HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, NHL revenues, relocation and expansion.

NHLPA fires Paul Kelly (UPD: player review of firing completed)

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-31-2009, 05:44 PM
  #101
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 13,480
vCash: 500
Salaries have gone up since the lockout, and so have revenues...the PA should be happy! Isn't the escrow thing done just in case the revenues fall apart? If they don't, they get their escrow money back...am I missing something?

BLONG7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 05:45 PM
  #102
discostu
Registered User
 
discostu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Nomadville
Country: Canada
Posts: 18,488
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Egil View Post
TSN has some interviews with Chelios, Hargrove and Ferrence. No details at all,
though ferrance says "there was information that came to us through the regular checks and balances that was too hard to ignore". What that means exactly is unclear.
It's going to have to be something pretty big for the NHLPA to at all look justified in their actions.

I have trouble seeing the 22 exec members who voted for his ousting to do so without something extremely concrete of some very foul play. I also have trouble seeing something that fits that description occurring without something being leaked out to the media today to run with. Everyone in the media commenting on this seems to generally side with Paul Kelly being the victim here. You'd think the NHLPA would be trying to do some damage control on the PR side if they is justification of their actions.

discostu is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 05:49 PM
  #103
BLONG7
Registered User
 
BLONG7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 13,480
vCash: 500
The PA should just being back Goodenow, he will make everything right...

BLONG7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 07:38 PM
  #104
MsWoof
Registered User
 
MsWoof's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 13,532
vCash: 500
Eric Lindros and his parents should get the hell away from the game. Wherever they go, trouble follows.

MsWoof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 07:45 PM
  #105
Burke's Evil Spirit
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 15,768
vCash: 500
Here's a question - who would possibly want the NHLPA's executive directorship at this point? Goodenow, Saskin, Kelly all ended up with their head on a pike. They're going to end up with a reject also-ran who Bettman+Daly are going to crush, if they don't destroy the league first.

Burke's Evil Spirit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 07:55 PM
  #106
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Russ Conway who was instrumental in bringing down Eagleson (who was prosecuted by Paul Kelly BTW) and certainly knows the NHLPA was very critical:
http://www.nesn.com/2009/08/kelly-fi...ver-learn.html

Also in that article:
Quote:
Ironically, Kelly, who has become the scapegoat for those concessions, had nothing to do with negotiating the current collective bargaining agreement, while Penny was one of the main lawyers involved. But this group decided to tarnish Kelly’s image with the players by pointing to what they believe was too cozy a relationship between Kelly and NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and deputy commissioner Bill Daly. Hargrove, Penny and Pink also claim that Kelly never made enough effort to get to know the players and members of the union.

According to sources, part of this group’s desire to get rid of Kelly also stemmed from Kelly ordering an internal audit (by a top former FBI forensic accountant) of the players' association's expenses during the previous three years before he took over. That audit was still ongoing prior to Kelly’s dismissal. Sources claim that through the audit, Kelly discovered that then-interim leaders Penny and Lindros were spending millions of dollars of the union’s money. Lindros ended up resigning, but word is, that move fueled this attack on Kelly, and Lindros was very much involved. Kelly also beat out Pink for the executive director job, and the belief is that Pink is still sour over that.
I have been in touch with a couple of players and agents I know.

Eric Duhatschek has it pretty much right.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sport...rticle1270789/

The real driving force I am told behind the move however is Ron Pink who has worked hand in glove with Eric Lindros. I am told that it was Pink who actually authored the report presented by Buzz Hargrove. Not a big surprise as Hargrove is not the most literate guy in the world.

The report apparently was masterful smear job with little hard evidence to back it up. One former NHLPA exec I know claimed they were going around the NHLPA offices asking staff how Paul Kelly treated them personally.

Even Hargrove admitted this in an interview after the firing:
Quote:
I don't think you can point to any one (issue) and I'm not prepared to name one," he said, adding that "people had just lost confidence that Paul was the one" to lead the union.
Pink was always miffed he did not get Kelly's job in the first place. He is a well-known union side labour lawyer from Halifax and IIRC he has ties to the CAW which would explain the Buzz Hargrove connection.

I am told that Lindros drove Kelly nuts with constant trips to his office and memo after memo about pretty much nothing.

I am a little surprised to see Ian Penny on board with that group but it seems he was bought off with a lucrative contract extension and the interim Director position.

