Why There Will be a Season

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by Jobu, Feb 15, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    With the NHLPA's continued concessions and a mere $12m separating the owners and players, there is no way in hell that any impasse declaration would hold water. What's more, the groundswell of support for the owners surely must evaporate if after being offered a 24% rollback, a cap, a luxury tax, salary arbitration concessions, etc., they still scrap the season.

    The owners basically have two options: (1) negotitate off of the $52m (perhaps by conceding less of a rollback, etc.) or (2) shut it down and hope for a better deal come the fall, without having any real threat of replacements.

    How can (2) be in any way better than (1)? Some might argue a $52m cap is high, but let's face it, negotiations and CBAs are generally incremental. The owners are scoring a big win here relative to each sides' positions, and even if they have to swallow a higher cap for 4-6 years, if it turns out to be a problem they can surely negotiate it down next time. At least it will be there to tweak.

    Frankly, I don't see how there can't be a deal, and if there's not, it's 100% squarely on the owners' backs. Even the most sympathetic Gary-lover can't expect more than this: an immediate reduction in player costs by 24% PLUS methods to control costs going forward.
     
  2. Greschner4

    Greschner4 Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Messages:
    755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The players have caved and Bettman has won. If he doesn't make a deal now he should be immediately fired ... and there's a good chance he will be.

    If a Gang of 8 holds this up, the others should just start their own league.
     
  3. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    Another problem with not making a deal is that it's going to REALLY galvanize the players. They were shocked when the initial 24% was a non-starter and that delayed the process from moving forward for weeks. If the NHL rejects this offer and a deal can't be made, how does anyone expect the players to continue to offer more and more? They'll shut down the negotiations themselves... and rightly so.

    I don't think it's realistic for the owners to have expected an ultimate deal to be their wet dream on paper.
     
  4. Brewleaguer

    Brewleaguer Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bettman can't turn away from this major development to his side of the story. If he does, you can rest assured his credibility will be destroyed.
     
  5. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    Another telling sign that a deal is imminent is Saskin's attempt at spinning already.... in his release he characterized the NHL's move from linkage as substantial. I think that this is directed at his constituents and the public at large to try to make it seem like both sides are giving and taking big, when in reality most can see that it's the players giving up the meat, or at least making the most significant move(s) to date.
     
  6. Brewleaguer

    Brewleaguer Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    TOTALY AGREE! :clap:
     
  7. Brewleaguer

    Brewleaguer Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2005
    Messages:
    260
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    With out any question they are. I am really curious to see if Bettmans clan makes ANY moves in the next 12 hours.
     
  8. Iceman23

    Iceman23 Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2003
    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If Bettman approves, would the gang of 8 even matter. Would they not simply need a simple majority? The lynchpin is quite obviously getting Bettman on board.
     
  9. marcel snapshot

    marcel snapshot Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    Messages:
    2,177
    Likes Received:
    112
    Trophy Points:
    111
    If no deal gets done, it's 100% on Bettman's hands. The players proffered a 24% cut more than 2 months ago, that Bettman immediately disparaged, but then included as a key component of his subsequent proposals (all of which were repackaged versions of their original proposal).

    So he sat still stubbornly for more than 2 months after the players made a proposal that showed their willingness to engage the issues (whoever heard of a union voluntarily and unilaterally giving back 24% of dollars they were entitled to under existing contracts).

    Then, finally, more than 2 months later, he has Daly put forth a cap proposal without linkage (the players were right to reject linkage, given Bettman's conduct and the manner in which he distorted the findings in the Leavitt report, how could the players ever trust a Bettman-defined notion of "hockey-related revenue).

    One day after Bettman finally coughs up a proposal that's different from his Sept. proposals, the players accept a cap. So it took Bettman 2 months to move following the movement showed by the players in December. And then it only took 1 day for the players to move again when Bettman finally showed some movement.

    A deal will get done here. The clubs get to forego two-thirds of a season's worth of contracts they hate, will still get playoff money, and can avoid the hit to franchise values (which is ultimately what drives all of this) which is sure to occur if they don't play this year.

