Bettman on the FAN today.

[CarlRacki]

Quite the opposite. Bob Goodenow has shown remarkable resilience, patience and resourcefulness under very difficult circumstances. I applaud his pluck.

He's soon cost his players mhundreds of millions of dollars and that figure will soon swell to well over $1 billion once the season goes kaput. Hooray for Bob.
Unless his goal has been to cost the people he serves money they'll never recover no matter what the next CBA looks like, there's nothing to applaud.

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

I'm sure it hurts Bob to have his idol rip him a new one in public, but the reason he didn't respond is because he knows Miller is right.

If you have a weak hand and you know you are going to lose, settle early, get the best deal possible and live to fight another day.

If Bob had done this two years ago, he could have had the luxury tax system he now is touting. Instead he chose to piss off the owners further and is in the midst of watching his constituents pay the price for his complete misread of the situation.

Goodenow certainly has his work cut out for him. However, it's premature to pronounce him up against the ropes. He's made a career out of superbly and successfully reading the nuances of his opposition and exploiting the weak spots.

Early capitulation would have been foolhardy.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

If the players were to have their way, the league would get flushed down the toilet within a few more years.

explain to me the mechanics of how the league would be flushed down the toilet. what does that mean ? the NHL would cease to exist ?

It should be the players that are making the lion's share of concessions.

And what concession(s) has the NHL made ? not a single.

As for the drop-dead date issue, there's no way Bettman will announce one. I'd be surprised if he formally annouced the season was done at all.

I agree, but for a different reason. See next ...

It keeps the PA guessing.

Actually, why is this so important ? Isnt the goal to get the PA answering and shouldnt Gary be trying to get them "understanding". Anyhow, Bettman wont cancel the season becuase then they owners have to give up all their season ticket revenue's.

Bettman takes away Goodenow's 11th-hour advantage. Very crafty.

If Gary's goal is to stifle negotiations, then of course he is on the right path. However, if he knows Goodenow will negotiate at the 11th hour, why doesnt he set an 11th hour to lure him into negotations ? WOuldnt this be a better strategy if you are sincerely interested in getting the game on the ice at the terms you need ?

Seriously, the NHL needs to dangle some bait and make it comfortable for Bob to get back to business. How else do they expect to get the best possible outcome ? Is the best outcome going to come via impasse, lockout or negotiation ?

I suppose if you dont have faith in your negotiators, you avoid negotiationg. if the PA wont negotiate your terms, you need to find a way to get them to do it. Is Bettman not smart enough to bait the players to the table ?

The behaviour of the owners seems to not be interested in having hockey, but rather to take their pound of flesh out of the PA at the expense of the fans.

DR

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

He's soon cost his players mhundreds of millions of dollars and that figure will soon swell to well over $1 billion once the season goes kaput. Hooray for Bob.
Unless his goal has been to cost the people he serves money they'll never recover no matter what the next CBA looks like, there's nothing to applaud.

It was the league who locked out the players, remember?

 

[CarlRacki]

It was the league who locked out the players, remember?

And it's Goodenow who's failed miserably to judge the circumstances and negotiate the best deal possible under those circumstances for his players.

 

[CarlRacki]

so how come the owners representitive wont admit it ...

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=110435&hubName=
""Let's be clear on where the responsibility lies for where we find ourselves today: it lies exclusively at the feet of union leadership who, despite numerous and repeated approaches by the league over many years, utterly ignored - and, in some cases, knowingly exacerbated - the financial distress the league was experiencing," Bill Daly, the NHL's executive vice-president and chief legal officer, told The Canadian Press via e-mail from New York"

nope, doesnt seem the owners believe this has anything to do with them at all.

dr

Wow, talk about taking a quote out of context. That quote speaks to the lockout situation and the brink of a cancelled season, not the financial status of the league and its teams.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Wow, talk about taking a quote out of context. That quote speaks to the lockout situation and the brink of a cancelled season, not the financial status of the league and its teams.

you need to read the entire article.

here is more text
http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=110435&hubName=

" ...in some cases, knowingly exacerbated - the financial distress the league was experiencing," Bill Daly, the NHL's executive vice-president and chief legal officer, told The Canadian Press via e-mail from New York."

he is not talking about the lockout situation, he is talking about how the league got into the financial situation. or why else would Daly follow up the "responsibilty" quote with a quip on "exacerbating the finacial distress the league was experiancing" ..

those two comments are not logical in the same breath if he is talking about the season being on the brink of cancellation.

dr

 

[Bicycle Repairman]

And it's Goodenow who's failed miserably to judge the circumstances and negotiate the best deal possible under those circumstances for his players.

