Skip Bettman, go straight to Owners???

[ACC1224]

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/columnist.jsp;jsessionid=LJAIDBHMODOI?content=20041118_132038_4940

Doubt it would make a difference but it could start some dialogue.

Click to read more...

 

[Guest]

Seems like if this was truely an issue, the Owners would simply remove Bettman from power as it is. The GM's are the one's who are going to be signing the CBA if I am correct, and no GM would go against the wishes of the owner who employs him.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but it seems like a fluff article with no true value. The only thing I see valid in the article is the thought of making the next proposal public. That could go a long way for both sides, to make everything wide open.

 

[FlyersFan10*]

While it is a great sounding idea, there are a few potential problems I see. First problem is that there are probably several teams who are not all on the same page. For instance, I could see the Flyers or the Leafs or the Red Wings agreeing to a luxury tax type system. However, I could see teams like the Bruins or the Blackhawks pushing for a salary cap. The problem is that because the owners are behind Bettman and because of the gag order Bettman has imposed (and don't kid yourself, if Bobby Clarke or Glen Sather could speak about what's going on, they would), we never get to really hear what the owners or GMs have to say.

The second problem is that it is the GMs who have to work with the new CBA. You'd figure that the GMs would be asked for some kind of input in the negotiations. Not once have you seen anything like that? Why not? Simple, because they could find a system that would be beneficial to all. Not once have you seen any of the GMs asked to be part of the negotiation process.

The third problem has to do with Bettman himself. You can bet that if the Players Union were to present an offer, there is no way in hell Bettman would let the proposal get to the owners. Unfortunately, this CBA thing has come down to a battle of Bettman and Goodenow waiting on who blinks first.

 

[shakes]

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/columnist.jsp;jsessionid=LJAIDBHMODOI?content=20041118_132038_4940

Doubt it would make a difference but it could start some dialogue.

Not as long as Gary "My way or the highway" Bettman is involved.

 

[Guest]

The third problem has to do with Bettman himself. You can bet that if the Players Union were to present an offer, there is no way in hell Bettman would let the proposal get to the owners. Unfortunately, this CBA thing has come down to a battle of Bettman and Goodenow waiting on who blinks first.

I don't believe that would be an issue simply because if Bettman wasn't disclosing 100% of his information to the owners, why would they chose to support him? I think many people are forgetting that Bettman works for the owners here, and while Bettman might have his own agenda, it's in part the owners agenda as well.

 

[Sanderson]

Bettman is the spokesperson for the owners. If the NHLPA wants to make an offer, they have to give it to Bettman (or Daly), giving it to some owners won't change anything.

The owners are informed about this matter. If they would have anything against Bettman's stance, they would have told him to handle this differently, but they haven't.

That's like suggesting to the league, to make an offer to the "lower" NHLPA members and not to Goodenow or Linden. Sure, some of them would take it, but they aren't the ones who decide on this matter.

 

[FlyersFan10*]

I don't believe that would be an issue simply because if Bettman wasn't disclosing 100% of his information to the owners, why would they chose to support him? I think many people are forgetting that Bettman works for the owners here, and while Bettman might have his own agenda, it's in part the owners agenda as well.

Yeah, but you know that this has become personal between Bettman and Goodenow. Why wouldn't Bettman try to go out of his way just to "stick it" to Goodenow a little further. Anyways, I do think a deal can be reached without a salary cap and I think that there is a way to achieve revenue sharing amongst everyone with success.

 

[Buffaloed]

I don't believe that would be an issue simply because if Bettman wasn't disclosing 100% of his information to the owners, why would they chose to support him? I think many people are forgetting that Bettman works for the owners here, and while Bettman might have his own agenda, it's in part the owners agenda as well.

I agree, the owners didn't give Bettman 75% veto power because they didn't trust him. The writer of this article is ignorant to imply that any proposal made by the NHLPA isn't presented to the owners.

 

[Old Hickory]

Looks to me like a NHL writer with very little to write about

 

[AM]

What a joke:

Bettman does what the owners say already.

 

[SENSible1*]

Here's hoping they are stupid enough to do it. It certainly would speak to bargaining in good faith when this matter is before the NLRB.

 

[thinkwild]

Maybe the owners will have Bettman fall on his sword once they have used him to extract maximum concessions. There must be a lot of owners not anxious for the possible strategy being contemplated. Even if the owners did get their deal, how can they go on with Bettman at the helm? Once these negotiations are over hopefully the bad cop is gone and a commisioner that will make the game proud and be able to sell it will be brought in.

 

[SENSible1*]

Maybe the owners will have Bettman fall on his sword once they have used him to extract maximum concessions. There must be a lot of owners not anxious for the possible strategy being contemplated. Even if the owners did get their deal, how can they go on with Bettman at the helm? Once these negotiations are over hopefully the bad cop is gone and a commisioner that will make the game proud and be able to sell it will be brought in.

Bettman will likely move on once he has gotten cost certainty in this negotiation. It makes sense for him and the league. He'll likely return to the NBA and eventually replace Stern.

 

[chara]

Bettman does what the owners say already.

Exactly.

Bettman was hired for this very battle. Bettman's mentor is NBA Commish David Stern, who broke that union and threw a cap down their throats. The NHL took note and replaced John Ziegler with Stern's protege - Bettman.

The owners hand picked Bettman and could have had their cap in 94 if they had the stomachs for it. Bettman wanted it but a bunch of owners had new arenas to pay off and couldn't afford to lose a season. That is not the case this time around. There will be cost certainty. It is inevitable. The owners are expecting Bettman to deliver this time around.

 

[fan mao rong]

Mr. Bettman only needs the agreement of around 8 owners to work his will in this negotiation. These powers were voted unto him by a unanimous vote of the owners. People who think any ownership are looking to proceed under the current system are buying into the pro-player propaganda. All the pro-player types have held up the Forbes report as the Holy Grail or handed down from the mountain top on a stone tablet. The Forbes report, even that, has Detroit losing around 15 million, Flyers losing 4.1 million, Rangers around that also, and so forth. And those numbers are low because Forbes did not include interest, taxes, mortgage, and the like, nor did they have access to the proper information to tabulate all the losses. The reason the Commisioner does not negotiate on the ineffectual luxury tax is that doing so would torpedo ever getting a cap because by continuing to negotiate on a luxury tax impasse can not be reached and implementation would not be legal.

 

[Johnnybegood13]

Spin it around and give all the players proposals and have a vote!

 

[me2]

Maybe the owners will have Bettman fall on his sword once they have used him to extract maximum concessions. There must be a lot of owners not anxious for the possible strategy being contemplated. Even if the owners did get their deal, how can they go on with Bettman at the helm? Once these negotiations are over hopefully the bad cop is gone and a commisioner that will make the game proud and be able to sell it will be brought in.

Probably.

Job done and Bettman is gone. Not much point keeping him as the players will hate him and he'll have a hard time working with the union. It'd be sensible to get a hockey man back as commisioner, a fresh face the union can work with. The new comish won't need to be able to go toe to toe with the union because they've been controlled, he'll just need to concentrate on hockey issues. On the other hand if Bettman loses the GMs will want him gone. Both of these make sense.

The question is, does Goodenow get the flick. If he leads the union into the equivalent of Napoleon's Russian campaign, can he stay on? Will he have lost support? What happens if players cross over, is that the ultimate vote of no confidence?

 

[gary69]

Mr. Bettman only needs the agreement of around 8 owners to work his will in this negotiation.

The reason the Commisioner does not negotiate on the ineffectual luxury tax is that doing so would torpedo ever getting a cap because by continuing to negotiate on a luxury tax impasse can not be reached and implementation would not be legal.

Bettman and the crap-hockey market teams can declare all the impasse they want and play replacement 3rd-4th liners + AHL hockey for ever, if they want. That doesn't still mean a squat, if the top players aren't coming back.

All it means NHL deteriorating to just "one of the top leagues" at the best, with money and best players going increasingly to other (overseas?) hockey leagues and youngsters to other sports. And all this just for Bettman's stubborness, his personal distorted ambitions and a few owners's incapabilities as businessmen, who can't make ends meet.

Hopefully there are enough potential profit making owners, who can see a compromise as a better solution than this "my way or highway" approach.

 

[eye]

Bettman and the crap-hockey market teams can declare all the impasse they want and play replacement 3rd-4th liners + AHL hockey for ever, if they want. That doesn't still mean a squat, if the top players aren't coming back.

All it means NHL deteriorating to just "one of the top leagues" at the best, with money and best players going increasingly to other (overseas?) hockey leagues and youngsters to other sports. And all this just for Bettman's stubborness, his personal distorted ambitions and a few owners's incapabilities as businessmen, who can't make ends meet.

Hopefully there are enough potential profit making owners, who can see a compromise as a better solution than this "my way or highway" approach.

Stay tuned. Players a year from now will speak a very different language. The NHL may start with replacement players but the dam will break and players will cross the line. In the meantime players from the AHL, Europe and newly drafted players will fill the void until players come to their senses and kick Goodenow the heck out.

