Bettman Pulling out ANYTHING to make Union look bad.....

[FLYLine27*]

???

 

[me2]

Shouldn't the Commissioner have some control over the owners' spending habits?

Only if he wants to get hit with law suits from the NHLPA.

 

[txpd]

flyline posts this gem...."Alright notice he was ASKED..right? Was he suppose to lie and say "Yes he is doing a VERY good job and the players are in FULL support" BUT YET Bettman states after hearing those comment"

maybe you are 14 years old, but even if you are I am sure you have heard the often asked question, "do I look fat in this?". yes, i noticed that you were asked. I also know that being asked a question does not mean answering truthfully, "Yes, actually. It makes your big a$$ look bigger.", it doesn't mean that the question needs to even be answered.

all you are doing is copping out for the players and their stupidity.

 

[thinkwild]

Rhetoric comes out of both sides. You are not looking at the big picture of what a level playing field really is. You can have many things go right in a small market and still miss the playoffs. You can on occasion have the stars align just right and have a couple of playoff runs at best. Over time, clubs with less resources run out of luck and it can put them in a five year rut. A salary cap will not cure the entire game, that seems to be beyond Bettman's reach. I hope he stays long enough to bring some sense to the financial side.

A 5 year rut like the Rangers? The big picture is that we already have competitive parity that rivals any of the major leagues. Teams take a while to build so of course they arent equal each year, but they have equal opportunity to become great. Like America. Everyone isnt equal, but has equal opportunity to become great. The big picture is that the teams that become the Colorado and Detroit of the next decade will be different. If Colorado loses Forsberg, Sakic and Blake, and are just another team like Edmonton, they wont be able to spend like they used. Not with the same effect anyway,. Because you cant buy a cup. Thats the big picture.

Calgary wasnt in a rut because they couldnt spend. They were in a rut because they couldnt draft and develop. It is hard. Not every team can do it at the same time. Its not a sign the system is unfair. Hampering great teams to "fix" this would be unfair.

Calgary beat Detroit. We dont need financial parity. The last decades great teams managed to stay together. Deroit and Colorado are only large markets in hockey - because they developed a team to have success.

 

[SPARTAKUS*]

I think it's about time that the pro NHLPA and you know who you are realize one thing. It doesn't matter who's falt it is, the bottom line is that the owners want a new economic system in place that will ensure them that each team has a chance to make the playoffs and make a profit what's wrong with that??? The players will still make millions of dollars. I don't think the NHL will use replacement players I would be very suprise if they do. Instead they'll wait as long as it takes for the NHLPA to come around and they will even if it takes 2 or 3 years. The NHL as we know it is dead and that's not bad thing and I am positive that in the long haul the NHL will be a better and stronger league.

 

[thinkwild]

The players are offering changes that will help each team have an equal opportunity to developa team that can make the playoffs and an opportunity for each team to make long term profits.

Garys analogy was that its like he had a car crash, and the players just want to change the tires. I think a better analogy, is that he had a car crash driving drunk at 60km/hr, and is proposing a governor on the car that caps his speed at 100km/hr. Saying, its not about blame, its not important why I crashed the car, the important thing is the car is crashed and I need a new one. Just prevent speeding while i drive drunk

But Gary, you crashed at 60km/hr.
Never mind the blame game, its irrelevant, we all know accidents are caused by speeding, just put a speed cap on the car.

 

[thinkwild]

Or maybe cap how expensive a car they can drive. If we didnt let Heatley drive a ferrari, but made him drive a clunker, the accident wouldnt of happened. So cap how much people can spend on their cars. Good analogy Gary.

 

[codswallop]

Apparently, the process of "negotiations" is getting lost in these parts.

Cliches, rhetoric, ambivalent statements, etc.; this is par for the course. Especially when the media is involved in the process. Why would you take these statements at face value? They could be completely true, or they could be completely false, or they could lie anywhere in between. How in the hell are we to know the true intentions behind them?

