Talks May Need New Faces, Domi Says

[snakepliskin]

http://www.msgnetwork.com/content_n...ticle&sports=ice-hockey&team=other&league=nhl

 

[Digger12]

I see nothing in Domi's speech though that gives the indication that "The UNION is disgruntled and Goodenow is going to be replaced any time soon type comments"

Do you ??

"If these guys (NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and NHLPA executive director Bob Goodenow) don't get a deal done, there's going to have to be new faces in there," Domi told the Times.

There's a lot of ego, and they don't want to put their pride aside. The fight is over. These two guys have got to get a deal done. They'd better, or they won't be around too long."

"You need trust," he added. "I don't know if these two guys at the top can get this done. That's the bottom line."

-Colour me crazy, but if I were Goodenow and I read that...I wouldn't exactly think my job security just got enhanced.

If anything, it'd tell me I have 4 months or less (likely a lot less) to get a signed agreement delivered to the people I represent.

 

[Johnnybegood13]

Roenick just said the same thing on TSN's OTR

 

[Slats432]

While I agree he speaks out against both sides .. he paints both with the same brush when he says "egos aside "or "need to get a deal done" .. Those are blanket comments no different then you and I have said here ourselves..

..but there is no confusion who is at the brunt of his tirade here ..

"You can only gouge so much and Gary is gouging," Domi said. "It's not a way to have a partnership. Is Gary trying to break the union? I think he is. I think Gary's more to blame than Bob."

The NHL issuing immediate responses to the comments should be an indication that they felt the heat .. The NHLPA has not issued any statements yet !!

I see nothing in Domi's speech though that gives the indication that "The UNION is disgruntled and Goodenow is going to be replaced any time soon type comments"

Do you ??

No. He isn't exactly painting them with the same brush...but a rectal cavity by any other name is still a rectal cavity.

Bob is no better than Gary, and vice versa. Although some NHLPA supporters would like to believe differently.

How can you still show any kind of support for either of these ridiculous sides?

Goodenow is a Pejorative Slur Messenger...an utter and ridiculous Pejorative Slur, because if I was in charge of the NHLPA, they would have had a deal last summer and $1 billion dollars to show for it. He gave them nothing that a union boss should have...the best possible deal. They got nothing, zero, and 90% of hockey fans are even disgusted by the mere mention of the NHLPA.

Bettman also is a Pejorative Slur. His job was to get the best possible deal for his owners. He is figuring that he can recoup the $800 million dollars over the next couple of decades. Not exactly the sound business strategy I would look for in a leader.

I am a negotiator. I make deals for a living. These two clowns should be fired.

 

[Hoss]

Ok. I need to say something. Has anyone ever THOUGHT LOGICALLY why the PA wants revenue sharing? Why ANY PA from any league wants revenue sharing.

Heres the answer:

If the lower revenue teams get revenue from outside sources, that enables those lower revenue teams to give more money to the players on their team.

i.e. The players want more money to be shared among the teams so that money can end up in THEIR pockets.

I find it hilarious that ppl are like "lets have revenue sharing" all the time. Sure, it helps. But all revenue sharing equals for players is MORE MONEY... in other words. GREED.

And I, for one, am tired of the player's greed. I'll be happy when the NHL comes back. Revenue sharing or no revenue sharing.

IMHO the league has shown that they expect thier employees to fix the league's poor business sense by forfeiting potential wage.
While a cap will reduce how much teams can spend on wages it does not in itself increase revenue to cash strapped teams. Revenue sharing will do that. With a cap reducing salary expenditures profitable teams will become more $ucce$$ful, spreading the wealth means more teams to be stable and hopefully $ucce$$ful as well.
Capping without revenue sharing just means the league will keep demanding the players foot the bill for poor business practices.

 

[AM]

We disagree....

No. He isn't exactly painting them with the same brush...but a rectal cavity by any other name is still a rectal cavity.

Bob is no better than Gary, and vice versa. Although some NHLPA supporters would like to believe differently.

How can you still show any kind of support for either of these ridiculous sides?

