HFBoards

HFBoards (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/index.php)
-   The Business of Hockey (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/forumdisplay.php?f=124)
-   -   Insider Jacobs: scheduled Romney use of TD Gardens on election night b4 game cancel'd (http://hfboards.hockeysfuture.com/showthread.php?t=1283071)

LadyStanley 11-14-2012 10:30 AM

Insider Jacobs: scheduled Romney use of TD Gardens on election night b4 game cancel'd
 
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...1331--nhl.html

Quote:

You see, Election Day in the U.S. was Nov. 6. Also scheduled for that date, for most of the calendar year: The Boston Bruins' home game against the Minnesota Wild that evening.
In fact, if the owners' Oct. 16 offer to end the NHL lockout and salvage an 82-game season had gone through, the game versus the Wild would have become the Bruins' home opener.
Of course, the lockout wasn't settled. The game was cancelled on Oct. 26, when the League officially pulled the plug on its November schedule.
None of these scenarios mattered to Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs. Because he already had alternate plans for the building on Election Night.
The Romney campaign told staff and volunteers they would be working from TD Garden on Election Day as early as Oct. 22, when the space was mentioned on a training call. According to a volunteer who was on the Oct. 22 call, Romney's Deputy Political Director Dan Centinello pointed to the TD Garden as the war room location.
This is four days after the NHL rejected the NHLPA's trio of counter-offers, but also four days before the NHL closed the books on playing games on this date.
This seems like not negotiating in good faith to me.


MOD NOTE: The BOH is not the place to discuss politics (so no Obama/Romney praise/bashing). Keep it focused on Jacobs and his insider knowledge.

Barrie22 11-14-2012 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilky01 (Post 55760885)
I find the fact that the Raptors played a game at the ACC on the Saturday night before the HHOF induction ceremony to also be kind of suspicious.

why? the nba had there schedule out months before the nhl even decided they were going to have a lockout. meaning the raptors were going to be playing in the acc on saturday night no matter of the lockout being over, or it being on.

ottawah 11-14-2012 10:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 55760709)
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...1331--nhl.html



This seems like not negotiating in good faith to me.


MOD NOTE: The BOH is not the place to discuss politics (so no Obama/Romney praise/bashing). Keep it focused on Jacobs and his insider knowledge.

One questions I'd ask before passing judgement.

"In fact, if the owners' Oct. 16 offer to end the NHL lockout and salvage an 82-game season had gone through, the game versus the Wild would have become the Bruins' home opener."

Is this in fact true? It is obvious that to do an 82 game schedule, some schedules would have had to be changed. Obviously games on the original slate were going to have to be moved around. I'm not sure you can just take the first game that would have been on a certain date and say for sure it would have been played.


But overall I think its more an issue for the league to deal with if they had explicitly told owners to keep those dates open and they booked it.

Personally I think its more of a case of Jacobs breaking (or bending) an internal rule based upon the fact he was close enough to negotiations to know there was no chance.

Ari91 11-14-2012 10:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pilky01 (Post 55760885)
I find the fact that the Raptors played a game at the ACC on the Saturday night before the HHOF induction ceremony to also be kind of suspicious.

Why? It was a part of the original schedule. The Raptors were always scheduled to play on Nov. 10th at 7pm at the ACC. The Leafs were originally schedule to play an away game in Washington that night.

As for Jacobs, considering he's very close to the negotiation process, I'm not the least bit surprised that he would do that. I don't think Jacobs gives a rats ass what anyone may think of him.

yotesreign 11-14-2012 10:49 AM

Best line in that article?

Quote:

Ars Technica describes some of the other technical problems Project Orca had as a result, but here's all you need to know: In the end, the operation was described by one Orca user as a "huge cluster[Gretzky]".
MOD

Butch 19 11-14-2012 10:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 55760709)
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...1331--nhl.html

This seems like not negotiating in good faith to me.

or just logical arena planning.

Freudian 11-14-2012 10:52 AM

I don't think it has anything to do with negotiating in good faith. If by some miracle the season would have been saved it would have been a logistical problem that had to be solved.

LadyStanley 11-14-2012 10:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottawah (Post 55761077)
One questions I'd ask before passing judgement.

"In fact, if the owners' Oct. 16 offer to end the NHL lockout and salvage an 82-game season had gone through, the game versus the Wild would have become the Bruins' home opener."

Is this in fact true? It is obvious that to do an 82 game schedule, some schedules would have had to be changed. Obviously games on the original slate were going to have to be moved around. I'm not sure you can just take the first game that would have been on a certain date and say for sure it would have been played.


But overall I think its more an issue for the league to deal with if they had explicitly told owners to keep those dates open and they booked it.

Personally I think its more of a case of Jacobs breaking (or bending) an internal rule based upon the fact he was close enough to negotiations to know there was no chance.