We certainly don't know all of the relevant info in this debate (to believe that we do is akin to believing in Santa Claus). We know bits and pieces, that's about it. I can't help but think of a snake-oil salesman at this point (both sides fit the description). Negotiations on this level are not the prettiest or most honest picture.

But as usual, a stance that isn't distinctly on one side or the other won't draw much interest (or ire, depending on certain moods). Certainly hasn't recently at least. Please continue with your regularly scheduled programming.

 

[gary69]

Quote Saskin:
When asked in a television interview if he thought commissioner Gary Bettman was the right man to run the NHL, Ted Saskin said: ''Not from what I've seen so far.''

Saskin was also asked if the players respected Bettman, to which he responded ''Certainly not now.''

Quote Bettman:
''We're finally getting to the stage where the union is resorting to personal attacks, a very common practice in collective bargaining when a union isn't getting what it wants,'' said Bettman. ''It sounds to me like the union's rhetoric is getting desperate. If that brings us closer to a deal then it will be constructive. I don't mind being the whipping boy as long as we get to the right result.''

It usually doesn't do any good in any negotiations if one party gets extremely pissed at on the other especially on the personal level, whatever is being negotiated or regardless of who's being right or who's being more reasonable.

In this regard Bettman's comments are really unfortunate, I would have thought him to understand better, that if the NHL eventually hopes to resume playing with these players, there has to be at least somewhat working relationship, however guarded. Maybe stress was getting better of Bettman, but he should have handled this one more astutely in public.

Even if Bettman doesn't personally care, (he is probably gone pretty soon after this confrontation for "better and bigger" things, no matter what the outcome), he should have considered the owners' relationship with players when all is said and done.

Then we would really see a league where players are nothing but paid mercenaries, who could care less of anything but their paychecks, and wouldn't mind sabotaging everything for their own benefit.

 

[txpd]

A 5 year rut like the Rangers? The big picture is that we already have competitive parity that rivals any of the major leagues. Teams take a while to build so of course they arent equal each year, but they have equal opportunity to become great. Like America. Everyone isnt equal, but has equal opportunity to become great. The big picture is that the teams that become the Colorado and Detroit of the next decade will be different. If Colorado loses Forsberg, Sakic and Blake, and are just another team like Edmonton, they wont be able to spend like they used. Not with the same effect anyway,. Because you cant buy a cup. Thats the big picture.

Calgary wasnt in a rut because they couldnt spend. They were in a rut because they couldnt draft and develop. It is hard. Not every team can do it at the same time. Its not a sign the system is unfair. Hampering great teams to "fix" this would be unfair.

Calgary beat Detroit. We dont need financial parity. The last decades great teams managed to stay together. Deroit and Colorado are only large markets in hockey - because they developed a team to have success.

Boy, I think you miss the big money boat all together. in the last 10 seasons, 9 of the 10 cups were won by teams in the leagues top 10 in payroll. the 10th team, Tampa Bay is only a signed contract with Martin St Louis(04 scoring champ and mvp) from being a $50m + payroll and top 10 payroll team themselves

 

[txpd]

Apparently, the process of "negotiations" is getting lost in these parts.

Cliches, rhetoric, ambivalent statements, etc.; this is par for the course. Especially when the media is involved in the process. Why would you take these statements at face value? They could be completely true, or they could be completely false, or they could lie anywhere in between. How in the hell are we to know the true intentions behind them?

We certainly don't know all of the relevant info in this debate (to believe that we do is akin to believing in Santa Claus). We know bits and pieces, that's about it. I can't help but think of a snake-oil salesman at this point (both sides fit the description). Negotiations on this level are not the prettiest or most honest picture.

But as usual, a stance that isn't distinctly on one side or the other won't draw much interest (or ire, depending on certain moods). Certainly hasn't recently at least. Please continue with your regularly scheduled programming.

I'll ask this again. as long as the nhl insists on a salary cap and the nhlpa insists on NO salary cap, what is there to negotiate??? where is there a middle ground between salary cap and no cap ever?

