are open to debate. They are not.

ahh you've moved the goalposts. Shocking. Here's where you started:

Bettman has *nothing* to do with this.

People don't seem to even understand what a Commissioner does. He works for the owners and answers to them, and them only.

Bettman doesn't even get a vote on whether their should be ads on the jerseys.

Bettman has no say on whether the Arizona Coyotes relocate or not.

Bettman has nothing to do with your favourite player being suspended (unless they appeal.)

Over and over again here people blame Gary Bettman for things he has zero involvement in.

I've never said anything about him being able to act independently of the owners. I said he provides the direction and vision of the league and gets the owners on board. You claimed he has "zero involvement in" these decisions, which is patently false.

But sure, play your semantic games about voting if that's what you need to do to avoid admitting you were wrong.

EDIT: Here's a few receipts since you apparently skipped these parts in The Instigator book:

From an interview with former Flyers owner Ed Snider in 2012:

one of the best things I ever did was strongly vote for Gary Bettman to be our commissioner. He’s done a fabulous job. How important a governor is today compared to the old days, when basically the owners ran the league and almost ran it into the ground, in my opinion.

Now it’s Bettman’s league. He’s a great commissioner. He brings the owners into his decision making. But basically he’s the force behind everything we do.

Q. and A. With Ed Snider: Philadelphia Hockey's Heart and Soul

A conversation with Ed Snider, who co-founded the Philadelphia Flyers in 1967 and has owned or run the team ever since.

archive.nytimes.com

A common defense of Bettman is that he’s often a figurehead merely representing the owners’ collective interest, yet this portrait seems to muddy that perception.
Jeff Z. Klein provides an abbreviated timeline for his rise in power in the eyes of NHL owners.

• The 1994-95 lockout wasn’t considered a success, yet it taught him to adapt. Bettman altered owner voting rules so that he could only be overruled by a three-quarters majority and also gave himself power to fine an organization for divulging information.
• 
  
• Ken Dryden described fiscal discussions with Bettman as visiting the “principal’s office.”
• 
  
• The NHL counter-sued the New York Rangers for seeking a site independent of the NHL universe in 2008. The league won soundly enough that Rangers owner James Dolan has been noticeably quiet during proceedings, according to Klein.
• 
  
• Finally, it appears that the owners are behind him completely - just like they were during the last lockout.

In other words, Bettman’s as empowered as ever among the league’s owners.
Author Jonathon Gatehouse even provides this account, which might be chilling for Bettman’s greatest detractors: “If he wins this round, I think he’s emperor for life.”

Breaking down Gary Bettman's influence among NHL owners

Flyers owner: " ... It's Bettman's league."

www.nbcsports.com

An example of how Bettman can punish owners that get out of line:

Bettman has rarely needed to strong-arm his clubs, but when the situation has arisen, he hasn't hesitated to keep them in line. There was no better example than in 1997, when the New York Rangers attempted to set up their own internet store and online broadcasting rights separate from NHL.com. Bettman fined the team $100,000 every day that its site wasn't in line with the league's other digital properties. That lasted 48 hours.

Then the Dolan family filed an antitrust suit against the NHL, partially as a vote of no confidence against Bettman. The NHL countersued, and a New York District Court judge gave Bettman the victory. But he wasn't done. In June 2008, he filed papers in court to strip the Dolan family of control of the Rangers for essentially suing the league's other 29 teams. James Dolan settled out of court and had to sign a letter that acknowledged the Rangers were wrong in their pursuit of separate digital rights.

It was like having to write "I lost to Gary Bettman" 100 times on a chalkboard.

The good, bad and ugly of Gary Bettman's 25-year NHL tenure

When he was hired as the NHL's first commissioner on Feb. 1, 1993, Gary Bettman said "we have a great product that's underappreciated." Has that changed in the quarter-century since? Here are the highlights and lowlights of hockey's head honcho's tenure.

www.espn.com

Another example of Bettman's influence over owners:

Part of Bettman’s work involves keeping 31 ownership groups and markets on the same page. Former Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment President and CEO Richard Peddie said Bettman bringing almost every owner into the league has its benefits.

“They’re all there because Gary ultimately blessed them, so I think they always have some kind of IOUs,” Peddie said. “I don’t mean that in a disingenuous or unfair way. But he was the gatekeeper, so he has that going for him.”

