Sigh. And tonight's tweets are an example of sports reporters spinning facts to suit their own agendas. Leaving aside which side you may support or otherwise, please recognize:
1) Both sides chose not to leak the fact that they were (shockingly!) meeting at one of their lawyers' offices - and this was interpreted as some major "secret." They weren't in a ****ing bunker, they were conducting normal business meetings and chose not to share it with the rest of the circus.
2) The fact that it was the league's counsel's office: oooooooh. OMG, those *******s! "Hardly neutral" and clearly an example of the big, bad "man" trying to stick it to the poor, beleaguered players. No. It was simply a convenient place to meet agreed upon by both parties. It could just as easily have been the PA's lawyers' offices. Do you think the Fehrs would've agreed to go to Proskauer Rose if they thought it in any way disadvantaged them?
Talk about Brooksie and others trying to create a story to match their own desired narratives. Are you ****ing kidding me? The fact that they had a normal meeting in a normal office, but chose not to share, is a GOOD thing. It was undisclosed, not the Bat Cave. And, at the risk of being ridiculed for actually having been in big money meetings myself, of COURSE they were in one side or the others' lawyers' offices. Where did you expect them to be? The lawyers are already working on the deal and would be more than ready to clear 3 conference rooms for them. They would have any number of associates and paralegals lined up to fetch contracts, make copies, etc. They'd have communications to their various constituencies all set up and ready to go. How is this at all an intimidation play? Do you have visions of the PA contingent exiting the elevators and having to navigate a gauntlet of sleep deprived, out of shape 1st years booing and hissing on their way to the plush 43rd floor conference room? If anything, the league did the PA a favor by footing the bill for the catering!
"@LouisJean_TVA: Told NHL didn't reject PA proposals. Offered detailed counter on rev sharing, make whole, etc. Both side are bargainning. Outcome unknown."
"@LouisJean_TVA: Told NHL didn't reject PA proposals. Offered detailed counter on rev sharing, make whole, etc. Both side are bargainning. Outcome unknown."
This is very good. At least the heads of the NHL (Bettman...ahem...) aren't storming out of the room after 10 minutes of meetings.
This could still fall apart, but I’m ready to state that I believe there’s a better chance of a deal getting done than not at this stage.
Quote:
From the NHL perspective, I don’t think Bettman can go to his owners where the only meaningful concession -- albeit a gigantic one -- is the players’ share going down to 50-50. The owners’ likely response would be that they were promised more than that in this deal.
And so, middle ground needs to be found on Make Whole, revenue sharing and player contract issues.
I wonder if this doesn’t come down to the player contract issues once there’s an agreement on Make Whole and revenue sharing. The league will fight hard to get some "wins" there. The elimination of back-diving deals (front-loaded) is a must for the league, and I don’t think the NHLPA will fight that one too much, but after that, I don’t sense the union willing to give much more in this area. The league will want more.
If Gary can get 50-50(with there being an agreement on the make whole)and getting rid of the dummy contracts,the NHL will have accomplished their top two objectives. The expanded revenue sharing helps the lower revenue teams. Stern got 57% to 49-51. He got tougher luxury taxes. He got another year in contract term limits. Expanded revenue sharing.
I'm trying not to read too much into it, but Bettman looked pretty happy in the interview today. You can see it on NHL.com - I don't think I've seen him display any positive emotion like that in a while.
"@Real_ESPNLeBrun: Told that NHL upped its total money in its revamped revenue sharing model today, north of the $200 M that was in their Oct. 16 proposal"
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
In my blog: after talking to 2 sources I can say this. We are not even close to a deal. NHL wants more concession from players...
Renaud P Lavoie @RenLavoieRDS
In my blog: after talking to 2 sources I can say this. We are not even close to a deal. NHL wants more concession from players...
from all the tweets RB just posted it looked like a lot of negotiating and progress was getting done. im just confused by all these conflicting reports
Sigh. And tonight's tweets are an example of sports reporters spinning facts to suit their own agendas. Leaving aside which side you may support or otherwise, please recognize:
1) Both sides chose not to leak the fact that they were (shockingly!) meeting at one of their lawyers' offices - and this was interpreted as some major "secret." They weren't in a ****ing bunker, they were conducting normal business meetings and chose not to share it with the rest of the circus.
2) The fact that it was the league's counsel's office: oooooooh. OMG, those *******s! "Hardly neutral" and clearly an example of the big, bad "man" trying to stick it to the poor, beleaguered players. No. It was simply a convenient place to meet agreed upon by both parties. It could just as easily have been the PA's lawyers' offices. Do you think the Fehrs would've agreed to go to Proskauer Rose if they thought it in any way disadvantaged them?