 

[Poignant Discussion*]

We have ourselves a winner. Thinkwild is right on every point he/she makes.
Christ 15 years ago it was the Pens and the Blackhawks spending the money and the Leafs and the Flyers were rebuilding. Now its the Flyers and the Leafs.

When you are losing games, you will not have players want to play on your team or have the extra money to sign these players. When you are a winner everyone wants to play for you and you make extra money in the playoffs to spend on those players.

How can anyone support Bettman when he has ruined the game of hockey or the owners who have put egos in front of good business sense.

The owners allowed Mcnall to buy the LA Kings when the man was just a crook who pretended to be a millionaire. They also allowed him to boost the Gretzky's salary to other sports levels when the NHL did not come close to bringing in the profits of other leagues. Instead of taking a step back and saying whoa we can't do this, we don't bring in enough money. They start spending crazy too

To ease the money troubles they start giving teams to any Tom, Dick or Harry that wants to spend the 50-100 million expansion fee. No matter if the location is a hockey location or not. Because they needed to make some money, because they started giving players too much money. Eventually expansion dried up, but the owners continued to spend and the NHL was getting in worse and worse shape.

The expansion teams for the most part were ill advised and started to lose money as well. Ownership changes happened regularly and of course the owners never looked at who the new owners were. No normal league would allow half the people trying to buy teams into the NHL.

Yes 2 teams went Bankurupt, both had thiefs as owners (which of course was approved by Bettman and the owners)

You DO NOT have a right to buy a team and demand to make money. Lets say I buy a small coffee shop and open it up beside a Tim Hortons. Will I make money? Or was I a stupid moron for opening it up in an obviously bad location?

Maybe I will just lock out my employee's until they will take a 50% pay cut so I can last a few more months. Who cares if the few customers I have are hurt, I'm doing this for them!!!

Wait maybe those customers will end up going to Timmys and I am totally screwed. When you take a chance and put teams into football markets, and when the market has very little hockey history you will NOT do well EVER. Now to take hockey from the few fans these locations have got is just stupid.

Did the owners TRY 3 or 4 years ago to work this out with the players? Nah they wanted to force something down their throats with the penalty of not being paid for a year or 2 as the punishment.


"Saskin said Bettman has put forth a proposal to get rid of guaranteed contracts"

How much more dishonesty can we handle? First it was how much the NHL has lost and NOW he is trying to take away guaranteed contracts after DENYING he had any intention to do so in a press conference 2 months ago.


The owners played a smart game knowing ignorant fans would take their side because none of them made anywhere close to what the players make. Eventually these same ignorant fans will open up their eyes and see that the owners are lying to them about everything. From "if we don's get cost certainy the Canadian teams will move" (considering the only team that came close to losing money last year in Canada was the Senators and thats because of their old owner)

Gary Bettman blew it by selling out to the USA and toying with the game to make it more appealing the the Americans.

Gary Bettman blew it by getting desperate and expanding way to fast and way to big.

The owners blew it by rubberstamping any new ownership groups and by spending way out of their means.


Why should the players bend over backward when it is NOT their faults at all? Especially when the owners refuse to even have talks with them.



The owners with Gary Bettmans help turned the NHL into the NASL. The NASL died, the NHL is soon to follow unless you replace the head figure with someone that has a clue

 

[PecaFan]

It usually doesn't do any good in any negotiations if one party gets extremely pissed at on the other especially on the personal level, whatever is being negotiated or regardless of who's being right or who's being more reasonable.

In this regard Bettman's comments are really unfortunate, I would have thought him to understand better, that if the NHL eventually hopes to resume playing with these players, there has to be at least somewhat working relationship, however guarded. Maybe stress was getting better of Bettman, but he should have handled this one more astutely in public.

Huh? Bettman's comments? There's nothing wrong with his comments at all. The other guy throws insults around, Gary didn't return them, he just said that's fine, they can say anything they want as long as we get a deal.

*That's* professionalism. Saskin should learn from him.

There's only one side here that's making things personal, and letting it get in the way of making a deal. And it ain't Bettman.

