Players upset @ NHLPA about timing of cap offer

[arnie]

Barnaby just summed it all up right there.

The NHLPA bluffed, the NHL didn't blink, and the leaders of the NHLPA were too stupid to realize the NHL wouldn't blink.

Oh, horsepuckey. Barnaby is an idiot. This deal couldn't get done until right now. No one ever is going to mae a major concession until there is something to lose. The bigger the loss, the bigger the concession. Both sides have given up on their key bargaining point. For the players it was a cap and for management linkage. Neither side was going to do this until the season was about to be cancelled.

Having gone this far, it is inconceivable that therte will not be a deal. But it was never going to get done more than 1 day before the season was cancelled.

 

[hockeymistress]

Oh, horsepuckey. Barnaby is an idiot. This deal couldn't get done until right now. No one ever is going to mae a major concession until there is something to lose. The bigger the loss, the bigger the concession. Both sides have given up on their key bargaining point. For the players it was a cap and for management linkage. Neither side was going to do this until the season was about to be cancelled.

Having gone this far, it is inconceivable that therte will not be a deal. But it was never going to get done more than 1 day before the season was cancelled.

Why didn't the NHL decide that 1/2 a season (not 24 games) was what was absolutely necessary for anything worth while, thus having the "drop dead" date a month ago and do all of this sooner?

H.

 

[SENSible1*]

If the PA would have conceded the salaries and cap last September, they'd be giving away much more than they are now. The owners wouldn't have stopped at where this is likely to end up.

Nope, the owners would have been far more willing to give before the PA did damage to their business.

 

[Jobu]

How does Goodenow get hired and fired? How does that process work?

The Executive COmmittee of the NHLPA decides, and it goes to the full membership for ratification.

 

[Leaf Army]

People in this thread have a different view of the matter than I do. I think Bettman was caught by surprise a little bit.

I'm sure the NHLPA knew from the very start they were going to have to settle for a cap. But I think Goodenow completely hoodwinked Bettman into thinking that an offer for a cap was not coming.

As a result, Bettman has been spending the last month or so going through the motions in an attempt to take this thing through the courts based on the premise that the NHLPA won't accept a cap.

Now when Bettman set the "drop dead date", Goodenow takes the cap off the table. Now Bettman only has less than 2 days to re-evaluate their entire situation and determine if they will gain anything by dragging this through the courts.

A lot of people don't realize how much pressure this puts on Bettman. This is not mission accomplished for him yet. I think to a minor extent Goodenow got what he wanted- he's got Bettman sweating under a deadline.

 

[Greschner4]

Goodenow makes $3.25 MILLION per year :lol

The players were surprised by the 24% rollback and by OFFERING a cap

You have to feel for the players.They were sold a bill of goods and lost so much money they will never recover.The exec commitee led by Mr.Linden and Mr.Guerin plus Goodenow and Saskin have alot of explaining to do

Plus now the players think there is going to be a season and Goodenow has to deliver one ... under tight deadline pressure.

Rollback plus cap plus 75% of a season's salary down the drain.

Ouch.

 

[NHLFanSince2020]

Reading the landscape with that unique skill that he brings to the table, and thinking that he now holds a strong position, Goodenow will likely try to hold out for more money and a salary increase.

:lol

 

[Foppa_Rules]

C'mon guys, just get a deal done. Cut it down the middle and have $46 million cap or whatever I don't care, just get a deal done.

 

[N.Y. Orangeman]

Nope, the owners would have been far more willing to give before the PA did damage to their business.

If this were the case, they would then be simply acting out of emotion. Both sides needed to hurt a bit for us to get back to serious discussions. Missing Novemeber and December didn't hurt either side enough.

 

[Drury_Sakic]

And from the NHLPA's arguments side..

If you say you are willing to accept a cap..

then come back after the season is canned, saying NO CAP...






Which leads me to believe the NHLPA is really backing into accepting a deal...

 

[Trottier]

I disagree, the owners would then risk the fans turning against them if the players offered a good deal and it was turned down.

And some still think Bettman and Goodenow are shaking in their boots worrying what YOU think about them.

Ah, such self-importance.

 

[MLH]

People in this thread have a different view of the matter than I do. I think Bettman was caught by surprise a little bit.

I'm sure the NHLPA knew from the very start they were going to have to settle for a cap. But I think Goodenow completely hoodwinked Bettman into thinking that an offer for a cap was not coming.

As a result, Bettman has been spending the last month or so going through the motions in an attempt to take this thing through the courts based on the premise that the NHLPA won't accept a cap.

Now when Bettman set the "drop dead date", Goodenow takes the cap off the table. Now Bettman only has less than 2 days to re-evaluate their entire situation and determine if they will gain anything by dragging this through the courts.

A lot of people don't realize how much pressure this puts on Bettman. This is not mission accomplished for him yet. I think to a minor extent Goodenow got what he wanted- he's got Bettman sweating under a deadline.

Great post. That was along my line of thinking also. I can't stand Goodenow, but I think this was a good move by him. Bettman now has a day to decide whether to ruin his sport over a difference in numbers, not philosophies. I think this is the best way for the PA to get the most out of their "bad hand".

 

[N.Y. Orangeman]

I disagree, the owners would then risk the fans turning against them if the players offered a good deal and it was turned down.

If the players offered a cap that would gaurentee profits for the owners, why would they not want to start the season with it?

B/c the prospect of getting a hard cap at $32m for the next 5-6 years, along with all the other bells and whistles they sought would be much more enticing than missing out on November and December revenues.

Fans are not a part of this equation. As we saw with baseball, they always come back..for good or bad.

