News from gouvernor reunion ???

[X0ssbar]

So heres my take:

When I heard that Gary said what he said, that there would be no season next year if theres no CBA and that replacements are off the table. I think this is nothing but bad bad bad. Why? Because theyve given leverage to the players where there was none. Now, the players can sit back and watch Gary destroy another year, whereas replacements would have forced the issue one way or the other.

Just the stupidest move in the universe.

I think something must have come out of yesterday's meeting for Bettman to completely reverse his replacement player stance overnight. That something I am sure is being kept internally - of course we can always speculate, what else do we have to do

 

[CGG]

I wont suppourt this if there is no linkage involved. Hopefully the owners stay strong, as another year might be needed to stick it to the greedy players. There has to be linkage, and a hard cap. What I don't understand is the idea of a luxury tax inside of a Salary Cap, absolutely one of the worst concepts brought forward to date. What kind of crap is that.

How 'come the owners aren't greedy in your universe? They're the ones whining about wanting / needing more money. There's a workable framework on the table, but the owners might lock 'em out another year for what? For a few extra bucks. Greed. And to stick it to the greedy players. Blah.

 

[Levitate]

Now, the players can sit back and watch Gary destroy another year, whereas replacements would have forced the issue one way or the other.

eh I don't buy this...cuz see if the players just sit back and watch Bettman lock out another year, well...that means the players are losing money once again!

they don't want to be locked out for another year, they'll be losing lots of money that way...make no mistake, the players want to be playing next year...I doubt they'll just sit back and stop negotiating now. They may push it some but if it comes down to bending a little more to get a deal done and staying locked out another year...they most likely bend

 

[futurcorerock]

Definitely by the tone of the article, it looks like replacements was pulled off the table based on the consensus that the owners think the deal is imminent and only needs more meetings to seal.

I know the conspiracy theorists here are glowing with excitement over having more fuel to speculate on the matter. It's only a matter of time, folks.

 

[Drury_Sakic]

Anyone else think that the owners may have backed off the replacement players road because the PA finally moved on to linkage... and a deal MIGHT be close?

I mean... we are all so negative about things.... is it prudent to mistrust Goodenow... yes....but... the NHL needs to respond back to moves by the players with moves of good faith, or what is the motivation of the PA to making any further moves...

Goodenow got what he wanted, the end to the replacement players idea and a slight split in the owners.... but who is to say this is a bad thing...


a 100% united owners group did nothing to save teh season... and the owners must give something back to the players to intice them into a deal..

The owners won....but they don't need to go for the kill..

they need to extend their hand and lift the PA off the ground, rather than slice its head off...


Goodenow might chose this moment to try and pull the owners down to the ground with him, but what does that serve right now? It just pisses more fans off and makes the PA look worse(if possible)...

 

[Morbo]

Replacements would never have worked anyway.

 

[futurcorerock]

Anyone else think that the owners may have backed off the replacement players road because the PA finally moved on to linkage... and a deal MIGHT be close?

I mean... we are all so negative about things.... is it prudent to mistrust Goodenow... yes....but... the NHL needs to respond back to moves by the players with moves of good faith, or what is the motivation of the PA to making any further moves...

Goodenow got what he wanted, the end to the replacement players idea and a slight split in the owners.... but who is to say this is a bad thing...


a 100% united owners group did nothing to save teh season... and the owners must give something back to the players to intice them into a deal..

The owners won....but they don't need to go for the kill..

they need to extend their hand and lift the PA off the ground, rather than slice its head off...


Goodenow might chose this moment to try and pull the owners down to the ground with him, but what does that serve right now? It just pisses more fans off and makes the PA look worse(if possible)...

Yes

 

[tantalum]

Yes

I think all this really says is that the owners are willing to give the PA another couple of weeks to grab hold of linkage and a deal they could have had months ago. If nothing progresses and no deal is hammered the owners opinions can change. The PA is close to linkage but not quite there yet. It may simply be a stay of execution so to speak.