Yes, that game would have been played. (NHL would have "added" about one game every five weeks to make up for the games missed in October.)

cheswick 11-14-2012 11:00 AM

Who cares. There was no one on planet Earth that felt there would be an agreement done by ther 26th of Oct on the 22nd of October. So a date was filled in an empty arena.

yotesreign 11-14-2012 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 55761353)
Yes, that game would have been played. (NHL would have "added" about one game every five weeks to make up for the games missed in October.)

No guarantee they would have played it on that date, but either way, it means nothing but a good laugh. On the day the league announced the cancellation of those dates, if instead the league had announced a deal with the players and that they intended to play the games scheduled on that date on that date, other arrangements would have been made to either move Mitt or the game, and it would not been some kind of horrific logistical nightmare or be seen as the nefarious subplot others might try and blow it into.

I get that reporters have to write about something, and better they write about Romney and the TD Garden than write about something else, if only to get that phrase "cluster[Gretzky]" into print again.

cheswick wrote:

Quote:

Who cares. There was no one on planet Earth that felt there would be an agreement done by ther 26th of Oct on the 22nd of October. So a date was filled in an empty arena.

+1

powerstuck 11-14-2012 11:38 AM

Wasn't Romney's speech done from Boston Convention Center and not TD Garden ? I remember live reporters hours before speech talk that it was there.

Maybe they just used some parts of the TD Garden (which is huge btw) and not the actual ice/play-field area.

Ari91 11-14-2012 11:42 AM

Wait a second, I just the article in full - the article says that the dates at TD were tentatively booked because owners were unsure of what would happen with the lockout. Romney said to prepare for work at the area before the November games were officially cancelled but then goes on to say that when confirmation was actually given to Romney is unknown. So this entire article is based on speculation of their best guess of what transpired?

zytz 11-14-2012 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HockeyCrazed101 (Post 55762589)
Wait a second, I just the article in full - the article says that the dates at TD were tentatively booked because owners were unsure of what would happen with the lockout. Romney said to prepare for work at the area before the November games were officially cancelled but then goes on to say that when confirmation was actually given to Romney is unknown. So this entire article is based on speculation of their best guess of what transpired?

Nope it's because the owners are unilaterally bad people who's ever move is a secret stab at the NHLPA.

It is known.

DL44 11-14-2012 12:05 PM

Yeah.. not enough details to jump to the conclusion that negotiations are in bad faith.
Quite the PA spin.

a- would the original schedule been utilized with extra games packed in and around it - unknown and unlikely.
b- no info on when confirmation to use the stadium was given.

tarheelhockey 11-14-2012 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Freudian (Post 55761303)
I don't think it has anything to do with negotiating in good faith. If by some miracle the season would have been saved it would have been a logistical problem that had to be solved.

That's pretty much the way I see it.

Players were signing contracts with European teams long before games were cancelled, just in case they needed a place to play this fall. Negotiating in bad faith? No, just making a Plan B with the understanding there might be conflicts to sort out later.

billybudd 11-14-2012 12:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 55760709)
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...1331--nhl.html



This seems like not negotiating in good faith to me.

Guy #1: Sell you this car for $10k, but you need to let me know by Friday

Guy #2: No, but I'll buy your van for $600

Guy #1: I'm not talking about the van, for any price, let alone that one. Car for $10k, no discussion, let me know by Friday.

Guy #2: I'll let you know now, don't want it.


Hour later
Guy #3: You sell that car yet?

Guy #1: Nope.

Guy #3: Can I borrow it for a day.

Guy #1 Sure.



The above exchange is not an example of bad faith negotiation.

Lost Horizons 11-14-2012 01:10 PM

The Garden was used as the site of the DNC convention in 2004. Also Jacobs has given a ton the Dems over the years including Edwards and Kerry so all this is to do about nothing. It's just Jacobs putting his privately owned building to work.

OrrNumber4 11-14-2012 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lost Horizons (Post 55764445)
The Garden was used as the site of the DNC convention in 2004. Also Jacobs has given a ton the Dems over the years including Edwards and Kerry so all this is to do about nothing. It's just Jacobs putting his privately owned building to work.

Not the point....

Lacaar 11-14-2012 01:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LadyStanley (Post 55760709)
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nhl-pu...1331--nhl.html



This seems like not negotiating in good faith to me.


MOD NOTE: The BOH is not the place to discuss politics (so no Obama/Romney praise/bashing). Keep it focused on Jacobs and his insider knowledge.

This seems like grasping at straws to me. Both the article and the poster.

Lost Horizons 11-14-2012 02:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superroyain10 (Post 55765483)
Not the point....

I was pointing out that politics wasn't involved. Also I don't think the event (not really an event just a large get out the vote thing using only the floor of the Garden) was moved to the Garden until after the first games were cancelled. I don't think they were/are going to just pick up the schedule at whatever start date they set so once the first games got tossed the whole schedule was tossed. So if they announced in mid oct a deal was done a new 82 game schedule was to be announced therefore there would there would be no conflict so once the first games went JJ rented out his building.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:36 PM.

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com, A property of CraveOnline, a division of AtomicOnline LLC ©2009 CraveOnline Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved.