Talks May Need New Faces, Domi Says

[WC Handy*]

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....

The picture you paint isn't an accurate one at all.

First of all, Detroit won't be retaining all their players with a $40M cap and if they do, they're going to have to lose people once it's time for Zetterberg and Datsyuk to get their payday.

Secondly, the "$$$" most certainly does matter. With a cap in place, the teams with the most cap room are going to have the most money to hand out. You're kidding yourself if you think someone is going to go to Detroit to play for peanuts when they can get much more money elsewhere. One thing you're clearly missing is that one of the reasons why Detroit is such an attrative destination for players is because their payroll allows them to be competitive every year. That won't be the case any longer. The most attractive destinations are going to be the ones with the best management.

And finally, if you don't think small market teams can be competitive with a cap, feel free to look at the Green Bay Packers. They sure haven't had trouble getting players to come to their small market. And it would be march harder to get a black guy who group up in an urban setting to move to Green Bay than it would to get a Canadian to move to Nashville.

 

[CGG]

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.

Way to congratulate yourself on being right all along and wiser than the rest of us, I think I speak for everyone when I say your prophetic posts are an inspiration to all. One player saying both leaders should be replaced if a deal isn't reached soon is proof enough to me that the one that you personally don't like must have an ego problem which is the only thing preventing a deal. Good work there.

By the way, who votes on the best hard stance negotiation in the history of sports? Is that part of the Espy Awards? Is there a trophy? Is there a "best hard stance negotiation in the history of sports" victory parade the next day?

 

[SENSible1*]

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.

Who is claiming that "all 30 owners continue to worship Bettman and secretly praise him day in and day out"?

I merely pointed out that Bettman has been able to maintain a public show of support while Goodenow's clients are publically fitting him for a noose if he fails to get a deal done SOON.

I you want to pretend that this has no effect on leverage in this situation, go ahead.

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.

One of us has direct evidence of pressure on the leader and the other has mere speculation.

What you are writing COULD be true, but the more likely scenario is that owners see themselves as close to the finish line and are willing to let Bettman finish the job.

This article certainly seems to paint the scenario of owners seeing a positive finish to the current situation. Where is a comparable article from a players perspective?

The owners went into this knowing it would be a long tough battle that would require a large degree of hardball to bring the ego-driven Goodenow to his knees.

Take a look how far Bettman has been able to get the players to move from their initial negotiating position and how closely it now resembles the owners original postition and then ask yourself if the majority of owners are happy with the job Bettman has done.

 

[SENSible1*]

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

No you do not.

Gary answers to billionaires who are used to making decisions on business deals and having their employees answer to them for there ability to make those decisions a reality.

Bob answers to a group of generally under-educated individuals who are used to having all the major decisions taken care of by others parents/coaches/agents.

Gary advises the owners as to his prefered strategies and then listens and acts upon their directives.

Bob tells the players what their tactics will be and then acts upon his instincts. The fact that the players were taken by surprize by both the 24% rollback and the switch in cap stance should tell you all you need to know about the power structure on the PA side.

To pretend that the relationship between each cheif negotiator and his clients is the same is naive in the extreme.

 

[WC Handy*]

Well put, Thunderstruck.

 

[SENSible1*]

One player saying both leaders should be replaced if a deal isn't reached soon is proof enough to me that the one that you personally don't like must have an ego problem which is the only thing preventing a deal.

I count 2 players--Domi and Roenick
1 agent--Bobby Orr
1 PA apologist/writer--Conway.

By the way, who votes on the best hard stance negotiation in the history of sports? Is that part of the Espy Awards? Is there a trophy? Is there a "best hard stance negotiation in the history of sports" victory parade the next day?

I'm sure Bettman will be rewarded handsomely.

 

[CGG]

No you do not.

Gary answers to billionaires who are used to making decisions and having their employees answer to them for there ability to make those decisions a reality.

Bob answers to a group of generally under-educated individuals who are used to having all the major decisions taken care of by others parents/coaches/agents.

Gary advises the owners as to his prefered strategies and then listens and acts upon their directives.

Bob tells the players what their tactics will be and then acts upon his instincts. The fact that the players were taken by surprize by both the 24% rollback and the switch in cap stance should tell you all you need to know about the power structure on the PA side.

To pretend that the relationship between each cheif negotiator and his clients is the same is naive in the extreme.

To pretend that all 700 players fit under the "I'm stupid and pampered and can't think for myself" stereotype is naive in the extreme. There's 700 players. If 351 of them thought Goodenow wasn't handling this well and in their best interests, he would be replaced. Just like if 16 owners wanted to turf Bettman, they certainly would.

 

[SENSible1*]

To pretend that all 700 players fit under the "I'm stupid and pampered and can't think for myself" stereotype is naive in the extreme.

Nice misrepresentation. I said "generally" and that is exactly the case. Sure their are some exceptions, but most players brush with business sense is based on their one-sided dealing with the owners in contract negotiations under the previous player friendly CBA. This fact explains their confusion and utter amazement that the owners haven't caved and begged them to come back.

To pretend that they, as a group, have even a passing understanding of the issues in a deal this complicated is laughable.

The owners, on the other hand, make business deals for a living and are inimately aware of the nuances and details of this process.

There's 700 players. If 351 of them thought Goodenow wasn't handling this well and in their best interests, he would be replaced. Just like if 16 owners wanted to turf Bettman, they certainly would.

I'm hoping we get to test your 351 theory soon enough.

 

[joepeps]

The picture you paint isn't an accurate one at all.

First of all, Detroit won't be retaining all their players with a $40M cap and if they do, they're going to have to lose people once it's time for Zetterberg and Datsyuk to get their payday.

Secondly, the "$$$" most certainly does matter. With a cap in place, the teams with the most cap room are going to have the most money to hand out. You're kidding yourself if you think someone is going to go to Detroit to play for peanuts when they can get much more money elsewhere. One thing you're clearly missing is that one of the reasons why Detroit is such an attrative destination for players is because their payroll allows them to be competitive every year. That won't be the case any longer. The most attractive destinations are going to be the ones with the best management.

And finally, if you don't think small market teams can be competitive with a cap, feel free to look at the Green Bay Packers. They sure haven't had trouble getting players to come to their small market. And it would be march harder to get a black guy who group up in an urban setting to move to Green Bay than it would to get a Canadian to move to Nashville.

your wrong.. players who want to win cup.. players who are older.. alla Karya will play for less to win a cup.. don't you kidd yourself.. weve seen in happen under the old CBS where Paul K would have gotten over 10 mill, he played for under 1 mil was it.... or 1.15 mil... so $$$ isn't the issue as much as people think... It becomes and issue when people over pay for **** players.... coughBOBBYHOLIKcough

 

[WC Handy*]

your wrong.. players who want to win cup.. players who are older.. alla Karya will play for less to win a cup.. don't you kidd yourself.. weve seen in happen under the old CBS where Paul K would have gotten over 10 mill, he played for under 1 mil was it.... or 1.15 mil... so $$$ isn't the issue as much as people think... It becomes and issue when people over pay for **** players.... coughBOBBYHOLIKcough

Funny that you picked the Paul Kariya case as your example. Do you know why he wanted that salary? Because of money. That salary guaranteed that he'd be an unrestricted free agent after his year with Colorado giving him the opportunity to get the big bucks a year later.

However, there are players that take less to play for the Cup and that'll certainly happen under a cap too. However, you're kidding yourself if you think this isn't anything more than a small percentage of players.

 

[SENSible1*]

Funny that you picked the Paul Kariya case as your example. Do you know why he wanted that salary? Because of money. That salary guaranteed that he'd be an unrestricted free agent after his year with Colorado giving him the opportunity to get the big bucks a year later.

However, there are players that take less to play for the Cup and that'll certainly happen under a cap too. However, you're kidding yourself if you think this isn't anything more than a small percentage of players.

You are also kidding yourself if you think they will be choosing the Leafs as a destination if they want to join a core of players capable of winning the cup in the next few years.

 

[eye]

To pretend that all 700 players fit under the "I'm stupid and pampered and can't think for myself" stereotype is naive in the extreme. There's 700 players. If 351 of them thought Goodenow wasn't handling this well and in their best interests, he would be replaced. Just like if 16 owners wanted to turf Bettman, they certainly would.

Did you even bother to listen to Domi's interview with Landsberg? Did you hear him say that players views are not taken seriously in negotiations of this type? Just one example of what Domi said that pro PA posters like yourself refuse to acknowledge. Domi thought the players/owners had a workable deal until he sat down with Goodenow. Did you listen to that comment? Domi spoke volumes in a short interview and 90% of it was a slam against his PA boss. I really don't care about gloating or saying who is right or wrong but I'm not afraid to call spade a spade.

 

[joepeps]

Funny that you picked the Paul Kariya case as your example. Do you know why he wanted that salary? Because of money. That salary guaranteed that he'd be an unrestricted free agent after his year with Colorado giving him the opportunity to get the big bucks a year later.

