2458 replies to this topic

[55fan]

Question for the legal eagles out there: If all of this goes to court, how will it be handled since there are two countries represented in the NHL? Would the decision be enforced and upheld in both countries or would two separate decisions be needed?

[chances14]

This issue so complicated because of the polarizing figure that is Gary Bettman. A New York lawyer running the most popular sport in Canada. 3 significant work stoppages in 18 years.

@Nightfall is partially right when he says that Bettman was not the "cause" of the lockout. Admittedly, that would be an oversimplification. I heard a TSN podcast today where one guy wondered if this isn't just the "new normal" given the fact that salaries were so constant for so many years and then shot up exponentially in the past 20 years. He wondered if the underlying problem isn't just that nobody knows "what anything is worth" in the NHL.

But I refuse to give Bettman a pass on "causing the lockout" for this reason: He DID create and stubbornly support the environment that caused this lockout to happen in the last 2 CBA's. When you a situation where you can make $3.3 billion in profits AND it can also be true that (allegedly) 18 franchises are operating in the red, you have fundamental problems. If I honestly believed that setting HRR at 50/50 and just telling the players to give a little more back would solve those problems, I would turn on the NHLPA and Fehr in a heartbeat.

i don't think anyone is completely giving bettman a pass on this lockout. I just think some people have gone overboard with all the bettman hate. i read and hear people saying that they will only watch the nhl again if bettman is fired. that just shows to me a lack of understanding about how this entire process works.

I believe that under the nhl constituation and by laws,bettman is allowed to make recommendations for expansion and relocation. however, the owners must vote on it for it to become final. so the owners deserve as much blame for the failed franchises as bettman (though we never hear criticism about the owners.

Just for clarification, Bettman didn't create the environment. The owners did. He did support it only because the ownership supported it. I understand why Bettman is taking the flack for this, but at the same time there are barely anyone that is able to look deeper into this situation. Yes, Mike Illitch is supporting this lockout. Why are there no fans upset at him? I guess being the mouthpiece means that they are going to take all the flack, but thats ok I suppose

this is just speculation on my part but now that the winter classic has been cancelled, it wouldn't surprise me if illitch was very much against giving into the players. it is a fact that illitch was very much against revenue sharing during the last lockout.

also, for those saying that the maple leafs are against the lockout. keep in mind that the leafs owners are also part of the bell/rogers broadcasting companies. they are pushing hard to get cbc's hockey rights when their tv contract is up so they might be trying to be good soldiers to the league right now.

Mediation is non-binding, which means that what the mediator says is just a recommendation. Non-binding mediation isn't something that has teeth in my opinion. Just like back in the last lockout, the mediator put forward some great ideas but one side or the other shot them down. It really is the same as having an informed expert that has no side that is willing to put their opinion and thoughts on the subject.

agreed. i don't see much coming from this but i guess mediation wouldn't hurt. it might tell us more about who truly doesn't want to negotiate or not, though that doesn't really do much in getting a deal done

[rrasco]

If it's any consolation, I hated Bettman before his contribution to a 3rd work stoppage in 18 years.

[Holmstrom96]

Question for the legal eagles out there: If all of this goes to court, how will it be handled since there are two countries represented in the NHL? Would the decision be enforced and upheld in both countries or would two separate decisions be needed?

Very interesting question.

The NHL is headquartered in New York. The non-binding mediators are from the US Government. I have no idea which, if any, court could render a decision that effects the entire NHL.

[cusimano_brothers]

Just for clarification, Bettman didn't create the environment. The owners did.

On today's instalment of TSN's OTR (OTR: The Reporters - Part 2) Michael Farber reminds people, or makes people aware for the first time (depending on your level of naivety), of what Uncle Gary's "mindset" has been since he took his present job.

[cusimano_brothers]

Well, one less "mediator"; from Sportsnet:

Guy Serota, one of three mediators assigned to oversee the NHL lockout, has been removed from the case due to a Twitter controversy.

Edited by cusimano_brothers, 26 November 2012 - 08:21 PM.

[chances14]

On today's instalment of TSN's OTR (OTR: The Reporters - Part 2) Michael Farber reminds people, or makes people aware for the first time (depending on your level of naivety), of what Uncle Gary's "mindset" has been since he took his present job.

yes and the owners allowed him to carry on with that mindset.

[rrasco]

In other news, it's been 195 days 7 hours 46 minutes 1 seconds since the last Kronwalling.

[Nightfall]

On today's instalment of TSN's OTR (OTR: The Reporters - Part 2) Michael Farber reminds people, or makes people aware for the first time (depending on your level of naivety), of what Uncle Gary's "mindset" has been since he took his present job.

