nyrmessier011
Registered User
I was thinking back on the events in the middle of February. How could they finish off so close to a deal and blow 1/3 of a seasons revenue ($700 million)??? In my opinion --and you can agree or disagree if you will but it won't change my mind-- the NHL was out to cancel the entire 04-05 season since the middle of the 03-04 campaign. The NHL team of lawyers, hired accountants and businessmen well understood that a powerful union like the NHLPA would never give into a deal linking salaries to depleted business revenues.
In order to achieve there deal, I think the NHL estimated it would need to literally break the union and dissolve the players association until they became a torn every man for himself group of 750 players. First, take a step back and realize that there is basically no difference between $42.5 hard cap and $45-46 million. You'll realize that the NHL really didn't want a 28 game shortened season or else they would have went up on there offer the less then 10% they needed to strike a deal.
It seems as though from the start of the lockout that the NHL has always planned on a fresh start "new NHL." Bettman wants a league with new rules and different expensive ways to market the "new NHL" (expensive as in hiring an expert like they did a few weeks ago). They had none of this in place to play a short season. It would have been a waste.
If you were an NHL owner tell me if you would actually embarass your league with the same exact slow lack of open ice product that we saw before a 150 day lockout. I don't think so. Add a 28 game season added to that...with out of shape players!!!What a disaster waiting to happen. What a way to bring back your fans--with a watered down season. I'll admit I have been a bit niave in not noticing the fact that no season for the NHL was better then a 28 game season. I was just so pissed they canceled the season I didn't take time to notice that I didn't really want to see a 28 game season, I just wanted the lockout to be over. I think that emotion filled a lot of us here.
Although I think so sometimes,I believe the NHL wasn't stupid enough to ever consider playing a 28 game season or to bring in replacements. They had no marketing plan, no nothing. They took all there money and put it on surviving the lockout with there $300 million warchest. Why in the world would the NHL need that much money if they weren't ready to go two full seasons? One full season? Where am I getting at: I don't think the NHL ever wanted that 28 game season without linkage. I think they went just far enough to push the union to a split of those who would play under a $42.5 CBA, and those who won't without actually getting the lot to agree to something. Kudos to the NHL for reading the PA like a book. Bettman knew from the beginning they would need to de-unify the union to land the best deal for the owners.
The union is not unionized what so ever in my opinion. With so many people thinking season on February 19, not having one cracked the union in half. Right now there isn't hush about any de-unionship within the union, but I think that's because there is no hockey until September (no what would be "paycheck cycles"=no more money to lose). I think by June some players will start to realize they need a deal with the owners because this deal is now linkage...by July I suspect more to jump ship into just playing...and I think by August most everyone who would play under $25-$38ish Million dollar linkage is going to bring up quite a fuss about the situation. The union will follow by showing more signs of cracking (as it did in Feb.). I still think, though, that no side has leverage at this point. I don't think the owners can afford to miss a puck drop and because of linkage, the players can't either. It's a joint responsibility and I think everybody is starting to wake up and realize this. I just hope the players realize NOW is the time to help better their next contract. The deal is linkage, let's get with it.
I think by June/July/August it will again be the guys would play under an NHL offer vs the die-hard union guys. I think the majority will be those who are willing to play under linkage at the 25-38 level. The players are not grumbling right now because they will not lose any more money in the SHORT RUN. But as soon as there salaries can begin to be effected--which I predect is July because they need the normal off season--they will begin to show cracks and the majority will be those who just want a damn deal already for the sake of there LONG RUN salaries
In order to achieve there deal, I think the NHL estimated it would need to literally break the union and dissolve the players association until they became a torn every man for himself group of 750 players. First, take a step back and realize that there is basically no difference between $42.5 hard cap and $45-46 million. You'll realize that the NHL really didn't want a 28 game shortened season or else they would have went up on there offer the less then 10% they needed to strike a deal.
It seems as though from the start of the lockout that the NHL has always planned on a fresh start "new NHL." Bettman wants a league with new rules and different expensive ways to market the "new NHL" (expensive as in hiring an expert like they did a few weeks ago). They had none of this in place to play a short season. It would have been a waste.
If you were an NHL owner tell me if you would actually embarass your league with the same exact slow lack of open ice product that we saw before a 150 day lockout. I don't think so. Add a 28 game season added to that...with out of shape players!!!What a disaster waiting to happen. What a way to bring back your fans--with a watered down season. I'll admit I have been a bit niave in not noticing the fact that no season for the NHL was better then a 28 game season. I was just so pissed they canceled the season I didn't take time to notice that I didn't really want to see a 28 game season, I just wanted the lockout to be over. I think that emotion filled a lot of us here.
Although I think so sometimes,I believe the NHL wasn't stupid enough to ever consider playing a 28 game season or to bring in replacements. They had no marketing plan, no nothing. They took all there money and put it on surviving the lockout with there $300 million warchest. Why in the world would the NHL need that much money if they weren't ready to go two full seasons? One full season? Where am I getting at: I don't think the NHL ever wanted that 28 game season without linkage. I think they went just far enough to push the union to a split of those who would play under a $42.5 CBA, and those who won't without actually getting the lot to agree to something. Kudos to the NHL for reading the PA like a book. Bettman knew from the beginning they would need to de-unify the union to land the best deal for the owners.
The union is not unionized what so ever in my opinion. With so many people thinking season on February 19, not having one cracked the union in half. Right now there isn't hush about any de-unionship within the union, but I think that's because there is no hockey until September (no what would be "paycheck cycles"=no more money to lose). I think by June some players will start to realize they need a deal with the owners because this deal is now linkage...by July I suspect more to jump ship into just playing...and I think by August most everyone who would play under $25-$38ish Million dollar linkage is going to bring up quite a fuss about the situation. The union will follow by showing more signs of cracking (as it did in Feb.). I still think, though, that no side has leverage at this point. I don't think the owners can afford to miss a puck drop and because of linkage, the players can't either. It's a joint responsibility and I think everybody is starting to wake up and realize this. I just hope the players realize NOW is the time to help better their next contract. The deal is linkage, let's get with it.
I think by June/July/August it will again be the guys would play under an NHL offer vs the die-hard union guys. I think the majority will be those who are willing to play under linkage at the 25-38 level. The players are not grumbling right now because they will not lose any more money in the SHORT RUN. But as soon as there salaries can begin to be effected--which I predect is July because they need the normal off season--they will begin to show cracks and the majority will be those who just want a damn deal already for the sake of there LONG RUN salaries
Last edited: