Rumors Are Starting To Fade

Status
Not open for further replies.

ResidentAlien*

Guest
Schlep Rock said:
This is such a B.S. report if that's exactly how Griffith's reported it.. there is no way an agent/agency will specifically disclose who they are on the phone with. What a joke. :lol

That is exactly what he said, and Griffith is no n00b to this stuff
 

xtra

Registered User
May 19, 2002
8,323
4,765
Vancouver
Visit site
The more i think about it. the 28 game season (if it ever happens) could lead to some of the best hockey ever. Why you say? because its unoffically like two playoffs back to back. The intensity and desire will be at an all time high as nobody could afford to take a day/game off when its more than likely the last 3 teams (spots 6-8) will make the playoffs by a goal differential or another type of tie breaker.

It could be great hockey. but its still frustrating not knowing whats going on. and unfortunatley thats not how it came across in my last post.
 

Bauer83

Registered User
Aug 27, 2004
577
0
xtra said:
The more i think about it. the 28 game season (if it ever happens) could lead to some of the best hockey ever. Why you say? because its unoffically like two playoffs back to back. The intensity and desire will be at an all time high as nobody could afford to take a day/game off when its more than likely the last 3 teams (spots 6-8) will make the playoffs by a goal differential or another type of tie breaker.

It could be great hockey. but its still frustrating not knowing whats going on. and unfortunatley thats not how it came across in my last post.

It would suck if your home town team started 0-5. But yeah it would be intense that is for sure.
 

ceber

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
3,497
0
Wyoming, MN
Even if people are meeting, so what?

Isn't that what you expect would happen? It's not like Bettman says "season canceled" and everyone just packs it in, never to discuss things again. Are they supposed to wait some specific amount of time before they start talking again? They still have to negotiate a CBA, after all. Doesn't mean they're trying to save the season. Sounds a lot like wishful thinking to me...
 

Egil

Registered User
Mar 6, 2002
8,838
1
Visit site
Drury_Sakic said:
I would not be shocked if the 28 drops to 24 really quick if a deal is struck..

unless the owners think the extra 4 games will make them that much more money?

28 games provides for a 100% fair seeding schedule for the playoffs. You play every team in your conference twice, home and away. At 24 games, you can no longer do this, so I'm curious as to what your proposed schedule would be for a 24 game season?
 

Egil

Registered User
Mar 6, 2002
8,838
1
Visit site
ceber said:
Even if people are meeting, so what?

Isn't that what you expect would happen? It's not like Bettman says "season canceled" and everyone just packs it in, never to discuss things again. Are they supposed to wait some specific amount of time before they start talking again? They still have to negotiate a CBA, after all. Doesn't mean they're trying to save the season. Sounds a lot like wishful thinking to me...

The problem is that the owners CAN'T take their last offer if this season is cancelled. Revenues will go down, and the cap number needs to go down with it. As such, any negotiations NOW must be with saving the season in mind, and not towards the long term solution.
 

ChiHawks468

Registered User
Jan 19, 2005
175
0
Aurora, IL
I think they can start on March 7th and still play 28 games and a full playoffs. That would leave 2 weeks to sign players and have a 7-10 day mini-camp.
 

HF2002

Registered User
Aug 20, 2003
2,924
80
Ottawa
Visit site
Drury_Sakic said:
Heck yah it is wishfull thinking..


But why would they talk now..

No cooling off?

PA has no incentive to negotitate right now other than to save a season IMO..
I'm not saying they are negotiating at all, but the PA has every incentive to keep negotiating. They know it's only going to get worse - there's no way they want to go back to square one.

Bettman has already stated they are back to linkage, even though the last offer "remains on the table".
 

bcrt2000

Registered User
Feb 17, 2005
3,499
3
Larry Kelly, has been talking to his clients and the PA, just talked to Arthur Griffiths of Mojo Radio and said that "players are encourging the PA to make another proposal"... Kelly is the player agent for Yzerman, so this has some credibility as Darren Pang talked to Yzerman this morning and Yzerman said he was confident that a deal would get done
 

ceber

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
3,497
0
Wyoming, MN
bcrt2000 said:
... as Darren Pang talked to Yzerman this morning and Yzerman said he was confident that a deal would get done

I read that Yzerman said he thought it was possible a deal could be made. Big difference between thinking "could" and thinking "would."
 

Schlep Rock

Registered User
Feb 28, 2002
2,732
0
USA
bcrt2000 said:
Larry Kelly, has been talking to his clients and the PA, just talked to Arthur Griffiths of Mojo Radio and said that "players are encourging the PA to make another proposal"... Kelly is the player agent for Yzerman, so this has some credibility as Darren Pang talked to Yzerman this morning and Yzerman said he was confident that a deal would get done

This is believeable I just don't see Larry Kelly going to Arthur and saying "I talked to my players. I called the NHLPA and told them to make another offer"

Just like Don Meehan and even Patt Brisson have selectively chose their public opinions, LK will as well. "Been talking to my clients and they are encouraging the PA to make another offer" isn't anything earth shattering.
 

bcrt2000

Registered User
Feb 17, 2005
3,499
3
ceber said:
I read that Yzerman said he thought it was possible a deal could be made. Big difference between thinking "could" and thinking "would."

