the players and their Hypocrisy!

[Greschner4]

Doesn't it tell you something when the union rejected to negotiate any of the triggers and instead (just as they always do) rejected the offer flat out with no counter proposals or concepts? They have shown zero interest in negotiating. Its that joke of a 24% *temporary* cutback or nothing from this union. Can't say I'm going to shed any tears when the replacements are brought in and the union crumbles.

It's the outright dismissal of the idea -- AT ANY FIGURE -- by Goodenow that is so galling. Goodenow's not willing to impose ANY standards on the rollback to see if it's working like he says it will.

The bottom line is that Goodenow isn't willing to sign anything other than a "market system" with a toothless luxury tax. All speculation that he is is based on nothing tangible.

He's the problem.

 

[Morbo]

What they did yesterday was admit their own offer wouldnt work for the NHL. Bettman called their bluff and they folded.

Only in the fevered imaginations of the pro-Bettman lemmings.

 

[rollins215]

A view from a new forum member

I have really tried to be objective in this whole mess. I thought the players' proposal in December was pretty good and a decent starting point where the NHL could counter-offer much better luxury taxes and such. I believed the NHL made a mistake not trying to negotiate it. I also thought the last NHL proposal was pretty good and a starting point for the NHLPA to negotiate a higher cap and a lower number from where the profit sharing would begin. I thought it was a mistake on their part not to, but the NHLPA has clearly made a bigger mistake with this recent turn-down.

The NHLPA claimed back in December that the NHL distorted the inflation numbers that would result from their offer, claiming their inflation numbers were accurate and would in fact give the NHL a similar effect to what their cap proposal would do. And from what they presented, it was beleivable. Now, the NHL basically said, "OK, here's your chance to put our money where your mouth is." And the NHLPA swiftly rejected the offer.

I agree that the triggers presented were worth rejecting. However, the NHLPA also pretty much handed the NHL their "Get out your impasse free" card by not even attempting to negotiate the triggers or even saying, "We standy by our offer and can guarantee it would work, but the triggers are too severe." They simply said, "Nope. Take our offer or make us a better one." They, very clearly, are not willing to negotiate. You could say the NHL isn't, either, considering all of their proposals basically include a cap. But...although both aren't really negotiating, the NHL is doing more of it. They would win easily in an "impasse contest" at this point. The NHLPA has done nothing but stonewall the NHL, giving no options (save one and only one) in return, while the NHL has constantly provided revised offers and some cross-over ideas. They may not be the best offers, but they are different offers. If the players have any hope of "winning", they had best make a different counter offer or at least publicly engage in some type of negotiating dialog.

 

[SENSible1*]

Only in the fevered imaginations of the pro-Bettman lemmings.

Steve is right, only if Goodenow fails to counter and show a willingness to apply any standard of measurement to the success of their system. His comments from last night indicated that he was unwilling to do so, which then indicates that his claims as to the effectiveness of his system were disingenuous.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Where does it say the NHLPA isn't considering negotiating the triggers? I'm mostly on the side of cost-certainty in this, but I wouldn't have taken that deal. I would have turned it down, gone back to my office, and started thinking about triggers I'd be willing to live with. Once you figure out what triggers would be acceptable, then you need to come up with what your counter offer will include (and it's got to push more more than what you'd accept.. otherwise you're not doing your job). It's not like Goodenow can see the proposal and in 15 minutes decide how he wants to counter.

I would have rejected it as well, but I would have taken some time, examined the triggers and come back with a counter offer. Good lord, the NHL came back to me with my proposal as the basis for a deal. Now its just trying to nail down the triggers and making sure they are fair to my constituents. By blindly saying no that does nothing, and that's what Goodenow did.

I've been examining the "triggers" and they are set up for a quick implementation of the owner's proposal. But they do appear to provide some flexability that could easily be worked with. Its up to Goodenow to do that. But when he stated that he was not willing to work with this framework as the basis for a deal he essentially admitted that the framework was flawed and that it would not prove to be what he once promoted and would indeed lead to rapid escalation, and then triggering what ever mechanism put in place by the NHL. This is why a completely different framework is needed by Goodenow. He knows the flaws of the system that could be exploited and he can't trust his agents not to exploit every single hole that he intentionally left in the proposal so escalation could take place again. That's the bottom line IMO.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

Thats not up to you to decide, chief. The owners *do* have the legal right to use replacement players if an impass is reached. And according to your own statements, the players refuse to negotiate and voila... impass, implementation and replacements!

ok, why dont you explain how the NHL will get around the immigration laws that will bar most if not all foreigners from being replacements ?

dr

 

[Crazy Lunatic]

Only in the fevered imaginations of the pro-Bettman lemmings.

If the Dec.9 proposal would work like the PA said it would, they should have put up or shut up. They shut up and walked away with their tails between their legs.

 

[Double-Shift Lasse]

You can "reject" something and still negotiate off of it. In fact, negotiating implies that the original offer was unacceptable. Let's wait and see.