 

[PecaFan]

Boy, I think you miss the big money boat all together. in the last 10 seasons, 9 of the 10 cups were won by teams in the leagues top 10 in payroll. the 10th team, Tampa Bay is only a signed contract with Martin St Louis(04 scoring champ and mvp) from being a $50m + payroll and top 10 payroll team themselves

Yup, and of course before that, it was the Rangers, making it 10 of 11. And I don't know where the Penguins stood salary wise before that, wouldn't surprise me if they were also quite high.

I love it when PA types throw out the Tampa Bay model as a route to success for small market teams to follow. All they have to do is miss the playoffs for nine out of ten years, then pick up the league's best player and scoring champion for free, and pay him peanuts, then win the Cup in their first shot, before any of their players come up for their huge salary jumps.

Gee, I don't know why every team isn't rushing to follow that model.

 

[codswallop]

I'll ask this again. as long as the nhl insists on a salary cap and the nhlpa insists on NO salary cap, what is there to negotiate??? where is there a middle ground between salary cap and no cap ever?

At this point, we only know what each side has said via the media.

Are they being truthful, or are they not? We don't have any real way to know. That's pretty much my whole point from before.

Unless someone has some inside information, we can't really know what either side really wants. Given the public information available, we can hazard a guess as bystanders. But even if someone here has an expertise on the related subjects, they cannot hazard more than a guess. We simply don't know enough; that's as easily as I can put it.

I've seen the inside of a labor dispute. Not as a participant, but as an intermediary so to speak. There's more to the process than a yes or no answer on one subject, and that's putting it fairly simpistic.

I can't give you a "real" answer. As a fan, I'd love more than anything to be able to answer that question and hopefully we'd have an NHL season. But in a realistic vein, I cannot.

I'm pretty sure that I didn't provide an answer that will satisfy you. But unfortunately that's the way it happens many times.

 

[struckmatch]

I'm just sick of this CBA crap. Bettman and Goodenow, the owners and the players can go straight to hell.

Give me NHL hockey, F*CK all this CBA BS.

 

[BCCHL inactive]

yes because ALL of canadian media that i can see here in the States is PRO-OWNER...so they are feeding you all and pro-ownership details...favoring the owners...Rightfully so I GUESS because of the small salary teams up there would favor this HARD CAP..but i guess they dont think you can make a decision for yourself...so they pretty much do it for you. This is way the majority of canada is pro owners. Go check out TSN, or Sportsnet Both are HIGHLY pro-ownership. Its amussing really.

Im not sure how news is run up there but here in the States its unbiased.

US media unbiased. Good lord, now I've heard it all. :lol

Seriously, Canadian media in general is much more credible when talking about hockey...you know, that sport that 9/10 average Americans couldn't care less about. At least we have a national TV deal up here.

I'm not saying that some US media don't have hockey people working for them, but the average hockey fan would be smart to take TSN a lot more seriously than ESPN when it comes to hockey.

The average Canadian hockey fan realizes that without an extreme change to the financial structure of the NHL (meaning much less league revenue going to player salaries), at least 3 of the 6 Canadian teams will be either moving or folding completely. Same can be said for some US-based teams as well.

And what about Bettmans hard cap..you dont find that laughable at best? I find both offers laughable BUT that has to be the starting ground...you work from there...but Bettman will not move. Someone needs to give him a swift kick in the rear.

Same can be said for Goodenow and Saskin. The NHLPA has made it very clear that they won't listen to anything that in their opinion amounts to a salary cap.

What makes it right for the NHLPA to refuse to negotiate whatever they think is a salary cap, while it is wrong for the NHL to demand a salary cap?

 

[Taranis_24]

Bettman has made his share of mistakes. But those bashing him here, including the NHLPA I believe are giving him way to much power. His job is to represent the owners. Why doesn't the NHLPA comment directly on the owners because by vote this is their demand not Bettman's? The owners directed Bettman to get a cap or a deal based on revenues and expenses. That his what he doing following the mandate given to him by the owners.