 

[futurcorerock]

I think all this really says is that the owners are willing to give the PA another couple of weeks to grab hold of linkage and a deal they could have had months ago. If nothing progresses and no deal is hammered the owners opinions can change. The PA is close to linkage but not quite there yet. It may simply be a stay of execution so to speak.

Just like they supposedly changed at the meeting.

 

[Drury_Sakic]

I also strongly believe that the owners don't understand(or don't like the idea) that for the PA to accept linkage, a floor is need....and with a floor, revenue sharing will be needed(strong revenue sharing).... So both sides are working around the issue...

The PA needs to work to find a % that works well for them, but is not asking for too much....they also need to work out the potential of demanding a lower % of revenue, but making gains elsewere in teh CBA...

 

[Tawnos]

I think all this really says is that the owners are willing to give the PA another couple of weeks to grab hold of linkage and a deal they could have had months ago. If nothing progresses and no deal is hammered the owners opinions can change. The PA is close to linkage but not quite there yet. It may simply be a stay of execution so to speak.

As I said, it's getting late for an impasse. If the league wants to start in October, ideally they would have declared an impasse at the beginning of this month... if an impasse is declared, the NLRB isn't going to get to their case in at least a month, probably more. Then they're gonna take months to review this as one of many cases that are on their docket at any given moment. 6 months, for a case this size, would be where you would start from. They could try to get it done in less, but the replacement option for next season is actually slipping through the owners fingers whether they wanted to do it or not.

Bettman made a big mistake with this one, probably the first negotiation tactical mistake he's made. He spoke prematurely and then waited too long to try to bring it to a head.

 

[Mess]

eh I don't buy this...cuz see if the players just sit back and watch Bettman lock out another year, well...that means the players are losing money once again!

they don't want to be locked out for another year, they'll be losing lots of money that way...make no mistake, the players want to be playing next year...I doubt they'll just sit back and stop negotiating now. They may push it some but if it comes down to bending a little more to get a deal done and staying locked out another year...they most likely bend

The downfall is that Bettman and the owners group patience and solidarity will also be tested by this option .. Some owners lost a lot of money last season by not playing .. Do you believe that the longer this goes particularly if it goes into next year that the pressure from within the Owners group is going to get near unbearable as well .. Some of these teams made money under the old system .. The 24% would have put most in a favourable financial position and any of these other NHLPA proposals would allow the majority of owners to make a profit if them became good businessmen .. So some point will come when not playing will make less sense for most .. IMO ..

and vice versa .. Some of the small market owners are robbing the War Chest already to pay the bills.. All owners put in 10 mil to draw from, what happens as that dries up for some .. pressure to accept any CBA to get season ticket money may become a matter of survival ..

 

[Tawnos]

I also strongly believe that the owners don't understand(or don't like the idea) that for the PA to accept linkage, a floor is need....and with a floor, revenue sharing will be needed(strong revenue sharing).... So both sides are working around the issue...

The PA needs to work to find a % that works well for them, but is not asking for too much....they also need to work out the potential of demanding a lower % of revenue, but making gains elsewere in teh CBA...

I'm pretty sure that the owners problem is not with the floor itself, but rather the range between the floor and the ceiling. They don't want $20million seperating the highest payroll from the lowest.

They also don't want this range to be based on the last set of revenues that the league had. I guess they want to come up with some arbitrary number.

 

[Drury_Sakic]

I did not word that right..

no so much that they are fighting a floor.... but the revnenue sharing that is needed to make a floor work..

 

[Mess]

They also don't want this range to be based on the last set of revenues that the league had. I guess they want to come up with some arbitrary number.

This is how all NHL proposals should be looked at particularly with the constant threat of declining Revenues and declining offers ..

" Arbitrary Number " based on sheer guess work backed up with Zero evidence ..

 

[WrightOn]

Actully this is the better move by the NHL ..

Replacement players was never going to work and was only going to blow up and give all the leverage to the NHLPA ..

Bettman made a huge mistake using that idle threat as it did not have its desired outcome ..