Apparently there was also a split on the advisory board with at least George Cohen and Dan O’Neill supporting Kelly. Here is the press release and brief bios on the members:
http://www.nhlpa.com/Content/Feature.asp?contentId=3865

I touched base with a couple of players and they are puzzled by the development. When I mentioned Pink being involved they were surprised - they were even more surprised when I told them that Pink had been in the running for the job Kelly got. Apparently that information was never shared with the rank and file members.

One of the players called me back and told me that two of the player members of the NHLPA Executive Board were also unaware that Ron Pink had been in the running for Kelly's job.

What surprises me given the search committee, unanimous vote on Kelly,etc. was that this was rushed through. The player reps should have come back to the teams when training camp opens and explain what was going on and get at least a straw vote on whether or not to keep Kelly.

This way (like with Saskin) there was no real chance for questions to be asked.

Pretty much a palace coup as Duhatschek says.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 07:59 PM
  #107
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,320
vCash: 500
This is likely what they are talking about with respect to escrow:
http://blog.mlive.com/snapshots/2009...ow_to_225.html

It appears that Kelly a) raised the escrow rate to 22.5% from 13.5%, and b) gave the cap an extra bump of 5%.

The first one negatively affects all players, and the second one negatively affects players whose contracts have already been signed (it cuts their take by 5%), but positively affects players who are signing new contracts (creates a bigger pool of money to be spent).

The real threat, of course, is that the new leadership claws back that 5% bump. Such a move would be highly divisive amongst the membership in a year where revenues are already under significant pressure.

If the NHLPA institutes a 5% drop next year, there will be a lot of players that will no longer have jobs. Guys who already are locked in will make that 5% extra though.

Can you imagine what this will do in locker rooms around the league? Jarome Iginla might make a little more money, but his centerman, Jokinen, would see a significant portion of his expected salary disappear when he signs a new contract.

If the owners were smart they'd hold off on signing any new contracts in order to exploit the divisions between these players.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:07 PM
  #108
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
I have been in touch with a couple of players and agents I know.
Burnside has a lot more good info:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/column...ott&id=4435098

Quote:
"Scary days," one prominent player agent told ESPN.com Monday morning.

At the end of the day it's the agents who usually keep the union in check. They more than anyone else were the ones who pulled the rug out from under Goodenowe and the players dutifully followed.


If they were caught by surprise by this move, there is a lot more crap hitting the fan to follow. They have just as much to lose as the players do, and are a much more savvy bunch than the players who make up the NHLPA executive.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:14 PM
  #109
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
Burnside has a lot more good info:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/column...ott&id=4435098

At the end of the day it's the agents who usually keep the union in check. They more than anyone else were the ones who pulled the rug out from under Goodenowe and the players dutifully followed.

If they were caught by surprise by this move, there is a lot more crap hitting the fan to follow. They have just as much to lose as the players do, and are a much more savvy bunch than the players who make up the NHLPA executive.
Interesting stuff from Burnside - pretty much what I was told as well.

As an agent you have to be careful, your ability to represent players is dependant upon your NHLPA certification since without that you are hooped.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:28 PM
  #110
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
As an agent you have to be careful, your ability to represent players is dependant upon your NHLPA certification since without that you are hooped.
Well, you certainly don't want to stand out alone on this. But you get the top guys at CAA and Newport in agreement on this, and they can take down pretty much anyone.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:31 PM
  #111
guyincognito
Registered User
 
guyincognito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 31,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
Burnside has a lot more good info:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/column...ott&id=4435098




At the end of the day it's the agents who usually keep the union in check. They more than anyone else were the ones who pulled the rug out from under Goodenowe and the players dutifully followed.


If they were caught by surprise by this move, there is a lot more crap hitting the fan to follow. They have just as much to lose as the players do, and are a much more savvy bunch than the players who make up the NHLPA executive.
Yeah, the article is an eye-opener. As for the reps, well, in the Devils case, the rep is David Clarkson. Why? No idea, maybe no one else wants to do it, it doesn't seem right that a 3rd year player would be repping a team with a ton of vets.

So, that could give you an idea of the dysfunction of the process. Nothing against the dude, but when the fans give you a nickname such as Clarktard, that's not the guy I would want handling my union business affairs.

guyincognito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:33 PM
  #112
Bluefan75
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,166
vCash: 500
Wow. Just wow. This thing is even worse than I imagined. Unbelievable.