It was the league who wanted to wiggle out of a set-term contract THEY originally signed off on.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

The owners should be ecstatic at how badly Bettman is outmanouvering Goodenow. This whole negotiation has been a complete whitewash for Gary over Bob.

fair enough, but now is time for Gary to close the deal..... he needs to continue his manipulation and by letting the season slip away he will not have maximized his position.

saving the season AND getting his deal is his best result. he needs to get the players to the table to achieve this.

how do you propose he does this without some sugar on table ?

hmm ?

dr

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

The NHL proposal offered over $150M more than their previous offer to the players. I don't think that's nothing...

you arent up to form tonight sir, i expect better for some reason.

would this then transfer if the players offered 150m in their next proposal, but no change to anything else ?

i dont think you would accept that as a concession either.

the owners havent shown any willingness to find a compromise, EVEN if they dont change their linkage stance.

dr

 

[The Maltais Falcon]

Most people on the owners' side, and I'd wager this includes Iconoclast, wholeheartedly agree that the state the league is in is the result of the owners' throwing cash at the players and allowing their personal competetiveness cloud their business judgment.

so how come the owners representitive wont admit it ...

"Let's be clear on where the responsibility for where we find ourselves today: it lies exclusively at the feet of union leadership who, despite numerous and repeated approaches by the league over many years, utterly ignored - and, in some cases, knowingly exacerbated - the financial distress the league was experiencing," Bill Daly, the NHL's executive vice-president and chief legal officer, told The Canadian Press via e-mail from New York"

nope, doesnt seem the owners believe this has anything to do with them at all.

I was speaking mainly about the position fans are taking. Of course, the owners and players are going to view their positions through tinted lenses ... but what the heck, I'll play along ...

How do you explain this quote from Flyers owner Ed Snider?

"They're blaming us for getting where we are and we're assuming full responsibility for that. But they're not agreeing with our cure for it."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=108345

So much for "doesnt seem the owners believe this has anything to do with them at all."

explain to me the mechanics of how the league would be flushed down the toilet. what does that mean ? the NHL would cease to exist ?

If the system the players want to hold on to were to stay in place, the league would eventually go bankrupt - or at least enough teams would go bankrupt to send it back to the good ol' days of six to twelve teams. I'm sure a number of fans would like that, but most wouldn't.

And what concession(s) has the NHL made ? not a single.

Just off the top of my head, they offered to lower the UFA age to 30 and they offered to increase the minimum salary to $300,000. So much for "not a single" concession"(s)", eh? Try to use facts and not hyperbole to make your arguments. It makes it a little more laborious to research and argue, but ultimately it makes your argument more effective.

Anyhow, Bettman wont cancel the season becuase then they owners have to give up all their season ticket revenue's.

They'll have to give them up or credit them for the next year hockey is played. It's not like owners can just pocket the money people paid this year then expect fans to pay in full again when the league resumes play.

If Gary's goal is to stifle negotiations, then of course he is on the right path.

His goal isn't to stifle negotiations, it's to get the system he wants. "Stifling" negotiations is a means to an end, not the end.

However, if he knows Goodenow will negotiate at the 11th hour, why doesnt he set an 11th hour to lure him into negotations ? WOuldnt this be a better strategy if you are sincerely interested in getting the game on the ice at the terms you need ?

Not really. You want the resolve of the person on the other side of the table to be as weak as possible. If Goodenow has a reputation for being a slick negotiator while the clock is ticking towards zero, then you don't announce to the world when the zero hour is and take away one of his strengths. You want him to come crawling to you desperate to negotiate. Remember that the "terms you need" part is more important than the "getting the game on the ice" part to the owners right now.

Giving a deadline also gives the players something to rally around should it pass with no deal. It gives them a second wind with respect to "sticking together" and all that stuff. No date means you keep them uncertain and on edge and more likely to cave or at least put pressure on union leadership to try to get the league to the table.

Seriously, the NHL needs to dangle some bait and make it comfortable for Bob to get back to business. How else do they expect to get the best possible outcome ?

They expect to get the best possible outcome by making Goodenow uncomfortable, not comfortable.

Is Bettman not smart enough to bait the players to the table ?

Sure he is. For the umpteenth time, he's going to bait them to the table by stalling because he knows the players need the NHL more than the owners do. It sucks, I hate it and most everybody else does too, but the bottom line is it will be an effective way to get the system he wants. That's all that really matters to him and the majority of the owners.

