Meeting Day Thread 6/2

[FLYLine27*]

Optimism chart:

1-10 im at 11!!!

 

[Motown Beatdown]

Optimism chart:

1-10 im at 11!!!

You better edit that before GKJ see that post.

 

[hubofhockey]

I think the good news we can take from this is that the leaks to the public are coming out with some accuracy attached to their merits to the actual meeting .. This is not just to sell papers ..IMO

In defense of the industry where I''ve made my livin' for over 30 years:
I'm sure there are examples, but very few, where papers have made things up just to sell papers. But only a fool would accept that tired cliche as a true underpinning of the biz.
Think about it: if papers routinely made things up, just to sell papers, how would vox populi interpret that? Answer: in very short order, the public would grow tired of being taken as fools, and stop buying the paper. Even more important--because it's not always just about you, dear reader--advertisters would abandon the paper. Again think: what business, big or large, would want to advertise in a product that the buying public believes is a total joke?
So, in terms of mainstream press...yes, we have our share of nitwits, just as in every walk of life and career path (think: police, attorney, judges, doctors, just to name a few). But overall, as a media industry (the only one) that has lasted centuries, newspapers USUALLY try to get it right, try to be honorable, and most of all, try NOT to cheat the public by making it up.
So, I respectfully suggest, choose your individual nitwits (writers) and ignore them, and choose your preferred papers, and read those. But don't look at the newspaper industry and think, even for a second, that the underlying motivation is to print slop for the sake of getting a one-day bump in circulation, or a quick mention on FAN radio. Absurd.
thanks, kpd/hoh

 

[incawg]

we should take a pool about who gets officially dumped first and when......Bettman or Goodenow...

I'll take Goodenow on July 15th......

Goodenow for sure. Bettman just won't have his contract renewed.

 

[WVP]

Goodenow for sure. Bettman just won't have his contract renewed.

I'm not sure Bettman did anything the owners didn't want him to do. In fact, it looks like he did his job damn well in terms of the lockout.

 

[not quite yoda]

BobMckenzie's PM box is full. How could I have possibly not seen that one coming? I a fool after all.

 

[Riggins]

Everyone needs to quit harassing Bob.

 

[Malo]

Goodenow for sure. Bettman just won't have his contract renewed.

why won't bettman have his contact renewed? he's done everything he said he was going to do for the owners. he's the only reason their in the spot they are in now. goodenow should be gone for sure, he hasn't gotten anything he said he would

 

[RangerBoy]

Because there was more work to do on the financial review, the small-group dynamic carried over from Wednesday's session and continued into Thursday.

The small group will pick it up again Friday morning, before the full-blown bargaining sides will enter the room later Friday - including NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and NHLPA executive director Bob Goodenow.

"We continued our small group meeting throughout the day and evening, and plan to meet again tomorrow morning in both small and large groups. We will not be making further comment until tomorrow's meetings have concluded," NHLPA senior director Ted Saskin said in a statement Thursday night.

Sources close to the talks said other issues were also brought up in small-group discussions Thursday although the revenue review was once again the dominant topic

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=126812

The negotiating session with Bettman and Goodenow in the room did not take place today

 

[incawg]

I'm not sure Bettman did anything the owners didn't want him to do. In fact, it looks like he did his job damn well in terms of the lockout.

He won't get dumped because of the lockout per se, he'll get dumped because he was responsible for the last CBA.

 

[Mess]

why won't bettman have his contact renewed? he's done everything he said he was going to do for the owners. he's the only reason their in the spot they are in now. goodenow should be gone for sure, he hasn't gotten anything he said he would

The NHLPA hate him as he is the opponent .. If you are a partnership with owners and you want healing to begin then getting Bettman replaced and putting in a new guy helps that process is the theory being floated in the papers ..

 

[RangerBoy]

These clowns better meet through the weekend.None of this we will break off talks at 6 pm to catch our 7 pm flights back home and we will not meet again until the following Wednesday

 

[handtrick]

In defense of the industry where I''ve made my livin' for over 30 years:
I'm sure there are examples, but very few, where papers have made things up just to sell papers. But only a fool would accept that tired cliche as a true underpinning of the biz.
Think about it: if papers routinely made things up, just to sell papers, how would vox populi interpret that? Answer: in very short order, the public would grow tired of being taken as fools, and stop buying the paper. Even more important--because it's not always just about you, dear reader--advertisters would abandon the paper. Again think: what business, big or large, would want to advertise in a product that the buying public believes is a total joke?
So, in terms of mainstream press...yes, we have our share of nitwits, just as in every walk of life and career path (think: police, attorney, judges, doctors, just to name a few). But overall, as a media industry (the only one) that has lasted centuries, newspapers USUALLY try to get it right, try to be honorable, and most of all, try NOT to cheat the public by making it up.
So, I respectfully suggest, choose your individual nitwits (writers) and ignore them, and choose your preferred papers, and read those. But don't look at the newspaper industry and think, even for a second, that the underlying motivation is to print slop for the sake of getting a one-day bump in circulation, or a quick mention on FAN radio. Absurd.
thanks, kpd/hoh