However, there are players that take less to play for the Cup and that'll certainly happen under a cap too. However, you're kidding yourself if you think this isn't anything more than a small percentage of players.

No that came about after.... he was taking a pay cut reguardless....

Selenne and Karya then went to Colorado and he took the 1.3 w/e to be under the League avg so he can become an UFA....

 

[WC Handy*]

You are also kidding yourself if you think they will be choosing the Leafs as a destination if they want to join a core of players capable of winning the cup in the next few years.

I'm guessing that reply was meant for joepeps

 

[joepeps]

Did you even bother to listen to Domi's interview with Landsberg? Did you hear him say that players views are not taken seriously in negotiations of this type? Just one example of what Domi said that pro PA posters like yourself refuse to acknowledge. Domi thought the players/owners had a workable deal until he sat down with Goodenow. Did you listen to that comment? Domi spoke volumes in a short interview and 90% of it was a slam against his PA boss. I really don't care about gloating or saying who is right or wrong but I'm not afraid to call spade a spade.

Now listen to yourself... BOB doesn't have the power to turn it down.. .the player do... so the players must have said no and BOB came back with teh NO answer...

If he said no without their approval.. he would be fired right now...

 

[WC Handy*]

Now listen to yourself... BOB doesn't have the power to turn it down.. .the player do... so the players must have said no and BOB came back with teh NO answer...

If he said no without their approval.. he would be fired right now...

That is not true at all. The players have never once voted on any NHL proposal.

 

[joepeps]

I'm guessing that reply was meant for joepeps

If it is for me...

who said anything about the leafs....

and secondly.... they would go where ever they wanted to... ie). hometown. fav place... cup contender

whether it be colorado detriot toronto philly dallas

 

[joepeps]

That is not true at all. The players have never once voted on any NHL proposal.

because they didn't have to.. it was turned down no one wanted to accept it...

no owner got to vote on one either.. does that mean it wouldn't pass????

 

[WC Handy*]

because they didn't have to.. it was turned down no one wanted to accept it...

no owner got to vote on one either.. does that mean it wouldn't pass????

How was it turned down by the players with no vote?

 

[joepeps]

How was it turned down by the players with no vote?

thats what I am saying... before they come back with an answer.. they already know what they want to accept and where they will go.. IT'S CALLED A GAME PLAN!!!!! and if there somthing in there thats not acceptable it wont be accepted...

OR ELSE HE WOULD BE FIRED.. what don't you get... OBVIOUSLLY IT WONT MAKE EVERY SINGLE PLAYER happy... but the majority are..... same with the owners side..

 

[WC Handy*]

thats what I am saying... before they come back with an answer.. they already know what they want to accept and where they will go.. IT'S CALLED A GAME PLAN!!!!! and if there somthing in there thats not acceptable it wont be accepted...

OR ELSE HE WOULD BE FIRED.. what don't you get... OBVIOUSLLY IT WONT MAKE EVERY SINGLE PLAYER happy... but the majority are..... same with the owners side..

What does this have to do with the convesation at hand? You claimed that Bob didn't have the power to turn down a deal. He does. Pretty simple.

 

[joepeps]

What does this have to do with the convesation at hand? You claimed that Bob didn't have the power to turn down a deal. He does. Pretty simple.

like I have been saying all along.. if he turned down a deal that more than 50% of players liked... he would be fired...

 

[WC Handy*]

Actually what you said was....

BOB doesn't have the power to turn it down

No you're saying that he does have the power to turn a deal down.

 

[joepeps]

Actually what you said was....



No you're saying that he does have the power to turn a deal down.

your so confusing.....

I said he can turn it down but he would get fired if the player want that CBA...
or
He can turn it down because the players agree before hand to not accept cerftain deals.. it's not that hard to comprehend

 

[CGG]

Nice misrepresentation. I said "generally" and that is exactly the case. Sure their are some exceptions, but most players brush with business sense is based on their one-sided dealing with the owners in contract negotiations under the previous player friendly CBA. This fact explains their confusion and utter amazement that the owners haven't caved and begged them to come back.

Using stereotypes is generalizing. I'm not misrepresenting anything, you think that the prevailing image of a hockey player, a big dumb jock with no intelligence or business acumen to speak of, is a great description to apply to most if not all members of the NHLPA, "with a few exceptions". That's a load of crap.

To pretend that they, as a group, have even a passing understanding of the issues in a deal this complicated is laughable.

Again, me hockey player, you Jane, CBA hard, me no understand, blah blah blah.

I can guarantee you, the average hockey player has a much better understanding of the CBA and the issues involved than any poster on an internet message board.