 

[me2]

Bettman and the crap-hockey market teams can declare all the impasse they want and play replacement 3rd-4th liners + AHL hockey for ever, if they want. That doesn't still mean a squat, if the top players aren't coming back.

All it means NHL deteriorating to just "one of the top leagues" at the best, with money and best players going increasingly to other (overseas?) hockey leagues and youngsters to other sports. And all this just for Bettman's stubborness, his personal distorted ambitions and a few owners's incapabilities as businessmen, who can't make ends meet.

Hopefully there are enough potential profit making owners, who can see a compromise as a better solution than this "my way or highway" approach.

I seriously doubt it plays out like that. The NHLers have shown that money is key factor in where they go. They won't turn down $4m in the NHL to make $1m in Russia or $0.5m is Switzerland. Money talks.

 

[SENSible1*]

I seriously doubt it plays out like that. The NHLers have shown that money is key factor in where they go. They won't turn down $4m in the NHL to make $1m in Russia or $0.5m is Switzerland. Money talks.

Yep and Goodenow walks.

 

[gary69]

I seriously doubt it plays out like that. The NHLers have shown that money is key factor in where they go. They won't turn down $4m in the NHL to make $1m in Russia or $0.5m is Switzerland. Money talks.

Well, I guess we'll find out. I know that some of them have quite a decent upbringing and responsible moral values, some even have spouces with academic background, their wifes are not just some money and fame hungry bimbos. The players are not all uneducated farms boys, or ghetto boys like in some other sports.

Especially European players have usually grown up in pretty ordinary families with mainstream western values until their late teens, and they can still relate to their youth team mates' families (often their best friends) and childhood friends, most of whom have pretty middle-class lives.

So while they fight for the princible that a reasonable part of the profit of 2+ billion industry they help to create is rightfully theirs, they are not void of sence of justice in the world, unlike many US billionaire team owners, who were usually either born rich or have long ago grown cynical enough to care nothing about their fellow men.

 

[SENSible1*]

Well, I guess we'll find out. I know that some of them have quite a decent upbringing and responsible moral values, some even have spouces with academic background, their wifes are not just some money and fame hungry bimbos. The players are not all uneducated farms boys, or ghetto boys like in some other sports.

Especially European players have usually grown up in pretty ordinary families with mainstream western values until their late teens, and they can still relate to their youth team mates' families (often their best friends) and childhood friends, most of whom have pretty middle-class lives.

So while they fight for the princible that a reasonable part of the profit of 2+ billion industry they help to create is rightfully theirs, they are not void of sence of justice in the world, unlike many US billionaire team owners, who were usually either born rich or have long ago grown cynical enough to care nothing about their fellow men.

The players are being offered a "reasonable share" of the 2+B industry and the opportunity to make more if they help grow the industry, like the NBAPA and NFLPA did by helping ensure the health of the league.

The problem for your position, is that it will only take a few stars crossing to get the ball rolling and the rest will follow suit to get "their fair share".

The same factor that is motivating them now, will be their undoing. Greed.

 

[CarlRacki]

Well, I guess we'll find out. I know that some of them have quite a decent upbringing and responsible moral values, some even have spouces with academic background, their wifes are not just some money and fame hungry bimbos. The players are not all uneducated farms boys, or ghetto boys like in some other sports.

Especially European players have usually grown up in pretty ordinary families with mainstream western values until their late teens, and they can still relate to their youth team mates' families (often their best friends) and childhood friends, most of whom have pretty middle-class lives.

So while they fight for the princible that a reasonable part of the profit of 2+ billion industry they help to create is rightfully theirs, they are not void of sence of justice in the world, unlike many US billionaire team owners, who were usually either born rich or have long ago grown cynical enough to care nothing about their fellow men.

What a load of cr--. If you believe the players' stand is about "responsible moral values" and a "sence (sic) of justice in the world" you're more deluded than they are. It's about money, money and one other thing: money. That's all it's about. Anyone who believes otherwise is a dope.

 

[YellHockey*]

What a load of cr--. If you believe the players' stand is about "responsible moral values" and a "sence (sic) of justice in the world" you're more deluded than they are. It's about money, money and one other thing: money. That's all it's about. Anyone who believes otherwise is a dope.

While it may have only been about money before, Bettman has succeeded in turning this into a personal fight. He's acted like a weasel and the players aren't going to give into the snivelling little weasel that they, correctly IMHO, view him as. Brett Hull, Tim Taylor, Adam Foote, Robert Esche, Chris Chelios and Bill Guerin have all called him out personally.

If they gave in and lost the battle to Bettman it would be like losing an on ice fight to Gretzky. They'd rather not play then live with the notion that they got punked by a weak little runt.