Now 25 years in, Bettman is never off as NHL commissioner

In 25 years, Commissioner Gary Bettman has helped the National Hockey League grow into a nearly $5 billion business.

apnews.com

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Not sure why you keep saying Board of directors, never heard that in NHL.
All I’ve ever heard is board of governors.

He's likely regurgitating it from my saying by his logic a CEO doesn't do anything other than whatever the board of directors instructs him to.

It's hard to say for sure because he's changed his argument.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

This is a post that deserves its own thread that is stickied to the top of each forum.

Why? It's a misrepresentation of Bettman's role as commissioner.

 

[ACC1224]

https://www.reddit.com/r/hockeyjerseys/s/wGP0PIrUak

View attachment 837372

Full on embroidered jerseys ads sewn on to Adidas Authentics sold in the Detroit team store.

Why wouldn't you want the ads on it, doesn't that make it authentic?

 

[Voight]

Maybe it’s just me but the jersey ad doesn’t really bother me. It’s part of the jersey.

Top league in the world has the ad larger than the team logo.

Right, but the trade off is there's no breaks in play for commercials.

 

[BenningHurtsMySoul]

Right, but the trade off is there's no breaks in play for commercials.

I'd let them put whatever the f*** they want on jerseys if they did away with commercial breaks entirely. We both know that will never happen, they want it on both ends.

 

[Kaapo Cabana]

Ads change. They gonna replace them or update them for free?

players change, you ever get the name replaced on the back for free?

 

[1989]

My suggestion is you do what the league did for so many years up until recently. You draw a hard line against ads on jerseys. Remove them
And apologize to fans, the league makes slightly less money and life goes on.

Business making "slightly less money" goes against the whole North American ideal of success and capitalism. Why should a business owner (and by extension the people who are employed by them) choose to make less money for the customer's satisfaction?

A reminder that sports and entertainment is a non-essential form of enjoyment. You want to enjoy the sport, especially one that requires a wholly artificial, complicated facility to even be played for 70% of the year, you get to pay for it.

Stop supporting "your franchise" and you get Winnipegged. Deal with it.

So many here lack business acumen and logistical awareness; it's quite amazing. All complaints, no real solutions.

 

[Golden_Jet]

Business making "slightly less money" goes against the whole North American ideal of success and capitalism. Why should a business owner (and by extension the people who are employed by them) choose to make less money for the customer's satisfaction?

A reminder that sports and entertainment is a non-essential form of enjoyment. You want to enjoy the sport, especially one that requires a wholly artificial, complicated facility to even be played for 70% of the year, you get to pay for it.

Stop supporting "your franchise" and you get Winnipegged. Deal with it.

So many here lack business acumen and logistical awareness; it's quite amazing. All complaints, no real solutions.

All it does is raise the salary cap and tickets.

 

[BB79]

Actually they would say if you don’t like it don’t buy it

And I doubt they'd say "bruh!"

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Business making "slightly less money" goes against the whole North American ideal of success and capitalism. Why should a business owner (and by extension the people who are employed by them) choose to make less money for the customer's satisfaction?

A reminder that sports and entertainment is a non-essential form of enjoyment. You want to enjoy the sport, especially one that requires a wholly artificial, complicated facility to even be played for 70% of the year, you get to pay for it.

Stop supporting "your franchise" and you get Winnipegged. Deal with it.

So many here lack business acumen and logistical awareness; it's quite amazing. All complaints, no real solutions.

You really don't think there's instances where business owners choose to make less money for the customer's satisfaction?

You're the one showing a lack of business acumen here.

 

[Bones Malone]

Are the Rangers the only team without jersey ads currently?

Sabres

 

[golfortennis1]

With two weeks left until Easter, I'm starting to worry someone is going to tell me the Easter Bunny doesn't exist either. I mean, if the NHL can lie to me....

 

[Marty Party]

I'm not buying. However, they also have them w/o the ad. Maybe those are the older ones.

 

[1989]

You really don't think there's instances where business owners choose to make less money for the customer's satisfaction?

You're the one showing a lack of business acumen here.

Congratulations, you've identified the exception to the rule.

Meanwhile, shrinkflation, inflation, job cuts, all trending towards one thing: profit.

 

[Lazlo Hollyfeld]

Congratulations, you've identified the exception to the rule.

Meanwhile, shrinkflation, inflation, job cuts, all trending towards one thing: profit.

In other words, while you were busy lecturing people, your statement showed a fundamental misunderstanding of basic business concepts.