Goodenow is a Pejorative Slur Messenger...an utter and ridiculous Pejorative Slur, because if I was in charge of the NHLPA, they would have had a deal last summer and $1 billion dollars to show for it. He gave them nothing that a union boss should have...the best possible deal. They got nothing, zero, and 90% of hockey fans are even disgusted by the mere mention of the NHLPA.

Bettman also is a Pejorative Slur. His job was to get the best possible deal for his owners. He is figuring that he can recoup the $800 million dollars over the next couple of decades. Not exactly the sound business strategy I would look for in a leader.

I am a negotiator. I make deals for a living. These two clowns should be fired.

Bettman has done a good job.

What more could he do, when dealing with the expectations that bob gave to the players?

The NHLPA wasnt even agreeing to a salary cap until the very last minute of last season.

He then went ahead and made an offer which the majority of owners didnt want him to go to.

What more could he do?....

I guess he coulda pandered to the egos of the players and played them like schmuks.... too bad he didnt patronize those guys!

 

[Mess]

"If these guys (NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and NHLPA executive director Bob Goodenow) don't get a deal done, there's going to have to be new faces in there," Domi told the Times.

There's a lot of ego, and they don't want to put their pride aside. The fight is over. These two guys have got to get a deal done. They'd better, or they won't be around too long."

"You need trust," he added. "I don't know if these two guys at the top can get this done. That's the bottom line."

-Colour me crazy, but if I were Goodenow and I read that...I wouldn't exactly think my job security just got enhanced.

If anything, it'd tell me I have 4 months or less (likely a lot less) to get a signed agreement delivered to the people I represent.

The biggest flaw with your point is that changing one side or the other still makes the statments true ... You are reading it as both need to be changed .. Either or still changes the bargaining teams and dynamics ..

That doesn't mean that you can't get a deal by replacing only one..

 

[Mess]

Goodenow is a Pejorative Slur Messenger...an utter and ridiculous Pejorative Slur, because if I was in charge of the NHLPA, they would have had a deal last summer and $1 billion dollars to show for it. He gave them nothing that a union boss should have...the best possible deal. They got nothing, zero, and 90% of hockey fans are even disgusted by the mere mention of the NHLPA.

I am a negotiator. I make deals for a living. These two clowns should be fired.

I am not saying he hasn't done lots of things wrong and negotiating on both sides if that is what you can call it was is and always will be complete nonsense on both sides .. I personally don't care if they get rid of both .. I have always said I am pro fan. If different guy can get a deal done good for everyone . .


I am curious however .. What kind of deal would you have suggested the NHLPA accept or take IF YOU ARE IN CHARGE ??

I have put myself in those shoes and would be interested to hear your viewpoint ..

What would your CBA look like from a NHLPA look like .??

 

[mr gib]

I am not saying he hasn't done lots of things wrong and negotiating on both sides if that is what you can call it was is and always will be complete nonsense on both sides ..

I am curious however .. What kind of deal would you have suggested the NHLPA accept or take IF YOU ARE IN CHARGE ??

I have put myself in those shoes and would be interested to hear your viewpoint ..

What would your CBA look like from a NHLPA look like .??

i would have taken the rollback - changes to arbitration - qualifying offers - 45 mil cap with luxury tax to 50 - traded the minimum floor for all the above and put a two year time limit on the deal -

 

[Mess]

i would have taken the rollback - changes to arbitration - qualifying offers - 45 mil cap with luxury tax to 50 - traded the minimum floor for all the above and put a two year time limit on the deal -

I think the biggest mistake that the NHL is making is that they want too much all at once .. We have all heard the Baby steps theory before .. I support Domi gouging theory to a point .. That the owners are letting the last CBA cloud its judgment in this one as they want to recover from all mistakes over night .. This takes time and patience and needs to be done in steps. .

The NHL should have taken a deal that had a the 24% rollback and a hard cap with as you say luxury tax (which generates forced Revenue Sharing) .. Penalties start and $40 Mil and increase in levels up to the Max of 50 mil Hard Cap ..