 

[Pepper]

WHAT AN IDIOT!! Where are the "PERSONAL ATTACKS" Does ANYBODY see them?? Because i sure dont..just ANOTHER attempt by Bettman to TRY To make the Union look bad. This guy is a joke.



EDit- Oops forgot to give the link http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=106594&hubName=nhl

lmao, does anyone see the irony of this post? Author calling Bettman an idiot for thinking Saskin attacked him personally.

Just goes to show the desperate attempts & lack of logic of pro-PA yahoos of this board.

Sad really.

 

[Pepper]

Hate to tell you, but the players are hardly looking bad. Bettman has resorted to lying to the public such as saying that Oilers and Flames fans are not able to expect their teams to make the playoffs when the Flames were a no-goal away from winning it.

Hate to break this to you but you pro-PA yahoos are a small minority. Wake up dude, huge majority of fans support league & Bettman in this issue.

 

[chara]

Personal attacks aren't going to solve this thing.

If Ted Saskin wants to be constructive, he should be drawing up a proposal.

 

[SwisshockeyAcademy]

A 5 year rut like the Rangers? The big picture is that we already have competitive parity that rivals any of the major leagues. Teams take a while to build so of course they arent equal each year, but they have equal opportunity to become great. Like America. Everyone isnt equal, but has equal opportunity to become great. The big picture is that the teams that become the Colorado and Detroit of the next decade will be different. If Colorado loses Forsberg, Sakic and Blake, and are just another team like Edmonton, they wont be able to spend like they used. Not with the same effect anyway,. Because you cant buy a cup. Thats the big picture.

Calgary wasnt in a rut because they couldnt spend. They were in a rut because they couldnt draft and develop. It is hard. Not every team can do it at the same time. Its not a sign the system is unfair. Hampering great teams to "fix" this would be unfair.

Calgary beat Detroit. We dont need financial parity. The last decades great teams managed to stay together. Deroit and Colorado are only large markets in hockey - because they developed a team to have success.

That is exactly what i expected, a Rangers led post. I'm not saying you will win by spending money. You can have it and make error after error in every department. I am saying that without money you are hard pressed to be consistently competitive. The Flames would probably not missed the playoffs for as long as they did if they were able to spend a few more free agent dollars to be somewhat competitive. A small market team that mishandles the draft and development is in for a really rough ride. The Daniel Tkachuks are too much to overcome.
" We don't need financial parity", you say.That is ridiculous, yes we do -there has to be a way to protect owners from themselves. That is what we are doing. I am no great fan of ownership i am a fan of the overall health of the game and we need as level a playing field as we can get to get us moving in the right direction.

 

[Mothra]

"Yes, actually. It makes your big a$$ look bigger.",

Personally...I like a big a$$

 

[FLYLine27*]

Personal attacks aren't going to solve this thing.

If Ted Saskin wants to be constructive, he should be drawing up a proposal.

Cha CHING! Your wish was granted.

 

[YellHockey*]

That is exactly what i expected, a Rangers led post. I'm not saying you will win by spending money. You can have it and make error after error in every department. I am saying that without money you are hard pressed to be consistently competitive.

Fortunately in the NHL it is proven that you become good and then, because you are good, you have money.

The Flames would probably not missed the playoffs for as long as they did if they were able to spend a few more free agent dollars to be somewhat competitive.

Why do you think that model will work for the Flames when it didn't work for the Rangers or Capitals?

A small market team that mishandles the draft and development is in for a really rough ride. The Daniel Tkachuks are too much to overcome.

Any team that mishandles the draft and development is in for a rough ride.

" We don't need financial parity", you say.That is ridiculous, yes we do -there has to be a way to protect owners from themselves. That is what we are doing. I am no great fan of ownership i am a fan of the overall health of the game and we need as level a playing field as we can get to get us moving in the right direction.

Fortunately, in the recent NHL, good teams had money. Regardless of whether the team was in the swamps of Jersey, Texas or a previously failed NHL market like Denver, if the team was really good then it brought in lots of money.

Playoff revenues and an unrestricted free agent age of 31 level the playing field pretty darn well.