Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by Brain Hemorrhage, Mar 7, 2005.
Very good article...
Hmmm...TWO GROUPS, yet the author only chooses to go after Bettman.
Two sides to every story, but the bottom line is both of these guys have ruined the NHL...Bob and Gary both should be fired!
Well, there's some irony for you.
if that ain't the pot callin the kettle black, well...
Yup, that's what I just said.
he does get it right though
the NHL payroll is out of step with the NHL income.
If you take away his hate on for Bettman, this article could double as Gary's resume.
All, in all on the money side, Bettman has done a fantastic job.
The only problem now is that he has to make all the teams competative, so he has to crush the high flying union, to take the next growth step.
Here's a clue.
Hockey ended as we knew it when the players costs went up 6 TIMES in the last 10-12 years.
Can anyone here name a business that experienced any kind of similar cost increases for labor and it stayed the same?
But its all this guys fault?
Prior to this period, player costs were illegally held in check by a criminal conspiracy.
Ah, the good old days.
And your point is...?
I think he means that because the PA leadership was crooked in the past and ultimately short changed the players, it then makes it ok that the players have subsequently taken more than their fair share out the league since then.
THAT in turn means that he hopes that the league extracts their pound of flesh on the union this time so that the pendelum can swing back to the other extreme which will result in the same kind of labour unrest we have been witnessing over the last 5 months.
This isn't about a fair deal, it's about continuing this game of eye for an eye....as demonstrated by the rehashing of the same arguments over and over, irregardless of what is proven one way or another....
Am I close?
As much as I despise Gary Bettman and Goodenow isn't far behind in my eyes, the fact of the matter is that neither Bettman nor Goodenow's legacy will be known for years.
If by chance these two clowns can figure a way out to get a CBA signed and re-invent the league, perhaps in 10 years it will be a better league than it is today. So perhaps both of their legacies will be the fact that they had to sacrifice something to have everyone win in the end. So their legacy will not be determined by the deal and who gave what up or who caved or who didn't, but rather what they do with the deal and how they will help the game of Hockey AFTER the deal was struck.
Just my opinion of course, but I am sure you will tell me how wrong I am.
Just like you, TWO GROUPS , yet you choose to go after Goodenow
then maybe you can explain what is it you meant by this quote
Well I would think obviously in the good ol days, the players salaries were artificially, even criminally supressed, far below their fair market value. Once the oppression and criminal conspiracy was removed, of course salaries drastically rised to the fair equilibrium level. Of course, to a clever spin artist, that would be radical growth far surpassing the rise in revenues. Well duh! That was expected.
The claim often made is that since the last cba, salaries tripled while revenues quadrupled.. Im not sure where the 10-12 multiple is coming from.
Re-invent seems the right word. The strategy. Early in the lockout, someone was suggesting that after a year and a half, the players would have to come back with an eye as to how to save the league, rather than just their jobs. With the league needing a makeover, it would seem Bettmans strategy has been to get the players to that point. He wants to break it, and then work together to fix it. He always said, once the union accepts our framework, we can easily work together to make a deal.
I dunno, seems to me the players have given in. They have conceeded on everything. If Bettman cant make a deal now, he really is being obstinate to the extreme. He has Goodenow starting summer negotiations without the catch phrase we will never accept a cap, not to mention the myriad concessions already tabled. Like Bettman said he always wanted.
These two clowns did once, at least in my minority opinion, collaborate to construct a brilliant model in its concept and compromise. The philisophy was sound, regardless of the perceived weakness due to losses claimed to be out of their control and cba related. I think there's a good chance they can do it again.
First of all, it still baffles me that any one is still taking sides here......
Second, that article said EVERYTHING I have been trying to say about Bettman, but everyone I know keeps thinking I am pro-player and hate bettman. This article beautifuuly explains the problems with him and the crappy job he's done (don't feed me crap about how he's "grown" the league or the revenues, the game is in shambles because of it. Growing the game and expanding cost Gary his chance to get out of this CBA twice, I've said that all along.)
Thanks for the link, great read, now where is the one on Bob............
For those who failed to grasp the obvious, it was the author, not me, who made the statement that there were two sides at fault. If, in HIS opinion, there are two sides to blame, why did he spend the entire article ignoring Goodenow's role?
Maybe his dog ate page 2?
exactly - ironic indeed. get back to work mr. cheese. goodenow needs to be changed...he just soiled his new pants
Exactly, so what does that say as far as Owner/Management is concerned. In my opinion, these guys couldn't run a ****e House next door to a Naval Base.
Interesting indeed. Also interesting how the last notion in the article is not as stated in the title "...the end of Hockey", but the "end of the NHL as we know it".
For my interest in all this (pure enjoyment as fan, spectator and weekend pickup/shinney player and father), the difference is key. As I have watched the league over the past few decades, my affiliation and identification with the NHL has steadily declined and the love of the game - junior, women's, Olympic, pee wee, pond, whatever - has emerged.
I care less and less about the NHL, the money-machine has priorities that do not include the game, the fan, or the future from what I can see. Nor should it, really. It is business. At the end of the day, business is about creating value/return for the shareholders, the owners, period. Everything evolves, has a cycle, and there always comes time to sell or cash-in. If you don't, your beneficiaries will. The NHL isn't going to outlast the epoch, resist the sands of time. It will evolve, die, and maybe be re-born in another form
Embrace it. Maybe it's time.
Separate names with a comma.