This allows the market Salaries and players to adjust better going into a future system then trying to take players used to making $6-8 mil and suddenly like a huge shock make them accept $3-4 mil for the Stars to fit under a cap or your career is over.

With the appropriate drag on salaries with the systemic issues addressed of the CBA you are educating the young Stars of tomorrow Nash, Crosby, Heatley, etc that the days of $8 million dollar Salaries are a thing of the past .. We all know you can't miss what you never had, but the opposite forcing today's Stars to take 50% pay cuts or else is a tough transition for anyone ..

Also a Hard Cap floor is just as important IMO .. You have to force owners to spend their money to a minimum level .. That figure should be around $30 mil when the league has recovered. .This Washington selling off all its stars is an embarrassment to the league and so are 18 and 20 mil payroll teams.. There will be lots of UFA out there each year and with the big market teams Capped out lots of choices for other teams with room to add vets to make the team competitive for fans even while the rebuild with youth that takes place.

This next CBA will truly give these recent expansion teams to test their true success and financial viability in the NHL .. If after the 5 years teams are still losing money at the 30 mil range then you have to pull the plug on the experiment once and for all...

Linkage should be the goal of the next CBA .. It has trust issues and those can be addressed over the life of this CBA .. Put things in place to capture the data and test the accuracy of it, even involve a 3rd party to build trust and the partnership of tomorrow. .. Then if the Owners can prove that the reporting and numbers are accurate you have overcome a big hurdle, and simply turn on the switch in the next CBA that links the HARD CAP ceiling to a percentage of tested and proven revenue in the future when the Game is at its top in growth and recovery.

It also allows a smooth transition into linkage as hopefully with no lockout and 5 or 6 years on this CBA to restore the 2.1 bil industry then you have actual figures to make the Cap numbers not pure guesses ..

 

[WC Handy*]

If linkage is what's necessary then it would be foolish for the owners to accept a CBA without it. The approach the league has taken is the right one. Get it all fixed now.. and by all I mean both the financial aspects and the game on the ice so they can 're-launch' the league and not have to deal with this stuff any time in the near future.

 

[Digger12]

The biggest flaw with your point is that changing one side or the other still makes the statments true ... You are reading it as both need to be changed .. Either or still changes the bargaining teams and dynamics ..

That doesn't mean that you can't get a deal by replacing only one..

Actually, I thought I was reading it as "Bob Goodenow has our support, but he'd better have a deal done by September or he's outta here"...I don't think Domi's words had much hidden meaning, to me it seemed rather plain to see.

Your contention was that Domi's rant didn't have anything in it regarding the possibility of Goodenow being replaced "any time soon", when to me it seems rather obvious Goodenow is having the heat turned up on him in not-so-subtle terms. Perhaps we need a clearer definition of what you consider "any time soon".

A year?
6 months?
6 days?

Why you went on the tangent you did in your reply to me, who knows?

 

[Mess]

Actually, I thought I was reading it as "Bob Goodenow has our support, but he'd better have a deal done by September or he's outta here"...I don't think Domi's words had much hidden meaning, to me it seemed rather plain to see.

Your contention was that Domi's rant didn't have anything in it regarding the possibility of Goodenow being replaced "any time soon", when to me it seems rather obvious Goodenow is having the heat turned up on him in not-so-subtle terms. Perhaps we need a clearer definition of what you consider "any time soon".

A year?
6 months?
6 days?

Why you went on the tangent you did in your reply to me, who knows?

You as pro-owner has directed all Domi's comments at his own leader...I admit that both leaders have done a poor job .. but if you exchange them then how do you know you are not back at square 1 in negotiations.

Gary Bettman made the mistake of promising the new owners a Hard Cap and is now painted into a corner to deliver it .. Removing him from the process removes the promises and perhaps move to a higher Cap but luxury tax within it ..Something Bettman is against ..

Also this is one guy , or even just a few .. That doesn't mean is has any teeth at all or just some idiots spouting off. it would take a large players vote to remove Goodenow anyways.

