Red Wings official "Season Gone"

Status
Not open for further replies.

chiavsfan

Registered User
This is off of the newswire I have at work (Radio Station):

Hockey Season Officially A Lost Cause

(Detroit, MI) -- Talks between the National Hockey League and the NHL's Players' Association broke up after almost ten hours of talks. In a statement released by NHL Executive Vice President Bill Daly, he said both sides had two good days of discussion, the lines of communication were open, and they would continue to work on it. But Daly also added there were some major philosophical differences and said the two sides have not scheduled further talks. Red Wings Senior Vice President Jimmy Devellano said time had run out and the season is done.


That sums it up folks
 

eye

Registered User
Feb 17, 2003
1,607
0
around the 49th para
Visit site
The season is over. Logistically, there isn't enough time to sign over 400 players, sign left over free agents, get players back from Europe some of which I'm sure have gone beyond their NHL out clauses, buy equipment, scheduling, arena conflicts, hiring employees that were let go and are no longer available and on and on and on. It's over people. :shakehead :cry: :shakehead
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
Son of Steinbrenner said:
Devellano just did a the players a huge favor. :dunce:

How do you figure? The players best chance at getting a favorable settlement are right now. That is gone. The next offer, in the fal, will likely be even worse than this one with a substantially smaller chunk of money to get a cut of. If the NHL loses a quarter of its revenues and shrinks to a $1.5 billion industry, the player just lost $324 million thqt will not be recovered in addition to the $1.3 they left sitting there from this past season. So the players will have lost $1.7 billion dollars by their onw inability to recognize the market. And Devellano just did the players a huge favor?
 

gerbilanium

Registered User
Oct 17, 2003
274
0
Yes the players can now fly over to the land of milk and honey and 1/10th the money with non-gauranteed contracts in Europe. Call Chevy Chase, the Gizzwads are heading for a European Vacation.
 

Schlep Rock

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
2,732
0
USA
eye said:
The season is over. Logistically, there isn't enough time to sign over 400 players, sign left over free agents, get players back from Europe some of which I'm sure have gone beyond their NHL out clauses, buy equipment, scheduling, arena conflicts, hiring employees that were let go and are no longer available and on and on and on. It's over people. :shakehead :cry: :shakehead

Arena conflicts? Most buildings haven't filled NHL dates. Hiring employees will be simple. Equipment? That could be an issue. Players back from Europe? Very few of them had deadlines in their out clauses, Kovalchuk did so he could get such a big pay day but most of them have a clause simply stating when and if the NHL resumes play their contract can be terminated by the player.
 

eye

Registered User
Feb 17, 2003
1,607
0
around the 49th para
Visit site
Schlep Rock said:
Arena conflicts? Most buildings haven't filled NHL dates. Hiring employees will be simple. Equipment? That could be an issue. Players back from Europe? Very few of them had deadlines in their out clauses, Kovalchuk did so he could get such a big pay day but most of them have a clause simply stating when and if the NHL resumes play their contract can be terminated by the player.

And just how long do you think it would take to get 400 players signed to contracts? Remember were dealing with lawyers here. I didn't realize that you knew the terms of every players contract in Europe so thanks for clearing that up for me. It kind of contradicts some of the information I have read on Euro fan forums and team sites.
 

Poignant Discussion*

I tell it like it is
Jul 18, 2003
8,421
5
Gatineau, QC
""We want the right deal," Devellano said. "The hockey's not important"

Maybe to these 2 sides, but I wonder whats important to the fans?

Comments like this makes me wonder how anyone can choose "sides"

Both sides need a good crack in the head
 

shadoz19

Registered User
May 21, 2004
1,769
0
NataSatan666 said:
""We want the right deal," Devellano said. "The hockey's not important"

Maybe to these 2 sides, but I wonder whats important to the fans?

Comments like this makes me wonder how anyone can choose "sides"

Both sides need a good crack in the head

Amen to that. :handclap: :handclap:
 

Schlep Rock

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
2,732
0
USA
eye said:
And just how long do you think it would take to get 400 players signed to contracts? Remember were dealing with lawyers here. I didn't realize that you knew the terms of every players contract in Europe so thanks for clearing that up for me. It kind of contradicts some of the information I have read on Euro fan forums and team sites.

400 players need to be signed? Link me.

You're dealing with agents... some are lawyers, some aren't.

Don't start attacking me as you normally do... the large majority of players over there do not have dates stipulated in their contracts. Maybe 1 in 5 NHLers do.
 

