Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

-Vintage Canuck-

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread

Recommended Posts

Bettman has taken almost every offer he's given off the table at some point. It's a transparent move that shows how bad Bettman is at negotiating. Owners will beg for that deal to be put back on the table if the PA is willing to take it. If you think that offer is gone, you've probably just bought a bridge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does anyone know what percentage of players currently have signed contracts that are longer than 5 years? I would think that it is star players and less than 5% of the league...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Final word on all of this and then I go to sleep. The reason Bettman is pissed is because he misjudged the players. He wanted to get his deal by taking Fehr out of the picture. PA said F that and brought him back in today. I can guarantee all of you who are up Bettmans rear end for no apparent reason that the biggest mistake Bettman and his posy made was trying to get Fehr out of the equation. The players did not waste so much money and effort to get Fehr for no reason They knew what they were getting into 2-3 years ago when they hired Donald.

Yeah there is a faction that is mad but that faction did not understand consequences of having Fehr in the first place. Even if worst case scenario there are 40-50 players that are not happy that accounts for about 7% of the player union MAX. You are not going to get a deal if 7% of players want last offer.

Now Fehr is going to make Bettman pay. The actions he chooses may not be ideal for hockey fans but remember this was brought upon by the owners. By calling out a guy who is the figure head for the union, you are challenging the union loyalty for him. If they are indeed loyal to him, they will go for desertification. At that point Bettman and the owners look like morons for calling out Fehr and thats when they really set themselves up to get killed. If Fehr can deal with the MLB and prevent a cap from occurring in that league, I know sure as hell he can do as much damage to a less powerful league whose revenue stream is tremendously smaller.

Oh and if any of you do not agree with me look at the first action that Fehrs company took when Bettman was on podium. They decided to walk into the conference and stare him down. I talked to 2 family members who have prominent roles in a union in BC (do not want to reveal anything about it) and they were saying that they even thought that the players intruding the Press Conference indicated a sign of war.

Bettman is gambling on union loyalty being low. The test for Fehr will be desertification. If it passes, as I expect it should then the NHL will be dropping on a dime to give up concessions because if desertification happens the season is done.

There is no way the NHL can sustain another full locked out season in any way shape or form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Listening to Dan Russell Sports Talk. Been listening to him for a couple of decades now. Most callers to his show are mature/older hockey fans. Perhaps 30 or 35 yrs to seniors.

Anyways, most callers are clearly pro owners now. Fehr is taking heat. Russell is siding with Fehr but clearly his listeners including me are not on the same page.

Great show btw. Haven't listened to him as much lately but for about 20 years it was my bed time radio. Longest running sports show in the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't understand how Gary can stand up there and say that he wants to get a deal done ASAP, and that they are willing to negotiate at anytime and stuff.

And yet they keep making "take-it of leave-it" offers.

Edit: I'm in the same boat as Canuckbeliever, that is my final tought for the night. uhh what a night it was....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So for 14% of the guys who have signed these 5+ deals, we are going to blow this deal up? Does Manny Malholtra think he can get a 6 years deal some where?

The PA doesn't want a 10 year labour agreement but they want themselves to be able to sign 10+ year labour agreements (player contracts)?

It is a bunch of idiots messing up our great game!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*decertification - the misspelling is starting to bother me.

Your numbers are vague and seemingly pulled out of nowhere. You also seem to assert players were in attendance at the press conference to 'stare down Bettman' which isn't true. They have every right to attend as any media nut does, if they speak up well that's a different situation. Hainsey even said he did it because "TSN wasn't in his hotel room".

Beyond that I agree with you that the frustration directed towards Fehr is unwarranted. Bettman is the villain, and the difference between the two press conferences showcased that tonight. Fehr was optimistic and said they were 'close', while Bettman took the stage with anger and dispelled any potential progress. I'd be shocked if the two sides met before January, thanks in part to Bettman's delivery.

Everyone says the players should have voted on the last proposal, then why didn't the owners? The PA was the last side to offer and would have been much easier to get a vote following the BoG meeting. I'm of the opinion that there is a deal, and the two sides are closer than what they are letting on. The media battle isn't helping, neither side should have held a presser, certainly not one to voice frustration - seems counter-intuitive.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The most entertaining day yet outta this year's version of the "NHL."

Bettman's performance was worth the wait. Really dialed it up a notch. Nice use of contrast.

Crocodile posturing at it's best.

He looked so 'angry'... !!! Exasperated even!!!

But he's been big on the over-sell hasn't he?

Poker is a much more popular game these days; even us layfolk are more accustomed to watching big bluffs.