    Unreal. Whoever heard of a sports league shutting itself down for most of the season for the benefit of its worst markets and dimmest owners.
     
  10. pei fan

    pei fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,536
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  11. chiavsfan

    chiavsfan Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    Messages:
    4,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Radio News Director
    Location:
    Chicagoland, IL
    Home Page:
    I love the line..."with the PA's continued concessions"

    WHAT?? This is the first time they have offered any kind of concession, and a 52 million dollar cap number is moronic.

    HOPEFULLY both sides are smart enough to negotiate off it
     
  12. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
     
  13. Motown Beatdown

    Motown Beatdown Need a slump buster

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2002
    Messages:
    8,572
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Indianapolis
    Home Page:

    Thats if all 30 teams have payroll of 52 million dollar. We know that wont happen right now. Heck 16 teams had payroill less than 40 million dollars. A little common sense goes a long way
     
  14. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    The NHL has offered no concessions off of the current CBA, in fact, they have been going for a totally different document. The players have offered several concessions: rollbacks, salary arbitration, ELS, cap, etc.

    Please.
     
  15. transplant99

    transplant99 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    548
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    119
    Home Page:
    This thread should be titled "PA love-in, come join us"

    A 52 Million dollar cap is a non-starter. Saying they would accept a cap IS a starter.

    There is a deal to be made, I agree, but BOTH sides still need to move to make it happen.

    A soft cap starting at 38 with a tax, moving up to a 48 hard cap makes some sense. All tax money then being distributed to the lowest 16 revenue teams.

    2-way arbitration, no automatic 10% raise to RFA's, drop UFA age to 30, guarenteed contracts, a cap on entry level contracts and bonuses....

    Deal.
     
  16. pei fan

    pei fan Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,536
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    But the basement is also higher in PA offer ,is it not?Also it sets the tone for
    competing offers.It's still a wide margin.
     
  17. DownFromNJ

    DownFromNJ Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 7, 2004
    Messages:
    2,536
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    :handclap:


    Exactly. The owners would hurt their sport long-term if they canceled the season, and when the next CBA rolls along they can negociate a lower cap.
     
  18. transplant99

    transplant99 Registered User

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2002
    Messages:
    548
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    119
    Home Page:

    No kidding!! That was the entire point of the lockout....good thing you grasp that now.

    10 years of bleeding money tends to make one want to change things when it will be their ONLY chance to do so.
     
  19. chiavsfan

    chiavsfan Registered User

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2004
    Messages:
    4,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Radio News Director
    Location:
    Chicagoland, IL
    Home Page:
    Because the CURRENT (actually it's no longer current since it expired) CBA is a complete and utter joke, and both sides know it. The reson we are in this mess...and Transplant beat me to it...is because they are coming up ith a NEW CBA not the OLD CBA.

    Would you like that last line slower?
     
  20. Jobu

    Jobu Registered User

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2003
    Messages:
    3,264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    84
    Location:
    Vancouver
    Home Page:
    And the point is, the players have made monumental concessions whereas the owners have not. Putting linkage on the table and taking it off is like Bart Simpson taking up smoking and then quitting to save the family money.
     
  21. Icey

    Icey Registered User

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2005
    Messages:
    591
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why does it have to be that the players caved and Bettman won? How about the players gave a little and the owners gave a little and the game of hockey won.

    It should never have been about winning and losing and that is the problem. Once everyone realizes that the game of hockey is bigger than ANYONE involved, then a deal will be done.

    And even if Bettman has won in your eyes, he has won this battle could still lose the war if the game does survive this.
     
  22. shnagle

    shnagle Registered User

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2003
    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NYC
    Home Page:
    Great post. Both sides were so focused on winning that neither side ever negotiated until yesterday. The fans had to lose a year of hockey while Bettman and Goodenow had their pissing contest claiming that they could not find a middle ground. Funny how this hybrid proposal,which has been floating around for some time, was staring them in the face the whole time but neither side wanted to blink. Thanks for the game of chicken guys. Now get a deal done.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"