Son of Steinbrenner

Registered User
Jul 9, 2003
10,055
0
The Iconoclast said:
How do you figure? The players best chance at getting a favorable settlement are right now. That is gone. The next offer, in the fal, will likely be even worse than this one with a substantially smaller chunk of money to get a cut of. If the NHL loses a quarter of its revenues and shrinks to a $1.5 billion industry, the player just lost $324 million thqt will not be recovered in addition to the $1.3 they left sitting there from this past season. So the players will have lost $1.7 billion dollars by their onw inability to recognize the market. And Devellano just did the players a huge favor?
If the owners declare an impasse the players can easily say while they were negotitating a deal a team was declaring the season dead. Wouldn't a court find it hard to believe the league is using good faith tactics when a team saying the season is dead?

The best time to make a deal for both sides is now because this thing will end up in court if it doesn't. The league doesn't have a leg to stand when this ends up in court.
 

Schlep Rock

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
2,732
0
USA
Son of Steinbrenner said:
If the owners declare an impasse the players can easily say while they were negotitating a deal a team was declaring the season dead. Wouldn't a court find it hard to believe the league is using good faith tactics when a team saying the season is dead?

The best time to make a deal for both sides is now because this thing will end up in court if it doesn't. The league doesn't have a leg to stand when this ends up in court.

The quote was a bad one from a legal standpoint but could simply be argued... "he never said it was declared dead by the league but simply said in his opinion it was too late" All depends on the judge or arbitrator you get.
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
Son of Steinbrenner said:
If the owners declare an impasse the players can easily say while they were negotitating a deal a team was declaring the season dead. Wouldn't a court find it hard to believe the league is using good faith tactics when a team saying the season is dead?

The best time to make a deal for both sides is now because this thing will end up in court if it doesn't. The league doesn't have a leg to stand when this ends up in court.

Wow, that's weak. If you're hoping to hang a court challenge on a quote in the paper you're hanging yourself. You don't even know if the quote was editted, was taken out of context or was possibly part of a much longer and much more complex discussion. How does the league "not have a leg to stand on in court"? This I gotta hear. And u trot out the old, "the league isn't negotiating in good faith" I will remind you that the players are not either. They have taken the polar view and dug their heels in about not accepting a cap, without even explaining in good fashion why a cap is not acceptable.
 

Schlep Rock

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
2,732
0
USA
The Iconoclast said:
Wow, that's weak. If you're hoping to hang a court challenge on a quote in the paper you're hanging yourself. You don't even know if the quote was editted, was taken out of context or was possibly part of a much longer and much more complex discussion. How does the league "not have a leg to stand on in court"? This I gotta hear. And u trot out the old, "the league isn't negotiating in good faith" I will remind you that the players are not either. They have taken the polar view and dug their heels in about not accepting a cap, without even explaining in good fashion why a cap is not acceptable.

Publicly the NHLPA has only said we cannot trust the NHL's numbers. Privately, they might have asked the NHL to negotiate that aspect and the NHL refused.

The NHLPA has initied all of the talks during these CBA negotiations so they do have that in their corner.
 

Lanny MacDonald*

Guest
Schlep Rock said:
Publicly the NHLPA has only said we cannot trust the NHL's numbers. Privately, they might have asked the NHL to negotiate that aspect and the NHL refused.

The NHLPA has initied all of the talks during these CBA negotiations so they do have that in their corner.

Well, according to Wetcoaster, the NHL has done forensic studies on the numbers of four NHL teams, so hey can't use that "trust the numbers" stuff any more IMO. The NHL has also invited the NHLPA to the negotiating table for years and was rebuffed, prefering for the 11th hour drama again. Both parties are to blame equally in the whole damn mess. Both would get killed in a court battle with the players taking the largest hit in the long run. The players need the league more than the owners do and right now the players earning potential is going down the drain with the mudslinging. A court challenge does nothing to help that. It in fact makes it worse.
 

Sammy*

Guest
The Iconoclast said:
Wow, that's weak. If you're hoping to hang a court challenge on a quote in the paper you're hanging yourself. You don't even know if the quote was editted, was taken out of context or was possibly part of a much longer and much more complex discussion. How does the league "not have a leg to stand on in court"? This I gotta hear. And u trot out the old, "the league isn't negotiating in good faith" I will remind you that the players are not either. They have taken the polar view and dug their heels in about not accepting a cap, without even explaining in good fashion why a cap is not acceptable.
Of course it's weak. He's a part time NHLPA shill when he's not clerking at the Supreme Court providing Justice's with legal briefs.
 

some_chick

Registered User
Jun 22, 2004
1,011
13
Los Gatos, CA
chiavsfan said:
Initiated what?

PA- You guys going to give in on your cap?
NHL - No
PA - Ok meeting over, see ya in 3 months

That's not initiating negotiation, that's just a PR stunt to get people to look at them in a good light. So far, it ain't working


:handclap:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->