That leads me to a long-standing question......when we read the work of the 'shills'....be it of the league or of the NHLPA....should we assume:

-that they receive a monetary reward for their stance
-assume a stance supporting the majority of their sources
-assume a stance directed by the paper in general
-truly see things altruistically through the prism of the writings

 

[Marconius]

Even more important--because it's not always just about you, dear reader--advertisters would abandon the paper. Again think: what business, big or large, would want to advertise in a product that the buying public believes is a total joke?

I think you just ended up proving the opposite point. You're right when you say companies would be scared away from advertising in a joke paper, but your doubly-right when you say that the newspapers holds the esteem of its advertisers as very important. Even more important, dare I say, then the truth at times.

The era of responsible media is over (if it ever truly existed), one only has to look at the absolute failure of the American media during the Iraqi invasion as evidence of this. The media, newspapers included, pay homage to the almighty dollar, a dollar usually in the grubby hands of someone with his/her/its own agenda

 

[Motown Beatdown]

I'm not sure Bettman did anything the owners didn't want him to do. In fact, it looks like he did his job damn well in terms of the lockout.

See the owners will want to try and repair some of the mess that has been done. Bettman is front and center and is viewed as the bad guy by the players, and some of the fan and even some of his owners. His job has been to beat the union, and get a cap. He fail in 1994 (even though it was the owners who went over him) he is responsible for it not happening. Now it seems he did the job they paid him for and now they can move on.

It's like owning a guard dog then installing an alarm system. You dont need both.

 

[Malo]

The NHLPA hate him as he is the opponent .. If you are a partnership with owners and you want healing to begin then getting Bettman replaced and putting in a new guy helps that process is the theory being floated in the papers ..

one would hope that if they do replace him, that he's given a really big goodbye present for the work he's done

 

[Marconius]

I'm not sure Bettman did anything the owners didn't want him to do. In fact, it looks like he did his job damn well in terms of the lockout.

Agreed, from the sounds of it, the owners got a pretty good cba. If he is fired/not renewed, I suspect it will ony be for his faliure at the last cba, which kickstarted the damage to the NHL.

EDIT: incawg beat me to it

 

[handtrick]

Any insight into the who's who list in the above referenced tsn.ca article involving who was part of the "small group" and who was relegated to the "large group" sessions tomorrow:

The NHLPA roster once again Thursday featured Saskin, outside counsel John McCambridge, associate counsel Ian Pulver, players' executive committee president Trevor Linden and vice-president Vincent Damphousse as well as two union financial people. The league was represented by chief legal officer Bill Daly, board of governors chairman Harley Hotchkiss of the Calgary Flames, Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs, outside counsel Bob Batterman, NHL general counsel David Zimmerman, lawyer Shep Goldfein and other financial figures.

Once the small group is done Friday morning, the larger group from the league will feature Bettman, Daly, Goldfein, Zimmerman, Hotchkiss, Jacobs, director of hockey operations Colin Campbell, New Jersey Devils CEO and GM Lou Lamoriello and Nashville Predators owner Craig Leipold.

The NHLPA bigger group will have Goodenow, Saskin, Pulver, director of business relations Mike Gartner, McCambridge, Detroit Red Wings veteran player Brendan Shanahan, and the players' executive committee: Linden, Damphousse, Bill Guerin, Daniel Alfredsson, Arturs Irbe, Trent Klatt and Bob Boughner.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

I think you just ended up proving the opposite point. You're right when you say companies would be scared away from advertising in a joke paper, but your doubly-right when you say that the newspapers holds the esteem of its advertisers as very important. Even more important, dare I say, then the truth at times.

The era of responsible media is over (if it ever truly existed), one only has to look at the absolute failure of the American media during the Iraqi invasion as evidence of this. The media, newspapers included, pay homage to the almighty dollar, a dollar usually in the grubby hands of someone with his/her/its own agenda

I think what Kevin is saying is yeah some reporters are slim. But there are guys out there that still take pride in their work. So you cant paint them all with the same brush it's just that you have to know who stands for what. The story or the headlines and there is a vast difference between the two.

