Nightfall

Hey, its the same as the last NHLPA offer. Starts at 53% and goes up to 57% at the end of the deal. Its not 53%, its 57%. I do get what you are saying though. IMHO, the NHL has hit 49% while the Players have relinquished to 53%. Why not just hit 51.5% and make the deal happen? This fight over those extra couple percent is going to cost them more in fans leaving the game.

Check your facts. http://starsblog.dallasnews.com/2012/09/nhl-and-nhlpa-exchange-offers-but-still-seem-far-apart-as-saturday-lockout-deadline-nears.html/

I don't see how you can make that claim. Fehr sacrificed a world series, and now due to the greed, he is going to cost the NHL at least part of a season. Unless of course you are putting the entire blame for the lockout on the league's shoulders. IMHO, both parties that are involved are at fault for a lockout or strike, not one side or the other. If Fehr is kicking himself, it is for dragging his feet during this whole negotiation process. The last NHL proposal was at 49%, which is a lot closer than the 50% split that many people envision.

3-0 so far. On Thursday night, it will be 3-1. The lockout obviously.... The previous poster mentioned this though. I think the key is "playoffs or finals". At least that is what jumped out at me.

Bettman and Fehr have combined to cause a lockout or strike that has resulted in missing their respective championship playoff series 1 each. Not 3.

Neither am I. The players wouldn't have went on strike. Hell, the deal benefits them the most. Why would they strike? The players would have played under the current CBA for years if they had the opportunity because of the 57% share they have under the CBA.

Hrm, didn't I say that Fehr may put forward a proposal that eliminates the salary cap and institutes a luxury tax? Call me surprised...... The owners are at 49% for players share The players are at 54% for players share Just make it 51.5% for the players and call it good!

http://www.pensionpl...attle-who-cares ---- Here is another article on the NHLPA stalling the negotiations. I thought the NHLPA put forward 3 proposals, but apparently, it was 1.5. http://www.blueshirt...he-negotiations

I am not for or against unions in any way. I have family members who are part of unions in fact, and some that hate unions as a whole. I mention that because some people are quickly labeled either for or against unions just based on their opinions. I am pretty much in the middle. IMHO, we can't put the fault on one side or the other. The fault is strictly on both sides. So why do we need a players union? The players union is there to make sure the players are treated fairly. The union is there to make sure they have benefits, retirement, disability, and so on. I would say that the union is there to protect the players from being taken advantage of. Do we as fans benefit from the players union? I can't think of any benefits. That being said, do I think the union is not necessary? I think they serve their purpose. I just don't believe that one side or the other is able to say that they are free from blame in the lockout.

I am going to do my part.

Fehr is dragging "the fans" into his rhetoric as well. It really is just both sides spouting off to play the PR card and nothing more. Neither side gives a crap about the fans at all. This is all about the $3.3 billion dollar pot and the split between the two sides.

Fehr is great at playing the public relations card. Just based on Fehr's behavior, if the league would have started the season, Fehr would have not negotiated a new CBA. Hell, I bet it would have been December/January before he even thought about it. No doubt that the ownership is trying to secure massive concessions. At the same time, neither the owners or players are blinking off of their initial stances. A deal can be made, but only if both sides drift to the middle. It really is that simple. Hell, Fehr is good at playing the PR card. What he should do is put forward a proposal that gives the players 52% of revenue while the owners get 48%, and then make it public.

Well, the war of words is still going on. The NHL whines about not getting their way and the NHLPA says they would have played while they continued negotiating for a new CBA, forget the fact that the NHLPA has drug its feet through this process so far. Both sides just need to get back to the bargaining table. It either could go this way or fans could be more upset because they were talking for 9 months and nothing happened. I guess at this juncture, I don't think it could be any worse than where we are today if we started negotiating early.

No offense taken. At the same time, my second statement does stand. If the NHLPA would have met with the NHL, the fans would have been happier because there would have been apparent traction. Also, if they would have met in January, both sides would have been better off in some part due to the fact they were talking sooner. I don't know if a deal would have been reached or not. I just can't understand how someone can say that meeting early wouldn't be a factor at all. The NHLPA behavior at least shows a pattern of negative bargaining behavior. Hey, at least Bettman and Fehr are tied in locking out/striking their respective sides and each losing a championship series in their respective sports.

This is good news for my wallet and for many years to come. I estimate I spend about $1500 on tickets, gas, and merchandise for the NHL in a year. With no more center ice, tickets, or merchandise for the next 5-6 years, I can take that money and spend it on something else. Preferably that isn't rife with greed or lack of compromise on the side of players and the league.

I cannot like this post enough. Very good points. I guess I am tired of the rhetoric from some people here just spouting off that the league is all at fault in this meanwhile standing behind the players. The players have played the PR card very well in these negotiations. Fehr needed to do it in order to get the fans on his side and put pressure on the ownership. I saw through it the moment that Fehr dragged his feet in negotiations and waited until June to even start negotiations. Now that he has the fans on his side, the players have carte blanche to fight the league. Of course, the ownership will get a lot of emails and letters from upset fans, but that won't curtail the strike or end it early. I have been participating in the social media blitz against both sides. Yes, its true that I love hockey. It is also true that I won't spend a dime on merchandise, nhl center ice package, or nhl tickets for the next five years or so if we lose any regular season games. That seems to be a formality at this stage, but the point is both sides are going to understand that the only support I will be extending to the NHL will be watching the games on TV. Both sides need to understand that the rhetoric won't be tolerated. The NHL will come back, but it will be weaker because many fans won't be buying tickets anymore. Sure, many will return, but the amount of people who change their spending habits will have a greater impact. It is my goal to get more people on board with this idea. True, I don't expect everyone to see things the way I do. That doesn't make our opinions more or less valid in the end. After all, this is a forum where we can voice our opinions. When the regular season starts back up, I intend to make my impact felt in some way.

I believe its less about pride and self respect. If there was pride and self respect on the line, the players association would have been negotiating in January. If pride and self respect were on the line, then the players association wouldn't be playing the PR role to a T. Lets face facts here, Don Fehr dragged his feet to the start of negotiations, then he drug his feet before he put forward his initial proposal. Fehr wants there to be revenue sharing, and I can understand why the owners don't want the deal based on what revenues could be. Now, the NHL has given the players a new proposal, and Don Fehr won't "play ping pong" and doesn't believe he needs to give the next proposal. Lets face facts here, the owners are asking for too much. By locking the players out, they are damaging the game of hockey and future revenues. At the same time, and others have said, they feel they have no choice. I know I have said it before, but I will say it again.... Both sides are in the wrong here. This should have never resulted in a lockout. All the owners have to do is come up a little from their demands, and all the players have to do is come down a little from their demands. As many have said here, its a game of chicken. Who will blink first? I am not waiting around for either side to blink. Both sides can go jump off a cliff.

I don't think its unreasonable to look for a 52-48 split in favor of the players. There is common ground here that can be achieved if the players come down a bit and the owners come up a bit. Then there are other things that can be given to the players, such as earlier unrestricted free agency. I do get what you are saying, but if you look at the ownership side as well, I understand why they are hesitant to agree to more revenue sharing. Personally, I think that revenue sharing is where it is at. That benefits everyone equally. If the NHL does really well, then the players should be well compensated for a job well done. I believe what we need are two leaders that are less hard line about what they want. We need more unity and a willingness to compromise and work together. So far, I haven't seen that from Bettman or Fehr. The players wanted to play for a year under the current CBA because it benefitted them the most to do so. The league had more to lose apparently and locked out the players. I question this move, but it was readily apparent that the players wanted to keep things the same or not come to the bargaining table unless they were forced to.

I suppose we can agree to disagree then. It should at least concern anyone who is pro-NHLPA and anti-owner when their side waits until the last minute to negotiate and their side is the big beneficiary of the last deal. As for the motivations behind both sides, I really don't know how we got to this point. The players don't want to give that much and the owners want to take more than the players want to give. No common middle ground? Can't figure out how to split a $3 billion dollar pot? The owners locking the players out doesn't put the blame on the owners 100% thats for sure. Both sides need a swift kick in the ass and a mediator. Hrm, NHL says the union doesn't want to budge while the NHLPA says the owners want to much. Both sides are way too greedy. Fire both Fehr and Bettman, and get some people in place that are willing to negotiate. Its that simple.

The ones previously were small in comparison to the one you just levied, but I digress. I was more relating to this thread in specific. I apologize and will try to limit my comments to your posts. I fixed it for you.

The PA is to blame for not coming to the table early and starting the process of negotiating in January. That is a fact. Would that have avoided a lockout? Who knows. Point is that lack of urgency on one sides part, the side that benefits the most from the current deal, doesn't excuse them from not negotiating preemptively.

I can't like this post enough. In order to get to a deal done, both sides have to make sacrifices to make it happen. So far, neither side wants to sacrifice anything. If both sides read these statements and followed them, we would be playing hockey today. The last deal benefited the players and rich franchises the most. Hell, if there was a labor deal in place that benefited one side more than the other, I would come to the conclusion that the deal wasn't going to be extended by a year. I do admit that the league probably should have been telling the PA that the deal was not going to be extended and there would be a lockout if a new deal wasn't in place.

I can also blame the union and the players for not being willing to budge off of key financial points. The league has one method in mind, and the players have another method in mind. Who is to blame here? Both sides for not being willing to compromise in the least bit. Once again, we don't know what would have happened with more time because we don't have it today. Its easy to dismiss this claim as a mere formality, but the simple fact of the matter is that with more time, this lockout could have been avoided. We don't know for sure one way or the other, but I would have loved to have seen an NHL and an NHLPA that were willing to work hard to avoid a lockout. The sooner that they met, the better off they would have been and the happier the fans would have been in the end. They would have seen two sides that genuinely cared about hockey. As it turned out, we all saw two sides that were monumentally greedy. The league gave a crap lowball offer while the union sat until the last minute and played the PR game which didn't result in a deal being made. At least you finally came out and said that it was a mistake for the union to not start negotiating last season. I know that was a hard step for you to take, and the very first constructive comment I have heard you take against the players association. Ok, fair enough. I choose to take what both sides say to face value. When I hear the league say, "We are ready," I believe them. Just like I believe the players when Fehr makes a statement. We can agree to disagree. With 6 months to negotiate instead of 6 weeks, a lockout could have been avoided. Just because they are at an impasse now doesn't mean with more time they wouldn't have been able to come up with a solution. We don't know for sure either way, but I will take more time than less that's for sure.

Sorry, but I disagree. The players and owners want two separate things. Yes, the owners came with that crappy lowball offer, but the players screwed around until June before coming to the table to negotiate. Two wrongs don't make a right in my book. There is no excuse for these two sides not making a deal other than pure greed. Neither side deserves your support. Hell, neither side deserves anyones support here. A lost season is all on both sides for screwing around. I especially love the war of words that is going on now between these childish sides. Daly says that the players aren't getting it. Fehr says that this lockout is the owners fault. What a load of garbage.

So, in short, you are willing to take what the NHLPA says at face value, but when the NHL says something you don't believe it. All through that, you are saying that you are not taking sides. Good to know.....