And please, folks, there's plenty of blame to go around here. Yes, Bettman's offer was calculated and disingenuous, but it did put the PA in an interesting position. The argument I've heard here from many league supporters in that the players rejected their own proposal. While technically that's not true, it is true that they don't believe their offer would provide the drag on salaries they suggested it would, because now that there are real numbers attached to it, as opposed to just "24 percent", they're backing away from it.

As to the idea that some triggers would be met right away, we've always assumed that, if a cap is implemented, some teams would have to dump or restructure salary. Why wouldn't this also be the case under this latest proposal? I find the idea of a player faced with negotiating his salary down to keep his team from hitting a salary threshold fascinating - maybe unfair, but fascinating.

 

[Crazy Lunatic]

ok, why dont you explain how the NHL will get around the immigration laws that will bar most if not all foreigners from being replacements ?

dr

Even assuming what you say is true (and I'm sure its not as the NHL's lawyers know a lot more than you do, no offense) but it doesn't matter where the scabs come from. In fact, Canadian cities would rather have all Canadian scab teams than a bunch or European scabs. Same probably goes for American teams. Its time for owners to exercise they legal rights. Either that or just shut down this God foresaken league and start again as the NHA.

 

[eye]

How do you know that didn't happen. Bettman could have said the triggers were non-neogeotiable.

He would have said so if that were the case. Bettman never misses a chance to make a point that supports their position. The reason most of us seem anti player is because we disagree with their stance and position. We disagree with their leader who many of us think or know is misleading his players or misreading the economic climate of professional sports today.

I got an email from a friend yesterday that overheard Jean Beliveau on a local radio station proclaiming that players in the last 10 years are very lucky and were overpaid during this period and a correction or system is needed to keep finances in check. He said the players should agree to a cap. Of course what does Jean know as he only went on to do very well for himself in business after hockey. It seems that all retired players that missed out on the big paycheck the last 10 years or only got a portion of it understand where the owners are coming from. Many of these players are now businessmen and have a better feel for the reality of the situation

KIM, For a MOD I expect more of you than to post personal attacks towards those of us that have voiced an opinion on this board.

 

[Morbo]

If the Dec.9 proposal would work like the PA said it would, they should have put up or shut up. They shut up and walked away with their tails between their legs.

.Stop pretending the owners offered the players their own deal. It's nothing like it.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

not too mention the triggers, but i think this was a rediculas clause in the NHL's proposal:


"Upon conversion, the terms of the NHL's February 2, 2005 proposal would become effective, and would be the governing terms of the CBA -- replacing the terms of the NHLPA's December 9, 2004 proposal -- and any "excess" payments made by the Clubs to the Players would be recouped. "

http://www.nhlcbanews.com/news/nhl_compromise020905.html

dr

 

[CGG]

Even assuming what you say is true (and I'm sure its not as the NHL's lawyers know a lot more than you do, no offense) but it doesn't matter where the scabs come from. In fact, Canadian cities would rather have all Canadian scab teams than a bunch or European scabs. Same probably goes for American teams. Its time for owners to exercise they legal rights. Either that or just shut down this God foresaken league and start again as the NHA.

The NHL has openly said it doesn't want to go the impasse route. Maybe because they know they can't. Even if they don't get shot down by the NLRB there's still six teams in Canada to worry about. Ever wonder why the Expos and Blue Jays were going to be playing in Florida during baseball's attempt at using scabs? Then, as pointed out numerous times, immigration issues. Quick, name me 600 American hockey players who are decent enough to fill in as scabs for the 24 US teams. That's gonna be some quality hockey.

 

[eye]

.Stop pretending the owners offered the players their own deal. It's nothing like it.

EXPLAIN your position please. The framework was there for the players to have the chance to prove their offer was as good as they claimed it was. All they needed to do was negotiate a longer trial period to prove it but once again GoodEGOnow's emotions got the better of him.

 

[GKJ]

If the last NHLPA proposal was legitimate and will fix the problems in the league, what is the problem with accepting it as long as it does what it says it is going to do? If the issue is how they are determining if the plan is working or not, negotiate those.

Because the tiggers kick in almost immedetaly. That's why the PA won't agree to it this time around. They get their way for about 45 minutes.

 

[Brent Burns Beard]

EXPLAIN your position please. The framework was there for the players to have the chance to prove their offer was as good as they claimed it was. All they needed to do was negotiate a longer trial period to prove it but once again GoodEGOnow's emotions got the better of him.

maybe you missed the part where the PA said they are not interested in a cap system ?

applying the NHL's triple cap measurements to the PA's proposal is not something the PA is ever going to agree to.

dr

 

[CGG]

EXPLAIN your position please. The framework was there for the players to have the chance to prove their offer was as good as they claimed it was. All they needed to do was negotiate a longer trial period to prove it but once again GoodEGOnow's emotions got the better of him.

If they accepted the player's proposal for three years to see if it worked, then had REASONABLE triggers after 3 years to go to a salary cap system, then the players would have a chance to prove it worked.

Even if the player's system immediately cut salaries to 45% of league revenues, there would still be a disparity between the top 3 and bottom 3 payrolls, and therefore the owners' Supercap proposal would automatically be implemented. In order to prevent implementation, all teams would have to spend between $32 million and $42 million, and as a whole under 55%. Sound familiar? That is the NHL's proposal.