Yup, and the owners have continued to allow him to carry on with this mindset as someone else has pointed out. So with that in mind, who should take the blame? The mouthpiece of the NHL owners or the owners themselves? I understand the Bettman hate, but every owners should take just as much flak for this. Just think of it this way.

Lets say that half of the owners voted for the lockout, who should take the blame for the lockout? Gary, the guy who speaks on behalf of the owners or the owners themselves?

The question is an easy one to answer.

Which is exactly what the next-to-last line of my previous post points out.

That said, getting both sides together with a third party will only help the process. It might not help enough to get a deal done, but if absolutely nothing else, it will make things abundantly clear as to which side is refusing to negotiate or willing to budge on certain issues.

Yup, sorry to cut you off. You are 100% correct. Mediators were brought in last time and it was not successful. I just hope that both sides are interested in mediation and are willing to go with what the mediators suggest. I don't know if the mediators discussions or recommendations will be made public, but I really think that they should avoid a PR battle. Both sides are working to score points with the public moreso than negotiating in some cases. They really should just roll up their sleeves and get down to work with these mediators like they did during the last bargaining sessions. Keep the public away and get to work.

Otherwise, both sides hunger for sound bytes and scoring PR points. That will take over for actual real negotiating work.

[NHLrules?]

Those poor players, getting paid millions to bang super hot chicks (as many as they want), skate around playing hockey for 15 years and retiring at 40. That must really suck.

It's a good thing someone pays them to do this sort of thing. Otherwise, working at Arby's , getting zero ***** and getting sodomized in a bar by a burly Canadian fellow in a restroom at the local watering hole seems like the only alternative.

Seriously guys these players are nuts. The only thing they can do is play hockey. They get paid well with lots of perks, I'm pretty sure most of them want to play the game. This union nonsense has to stop. The union rep,doesn't care about that it's about $.

It's about time we got this season started.

[frankgrimes]

Those poor players, getting paid millions to bang super hot chicks (as many as they want), skate around playing hockey for 15 years and retiring at 40. That must really suck.

It's a good thing someone pays them to do this sort of thing. Otherwise, working at Arby's , getting zero ***** and getting sodomized in a bar by a burly Canadian fellow in a restroom at the local watering hole seems like the only alternative.

Seriously guys these players are nuts. The only thing they can do is play hockey. They get paid well with lots of perks, I'm pretty sure most of them want to play the game. This union nonsense has to stop. The union rep,doesn't care about that it's about $.

It's about time we got this season started.

They are the 1 % best hockeyplayers worldwide so for sure they are going to want a rfair deal and not an insulting one presented by a guy, who has absolutely no atlethic or negotiating skills and is the exact opposite of everything, hockey should be.

If the NHL wants the players to give up money, they have to at least honor their contract rights simple as that.

[Pskov Wings Fan]

Those poor players, getting paid millions to bang super hot chicks (as many as they want), skate around playing hockey for 15 years and retiring at 40. That must really suck.

It's a good thing someone pays them to do this sort of thing. Otherwise, working at Arby's , getting zero ***** and getting sodomized in a bar by a burly Canadian fellow in a restroom at the local watering hole seems like the only alternative.

Seriously guys these players are nuts. The only thing they can do is play hockey. They get paid well with lots of perks, I'm pretty sure most of them want to play the game. This union nonsense has to stop. The union rep,doesn't care about that it's about $.

It's about time we got this season started.

The money NHL takes in has to go somewhere. The choices appear to be either the players or the owners. I would love fans to be on the list in form of lower ticket prices but recent history shows that this is not likely to happen. Between the players and the owners I would choose the players because I watch them on the ice playing the game. It does not really matter how much the players are paid in absolute terms. The argument is about which portion of the money NHL gets because of fans watching the hockey players on the ice should go to the owners.

Here is a exaggerated example to demonstrate my point. Lets assume that a person engages in some activity which earns $1B. She gets paid $10M, which is a lot of money and would provide a comfortable living for quite a while. But is it fair that the person who generated the income got only 1% of it?

[Dabura]

Hey, guys, guess what:

Both Bettman and the owners are responsible for creating "the environment."

BOOM
LOST

[Kronstantinov]

i don't think anyone is completely giving bettman a pass on this lockout. I just think some people have gone overboard with all the bettman hate. i read and hear people saying that they will only watch the nhl again if bettman is fired. that just shows to me a lack of understanding about how this entire process works.

I believe that under the nhl constituation and by laws,bettman is allowed to make recommendations for expansion and relocation. however, the owners must vote on it for it to become final. so the owners deserve as much blame for the failed franchises as bettman (though we never hear criticism about the owners.




this is just speculation on my part but now that the winter classic has been cancelled, it wouldn't surprise me if illitch was very much against giving into the players. it is a fact that illitch was very much against revenue sharing during the last lockout.

also, for those saying that the maple leafs are against the lockout. keep in mind that the leafs owners are also part of the bell/rogers broadcasting companies. they are pushing hard to get cbc's hockey rights when their tv contract is up so they might be trying to be good soldiers to the league right now.





agreed. i don't see much coming from this but i guess mediation wouldn't hurt. it might tell us more about who truly doesn't want to negotiate or not, though that doesn't really do much in getting a deal done

I would imagine that there will be a gag order put on the mediation

[55fan]

Hey, guys, guess what:

Both Bettman and the owners are responsible for creating "the environment."

BOOM
LOST

Quick. Someone notify the EPA.

[Dabura]

"Global smarming."

[RippedOnNitro]

The money NHL takes in has to go somewhere. The choices appear to be either the players or the owners. I would love fans to be on the list in form of lower ticket prices but recent history shows that this is not likely to happen. Between the players and the owners I would choose the players because I watch them on the ice playing the game. It does not really matter how much the players are paid in absolute terms. The argument is about which portion of the money NHL gets because of fans watching the hockey players on the ice should go to the owners.

Here is a exaggerated example to demonstrate my point. Lets assume that a person engages in some activity which earns $1B. She gets paid $10M, which is a lot of money and would provide a comfortable living for quite a while. But is it fair that the person who generated the income got only 1% of it?

Yes that is fair, because of that $1B there are costs of $989 leaving a profit of $11M of which 91% is going to her.

[Z Winged Dangler]

i don't think anyone is completely giving bettman a pass on this lockout. I just think some people have gone overboard with all the bettman hate. i read and hear people saying that they will only watch the nhl again if bettman is fired. that just shows to me a lack of understanding about how this entire process works.

I believe that under the nhl constituation and by laws,bettman is allowed to make recommendations for expansion and relocation. however, the owners must vote on it for it to become final. so the owners deserve as much blame for the failed franchises as bettman (though we never hear criticism about the owners.




this is just speculation on my part but now that the winter classic has been cancelled, it wouldn't surprise me if illitch was very much against giving into the players. it is a fact that illitch was very much against revenue sharing during the last lockout.

also, for those saying that the maple leafs are against the lockout. keep in mind that the leafs owners are also part of the bell/rogers broadcasting companies. they are pushing hard to get cbc's hockey rights when their tv contract is up so they might be trying to be good soldiers to the league right now.





agreed. i don't see much coming from this but i guess mediation wouldn't hurt. it might tell us more about who truly doesn't want to negotiate or not, though that doesn't really do much in getting a deal done

I truly hope that Rogers Sportsnet doesn't get CBC's hockey rights. Rogers can take their local blackouts and shove them up Roger Millions peehole.

It's not Saturday Hockey Night in Canada without Coach's Corner and CBC. If that changes, Hockey Night in Canada will lose it's tradition along with it's name that won't follow to Sportsnet. Just like the Wings fans not being allowed to toss octopi on the ice before Wings playoff games, this is another NHL tradition that cannot be cast aside.

[Kronstantinov]

They should have a hockey game to settle their dispute. Winner takes all.

They should have a hockey game to settle their dispute. Winner takes all.

Hopefully Bettman gets Kronwalled

Edited by Kronstantinov, 27 November 2012 - 01:57 PM.

[toby91_ca]

Those poor players, getting paid millions to bang super hot chicks (as many as they want), skate around playing hockey for 15 years and retiring at 40. That must really suck.

That comment really only applies to a very small portion of total NHL players. The vast majority, beyond 90%, have very short careers and need to find another job after playing to support themselves.

Edit: couple more thoughts on recent talks/developments:

- I'm a bit angered by the NHLs response to the NHLPAs latest proposal. The NHLPA came back and gave a lot, got a lot closer to the NHLs offer. I wouldn't expect the owners to accept the offer, but they could have at least considered it and countered. What they have basically done it take it and say....no, we aren't budging. This is what they did 7 years ago when the players finally agreed to a 24% rollback...they said thank you....now what more will you give us. My worry is that they will simply sit there and wait for the players to give in because they will eventually. Then, 5, 6 or 7 years from now we'll be back at the same place with the owners wanting the players to give back more and the owners will be willing to sit without hockey knowing it's only a matter of time before the players give in again.

- mediation - makes some sense, but far too late in the process if you ask me. Hopefully it's not just a PR move to show everyone that they are trying their best. The only glimmer of hope I take from it is that both sides fell like they could settle in the middle somewhere but don't want to admit to it (i.e. lose the negotiation). The mediator would allow them both to admit a tie and suggest they were pushed there by the mediator. It is a stretch, but a logical one too. I'm not optomistic at that it will go down that way though.

Edited by toby91_ca, 27 November 2012 - 03:42 PM.