The amount of info that did not get back to the players is incredible. I wonder who is the driving force in trying to have a decision reached Sunday. Like the article said, this is the kind of decision you probably want all the members involved.

I'd be real interested to find out a)the veracity of the reports of the internal audit, and b)how many players were made aware of the Pink/Lindros money spending. How do Pink/Hargrove/Lindros get such a power base within the exec committee? This is the scary part.

Bluefan75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:37 PM
  #113
Dado
Guest
 
Country:
Posts: n/a
vCash:
Seems this all really went off the rails when the Linden faction torpedoed the Goodenow regime in the middle of a contract dispute. I do wonder what would have happened to the NHL if the players had stuck to the original plan of a 2 year lockout - not clear to me the players would have folded before the owners.

If this is now going to be a repeat of the strategy Goodenow was brought in to implement originally, seems extremely unlikely there won't be another season lost.

  Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:42 PM
  #114
guyincognito
Registered User
 
guyincognito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 31,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
Seems this all really went off the rails when the Linden faction torpedoed the Goodenow regime in the middle of a contract dispute. I do wonder what would have happened to the NHL if the players had stuck to the original plan of a 2 year lockout - not clear to me the players would have folded before the owners.

If this is now going to be a repeat of the strategy Goodenow was brought in to implement originally, seems extremely unlikely there won't be another season lost.
the league would have gone out of business. the 2 year plan was ********. but much of what the PA does is, so...

Goodenow got torpedo'd for good reason and Saskin saved the league. the funny thing is that this witch hunt now calls into question what exactly happened to Saskin.

guyincognito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:51 PM
  #115
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dado View Post
If this is now going to be a repeat of the strategy Goodenow was brought in to implement originally, seems extremely unlikely there won't be another season lost.
I'd say it's rather unlikely.

The Hargrove / Lindros / Pink crowd seems to have the upper hand at the moment, but you know the adults are going to step in at some point. After the Saskin fiasco the hardliners were likely calling for that exact scenario but they ended up with Paul Kelly.

It's easy for Lindros and Hargrove to advocate another lockout - they've got absolutely nothing to lose.

The players aren't looking at a scenario where they can expect their salaries to go down under a new CBA. Indeed, I'd expect the league to be making more concessions rather than the other way around, with players potentially getting a chunk of relocation fees, expansion fees, etc. The league's biggest bargaining chip at this point seems to be the 2014 Olympics.

But I think the next CBA is going to be a fight amongst the owners themselves as much as it is between the league and the players. "Cost certainty" is proving to be anything but in many small markets, and I'd expect those teams to be fighting to increase revenue sharing as a matter of survival. These teams are also likely going to be against expansion as well, since it takes away markets that they could potentially be interested in moving to.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:58 PM
  #116
Bluefan75
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by guyincognito View Post
the league would have gone out of business. the 2 year plan was ********. but much of what the PA does is, so...

Goodenow got torpedo'd for good reason and Saskin saved the league. the funny thing is that this witch hunt now calls into question what exactly happened to Saskin.
your hypothesis requires 2 big assumptions: 1) that the league was never going to agree to anything other than what was agreed to, and 2) that should the NHL fold another league would not materialize nearly immediately. Among other things, the NHL's history indicates there is a market for hockey.

Saskin saved the owners.

Bluefan75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 08:59 PM
  #117
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,320
vCash: 500
Lebrun chimes in too:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/...=lebrun_pierre

Quote:
"To me, what's troubling is that a decision with such huge ramifications took place in two days with such a small group," said one veteran player agent, requesting anonymity. "How can that small group make such a big decision? That's the concern, regardless of whether you're an advocate of Kelly or not."


Said another agent: "I'm dumbfounded by the immediacy of this decision. You'd think this should be deliberated for more than 10 hours. I would have thought something as significant as this would have involved more discussion among more players. I just think the general union populace should have had more of a say in this."
By the time the players have their team meetings in two weeks, the agents will have their ducks in a row. Now they just have to find someone credible to take the job over. My guess is that they try to put their own guy in there, and clear the decks of everyone who was involved in this.

Anyone know when a new executive committee is chosen?

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 09:01 PM
  #118
mouser
Global Moderator
Business of Hockey
 
mouser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: South Mountain
Posts: 12,887
vCash: 500
Anyone want to recommend some good articles/links on how Hargrove arrived at his current position with the NHLPA?

mouser is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 09:03 PM
  #119
Bluefan75
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,166
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
I'd say it's rather unlikely.