I think you might be thinking about the articles from yesterday, i'm talking about new comments from Yzerman to Darren Pang
 

ceber

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
3,497
0
Wyoming, MN
Egil said:
The problem is that the owners CAN'T take their last offer if this season is cancelled. Revenues will go down, and the cap number needs to go down with it. As such, any negotiations NOW must be with saving the season in mind, and not towards the long term solution.

Revenues are down no matter what, and the cap will reflect that.

I don't agree that talks happening now are by necessity aimed at saving this season.
 

ceber

Registered User
Apr 28, 2003
3,497
0
Wyoming, MN
bcrt2000 said:
I think you might be thinking about the articles from yesterday, i'm talking about new comments from Yzerman to Darren Pang

What I read was on a blog (not the Eklund one), so it's not worth linking to, but it about Pang on the radio this morning. Could be it's not the same thing, though, and it could be wrong.
 

bcrt2000

Registered User
Feb 17, 2005
3,499
3
ceber said:
What I read was on a blog (not the Eklund one), so it's not worth linking to, but it about Pang on the radio this morning. Could be it's not the same thing, though, and it could be wrong.

i might be misquoting then if the comments weren't as strong as i remember
 

discostu

Registered User
Nov 12, 2002
22,512
2,895
Nomadville
Visit site
Egil said:
The problem is that the owners CAN'T take their last offer if this season is cancelled. Revenues will go down, and the cap number needs to go down with it. As such, any negotiations NOW must be with saving the season in mind, and not towards the long term solution.

I know they've been saying that the offer comes off the table, but in negotiations such as these, it's very hard to pull back from your latest offer. Unless there is a long, extended gap between any official discussions (i.e. the two sides don't talk all summer), I think each sides last proposal will be used as the jumping point for further negotiations.
 

futurcorerock

Registered User
Nov 15, 2003
6,831
0
Columbus, OH
Doctor Zoidberg said:
The season is toast. All of these stories are to be expected the day after a pro sports league shuts down an entire season. Today, things are dying down and I think it's only wishful thinking that the players would break the union. It's just not going to happen.
The ending of the rumors may be good, meaning no more will be heard from this... until they uncancel the season, suckas
 

Egil

Registered User
Mar 6, 2002
8,838
1
Visit site
discostu said:
I know they've been saying that the offer comes off the table, but in negotiations such as these, it's very hard to pull back from your latest offer. Unless there is a long, extended gap between any official discussions (i.e. the two sides don't talk all summer), I think each sides last proposal will be used as the jumping point for further negotiations.

It isn't hard when your first deal was done with 2.1 Billion in revenue, and future deals would need to be done with 1.8 Billion in revenue. So the deal WOULD change from the NHL. Now, putting in full indexing off of last season off the current deal could work, but that is tantamount to linkage, which would then be back on the table.

The $42.5 Mil cap without indexing is gone if the season is cancelled.
 

Jaysfanatic*

Guest
Sure they're starting to fade, it's the calm before the storm. Im as optimistic as I've ever been, if it doesn't happen, fine, but, the tension from these rumors are fun!
 

oil slick

Registered User
Feb 6, 2004
7,593
0
discostu said:
I know they've been saying that the offer comes off the table, but in negotiations such as these, it's very hard to pull back from your latest offer. Unless there is a long, extended gap between any official discussions (i.e. the two sides don't talk all summer), I think each sides last proposal will be used as the jumping point for further negotiations.

I completely don't agree. I think that all offers were predicated on the offers allowing a season this year. As soon as the season was cancelled, a very different financial situation evolved, and I think it's proper for the offers to reflect this situation.

I think while the last offers are probably still on the table for the next short time, I really think that Bettman can easily propose a 40.5 million cap linked to revenues (based on 2003-2004 numbers), which would probably amount to a cap < 30 million next year.
 

discostu

Registered User
Nov 12, 2002
22,512
2,895
Nomadville
Visit site
Egil said:
It isn't hard when your first deal was done with 2.1 Billion in revenue, and future deals would need to be done with 1.8 Billion in revenue. So the deal WOULD change from the NHL. Now, putting in full indexing off of last season off the current deal could work, but that is tantamount to linkage, which would then be back on the table.

The $42.5 Mil cap without indexing is gone if the season is cancelled.

It's still much easier said than done.

I understand the owners need for it, but in reality, if negotiations continue at a decent pace, an owner retreat back to linkage right away would be a very difficult maneuver to pull, without accusations of negotiating in bad faith to be thrown out. That hurts with public relations, and with trying to continue to faction the union, let alone any attempt at declare an impasse.

If things hit a road-block over the summer, then they can retreat back to linkage, claiming the damage incurred by the lockout has changed the reality. Making that claim at this stage is a very dangerous maneuver in this negotiation game.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad

-->