Why you ignore comments like gouging and union busting is only up to you to decide . If you accuse someone of that it doesn't mean your own leader is faultless but certainly on the defensive to avoid a CBA that players feel includes gouging .. IMO

This all comes out of dumb hockey players wanting to play hockey and then when the smokes settles you are going to hear all the complaints in the future that this such a bad CBA ..

Both leaders are working on their own legacies and it is those ego's that are clouding the negotiations ..

 

[alecfromtherock]

Domi can have a monopoly on fan support if he would just give out free Quizno’s Sub coupons to all of the fans upgrade it to the $5.99 combo(AKA a signed CBA) and he would be set.

Super Mario and the Great One had little effect on the players coming to their senses, but Domi is a fellow NHLPA member and should have the ear of many players.

Domi making sense... BG and GB(did anyone else notice the their initials are the exact opposite, they are just like Ying and Yang) might soon be blinded by the obvious: get a deal done or kiss your ass’s(assess?) Goodby.

 

[SENSible1*]

The message is crystal clear.

All attempts to spin this to the contrary, only one sides constituents are calling for a change. Orr, Domi and Roenick have all called for Goodenow's head if he can't get a deal done shortly. No similar statements have been forthcoming from the owners side regarding Bettman. Translation-- Goodenow is on a VERY short leash and Bettman has the upper hand.

This provides the NHL with a good deal of leverage in the current round of talks. Hopefully they use it to get a better deal or get rid of Bob (and then get a better deal).

 

[joepeps]

All attempts to spin this to the contrary, only one sides constituents are calling for a change. Orr, Domi and Roenick have all called for Goodenow's head if he can't get a deal done shortly. No similar statements have been forthcoming from the owners side regarding Bettman. Translation-- Goodenow is on a VERY short leash and Bettman has the upper hand.

This provides the NHL with a good deal of leverage in the current round of talks. Hopefully they use it to get a better deal or get rid of Bob (and then get a better deal).

like in the other thread... Gary has a gag order on his owners...

Toronto, Colorado, Detriot, Philly, and a few other want to play hockey.....

I know for a fact Toronto is losing money.. i'm sure about some other teams... I would figure Tampa will lose money... they just got off a CUP maybe more people would have watched thier games

 

[SENSible1*]

like in the other thread... Gary has a gag order on his owners...

Toronto, Colorado, Detriot, Philly, and a few other want to play hockey.....

I know for a fact Toronto is losing money.. i'm sure about some other teams... I would figure Tampa will lose money... they just got off a CUP maybe more people would have watched thier games

Toronto, Colarado, Detroit and Philly all want to play hockey, but none have called for a change in leadership. The whole league wants to play hockey, but realize that their leader is getting them a very owners friendly deal through his adept manipulation of his defeated opponent.

Only one side is calling for a change in leadership in public and that gives a ton of leverage to the other side.

 

[joepeps]

Toronto, Colarado, Detroit and Philly all want to play hockey, but none have called for a change in leadership. The whole league wants to play hockey, but realize that their leader is getting them a very owners friendly deal through his adept manipulation of his defeated opponent.

Only one side is calling for a change in leadership in public and that gives a ton of leverage to the other side.

A very fair deal for who?????

Toronto doesn't care.. Colorado Philly... they wanna spend the money to get plays...

it's only fair to the small market teams... yeah sure lower player prices are nice.. but they had that over 6 months ago... theres no need fr this to drag out longer than it has to.. just so the small market teams are happy.... becuase you can't please everyone... your just going to make teams with money.. unhappy....

 

[eye]

For those of you trying to put a spin on Domi's remarks, I suggest you go back and listen to all 3 parts of his interview on TSN.ca

How many times have I told you all that Goodenow's pride, ego and determination to have that "spoiled little kids last say" are the only things preventing a deal from getting done.

Fans, players and owners will one day agree that Bettmans stand on behalf of the owners was the best thing for the long term and the may go down as the best hard stance negotiation in the history of sports.

Even pro player Nick Kypreos said yesterday that the hockey will be better just because of more balanced team by team payrolls. No longer the 70 million dollar Red Wings against the 20 million dollar Preds.