Talk about Brooksie and others trying to create a story to match their own desired narratives. Are you ****ing kidding me? The fact that they had a normal meeting in a normal office, but chose not to share, is a GOOD thing. It was undisclosed, not the Bat Cave. And, at the risk of being ridiculed for actually having been in big money meetings myself, of COURSE they were in one side or the others' lawyers' offices. Where did you expect them to be? The lawyers are already working on the deal and would be more than ready to clear 3 conference rooms for them. They would have any number of associates and paralegals lined up to fetch contracts, make copies, etc. They'd have communications to their various constituencies all set up and ready to go. How is this at all an intimidation play? Do you have visions of the PA contingent exiting the elevators and having to navigate a gauntlet of sleep deprived, out of shape 1st years booing and hissing on their way to the plush 43rd floor conference room? If anything, the league did the PA a favor by footing the bill for the catering!
Jiminy Christmas.
The only thing I can conclude from your commentary is that you need to have a drink (or three). : )
from all the tweets RB just posted it looked like a lot of negotiating and progress was getting done. im just confused by all these conflicting reports
I don't think they're ever going to be "close", because neither side is going to act like "yeah everything is perfect except for this one little detail, let's debate that". They're going to act like they're not ready to accept the entire thing right up until the point they accept the deal.
It really shouldn't be about how close they are, but about how likely the sides are to be able to negotiate on outstanding points and how much room they have to move
The NHL isn't going to get everything they want. If Bettman promised the owners changes in contracts,that's his fault and their fault. The NHL has 3 year ELCs. Arbitration after 4 years. Free agency at 7 or 27. More restrictive than the other leagues. The NHL owners ignored those tools and handed out ridiculous contracts. The NHLPA is willing to work with them on the long term dummy contracts.
Quote:
In addition to differences regarding players’ share and league revenue-sharing, the parties remain separated by a wide gulf regarding changes to systemic issues proposed by the league, most notably including salary arbitration and free agency eligibility.
Both sides will need to compromise. Can't wait until this nonsense is finally over. How many best offers has the NHL made only to come back with a better best offer?
I know people got pissed over the players not negotiating during the season. Seems like the owners needed to negotiate amongst themselves. Some teams insist on 50%, some insist on immediate drops, some demand contractual changes. Different factions have unique lines in the sand. If they were united, they might be able find their happy medium. As long as 8 teams feel shorted, there is no hockey.
To soften the drop in percentage, Boston could be insisting on stricter contracts. The players want the needle moved toward them on all fronts. Too much power to individual owners.
Last edited by DutchShamrock: 11-09-2012 at 07:30 AM.
I have a few key contacts over at NBC. They are telling me December 1st...
And from a business stand point it makes no sense to miss the whole season, for either side. I'm tuning out and gonna stop following the BS until I hear a deal is done.
I have a few key contacts over at NBC. They are telling me December 1st...
And from a business stand point it makes no sense to miss the whole season, for either side. I'm tuning out and gonna stop following the BS until I hear a deal is done.
I assume December is the what the NHL is telling people to be ready for IF a deal gets done. It makes sense if they feel like there's progress and a chance, to go ahead and get stuff moving a bit behind the scenes just in case
Sigh. And tonight's tweets are an example of sports reporters spinning facts to suit their own agendas. Leaving aside which side you may support or otherwise, please recognize:
1) Both sides chose not to leak the fact that they were (shockingly!) meeting at one of their lawyers' offices - and this was interpreted as some major "secret." They weren't in a ****ing bunker, they were conducting normal business meetings and chose not to share it with the rest of the circus.
2) The fact that it was the league's counsel's office: oooooooh. OMG, those *******s! "Hardly neutral" and clearly an example of the big, bad "man" trying to stick it to the poor, beleaguered players. No. It was simply a convenient place to meet agreed upon by both parties. It could just as easily have been the PA's lawyers' offices. Do you think the Fehrs would've agreed to go to Proskauer Rose if they thought it in any way disadvantaged them?
Talk about Brooksie and others trying to create a story to match their own desired narratives. Are you ****ing kidding me? The fact that they had a normal meeting in a normal office, but chose not to share, is a GOOD thing. It was undisclosed, not the Bat Cave. And, at the risk of being ridiculed for actually having been in big money meetings myself, of COURSE they were in one side or the others' lawyers' offices. Where did you expect them to be? The lawyers are already working on the deal and would be more than ready to clear 3 conference rooms for them. They would have any number of associates and paralegals lined up to fetch contracts, make copies, etc. They'd have communications to their various constituencies all set up and ready to go. How is this at all an intimidation play? Do you have visions of the PA contingent exiting the elevators and having to navigate a gauntlet of sleep deprived, out of shape 1st years booing and hissing on their way to the plush 43rd floor conference room? If anything, the league did the PA a favor by footing the bill for the catering!
Jiminy Christmas.
Agreed. Any kind of uproar over the site of the meeting is ridiculous. Brooks would like to have you think that Fehr and company were walking into the Temple of Doom yesterday - its ridiculous.
There is no perfect CBA to satisfy all of the owners. Some of the NBA owners such Michael Jordan wanted Stern to make a deal at less than 49-51. Mickey Arison of the Heat voted against the CBA because he didn't like the revenue sharing component of the deal. Some owners wanted a hard cap and not the soft cap system with high luxury taxes. Stern made a deal with 49-51 from 57%. Tougher luxury taxes. No hard cap. Bettman needs to have a talk with some his guys.
