Who feels today is do or die?

[Twine Seeking Missle]

I know this is pretty obvious but who thinks that todays meetings will be the end one way or another? Its already Feb 2nd so if the meetings end today without an announcement of an agreement I think we can pretty much throw in the towel on a season.

Click to read more...

 

[Jobu]

I know this is pretty obvious but who thinks that todays meetings will be the end one way or another? Its already Feb 2nd so if the meetings end today without an announcement of an agreement I think we can pretty much throw in the towel on a season.

Not me. If the owners are making an offer, I suspect the NHLPA will counter it (unless it's as outrageous as the December offer in which case it will get a swift rejection) and the owners may have one more left.

As the days roll on, the players have less and less incentive to strike a deal for this year, unless of course the owners are offering up playoff pay, so I'd imagine the owners will have a little more flexibility than today. But who knows?

 

[OilerFan4Life]

If the groundhog sees its shadow= Hockey will be played this year.

If the groundhog doesnt see its shadow=Bettman tells the PA to screw off and the season is cancelled.

 

[amazingcrwns]

I think we as fans should step up and announce that if there is no deal from this meeting (be it 1 day or 2) that we don't want a season starting any later.

This has to be it. If they think they can take another week then try again we can't allow that. I don't know that there is much else that we can do other than send Email's expressing our disgust but personally I don't want this thing to drag out another week with the NHL + NHLPA believing that the fans will wait as long as it takes to get a season in this year.

 

[Fish]

Well here's two ways to look at it..

The current regular season was planned to end on April 10th...and you figure the league would need at least say 10 days to get started...that leaves 57 days on the schedule for games (if they don't push it out)...probably a maximum of around 25 games could be played in that time.

Or

The league has already figured on cancelling the season and they just don't want to announce it so they can continue to put leverage on the players.

 

[Jobu]

Well here's two ways to look at it..

The current regular season was planned to end on April 10th...and you figure the league would need at least say 10 days to get started...that leaves 57 days on the schedule for games (if they don't push it out)...probably a maximum of around 25 games could be played in that time.

Or

The league has already figured on cancelling the season and they just don't want to announce it so they can continue to put leverage on the players.

How does not cancelling the season put leverage on the players? If a new CBA were struck, they would negotiate the number of games, etc. to be played this year. If for some reason the players found it material to have a season this year, the owners' intent to cancel it would scuttle the deal.

Bettman hasn't set a deadline because that puts pressure on the OWNERS, not the players; they're the ones who'd miss out on playoff revenues, etc.

 

[eye]

The only room for compromise is now in the luxury tax area of the negotiations. I would say the numbers are about as high as the owners are prepared to go. I could see 32 floor 42 ceiling with luxury at 100% over 42 up to 50.

 

[RangerBoy]

If the groundhog sees its shadow= Hockey will be played this year.

If the groundhog doesnt see its shadow=Bettman tells the PA to screw off and the season is cancelled.

Punxsutawney Phil saw his shadow this morning.Six more weeks of winter.Drop the puck

 

[Jobu]

The only room for compromise is now in the luxury tax area of the negotiations. I would say the numbers are about as high as the owners are prepared to go. I could see 32 floor 42 ceiling with luxury at 100% over 42 up to 50.

The so-called "42" ceiling is a joke. Based on $2.1b of revenues and the insistence on owners to link the cap to revenues, it's already down to $38m. Take away the insurance, etc. costs, and it's down to $36m. You call this negotiation and concession?

Another example of how the casual hockey fan has had the wool pulled over his eyes.

 

[eye]

The so-called "42" ceiling is a joke. Based on $2.1b of revenues and the insistence on owners to link the cap to revenues, it's already down to $38m. Take away the insurance, etc. costs, and it's down to $36m. You call this negotiation and concession?

Another example of how the casual hockey fan has had the wool pulled over his eyes.

You obviously have some inside info or connections. One thing that is 100% guaranteed = the longer the players wait to come to grips with reality and that there will be a linkage between revenue and players costs which as you pointed out includes insurance and many other player costs the lower their salaries will be when they do finally capitulate.

It's like selling a bad stock before it puts you in the poor house. Everyone knows the stock is going to be worthless so you can decide to hold onto it and watch as it brings you down or cut your losses and sell it now while it's still worth the paper it's written on.

 

[Fish]

How does not cancelling the season put leverage on the players? If a new CBA were struck, they would negotiate the number of games, etc. to be played this year. If for some reason the players found it material to have a season this year, the owners' intent to cancel it would scuttle the deal.

