This is getting beyond ridiculous now....

[GKJ]

How's this for an indication of the NHL's status:

- on CNN, the host (Daryn Kagan) just reported that the commissioners of the NFL, MLB, NBA and... Major League Soccer are testifying before Congress today.

That sums it up right there! Ouch.

espically since no one from the NFL is there.


The other commishes are there, as is, Donald Fehr and Bob Goodenow and someone else.

 

[HF2002]

espically since no one from the NFL is there.


The other commishes are there, as is, Donald Fehr and Bob Goodenow and someone else.

She made a reference to the NFL, although the tv was on in the background, so I wasn't espically paying attention at first. Then she mentioned the NBA, MLB and then MLS. That caught my attention.

Anyway, the point is that whoever wrote the teleprompter wrote MLS. Did they forget about poker?

 

[Tawnos]

There was an article on TSN yesterday about how it was nice to see actual hockey played in the WCs, but now it's back to the lockout. In this article, there was a line about the discussion of revenues is intended to bring "the union's April 4 proposal to life"

If they weren't just talking out of their asses, doesn't that sound like they already agreed on something? I can't find the article anymore.

 

[nyrmessier011]

rant thread please

 

[nyr7andcounting]

They did not need to agree to linkage first. With all the crap meetings they had, there certainly could and should have been one about revenue. Perhaps that meeting would have been a huge benefit to the process.

But if there is no linkage then why would the PA bother discussing it, and why would the NHL bother having the Levitt report disputed? The PA didn't care what revenue is reported and what is not, because if there is no linkage than the owners are going to spend whatever they can anyway.

 

[nyr7andcounting]

That's not quite accurate. The PA needed to know the numbers to agree on or propose any kind of deal. If not, it's just a series of self-proclaimed fair offers that have no link with the economical reality of the league. How can the PA accept or refuse a cap set at x number when they don't even know if the league can afford more or less than that? Revenue talks are much needed to move this thing forward, but they were at any step of the process.

They aren't stupid. You don't think the PA can project what revenues are based on what the NHL says and their inside knowledge on everything else? They can propose a cap based on everything they know, and they know enough to know where salaries should be.

But we are talking about REPORTED revenues here. The PA doesn't care what the NHL reports, aslong as owners can spend more or less than what is reported. Without linkage, reported revenues are just a mandatory accounting procedure. With linkage, reported revenues are not only for accounting, but they determine the max that the players are going to be able to get. Without linkage the PA couldn't care less how teams report revenues, but with it it's their main concern.

 

[GKJ]

She made a reference to the NFL, although the tv was on in the background, so I wasn't espically paying attention at first. Then she mentioned the NBA, MLB and then MLS. That caught my attention.

Anyway, the point is that whoever wrote the teleprompter wrote MLS. Did they forget about poker?

The MLS was really there. Commish and PA director. Bid Selig, Donald Fehr, Gary Bettman and Bob Goodenow and some guy who was an olympian in the 1976 Montreal games who lost a race to someone who took steroids.


The NBA guys were there in an afternoon session and the NFL will be there tomorrow.

 

[Wetcoaster]

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=125221

Both sides are getting idiotic now. 4 and half hours to discuss revenue? Come on, get a damn deal worked out. With the threat of even more revenue being lost, do they not understand the importance of having a deal done ASAP? Obviously not.

I don't get it anymore. Both sides are totally moronic. It's clear from these meeting that they have no interest in getting a deal done. If they wanted one, they wouldn't be quitting the meetings after 4 hours and change.

I'm starting to hope now that the NHL just doesn't come back. How sad this whole sorry sordid thing has become.....

It took almost 18 months for the NBA and NFL to negotiate the definition of revenues once there had been full disclosure.

 

[Hockeyfan02]

8 and a half hours meeting today discussing the same topics. This article says they met for 6 hours yesterday, not 4 and a half hours.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=125302

 

[Wetcoaster]

As Spector has pointed out at Fox Sports:

The league and the owners have seemingly "won" this labor war. They got what they wanted, a hard cap and linkage, but as more than one critic of Bettman and the owners have noted, the league isn't content with that. It wants a "home run", to get linkage of salaries set at 54 percent of revenues. By refusing to budge from this stance, the league has only toughened the PA's resistance toward it.