 

[Greschner4]

When the owners took linkage off the table, the NHLPA moved in response. A number of posters claimed players would play with a cap in the past.

If the players do not want a cap when it goes before them for a vote they can vote any proposed deal down.

Let me get this straight. The players would have taken a cap at any time ... if only the owners didn't demand linkage. Hmmm.

Do the rivers flow with chocolate and are the streets paved with alabaster in your world?

 

[Greschner4]

And if the PA had given in to the cap framework during the summer, the owners would have been in a better position/disposition to sweeten the pot and get far "greater returns" than they can after the damage this bluff has caused the league.

Terrible leadership from Goodenow. It will be a pleasure to see him shown the door.

Goodenow now has no time to negotiate the NBA style loopholes in the cap that should have been his objective from the beginning. If he'd have played his cards right he could have had the type of system that still lets the Knicks spend twice the amount of the luxury tax threshold.

This was Goodnow's Waterloo. A textbook example of how not to negotiate that will be taught in law schools for a century.

 

[Greschner4]

Come on, people.
You people have been harping about how bad the players' hand has been since the outset.
The monday-morning quarterbacking is more than a little disingenuous.

People have been saying for months that deadline hunting would get Goodenow in trouble.

 

[GKJ]

Barnaby just summed it all up right there.

The NHLPA bluffed, the NHL didn't blink, and the leaders of the NHLPA were too stupid to realize the NHL wouldn't blink.

And it will cost Goodenow his job.

 

[BLONG7]

When all is said and done, most of us are fans of neither Bob or Gary...so let's hope they are both gone very very soon...

 

[Beukeboom Fan]

If the players had any sense, they would shut up until this is finished. Anything they say now is going to do nothing more than weaken the negotiating position of the NHLPA.

I'm pro-owner, but if you are the NHLPA, why would you give in on the cap early on? Giving the owners the cap is a huge concession, one that should be given with the expectation of great returns. The only way to maximize the return was to make the owners hurt a bit and put their collective backs up against the wall, just as the NHLPA's backs are right now.

But their bluff cost the players something like $1,200,000,000! Add in that anyone whose is under contract going forward is out another 24% of what they thought they were guaranteed. That's not good.

 

[Steve L*]

And some still think Bettman and Goodenow are shaking in their boots worrying what YOU think about them.

Ah, such self-importance.

Like it or not, the NHL is nothing without its fans.

 

[AlexGodynyuk]

Goodenow now has no time to negotiate the NBA style loopholes in the cap that should have been his objective from the beginning. If he'd have played his cards right he could have had the type of system that still lets the Knicks spend twice the amount of the luxury tax threshold.

This was Goodnow's Waterloo. A textbook example of how not to negotiate that will be taught in law schools for a century.

Thing is the NBA style "loop-holes" aren't really loop-holes. It will not allow you to get great players, just a lot of really overpaid ones (just look at the Knicks).

 

[Quantas]

Well according to most posters on this board, it was only the top % of the players that were driving the cap. Hasn't it been post numerous times that if given a vote the majority would accept the cap? You know.. the stars get richer at the expense of the pluggers and third line players? Hasn't it been said that Bob wasn't listening to the majority of his members in not accepting a cap? If that's the case and the majority of the union want a cap, why should BG be in fear of losing his job?

The exaggeration hypocrisy and hyperbole on this board are amazing.

I doubt there's a single player in the league who wants a cap, however more than a few are willing to play under it, and that number will only grow the closer we come to cancelling the season.

Now not only has Goodnow cost them roughly 75% of their salary this year, but the 24% rollback is still on the table and there will be cap when all is said and done. If I'm a player, it seems to me that not only did we cave (give the owners their cap) but offered something that wasn't on the table in the first place (salary rollback), cost me my wages (75% of this year's salary is gone) and the owners still get to have their gravy (i.e. playoff revenue).

And you're saying he shouldn't be worried about his job???

I don't often agree with Matt Barnaby, but so far he said it best when he said that (paraphrasing) if the PA was going to accept a cap, why the hell didn't they do it during the summer so that all of this could be avoided.

 

[Trottier]

This was Goodnow's Waterloo. A textbook example of how not to negotiate that will be taught in law schools for a century.

Holy hyperbole, Batman! The HF tabloid quote of the day (althought the day is not over. )

Only on this board do you get post-mortems on events that have not yet taken place!

Does anyone here live in the present? Can we at least let events unfold (or not) before spewing the talking points, i.e., "Goodenow lost", "Bettman is a bum", etc.?

 

[barnburner]

I think it's safe to say that we will not be seeing Goodenow on any of ESPN's poker tournments in the near future...

 

[AlexGodynyuk]

I doubt there's a single player in the league who wants a cap, however more than a few are willing to play under it, and that number will only grow the closer we come to cancelling the season.

Now not only has Goodnow cost them roughly 75% of their salary this year, but the 24% rollback is still on the table and there will be cap when all is said and done. If I'm a player, it seems to me that not only did we cave (give the owners their cap) but offered something that wasn't on the table in the first place (salary rollback), cost me my wages (75% of this year's salary is gone) and the owners still get to have their gravy (i.e. playoff revenue).

And you're saying he shouldn't be worried about his job???

I don't often agree with Matt Barnaby, but so far he said it best when he said that (paraphrasing) if the PA was going to accept a cap, why the hell didn't they do it during the summer so that all of this could be avoided.

I think the rollback was assumed from the start to be part of the process. If you look at the original NHL proposals from back in the summer, you'll see at least a couple of them involved basically ripping up every contract in the league.