 

[SuperUnknown]

you arent up to form tonight sir, i expect better for some reason.

would this then transfer if the players offered 150m in their next proposal, but no change to anything else ?

i dont think you would accept that as a concession either.

the owners havent shown any willingness to find a compromise, EVEN if they dont change their linkage stance.

dr

Well that's what you do when you deal, you take the compromises the other has made and add a compromise of yours (to your position). You don't give your best proposal if you think that you'll still have to compromise some more.

I think the owners proposal was decent. They did take the players concession (24% rollback) and they made a compromise of their own, raise the amount of money going to player.

Now I think it's up to the players to come up with a proposal that will reduce salaries on the longterm. They can even take out the rollback if they want. If the rollback offer was their best one, they are clearly lunatics because it was certain they'd have to compromise some more.

The owners stance is that their proposal is within 2% of the player's proposal and they're willing to negociate something in the middle. Obviously, since the players don't believe their offer will keep salaries in that range, they can't agree to negociate something that would give them a deal within that 2%. Why should this be the NHL problem if the players aren't willing to compromise in that "window"? The NHL has said clearly they're willing to negociate right there.

In other words, so far the NHL's stance is that "cost certainty" is not negociable, everything else is. The NHLPA has said that they won't agree to cost certainty or to a stiff luxury tax. The other subjects are almost meaningless. I'm sure the NHLPA could win most other subjects if they were to agree to cost certainty. They won't though. As for the NHL, I doubt they could get wins on other subjects (like UFA to 34, no arbitration, etc) even if they were to go the stiff luxury tax road. And if you look at it that way, the NHL's resolve and commitment so far seems to be greater than the NHLPA. If you know that sooner or later you will be the one dropping, why not salvage the most you can while making the first significant compromise?

P.S.: and I still believe that putting over $150M more in salaries on the table for the 2nd proposal, while saying that "they're willing to negociate the amount going to players in a cost certainty situation" in the press conference, is a decent compromise, especially since the other negociation issues are minor compared to the big "cost certainty" one.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

I was speaking mainly about the position fans are taking. Of course, the owners and players are going to view their positions through tinted lenses ... .

i respect your opinion ...

but what the heck, I'll play along ...

but not your sarcasm ..

How do you explain this quote from Flyers owner Ed Snider?

"They're blaming us for getting where we are and we're assuming full responsibility for that. But they're not agreeing with our cure for it."

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=108345

So much for "doesnt seem the owners believe this has anything to do with them at all."

...

Ok, Snider is one owner. Who do you think represents the wider opionion of the ownership group, a hawk owner like ES or a paid spokesman ?

If the system the players want to hold on to were to stay in place, the league would eventually go bankrupt - or at least enough teams would go bankrupt to send it back to the good ol' days of six to twelve teams. I'm sure a number of fans would like that, but most wouldn't. ...

its just not as simple as flicking the switch. can you answer how mechancially it works. bleedgreen said it well. ... link here
http://www.hfboards.com/showpost.php?p=2294607&postcount=84

Just off the top of my head, they offered to lower the UFA age to 30 and they offered to increase the minimum salary to $300,000. So much for "not a single" concession"(s)", eh? Try to use facts and not hyperbole to make your arguments. It makes it a little more laborious to research and argue, but ultimately it makes your argument more effective....

look, i know what you are getting at. but this does not concede anything in any of the "major" issues. its no different then me arguing that the players have conceded by moving on the QO and arbitration issues.

They'll have to give them up or credit them for the next year hockey is played. It's not like owners can just pocket the money people paid this year then expect fans to pay in full again when the league resumes play.....

yes, this was my point. by not cancelling the season, they can continue to keep that money in the bank and in the working cash they need for their bare bones expenses.

His goal isn't to stifle negotiations, it's to get the system he wants. "Stifling" negotiations is a means to an end, not the end. .....

this is only a good method if you arent interested in expediting a solution.

Remember that the "terms you need" part is more important than the "getting the game on the ice" part to the owners right now. .....

yes, this point is obvious. however, dont you believe the NHL has ANY obligation to its paying fans to give them a product ? they should be DOING both with just as much innovation, urgency and effort.

Giving a deadline also gives the players something to rally around should it pass with no deal. It gives them a second wind with respect to "sticking together" and all that stuff. No date means you keep them uncertain and on edge and more likely to cave or at least put pressure on union leadership to try to get the league to the table......

i dont agree. a date could work in other ways to get the players to resolve the issue.

They expect to get the best possible outcome by making Goodenow uncomfortable, not comfortable. ......

again, i disagree. its a known fact the owners will get linkage come hell or high water. they wont get it until the players are at the table, so if means making BG comformtable to get them there, so be it.