This doesn't mean that Goodenow has "lost". Indeed, as Dubi Silverstein of Blueshirt Bulletin recently noted, the PA director doesn't need "an outright win", only "good definitions of what makes up payroll and what counts toward revenue."

This of course would explain why both sides spent last week, for the first time in this dispute, sitting down to go over the Levitt Report. As Silverstein noted, there is a big difference between "54 percent of Levitt revenues and 54 percent of true revenues, a huge difference between $x million of Levitt player costs and true payroll."

http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/3619478

 

[WC Handy*]

The league and the owners have seemingly "won" this labor war. They got what they wanted, a hard cap and linkage, but as more than one critic of Bettman and the owners have noted, the league isn't content with that. It wants a "home run", to get linkage of salaries set at 54 percent of revenues.

Or maybe the league might just know what they need the salaries to be at for the league to be healthy?

 

[FLYLine27*]

I have a feeling these meetings today will go on for hours longer. I heard they met at 10:00am est.

 

[HockeyCritter]

This of course would explain why both sides spent last week, for the first time in this dispute, sitting down to go over the Levitt Report. As Silverstein noted, there is a big difference between "54 percent of Levitt revenues and 54 percent of true revenues, a huge difference between $x million of Levitt player costs and true payroll."

Which is why I don't understand why it took the two sides so long to sit down and review the Levitt report once the PA agreed to a cap/linkage. Sure there are discrepancies and issues regarding the report, but it was a starting point - - the PA could have requested that this and that be added to the revenue stream or certain items deducted from the cost model.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Or maybe the league might just know what they need the salaries to be at for the league to be healthy?

Why would you possibly think that given the past history?

 

[Wetcoaster]

Which is why I don't understand why it took the two sides so long to sit down and review the Levitt report once the PA agreed to a cap/linkage. Sure there are discrepancies and issues regarding the report, but it was a starting point - - the PA could have requested that this and that be added to the revenue stream or certain items deducted from the cost model.

Because up until now the NHL had continued to insist on using the URO's and not providing full dislosure of the finaicials.

 

[SENSible1*]

Because up until now the NHL had continued to insist on using the URO's and not providing full dislosure of the finaicials.

The PA could have had their hands on those documents the moment they agreed to a cap and linkage. In fact, they simply had to make their agreement to those terms conditional upon access to the books.

 

[Wetcoaster]

The PA could have had their hands on those documents the moment they agreed to a cap and linkage. In fact, they simply had to make their agreement to those terms conditional upon access to the books.

No, the NHL has refused to disclose.

 

[SENSible1*]

No, the NHL has refused to disclose.

Until now, the PA has refused to agree to a cap and linkage.

Now that they have agreed to a cap and a form of linkage, they get to see the books.

It would have been a PR DISASTER for the NHL if the PA publically agreed to those terms, but failed to get a deal done based on the NHL's refusal to disclose.

In fact, this was perhaps the biggest of the numerous mistakes Goodenow made.

 

[WC Handy*]

No, the NHL has refused to disclose.

Do you really think that if you keep telling this blatant lie that people will suddenly just start believing you?

 

[HockeyCritter]

No, the NHL has refused to disclose.

One would think the League would make the material available if it lead to cap/linkage.

 

[Hoss]

Do you really think that if you keep telling this blatant lie that people will suddenly just start believing you?

Slandering people by calling them liars does absolutely nothing for your arguement.

 

[WC Handy*]

Slandering people by calling them liars does absolutely nothing for your arguement.

For me to commit slander my claim must be false.

 

[Hoss]

For me to commit slander my claim must be false.

Perhaps you'd like to back up your claim with evidence? URO's and the Levit Report?

 

[WC Handy*]

There's no need to. Anyone who paid any attention to this situation over the last year should know that the NHL specifically offered to open the books numerous times to the NHLPA and the union declined every time.

 

[HockeyCritter]

Wouldn't it technically be "libel" since it is written?

And I thought he called the idea that the NHL refused to disclose a lie not so much as calling the person a liar.