How is it that no one understands this???

 

[Crazy Lunatic]

.Stop pretending the owners offered the players their own deal. It's nothing like it.

They *did* offer them their own deal on a trial basis. That is a cold, hard, indisputable fact. The PA said their Dec.9 proposal would reduce salaries to 56% of league wide revenues and therefore was a CBA every owner should be able to live with. Well, it was put up or shut up time and we all know how Goodenow reacted. The PA knows full well that their joke of an offer falls flat on its face and there is now way they could ever back it up, so they didn't even try.

 

[GKJ]

EXPLAIN your position please. The framework was there for the players to have the chance to prove their offer was as good as they claimed it was. All they needed to do was negotiate a longer trial period to prove it but once again GoodEGOnow's emotions got the better of him.

We've more than explained our positions. If you can't see that then maybe you should do some homework and look at other posts that explain why this proposal was a joke. Please explain how this was a legitimate proposal and how the PA get anything they want.

 

[Crazy Lunatic]

If they accepted the player's proposal for three years to see if it worked, then had REASONABLE triggers after 3 years to go to a salary cap system, then the players would have a chance to prove it worked.

Even if the player's system immediately cut salaries to 45% of league revenues, there would still be a disparity between the top 3 and bottom 3 payrolls, and therefore the owners' Supercap proposal would automatically be implemented. In order to prevent implementation, all teams would have to spend between $32 million and $42 million, and as a whole under 55%. Sound familiar? That is the NHL's proposal.

How is it that no one understands this???

The triggers are all likely negotiable, why is it you don't understand this???

 

[GKJ]

They *did* offer them their own deal on a trial basis. That is a cold, hard, indisputable fact. The PA said their Dec.9 proposal would reduce salaries to 56% of league wide revenues and therefore was a CBA every owner should be able to live with. Well, it was put up or shut up time and we all know how Goodenow reacted. The PA knows full well that their joke of an offer falls flat on its face and there is now way they could ever back it up, so they didn't even try.

The triggers kick in almost immedetaly. What did the PA have to gain from getting to use their proposal for about 45 minutes before letting the NHL use their totalitarian way for 9 years.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

.Stop pretending the owners offered the players their own deal. It's nothing like it.

Really? Seems exactly like it. Exact same verbage, exact same mechanisms, everything. The only difference is that the NHL has placed conditions on the deal that demand the system be guaranteed to work.

This is the exact same situation the NHLPA put to the NHL back in December when the talks of a hybrid system were floating around. The NHLPA said that they would agree to the NHL's deal if they would try the NHLPA's offer for three years, and if it didn't work they would try the NHL's offer. The difference here is that there is no three year period and there are triggers based on the NHL framework, and that should those thresholds be reached the NHL's agreement goes into effect the following season. Zero difference from the what the players have offered except the NHL has put strict thresholds onto the system as a guarantee that it would work. Failure of the NHLPA's system would be immediately evident and the NHL's system implemented.

If the NHLPA were so sure their system would work they would be all over this like a fat chick on a Smartee. Unfortunately Goodenow knows better and has said the framework is not t his liking any longer and a new one must be formulated. That says it all right there. Goodenow is running away from his own proposal looking for a new framework. He knows it's flawed and wouldn't work.

 

[GKJ]

Thank you for your "fact based" drivel as well. I notice how your "rant" was backed up with a plethora of links and analysis. I would suggest you take your own advice.

ok.


www.tsn.ca

www.sportsnet.ca

www.espn.com

www.fan590.com

keep going?


And eye, don't whine to me about breaking the rules. That's as far as I will leave it.

 

[Charge_Seven]

The triggers kick in almost immedetaly. What did the PA have to gain from getting to use their proposal for about 45 minutes before letting the NHL use their totalitarian way for 9 years.

It's like talking to a rock GKJ, it's impossible to get through to people when they refuse to look at facts, as many around here are doing far too much of. There are still people saying they rejected their own proposal, which is ridiculous, as anyone whose watched TSN, or picked up a paper, already should know is untrue. Brian Burke said it himself last night that it would be stupid of the players to accept that offer...BRIAN FREAKIN BURKE. That's how bad those triggers are, a guy who has been 150% on the owners side even says it's a bad offer.

 

[Crazy Lunatic]

We've more than explained our positions. If you can't see that then maybe you should do some homework and look at other posts that explain why this proposal was a joke. Please explain how this was a legitimate proposal and how the PA get anything they want.

I agree this offer was a joke, but only because it included the DEc.9 NHLPA slop offer. The NHL accepted that slop on a trial basis. If it works as the PA said it would, then great! No need to ever have another labour dispute again. The only problem is that the PA knows full well that their offer is completely and utterly meaningless and you have next to no impact whatsoever on a league on the brink of total financial obliteration.

The NHL is a dying patient who needs heart surgery. Dr. Goodenow and his cronies have offered a used band-aid and half an aspirin. The NHL has said, "Ok, I'll try that used band-aid and half an aspirin but if I dont get better with what you are giving me, I want my surgery!". Dr.Goodenows responce, "Screw off and die!"