http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7575770/“We will continue to plan for the start of next season with an on-time opening in October, that is where our efforts will be,†Bettman said after a four-hour meeting with the league’s board of governors. “If we do not have a new collective bargaining agreement, we will not open the season on time."
Representatives from all 30 NHL teams met in New York for the second time in seven weeks. The idea of replacement players was discussed as an option should the lockout continue, but that possibility has apparently lost steam.
nyrmessier011 said:
Egil said:ODC, I couldn't disagree more.
Replacements is a easily achieved target with a clear exit strategy for the PA. Not going to replacements iliminates this target and ensures that the only way an agreement will be reached is if the players negotiate a setlement. Not agreeing to anything is no longer an option for the players.
Wetcoaster said:Apparently the NHL has abandoned the idea of using replacement players according to reports following the BOG meeting. No CBA - No 2005-06 season.
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7575770/
Looks like the NHL has accepted what many labour law pundits have said all along - replacement players really were never really an option.
hockeytown9321 said:Welcome back. I've missed your insights.
Wetcoaster said:What a difference a day makes.
Yesterday here was Bettman's position following the negotiating session as quoted in numerous media:
"My stance on starting the season hasn't changed," he said. "What I have said is that we are going to start the season on time and that is a plan that will continue to be in place."
And after meeting with his bosses his tune now is:
“We will continue to plan for the start of next season with an on-time opening in October, that is where our efforts will be,†Bettman said after a four-hour meeting with the league’s board of governors. “If we do not have a new collective bargaining agreement, we will not open the season on time."
Sounds like Bettman has received new marching orders.
jojo said:Call me naive but I think this is a gesture of good faith from the NHL. It's showing that they won't try to enforce a bargaining agreement by declaring a deadlock and are ready to negotiate accordingly.
Sure it's also a PR move but one that sits them down at the negotiating table. That's at least mildly good news.
Wetcoaster said:Sounds like Bettman has received new marching orders.
nyrmessier011 said:I believe the owners realized the numbers for replacement hockey doesn't work. IMO they are still trying to bring in season ticket money because right now is a time of fan optimism thinking it's going to come back in the fall. Because the NHL sees replacements as a bad fit, they still would drag this on
And figuring out their hand wouldn't have been real hard as that information and research is available to both sides equally .Wetcoaster said:I have seen nothing in the way of "good faith" from the NHL thus far.
IMHO the NHL has simply recognized that replacement players are a "no go" in this situation - labour law precedents and immigration law scuttled that strategy. The NHLPA knew this long ago so the NHL threats were empty. If you are going to bluff you need to be sure the other side does not know what cards you are holding.
Timmy said:I thought this whole mess was just his fault, due to his hate-on for Goodenow?
The Messenger said:And figuring out their hand wouldn't have been real hard as that information and research is available to both sides equally .
Wetcoaster said:It would not be the first time pro sports owners have badly miscalculated - see the failed MLB experiment with replacement players for example.
In the NFL case the NFLPA simply did an end around, decertified and won what they sought using anti-trust law.
In the case of the NBA, the NBAPA simply threatened decertification and the NBA backed down.
History is on the side of the players.
Wetcoaster said:Bettman is ultimately answerable to his employers. While he has his "super-majority" to control what offer goes to the BOG for a vote, it only takes a simple majority to fire him.
In that case you simply do not fill the Commissioner's chair for a short while (therefore no super majority any longer because it depends upon the Commissioner's recommendation - no Commissioner, so no 8 owner veto bloc). Some designated BOG member or members take over the negotiations - then it is a simple majority vote to get a deal done.
Many NHL owners cannot afford to let this go on for a second season given leases, sponsorship contracts, advertising, los of draft picks, etc. Bettman may have shot his bolt as the NHLPA has shown no sign of folding. The players do have options, the owners much less so.
Declaring an impasse only is an issue if you are intending to use replacement players and the NHL has apparently conluded that is not a viable option.Beauty said:Next stop, Impasseville!
I was responding to the point that the NHL owners know what they are doing.Timmy said:So you figure the NHLPA is going to come out of this one the "winner"?
No drags on salaries, no cap, fully guaranteed contracts, etc?
If that is the case, do you think the league will be able to survive the same salary escalation for the next ten years that it had in the last ten years?