Bettman hasn't set a deadline because that puts pressure on the OWNERS, not the players; they're the ones who'd miss out on playoff revenues, etc.

Because once the season is cancelled, there's no motivation to do any sort of negotiations. Negotiating in September next year would pretty much be as good as negotiating now...in the mean time the league can line up their replacement players, draft a new set of rules and plan to start 2005-06 with whomever wants to play.

 

[jratelle19]

Another example of how the casual hockey fan has had the wool pulled over his eyes.

We are hockey fans, that is, passionate hockey fans. Not all of us are going to be highly knowledgable about the business of the game. Most fans of any sport aren't.

That doesn't make us "casual fans" as you so ignorantly stated.

What matters to me is the game of hockey. The speed, the passing, the line changes, the shots, etc., and there aren't many as passionate about their sport as myself and many others on this board.

 

[barnburner]

Not me. If the owners are making an offer, I suspect the NHLPA will counter it (unless it's as outrageous as the December offer in which case it will get a swift rejection) and the owners may have one more left.

As the days roll on, the players have less and less incentive to strike a deal for this year, unless of course the owners are offering up playoff pay, so I'd imagine the owners will have a little more flexibility than today. But who knows?

I think the pressure is equal on both sides. The players know that if the deal isn't made in time to salvage somthing this season - that there is almost zero chance of getting a deal before well into next season. It's in both parties best interest to get a deal done now - but, I don't think it's going to happen. The top highly paid players haven't changed their stance, and the lower salaried majority haven't been hurt enough yet to cause them to revolt.

 

[Jobu]

You obviously have some inside info or connections. One thing that is 100% guaranteed = the longer the players wait to come to grips with reality and that there will be a linkage between revenue and players costs which as you pointed out includes insurance and many other player costs the lower their salaries will be when they do finally capitulate.

It's like selling a bad stock before it puts you in the poor house. Everyone knows the stock is going to be worthless so you can decide to hold onto it and watch as it brings you down or cut your losses and sell it now while it's still worth the paper it's written on.

Well, assuming the players' ever agreed to a linkage between revenues and salaries, there is no question but that they would be in a better position to accept today than several months from now (absent a material difference in the % of revenues being offered by the owners). However, I don't accept that linking revenues to salaries will be the end result; if that happens, the players have been soundly defeated (unless, as I said, we're taling 60% or so of revenues and significant profit-sharing, not to mention an opening of the books and independent audits).

The owners will fracture and capitulate before the players, IMO. All the owners have done with their "offers" and "concepts" is further mobilize the players.

 

[Jobu]

We are hockey fans, that is, passionate hockey fans. Not all of us are going to be highly knowledgable about the business of the game. Most fans of any sport aren't.

That doesn't make us "casual fans" as you so ignorantly stated.

What matters to me is the game of hockey. The speed, the passing, the line changes, the shots, etc., and there aren't many as passionate about their sport as myself and many others on this board.

That's fine. But then these fans shouldn't be commenting or opining on the state of the hockey business.

 

[eye]

Well, assuming the players' ever agreed to a linkage between revenues and salaries, there is no question but that they would be in a better position to accept today than several months from now (absent a material difference in the % of revenues being offered by the owners). However, I don't accept that linking revenues to salaries will be the end result; if that happens, the players have been soundly defeated (unless, as I said, we're taling 60% or so of revenues and significant profit-sharing, not to mention an opening of the books and independent audits).

The owners will fracture and capitulate before the players, IMO. All the owners have done with their "offers" and "concepts" is further mobilize the players.

That's the #1 problem. Players are treating this like it's a game with a winner and a loser. Guess what - we all have lost this game. Players can now take the high road. Like I said in another thread;

Owners should concern themselves with the business of hockey
GM's should worry about hockey operations
Coaches should coach
Players should play = the more they think the more trouble they get themsleves into
Fans should cheer and support the game or their favourite teams.

The sooner everyone gets that the sooner the game will grow to record levels. The cap doesn't have to be a negative. It might turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to the NHL but minds have to be opened for it to ever have a chance of succeeding.

 

[SENSible1*]

Well, assuming the players' ever agreed to a linkage between revenues and salaries, there is no question but that they would be in a better position to accept today than several months from now (absent a material difference in the % of revenues being offered by the owners). However, I don't accept that linking revenues to salaries will be the end result; if that happens, the players have been soundly defeated (unless, as I said, we're taling 60% or so of revenues and significant profit-sharing, not to mention an opening of the books and independent audits).

The owners will fracture and capitulate before the players, IMO. All the owners have done with their "offers" and "concepts" is further mobilize the players.

