Sunday articles

[tantalum]

Well if that's the case the PA would tell the owners if they had an offer.

Hmm perhaps the PA let it known they had something to talk about. No that couldn't possibly have happened or a mutlitude of other things that make sense as well. The owners must have done it to embarass the PA some more not to mention themselves and two of the greatest to ever play. Please.

 

[CarlRacki]

Why should they? The owners invited them to the meeting. Why would the owners invite the PA to a meeting and expect the PA to make an offer? If the PA had an offer to make they would invite the owners to meet with them.

Well, if we're to believe the press reports - and I understand that's a leap of faith - Bettman was willing to offer $45 million but owners told him no.
So what's the next best thing Bettman could do? Let it be known that he would "have to listen" to an offer around $45 million then invite the PA to New York to discuss the situation. I mean, sheesh, he's dropping more clues than Hansel and Gretel. Someone in an earlier post suggested we read between the lines. Perhaps that advice is better given to the NHLPA, because they certainly seemed to have missed - quite possibly on purpose - a pretty big hint.

 

[bcrt2000]

it was speculation that bettman was refused to go to $45M. i really believe that they *did* have a deal in principle based on the cap, but they still needed to hammer out other CBA issues. i'm pretty sure that if both the players/owners are having meetings in the next week its to discuss their gameplan on these issues

 

[mr gib]

Hmm perhaps the PA let it known they had something to talk about. No that couldn't possibly have happened or a mutlitude of other things that make sense as well. The owners must have done it to embarass the PA some more not to mention themselves and two of the greatest to ever play. Please.

from what i've read mario had the leafs on board which had all the other big clubs on board - the pens and coyotes were on board - but... boston, nashville,carolina,chicago,atlanta,edmonton,calgary, and ottawa, poo pooed the deal - trevor linded in his press conference mentioned the league leaked the info that the deal was done - another tactic to get the public jonesing in hopes they could pressure the players into taking the owners home run deal - cause going in bettman knew those clubs would skuttle the thing -

 

[Marconius]

Players were willing to go to 45 mill...from there 52 million...how did they not move?? Owners moved from 40 to 42.5 and stopped. Seems like your reading to much Burke.

Do you seriously think that the problem was as simple as splitting the difference in the cap number? Obviously, they ran into some kind of unexpected snag, at this point no really knows, so how can you claim the owners are soley at fault?

 

[Marconius]

Obviously you don't have access to Canadian sports coverage otherwise you would have heard the number 45 enough to make your head explode on that Wednesday leading up to 1:00PM.

Speculation by the Canadain media is still speculation

 

[mr gib]

Do you seriously think that the problem was as simple as splitting the difference in the cap number? Obviously, they ran into some kind of unexpected snag, at this point no really knows, so how can you claim the owners are soley at fault?

the snag was the 8 owners that said no way

 

[tantalum]

from what i've read mario had the leafs on board which had all the other big clubs on board - the pens and coyotes were on board - but... boston, nashville,carolina,chicago,atlanta, poo pooed the deal - trevor linded in his press conference mentioned the league leaked the info that the deal was done - another tactic to get the public jonesing in hopes they could pressure the players into taking the owners home run deal - cause going in bettman knew those clubs would skuttle the thing -

Maybe maybe not. No one knows and any speculation this way or that is just as accurate and juat as believable. Now that said. It is a common misconception that 8 teams can hold up a deal. That can only happen IF Bettman does not recommend it. If Bettman recommends it it is simply a majority vote. Given that Bettman can lose his job on the same majority vote he isn't going to be stubborn on recommending a deal that the majority of the clubs feel would be fine. And perhaps those teams would have accepted a $45 mil cap deal IF the free agency was X, arbitration was gone or completely equitable with limits to raises, qualifying offers were X etc. etc. etc.. They may have accepted the increased cap but the "throwaways" were no longer so disposable, the cap doesn't increase etc etc etc etc. Or the players accepted the $42.5 mil cap (or close to) but wanted to hit the jackpot on all the throwaways.

No one other than those in the room knows what went on Saturday...it's a good bet that NHL wasn't as evil as the PA says (even in the PA statement the revenue sharing decreasing to 0 was only something the COULD happen not would happen) and the NHL isn't as confused as they make themselves out to be. It may be the cap issue is settled but the other things aren't and as a result nothing is settled.

 

[Marconius]

Bottom line

Owners called the meeting and should have put 45 mill offer on the table take it or leave it right now.

Why exactly? You really think it's that simple?

That wasnt done. The small markets and hawks dominate the owners ranks and the rangers, flyers, red wings, stars, blues, avalanche and leafs suffer. These are the teams that bring the major revenues into this league. These are the teams that are the earners. I know it wont happen, but the above teams should at this point cecede from the NHL and start a new super league. Leave the pipsqueaks out. Gary Bettman should be fired for not coming out this weekend w/o a deal.

Its so fantastically easy to just set up a new league, isn't it? Bettman is doing his job. If the owners get split like last time, they only need 8 votes to nix the deal, to protect the same markets that got sold out in the last bargaining session

Jaques Lemaire ruined the sport in 94 by introducing this Sport killing system called "The Trap".

Yes, thats exactly what 'killed' the NHL dead. Lemaire and the trap. I don't think things are as simple as you're making them out to be.