 

[hubofhockey]

That leads me to a long-standing question......when we read the work of the 'shills'....be it of the league or of the NHLPA....should we assume:

-that they receive a monetary reward for their stance
-assume a stance supporting the majority of their sources
-assume a stance directed by the paper in general
-truly see things altruistically through the prism of the writings

Good question. And loaded, too.
At issue here, in order to answer, is the word shill--one man's shill is another man's hero. It's not just the prism of the writer, that of the reader(s), too. Agreed?
But if we were to mutually agree upon someone we believed is a shill, I believe it comes down usually to one of two things.

1. The shill truly believes what he/she is writing. His or her passion, or belief, has gotten in the way of offering an objective take, or a take with balance. The reader may believe the writer is warped, or on the take, but the writer actually sees the world this way (on a particular issue). Frankly, I've seen a lot of posts on HFboards that read this way. The JO biz should be above that standard, but....
or
2. The writer is cultivating one side for a payback, not in terms of money, but in terms of stories to be harvested at a later date -- be it days, weeks or months. or years. Seen it a million times. I've also seen that same writer go to harvest the stories, for good deeds rendered, only to be shutout. Played for a fool. Very sad, but it happens.

kpd/hoh

 

[Malo]

Any insight into the who's who list in the above referenced tsn.ca article involving who was part of the "small group" and who was relegated to the "large group" sessions tomorrow:

The NHLPA roster once again Thursday featured Saskin, outside counsel John McCambridge, associate counsel Ian Pulver, players' executive committee president Trevor Linden and vice-president Vincent Damphousse as well as two union financial people. The league was represented by chief legal officer Bill Daly, board of governors chairman Harley Hotchkiss of the Calgary Flames, Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs, outside counsel Bob Batterman, NHL general counsel David Zimmerman, lawyer Shep Goldfein and other financial figures.

Once the small group is done Friday morning, the larger group from the league will feature Bettman, Daly, Goldfein, Zimmerman, Hotchkiss, Jacobs, director of hockey operations Colin Campbell, New Jersey Devils CEO and GM Lou Lamoriello and Nashville Predators owner Craig Leipold.

The NHLPA bigger group will have Goodenow, Saskin, Pulver, director of business relations Mike Gartner, McCambridge, Detroit Red Wings veteran player Brendan Shanahan, and the players' executive committee: Linden, Damphousse, Bill Guerin, Daniel Alfredsson, Arturs Irbe, Trent Klatt and Bob Boughner.

i find it funny that Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs is in the small group, i though they couldn't make any progress with him Jacobs there?

 

[handtrick]

i find it funny that Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs is in the small group, i though they couldn't make any progress with him Jacobs there?

Me too....I would have expected Lou Lamoriello instead of Jacobs in the small group for anything positive to be occuring....I am in fact shocked by it.

Can we assume that Jacobs is "the voice of the owner hardliners"?

 

[Mess]

i find it funny that Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs is in the small group, i though they couldn't make any progress with him Jacobs there?

Who do you think is pinning Linden on the ground and pressing his knee between Linden shoulder blades during the meetings to help move them along as progress made ??

 

[Malo]

Me too....I would have expected Lou Lamoriello instead of Jacobs in the small group for anything positive to be occuring....I am in fact shocked by it.

Can we assume that Jacobs is "the voice of the owner hardliners"?

i think he's there cause the other owners though this would make him feel important, and he won't cry about being under used. but no one really listens to him. lol

 

[handtrick]

Good question. And loaded, too.
At issue here, in order to answer, is the word shill--one man's shill is another man's hero. It's not just the prism of the writer, that of the reader(s), too. Agreed?
But if we were to mutually agree upon someone we believed is a shill, I believe it comes down usually to one of two things.

1. The shill truly believes what he/she is writing. His or her passion, or belief, has gotten in the way of offering an objective take, or a take with balance. The reader may believe the writer is warped, or on the take, but the writer actually sees the world this way (on a particular issue). Frankly, I've seen a lot of posts on HFboards that read this way. The JO biz should be above that standard, but....
or
2. The writer is cultivating one side for a payback, not in terms of money, but in terms of stories to be harvested at a later date -- be it days, weeks or months. or years. Seen it a million times. I've also seen that same writer go to harvest the stories, for good deeds rendered, only to be shutout. Played for a fool. Very sad, but it happens.

kpd/hoh

excellent point on the definition of 'shill' and who is doing the reading.

To carry this one step further.....assuming the writer 'actually sees the world this way (on a particular issue)' or 'trying to cultivate one side for a future payback'.....wouldn't it seem that the outcry and label of being a 'shill' drive them back to the center?

It seems that everyone [that most could agree is a shill of one side or the other] has been pretty entrenched in their given rut throughout this mess.

It would also seem that the writers striving to take an objective take, or take with a balance are being held up as the "true journalistic heros" of this ordeal....and in the long run...will be the true winners.