From a fans perspective I only see upside in balancing the playing field, unless your only looking at it through your team colored glasses. Players may think they are losing out in this CBA but they may actually be helping the game and their future alumnists for the long term.

 

[Slats432]

I am not saying he hasn't done lots of things wrong and negotiating on both sides if that is what you can call it was is and always will be complete nonsense on both sides .. I personally don't care if they get rid of both .. I have always said I am pro fan. If different guy can get a deal done good for everyone . .


I am curious however .. What kind of deal would you have suggested the NHLPA accept or take IF YOU ARE IN CHARGE ??

I have put myself in those shoes and would be interested to hear your viewpoint ..

What would your CBA look like from a NHLPA look like .??

The problem with me suggesting what my deal would look like TM is that it would have been done before last season, so the whole landscape was different than it is now.

I probabably would have had a hard cap at $45-49 million, a franchise player waiver, rookie cap waiver once every three years, percentage of profit/growth to the players, UFA at 29, but who knows what kind of deal I would have got if I was smart enough last July to have 6 negotiating sessions in two weeks without looking for pressure points of my counterpart.

As someone in business, I personally look for the win-win, not...."What can I win." I also don't look at the other side as my adversary, but my partner. As time goes on, I would have easily recognized the disdain that the majority of fans have for my membership. I would have recognized in 2003 that my counterpart wasn't in a position to maintain any semblance of status quo. I would have recognized that the people that PAY THE BILLS can turn the tap off and close shop.

And here is the big one.....I would have recognized their willingness to do so.

 

[WC Handy*]

You as pro-owner has directed all Domi's comments at his own leader...I admit that both leaders have done a poor job .. but if you exchange them then how do you know you are not back at square 1 in negotiations.

Gary Bettman made the mistake of promising the new owners a Hard Cap and is now painted into a corner to deliver it .. Removing him from the process removes the promises and perhaps move to a higher Cap but luxury tax within it ..Something Bettman is against

Gary works for the owners. If they collectively didn't want a hard cap (yes, I'm sure a few don't) they would tell him to get the best deal he could so they could get back on the ice. The simple fact that the lockout is still going on verifies that the owners support him. Otherwise they would have never let a season be cancelled.

 

[joepeps]

okay wow.. 70 mil wings vs 20 mil preds...

So now lets say it's 40 vs 40

Detriot

still has all there players everyone reduced salary.. payroll 40 mil

nashville has there players manye some got more money payroll 20-40 mill

it doesn't matter about the $$$ ammount.. it matters about the players on the team... and be honest who is goig to want to go to nashville and otehr small market teams....

 

[CGG]

Toronto, Colarado, Detroit and Philly all want to play hockey, but none have called for a change in leadership. The whole league wants to play hockey, but realize that their leader is getting them a very owners friendly deal through his adept manipulation of his defeated opponent.

Only one side is calling for a change in leadership in public and that gives a ton of leverage to the other side.

You have no clue what is going on behind the scenes on the NHL side, underneath the gag order. There could be several teams calling for Bettman's head if he doesn't get them a deal soon. I can guarantee they don't have 30 owners sitting around patiently waiting for something to slowly happen while debts mount, bankers call to collect, and revenues stay at zero. There is no possible way that all 30 owners continue to worship Bettman and secretly praise him day in day out.

None of this is made public since the teams don't want to cough up millions to violate a gag order. There's just as much pressure on Bettman's side to get a deal done NOW than there is on the players side. If you want to pretend this gives the owners added leverage to crush the players, go ahead.

 

[SENSible1*]

A very fair deal for who?????

Try re-reading my post. No mention was made of a "fair" deal.

 

[CGG]

Gary works for the owners. If they collectively didn't want a hard cap (yes, I'm sure a few don't) they would tell him to get the best deal he could so they could get back on the ice. The simple fact that the lockout is still going on verifies that the owners support him. Otherwise they would have never let a season be cancelled.

Replace "Gary" with "Bob" and "owners" with "players" and you have an equally correct statement.