Did he kinda show us his cards though?

Were those some ingenious, or ingenuous gestures?

He's trying to play a different game: Monopoly - but that requires eliminating his opponent.

The strategy: exclude and isolate the NHLPA's counsel... After all, it's really not fair/fehr that the player's have professional representation...

Really - the owners don't need Gary Bettman to do their bidding - they are entirely capable of negotiating on their own behalf. The players are not businessmen, they are athletes - they are intelligent, but this isn't their game.

Not surprised there was a bit of a feeding frenzy - some people who bought into this ploy (although McLean's performance was not quite as stellar as Bettman's) - but from where I sit, it looks like another form of PR stunt. Unconvincing. Fehr responded in kind. Was it really the case of good faith negotiation on the part of the NHL, or another power play? How dare the players counter!?

Not too long ago Bettman was suggesting taking a few weeks away from negotiations, wasn't he?...now, all of a sudden there is a newfound utmost urgency - the hourglass has suddenly run out of sand? This is a classic negotiation strategy. I don't buy the dramatics at all. But it was entertaining. It's the least they owe us fans. If they are going to drag out the marathon snore of a pseudo-negotiation, the least they can do is throw in a little more of the high dramatics.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We shall see. Players have only lost only 3 paychecks. By mid Jan they will have lost 3 more. We will see where they stand by then.

As far as bringing in same amount of money by missing almost 50% of games I have no idea how you propose to do that. By all reports the league has lost approx $400 million. Players share of that is $200 million. If you think billionaires owners care about losing a few million as much as NHL players do then I would like to introduce you to a guy I know, he's a Nigerian prince.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bettman has taken each offer off the table after it's been countered by the PA. If you don't know this, you've clearly got no clue what's going on this lockout. Simple as that. And yeah, you just said Bettman had power because he took the last offer off the table. Look in my last post, it's quoted there. Do you have a one post memory limit or something?

Lost revenue =/= lost HRR/lost profits. You need to learn to actually research what you're talking about. I laid it out for you on how to equip yourself with the knowledge to comprehend my point. Go away and do your homework, then come back with a reply. This knowledge is neither secret nor difficult to understand. Currently you're just exhibiting willful ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the issue of the 'Big 3 Issues' for the owners and the extra $100, I look at it this way.

1- the owners committed 100% of the contract money on each and every player contract that they negotiated. So really, if the players take 1 cent less than the full value, it's a concession. All of the numbers talked about so far on the make whole provision have been a concession by the players financially.

2- the owners said 'here's a 100 million for a total of 300 million, but we get 5 years terms, a 10 year CBA, and the transitional terms we want (escrow, buyouts, etc.). It came with a typical 'take it or leave it'.

That extra 100 million (98 actually) spread out over 30 teams works out to 3.3 million per team. For giving up 3.3 million, which in the grand scheme of things is nothing, especially over 10 years, the owners get the last 3 remaining issues completely in their favour without having to compromise on them at all.

Not a bad deal. For the owners.

It didn't need to be this way.

I believe the owners need a ten year deal in order to shore up the weaker teams so that they can survive the war that always ensues in CBA negotiations. They might be able to afford a lost season every 10 years, but not every 5 or 6. If true, that tells me that there are owners today that are VERY nervous about the survivability of a cancelled season this time around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who noticed the expression change on Bettman's face when the reporter asked about decertification?

Go to about the 23 minute mark of the interview to see what I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is gibberish for not being able to back up what you claim.

Give me a link or admit you are pulling things out of your....... "hair"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who noticed the expression change on Bettman's face when the reporter asked about decertification?

Go to about the 23 minute mark of the interview to see what I mean.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was heartened to here Daly say that the league was willing to "die on that hill" over contract term lengths.I hope the league stands it's ground on the ten year CBA as well. I have no stomach to go through this in five or six years again. Even if it means missing another year I would hope the owners are willing to stand in there for a good, sustainable CBA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Red herring day.

A day of public relations displays - competition - to attempt to one-up on expressions of the greater disappointment that they did not capitulate under pressure.

Great energy in the room, until their professional was allowed back into the process...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There will be hockey this season, I've said it from the start and I still maintain that. The two sides have never been closer, talks will resume shortly and we'll have a 48-52 game season starting in late December or mid January the latest. The stakes are too high, theres no way they would cancel another entire season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should I provide an excel spreadsheet on the repercussions of each proposal as well? Do your own work you lazy sod. It's happened multiple times over the course of the negotiation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what did you think? I remember when watching it earlier Bettman suggested to look up disclaimer of interest rather than decertification..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.