The Hargrove / Lindros / Pink crowd seems to have the upper hand at the moment, but you know the adults are going to step in at some point. After the Saskin fiasco the hardliners were likely calling for that exact scenario but they ended up with Paul Kelly.

It's easy for Lindros and Hargrove to advocate another lockout - they've got absolutely nothing to lose.

The players aren't looking at a scenario where they can expect their salaries to go down under a new CBA. Indeed, I'd expect the league to be making more concessions rather than the other way around, with players potentially getting a chunk of relocation fees, expansion fees, etc. The league's biggest bargaining chip at this point seems to be the 2014 Olympics.

But I think the next CBA is going to be a fight amongst the owners themselves as much as it is between the league and the players. "Cost certainty" is proving to be anything but in many small markets, and I'd expect those teams to be fighting to increase revenue sharing as a matter of survival. These teams are also likely going to be against expansion as well, since it takes away markets that they could potentially be interested in moving to.
This we can agree on. Bettman managed to keep the ownership side from reaching this point during the lockout, but like you say, they are already there without any labor trouble now. It makes you wonder whether the "supermajority" Bettman got the owners to agree to last time around will actually work against him..

Bluefan75 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 09:04 PM
  #120
Ernie
Registered User
 
Ernie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 10,320
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefan75 View Post
your hypothesis requires 2 big assumptions: 1) that the league was never going to agree to anything other than what was agreed to, and 2) that should the NHL fold another league would not materialize nearly immediately. Among other things, the NHL's history indicates there is a market for hockey.

Saskin saved the owners.
The owners would have been fine if they were out another 2 seasons. They may have been taking a hit, but the majority of them were losing money anyhow.

However, many players would have lost a huge chunk of their potential life earnings. Union members are usually inherently selfish - they have no problem selling out future members as long as they can keep their own entitlements.

Ernie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 09:04 PM
  #121
puckhead103*
 
puckhead103*'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 819
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevin Forbes View Post
When Lindros' resigned from his position at ombudsman, there was talk that the reason he was stepping down was due to him butting heads with Kelly, namely over Lindros doing everything he could to prove his worth and prove the need of the position. So Lindros would chase down every lead, dig up dissent even if it wasn't really there and try to investigate griefs with the NHLPA brass whether they were worthwhile causes or not.

Is it too big of a jump to imagine Lindros going from digging up corpses and chasing ghosts to actively causing problems?
sounds like lindros took too much concussions which probably affect his decision making.........

puckhead103* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 09:06 PM
  #122
guyincognito
Registered User
 
guyincognito's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 31,300
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefan75 View Post
your hypothesis requires 2 big assumptions: 1) that the league was never going to agree to anything other than what was agreed to, and 2) that should the NHL fold another league would not materialize nearly immediately. Among other things, the NHL's history indicates there is a market for hockey.

Saskin saved the owners.
1) if they had reached the point of having accepted something else, the league would have failed in the near future.

2) great, and unless it comprised 30 teams, alot of people in the union would lose their jobs. would the new league be able to pay the same salaries? etc...

guyincognito is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 09:07 PM
  #123
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,910
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ernie View Post
Lebrun chimes in too:
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/...=lebrun_pierre



By the time the players have their team meetings in two weeks, the agents will have their ducks in a row. Now they just have to find someone credible to take the job over. My guess is that they try to put their own guy in there, and clear the decks of everyone who was involved in this.

Anyone know when a new executive committee is chosen?
These were my concerns as well when I heard the details of how the coup was carried out.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 09:14 PM
  #124
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: ϶(°o°)ϵ
Posts: 31,329
vCash: 500
Mod: Apologies to those of you who were trying to explain the history and legal aspects of some past events, however the thread is about the ouster of Paul Kelly.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-31-2009, 09:15 PM
  #125
kdb209
Global Moderator
 
kdb209's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 13,031
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefan75 View Post
It makes you wonder whether the "supermajority" Bettman got the owners to agree to last time around will actually work against him..
It can't. The supermajority clause was only triggered if GB opposed a proposed CBA. It took a 75% majority to approve a CBA over GB's objections (like what happened in 1995) - only a simple majority was needed to approve one that GB supported.

kdb209 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.