Sure he is. For the umpteenth time, he's going to bait them to the table by stalling because he knows the players need the NHL more than the owners do. It sucks, I hate it and most everybody else does too, but the bottom line is it will be an effective way to get the system he wants. That's all that really matters to him and the majority of the owners.

yup and for that i hold them accountable. they are holding you and me hostage to win this.

dr

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Here is a more accurate summary of Gary Bettman's interview...
http://www.letsgokings.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=83307

Unlike the other poster, this one does not include the poster's opinions. Thanks to JP from www.letsgokings.com for his summary.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Here is a more accurate summary of Gary Bettman's interview...
http://www.letsgokings.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=83307

Unlike the other poster, this one does not include the poster's opinions. Thanks to JP from www.letsgokings.com for his summary.

Well, that delivers a much different message, doesn't it? The most telling thing was the last line.

"Hosts: We'll say this again we have asked for the other side a million times, they will not talk to us... We have tried a thousand times to get Goodenow to the phone, he wont come to the phone."

Who's being beligerent and not willing to discuss matters?

 

[SENSible1*]

fair enough, but now is time for Gary to close the deal..... he needs to continue his manipulation and by letting the season slip away he will not have maximized his position.

saving the season AND getting his deal is his best result. he needs to get the players to the table to achieve this.

dr

Sadly, Bettman's position is maximized by cancelling the season. Read Modano's comments again for clarification.

Until the owners show their resolve by axing the season, there will be a significant portion of the players and PA leadership that believes the will cave before cancelling the season. Once the owners have established that they won't come back without a cap, the players will cave.

 

[chiavsfan]

Which Modano comments? The ones he actually said? Or his so called "retraction" BS comments

 

[SENSible1*]

Which Modano comments? The ones he actually said? Or his so called "retraction" BS comments

Both actually.

He never recanted the part where he said that the players would be chomping at the bit next fall wondering if it was worth it to lose another season.

 

[nyr7andcounting]

Well, that delivers a much different message, doesn't it? The most telling thing was the last line.

"Hosts: We'll say this again we have asked for the other side a million times, they will not talk to us... We have tried a thousand times to get Goodenow to the phone, he wont come to the phone."

Who's being beligerent and not willing to discuss matters?

Actually both sides are. The hosts of the show really got on Bettman because he was being overly evasive with his answers, and thoughout the interview one of the host was upset with Bettman and it was clear Bettman was upset with him.

Thus, after the interview the host was pretty much saying 'I know Bettman won't give us that much info and tried to get around the questions, but the other side would do the same thing if they were on the phone.'

 

[nyr7andcounting]

If you don't expect him to tell you the date, why would you expect a "general time frame"? What's the difference? And, more importantly, what difference would it make? Frankly, only a developmentally challenged chimp (and I'm not placing you in that category) lacks the marbles to know the season is just about done.
Also, he didn't ignore the question. He gave an answer. The fact you found the answer unsatisfying doesn't mean he did not give one.
Lastly, let's not start debating who cares about the fans. I think there's plenty of evidence to indicate neither side cares for the fans.

The difference is giving a general time frame would atleast be acknowledging that the season is coming to a close the the two sides only have a week or so to get a deal done that would result in a meaningful season. Bettman wouldn't do this and he actually went so far as to say that the league hasn't even thought about at what point a meaningful season wouldn't be possible. I guess Bettman is to busy with all the negotiations that are going on that he hasn't had time to think about anything else. Come on.

"Frankly, only a developmentally challenged chimp (and I'm not placing you in that category) lacks the marbles to know the season is just about done."

Well that's my point...With what Bettman said on air yesterday he would certainly be one of these chimps. He claimed he didn't know the season was about done and hasn't even thought about it.

 

[NYIsles1*]

Bettman will give WFAN the courtsey of appearing to talk about some things and discuss his viewpoint but he is not going on a program that treats hockey like dirt on their shoes to give them exclusive information.

Neither Russo or Francesa do not know enough about today's NHL to bring much constructive to a discussion in the first place and neither could be bothered doing any homework when they have plenty of other sports they prefer to discuss.

 

[AM]

only slightly different

Here is a more accurate summary of Gary Bettman's interview...
http://www.letsgokings.com/bbs/showthread.php?t=83307

Unlike the other poster, this one does not include the poster's opinions. Thanks to JP from www.letsgokings.com for his summary.

Just like all the union posters in this thread who say the owners never made an offer in good faith!

Money wise it was within 2%!!

eg====> minimum team salary!

Thats a huge thing.