Owners, take some responsibility and get this done. The 2.5 million extra on the cap isnt going to make that much difference and no matter what Ted Saskin says, The players would have accepted a 45 million dollar flat cap over 6 years.

[/quote]

I don't think you can say what the players would have accepted, the cba had a lot more then a simple cap number, you know that right?

 

[mr gib]

Maybe maybe not. No one knows and any speculation this way or that is just as accurate and juat as believable. Now that said. It is a common misconception that 8 teams can hold up a deal. That can only happen IF Bettman does not recommend it. If Bettman recommends it it is simply a majority vote. Given that Bettman can lose his job on the same majority vote he isn't going to be stubborn on recommending a deal that the majority of the clubs feel would be fine. And perhaps those teams would have accepted a $45 mil cap deal IF the free agency was X, arbitration was gone or completely equitable with limits to raises, qualifying offers were X etc. etc. etc.. They may have accepted the increased cap but the "throwaways" were no longer so disposable, the cap doesn't increase etc etc etc etc. Or the players accepted the $42.5 mil cap (or close to) but wanted to hit the jackpot on all the throwaways.

No one other than those in the room knows what went on Saturday...it's a good bet that NHL wasn't as evil as the PA says (even in the PA statement the revenue sharing decreasing to 0 was only something the COULD happen not would happen) and the NHL isn't as confused as they make themselves out to be. It may be the cap issue is settled but the other things aren't and as a result nothing is settled.

well said but if you look at all that has gone down from the perspective that the owners were going to sit out the season unless they hit the home run it all makes sense - i have to admit bettman was pretty clever - the players are too - wacky

 

[Marconius]

the snag was the 8 owners that said no way

again though, I've heard numbers as high as 16 teams being unhappy with the cba and voting it down. Do we actually have a list or number of teams that voted it down somewhere?

 

[mr gib]

again though, I've heard numbers as high as 16 teams being unhappy with the cba and voting it down. Do we actually have a list or number of teams that voted it down somewhere?

not really but... the owners didn't want to play anyway... unless they hit the home run

 

[Marconius]

not really but... the owners didn't want to play anyway... unless they hit the home run

Which I think is the right move. No sense killing this much of a season only to agree to a deal that doesn't address the roots of the problems. As much as I love hockey I was a little relieved when there was no last minute deal. Those in the know need the time to fully think out their proposals, iron out possible loopholes and basically make it idiot-proof

 

[nomorekids]

Again...the humor here is that the only thing that kept a deal from getting done was the 42.5 instead of 45. Wrong.

Until the players accept that a "partnership" means they might have to risk some of their precious, inflated salaries...no deal will be nor SHOULD be signed. It's not fair to demand that the cap floats upward but never downward, especially when the revenues are likely to trend downward for quite a while.

It's funny that people thought that no one would be able to be pro-owner after Saturday...well, I'm more pro-owner than ever. 42.5 was the "best offer" that everyone was waiting for, whether people want to believe it or not, and the removal of linkage was a whopping concession..and yet still not enough. Well, with that...

Crush the union into fine powder.

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Sunday's Articles? How about this one from Monday in Oklahoma. Apparently news still travels by pony express in parts of the Southwest.

http://pryordailytimes.com/articles/2005/02/21/news_content/sports/sports03.txt

 

[Habnot]

owners:
- moved from $31M to $42.5M
- moved from linkage of 53-55% of revenues to no linkage
- willing to bring down UFA age 2 years
- wanted 2-way arbitration
- wanted qualifying offers to move from 110% to 75%
- moved from no revenue sharing to minimal revenue sharing

players:
- moved from no cap to cap
- moved from $52M to $49M
- moved from no linkage to upwards linkage
- want to lower UFAs to 29
- went from 1-way arbitration to allowing owners to send a player to arbitration once in his career
- not sure on qualifying offer status, but weren't pleased with 75%
- wanted heavy revenue sharing

I think the concessions and wants from both sides have been pretty even, unlike what the players are saying

Oh BTW - you forgot about one small player rollback - 24%. But hey - fair and balanced right?

 

[bcrt2000]

Oh BTW - you forgot about one small player rollback - 24%. But hey - fair and balanced right?

yeah, someone did mention that earlier in the thread

 

[Jaded-Fan]

Oh BTW - you forgot about one small player rollback - 24%. But hey - fair and balanced right?

only 20% of contracts remain next year. A 24% rollback that does not effect 80% of contracts is nice enough I suppose, but let us not make it some ghandi-like offer.

 

[nomorekids]

Oh BTW - you forgot about one small player rollback - 24%. But hey - fair and balanced right?

to compliment the 6 zillion percent "rollup" over the past 10 years

 

[ti-vite]

Crush the union into fine powder.

And Glen Healy please.

 

[nomorekids]

And Glen Healy please.

That goes without saying.

 

[bcrt2000]

only 20% of contracts remain next year. A 24% rollback that does not effect 80% of contracts is nice enough I suppose, but let us not make it some ghandi-like offer.

You make a good point. I don't think the NHL will care if a 24% rollback is on the table next year as much as they do right now.. another card that the PA will lose because of their inability to negotiate more than 8 hours in a 2 week span.

 

[BLONG7]

Oh BTW - you forgot about one small player rollback - 24%. But hey - fair and balanced right?

Then the players decided to take a 100% rollback...