A stronger postion is a continued lockout and threat of more of the same by the NHL .. That will have a bigger impact on the players then anything else .. IMO

Time is quickly coming for the players to decide to commit to Europe for next year or other options or test player solidarity.

I was talking about you.....not Bettman.

 

[AM]

replacements

Replacements would never have worked anyway.

would have worked in Edmonton 100%.

Where wouldnt it have worked? ....

may be a good indication of where they should move teams out of.

 

[WrightOn]

may be a good indication of where they should move teams out of.

Ummm, no. I disagree.

 

[CalgaryThrasher]

would have worked in Edmonton 100%.

Where wouldnt it have worked? ....

may be a good indication of where they should move teams out of.

Edmonton basically had replacements with the AHL roadrunners and i'd hardly call that a success.

 

[AM]

how

Edmonton basically had replacements with the AHL roadrunners and i'd hardly call that a success.

do you come to that conclusion?

 

[Morbo]

would have worked in Edmonton 100%.

Where wouldnt it have worked? ....

may be a good indication of where they should move teams out of.

Where wouldn't it have worked? Obviously a lot of places, or they wouldn't have abandoned the strategy so soon after the season's cancellation.

 

[Hockeyfan02]

Good news. A) I never wanted to see replacement players. I would have 0 interest in going to see replacement players defend the Stanley Cup championship here in Tampa or watching my other favorite team the Ducks at 10:30 if there are replacements. B) From the quotes, it sounds like there is some progress being made in the talks and a deal could be coming in the next few months.

 

[me2]

I'm pretty sure that the owners problem is not with the floor itself, but rather the range between the floor and the ceiling. They don't want $20million seperating the highest payroll from the lowest.

I'm sure the owners would accept $15m-35m or $20m-$40m ranges. I doubt the $20m is the killer. Its the $50m on the high end. Knock $10m off that and have a $30m-$40m range and the owners would jump on it.

 

[Shawnski]

As I said, it's getting late for an impasse. If the league wants to start in October, ideally they would have declared an impasse at the beginning of this month... if an impasse is declared, the NLRB isn't going to get to their case in at least a month, probably more. Then they're gonna take months to review this as one of many cases that are on their docket at any given moment. 6 months, for a case this size, would be where you would start from. They could try to get it done in less, but the replacement option for next season is actually slipping through the owners fingers whether they wanted to do it or not.

Bettman made a big mistake with this one, probably the first negotiation tactical mistake he's made. He spoke prematurely and then waited too long to try to bring it to a head.

Impasse can be declared at any time. Utilization of replacements can occur at any time. There is NO waiting period for the NLRB, as they only become involved IF the NHLPA files a complaint with the NHL.

This link has been posted several times already. Obviously you missed it. Impasse myths.

I thought the NHL had to get approval from the NLRB to declare an impasse?
That's a myth. There's an erroneous assumption that has crept into some media reports that the NHL would go to the NLRB to seek some sort of certification of impasse. The NLRB can only get involved in this matter if the NHLPA files a 'bad faith' complaint in response to the league unilaterally implementing a new economic system.

But doesn't the NHL have to get approval from the NLRB to use replacement players?
No, that's another myth. The use of replacement players is an entirely separate issue that doesn't involve the NLRB. There's nothing about the issue of impasse that relates to the use of replacements. The NHL would likely face other legal challenges based on Canadian provincial labour laws if it tried to use replacement players, but the NLRB can't prevent the NHL from doing so.

 

[kdb209]

eh I don't buy this...cuz see if the players just sit back and watch Bettman lock out another year, well...that means the players are losing money once again!

they don't want to be locked out for another year, they'll be losing lots of money that way...make no mistake, the players want to be playing next year...I doubt they'll just sit back and stop negotiating now. They may push it some but if it comes down to bending a little more to get a deal done and staying locked out another year...they most likely bend

And remember, the owners are there for the long term - the players aren't. Money lost by the owners may be eventually earned back over time. The players will never get this year (and next year) back. Considering that the average NHL career is only about 5 yrs, some players have already thrown away 20% of their career earnings.