The Bookie Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Fair enough. Back to the topic of which players might be attending, I was just reading a National Post article that quoted a player agent suggesting they send players from those specific teams, so that the players are talking directly to their respective owners. “Really what it comes down to is that while Bettman and Fehr are working on behalf of both sides, it’s the owners and the players that the dispute is between,” player agent Kevin Epp said. “If you get in a room with an owner and listen to what his perspective is, and you get to tell an owner what your issues are, then I think that makes sense.” The key, added Epp, is making sure the right people are present. “You can’t have players who are on the periphery, who just get all the hearsay and don’t know all the issues or dynamics and haven’t been in on any of the meetings,” Epp said. “I think you’d want players to speak to the owners they are employed by. You want a guy like [Vancouver Canucks owner Francesco] Aquilini talking to Cory Schneider or [Montreal Canadiens owner] Geoff Molson talking to Josh Gorges.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 That's an interesting idea, but I could see it going the other way too. Talking to their bosses directly might make them feel more intimidated or threatened into a deal for fear or repercussions once they return. I still think the players should have more than 6 anyway. Since there are so many more players than there are owners, each side having only 6 seems players would be disproportionately represented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Fair enough. Back to the topic of which players might be attending, I was just reading a National Post article that quoted a player agent suggesting they send players from those specific teams, so that the players are talking directly to their respective owners. So I was wondering who that might be. Crosby seems obvious from Pittsburgh, and most likely Hainsey from Winnipeg. I don't know who the other four teams have had representing them in the negotiations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 That's an interesting idea, but I could see it going the other way too. Talking to their bosses directly might make them feel more intimidated or threatened into a deal for fear or repercussions once they return. I still think the players should have more than 6 anyway. Since there are so many more players than there are owners, each side having only 6 seems players would be disproportionately represented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iLLmAtlc Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 lmao Jeremy Jacobs and Bill Daly? Yeah this is totally going to be a lot different. And the NHL apparently declined having federal mediators present, says TSN. Wonder why. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=410815 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bookie Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Bookie, while I agree it would make some sense to send players from teams these 6 owners will be representing I'm not sure it would be right to send players just because they are from one of those teams and because they are good hockey players. Crosby has a high school education, I'm not sure he's qualified to talk business with billionaires. He won't be able to comprehend simple charts and graphs etc. IMO it would be better to send players who have post secondary education. There are some who went the college hockey route and earned degrees. Bieksa and Schneider are examples. At least these players will be able to comprehend what the owners are saying. What's the point of meeting if one side can't even understand what the other is saying. I remember after the last lockout some players were angry when they saw escrow deductions from their checks. They didn't know what it was and couldn't comprehend the concept of escrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmo2337 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 lmao Jeremy Jacobs and Bill Daly? Yeah this is totally going to be a lot different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I agree, there should be at least 10 or 15 players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goalie13 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 That's an interesting idea, but I could see it going the other way too. Talking to their bosses directly might make them feel more intimidated or threatened into a deal for fear or repercussions once they return. I still think the players should have more than 6 anyway. Since there are so many more players than there are owners, each side having only 6 seems players would be disproportionately represented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck_trevor16 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 6 player representation? will there be like one person from each of the division? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 6 player representation? will there be like one person from each of the division? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck_trevor16 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Whoever they sent to meet with the owners should have some business background/experience in negotiations and should be represented from eastern/western teams, as well players from Canadian/USA/European Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mauii Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 lmao Jeremy Jacobs and Bill Daly? Yeah this is totally going to be a lot different. And the NHL apparently declined having federal mediators present, says TSN. Wonder why. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=410815 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Just looked at Bookie's list of player reps. Interesting to note Brendan Morrison is on the list. He has an economics degree if I remember correctly. Edit, another interesting tidbit. Craig Adams went to Harvard and he's married to the daughter of for former Mass Gov. and US Ambassador to Canada. He's done well in life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHL rocks Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Mediators should be able to sit in on that meeting, if not to help facilitate the discussion. Not sure why Bettman would object to that, and if Daly is going to be there, then Steve should sit in for the players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UFCanuck Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Gary Bettman promised the Owners a huge win. His mouth wrote a check that his ass cant cash. He underestimated Don Fehr and now he's stuck. Saying that, there is zero chance this season will be cancelled without one more offer from the NHL. The PA knows it and thats what they're waiting for. If the NHL were to just cancel the season in a month w/o one more significant offer, they would be beyond insane. Bettman does not want to be in the history books for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck_trevor16 Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I doubt that the owners want a lockout.......hopefully this player-owner meeting can be a turning point and closer to an agreement? can they just agree on some agreement and continue to work throughout the season to improve? or is it required to have it done beforehand.....will the salary cap change or not that the real question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Bookie Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 Was reading up a bit on some of these owners. Ron Burkle sounds like quite the character. His nickname is the Billionaire Party Boy, he's close friends with Bill Clinton and Mick Jagger, and most interestingly, once received a Los Angeles award for labor negotiations when the Union at his chain of grocery stores went on strike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salmonberries Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 It's possible that some of them don't mind not losing piles of money like they would be doing if they were playing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boudrias Posted December 3, 2012 Share Posted December 3, 2012 I would've liked to see Dolan in as well, but by all reports he and Bettman haven't even spoken since their legal battle in 2007, so it didn't seem likely. There are rumours that he doesn't even attend Board of Governors meetings. Seems like he has decided to hang back as a silent partner in the NHL until a new commissioner comes in. Happy that Burkle and Chipman will be there, they've both come across as respectable owners from everything I've read about them. I don't know much about Vinik or Tanenbaum, anyone else? DeNiro - I think it was Union's request to have legal representation on either side, hence Daly. I assume they'll be sending Steve Fehr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.