There has been zero evidence of any fractures on the NHL's side and plenty of evidence of fractures on the PA's side. You will be proven wrong. Hopefully the players don't make the same mistake as it will be an extremely costly one.

 

[Jobu]

That's the #1 problem. Players are treating this like it's a game with a winner and a loser. Guess what - we all have lost this game. Players can now take the high road. Like I said in another thread;

Owners should concern themselves with the business of hockey
GM's should worry about hockey operations
Coaches should coach
Players should play = the more they think the more trouble they get themsleves into
Fans should cheer and support the game or their favourite teams.

The sooner everyone gets that the sooner the game will grow to record levels. The cap doesn't have to be a negative. It might turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to the NHL but minds have to be opened for it to ever have a chance of succeeding.

First of all, what you propose is far too simplistic and runs counter to the owners' insistence on a business "partnership." Whether it be due to trite labour laws or business reality, players and owners each have a say on the terms and conditions of employment.

Secondly, why doesn't the NHL agree to a rollback, luxury taxes, two-way salary arbitration, and all of the other players' concessions on a 3-4 year trial basis before insisting on a cap? Surely there is more than one way to skin a cat. Is this not a compromise that the NHL can agree to? Why don't they take the moral high road?

 

[Jobu]

There has been zero evidence of any fractures on the NHL's side and plenty of evidence of fractures on the PA's side. You will be proven wrong. Hopefully the players don't make the same mistake as it will be an extremely costly one.

Yeah, those, what, 3-5 players out of 750 who have spoken out sure speak louder than the other 99.5% of players.

Perhaps if Bettman didn't fine every management crony $1m everytime they did speak out, we'd here more on-the-record opining. Surely you don't believe that Toronto, Philly, Detroit, etc. are in line with this, do you?

 

[SENSible1*]

Yeah, those, what, 3-5 players out of 750 who have spoken out sure speak louder than the other 99.5% of players.

Perhaps if Bettman didn't fine every management crony $1m everytime they did speak out, we'd here more on-the-record opining. Surely you don't believe that Toronto, Philly, Detroit, etc. are in line with this, do you?

Yes they are "in line with this". Bettman has made it worth their while.

3-5 players out of 750.

What colour is the sky in Jobu world?

Mike Brophy and numerous other respected source have reported that informal votes on some teams have indicated they were willing to drop the "no cap" principle. Are you willing to go on record calling all these sources liars?

The players are fractured and it will get worse as each day passes.

 

[John Flyers Fan]

Who feels today is do or die?

I know this is pretty obvious but who thinks that todays meetings will be the end one way or another? Its already Feb 2nd so if the meetings end today without an announcement of an agreement I think we can pretty much throw in the towel on a season.

I don't think that there needs to be a deal done today, but I do feel that the season could be killed today. If the NHL proposal is strict enough that the NHLPA just walks away the season is toast.

The proposal needs to be something that makes the NHLPA think about it and comeback with a counter proposal.

 

[pacde]

That's fine. But then these fans shouldn't be commenting or opining on the state of the hockey business.

sounds to me like you consider yourself to be quite an authority on the matter - somehow better qualified to make comments than the rest of us. So please enlighten us - let us know your credentials so that when we regurgitate your passages to the path of rightousness we may say we heard if from a master

 

[Morbo]

There has been zero evidence of any fractures on the NHL's side and plenty of evidence of fractures on the PA's side.

False.

I have personally heard Bobby Clarke and Richard Peddie, to name 2, voice objections to Bettman's plans. I would think that without a $1 million fine to worry about, there would be more.

I also believe there are some players who would take a cap, but I don't believe it's a significant number yet. Not enough to get an agreement done for this year.

 

[Jobu]

Yes they are "in line with this". Bettman has made it worth their while.


What colour is the sky in Jobu world?

Mike Brophy and numerous other respected source have reported that informal votes on some teams have indicated they were willing to drop the "no cap" principle. Are you willing to go on record calling all these sources liars?

The players are fractured and it will get worse as each day passes.

Their sources are about as good as Eklund's.

The fact is, if 500 players were beating down Bob's and Trevor's door to play, they would.

 

[Jobu]

sounds to me like you consider yourself to be quite an authority on the matter - somehow better qualified to make comments than the rest of us. So please enlighten us - let us know your credentials so that when we regurgitate your passages to the path of rightousness we may say we heard if from a master

It's simple - Anyone who thinks this is a strike and not a lockout, or anyone who thinks the players are holding out for more money or refusing to play because they want something more rather than wanting to give up less, or anyone who admits to being a hockey fan without much business acumen should just talk hockey and not the business thereof.