NBC is paying $200M this year for absolutely nothing, and an extra year is getting tacked onto the deal at no charge.
That doesn't sound right, an extra year gets tacked on if it's lost but NBC gets paid that year what they're supposedly owed now. I dunno if interest is added on or the value is adjusted due to currency values then compared to now. If inflation continues by then then obviously $200 M right now for example is worth more than it is 11 yrs from now. Actually no that's wrong too. NBC gets a free year during that 11th season, not the NHL getting a free year. So that means that the NHL will get no US TV revenue that season from my understanding but their games will be broadcast on NBC. So it's basically Bettman pushing down the problem to future Commisioner who's gonna be short of some revenue that season.
Anyone see the Koci vs Valabik fight in the KHL? Fairly good, two big players.
Haha, the NHLPA requested a staff member from each side be present for the players-owners meeting, so Bettman sends the leagues #2 guy Bill Daily. What a joke. Really shows whether Bettman is more interested in saving the season, or crushing the PA again.
The players had not decided who to send from their side at the time of the report. They'll probably send Fehr's brother now which will make it essentially the same kind of meeting they've had five or six times.
When you bring a supplier into a meeting to discuss the products they are trying to sell you, you don't put the Janitor and Cook in the room as your company's representatives to answer questions about how their product will pertain to your company and how responsive you'll be to their terms.
When you bring a supplier into a meeting to discuss the products they are trying to sell you, you don't put the Janitor and Cook in the room as your company's representatives to answer questions about how their product will pertain to your company and how responsive you'll be to their terms.
How does that make sense? The players are completely out of their element talking and possibly negotiating with the owners as it is. Now he sends in the leagues #2 guy, when he sold the idea as a metting without the leadership present.
There's zero interest in trying to be fair, and make a legit effort to save the season. He's got a bunch of children in a room full of wolves. Right where he wanted them.
How does that make sense? The players are completely out of their element talking and possibly negotiating with the owners as it is. Now he sends in the leagues #2 guy, when he sold the idea as a metting without the leadership present.
There's zero interest in trying to be fair, and make a legit effort to save the season. He's got a bunch of children in a room full of wolves. Right where he wanted them.
I know you're passionate about the lockout, but think of it from a business standpoint. You've got a bunch of people that don't know the other side's point of view in a room being updated on the labor strike. They have questions that the NHLPA cannot always answer or need the league's clarification on their stance.
Enter NHL rep Bill Daly that is privvy to all discussions and can clarify what the league has been saying if needed. The rest of the time he is quietly present to help keep the bridges on both sides of the discussion open.
This isn't a war, I'm sure both sides will return to work just fine afterwards when they start seeing their checks coming in.
Anyone know if the Avs are one of the hard-lining teams, or not?
Haven't seen anyone involved with the Avs to do anything in this lockout, do Kroenkes even know there is a lockout?
In an article from... someone a couple of months ago he listed teams that he assumed weren't hardliners, I'll try and find it. I personally don't think so though, what do we gain? We're a profit-making team who have a very young roster who need to play together to develop properly, we need to be playing.
Speaking of Avs and the lockout, is anyone concerned that no Avs players have been at any of these meetings?
__________________ “It’s embarrassing. I’m embarrassed to be here right now. It’s not even funny. And it’s just embarrassing, the way we, you know, the energy we have in the room and the way we approach practices and the way we approach this game. It’s not how you’re going to win any games in this league." - Jean-Sebastien Giguere, April 8 2013
The commish has three groups of owners: the ones who want to play; the ones in the middle, including Tampa and Nashville, who want a better collective bargaining agreement but recognize not playing is worse; and the hardliners. It would be a mistake to underestimate the last group. There are several who would rather cancel the season than accept a bad deal because they are hemorrhaging money and need immediate satisfaction.
While the players believe Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs is calling the shots, an educated guess at the final group includes but may not be limited to Anaheim, Columbus, Florida, the Islanders, Phoenix, St. Louis, Washington and Dallas -- enough to block any agreement from getting done (It's tough to lock it down because owners are forbidden to discuss this stuff. Attempts to talk to a couple were politely shot down).
This group is the biggest challenge for both the commissioner and the players.
In an article from... someone a couple of months ago he listed teams that he assumed weren't hardliners, I'll try and find it. I personally don't think so though, what do we gain? We're a profit-making team who have a very young roster who need to play together to develop properly, we need to be playing.
Speaking of Avs and the lockout, is anyone concerned that no Avs players have been at any of these meetings?
I'm glad they haven't. I'm also glad that they (but Giguere and PAP, I think) haven't tweeted about the whole crap.
I know you're passionate about the lockout, but think of it from a business standpoint. You've got a bunch of people that don't know the other side's point of view in a room being updated on the labor strike. They have questions that the NHLPA cannot always answer or need the league's clarification on their stance.
Enter NHL rep Bill Daly that is privvy to all discussions and can clarify what the league has been saying if needed. The rest of the time he is quietly present to help keep the bridges on both sides of the discussion open.
This isn't a war, I'm sure both sides will return to work just fine afterwards when they start seeing their checks coming in.
The idea that the players weren't getting all the information, or didn't know exactly what was going on was a tactic to divide the players from the leadership. The same way the PA tried to divide the owners from Bettman.
If either side doesn't know what the others POV, or stance is three months into the lockout, then they need to remove themselves from the process because they're idiots. The only purpose any meeting has is for one or both sides to move in the other's direction on something to get closer to a deal.
If they want to paint it in a way that new voices are being heard, so they can save face when they cave on what they've been holding onto as a group that's fine, but everyone knows where the other side stands.
The problem that I've been stating is that Bettman hasn't put the PA in a position to say yes to anything, because they haven't offered them anything. It's a retarded tactic, unless your goal is to win big and think you can weather another lockout because the diehard fans of the Leafs, Rangers, and Canadians will be back no matter what and account for 83% of the leagues revenue.
Henrik Sedin put the players POV into a clear perspective when he said, "I want to hear a change, that they're actually going to give us something in return for the things we've given them." It's painfully clear they're ready to make a deal they just want the league to give them something in exchange for moving in the owners direction on every other issue. You can't expect to make a deal if you don't do that, and the league has never offered them anything from day one. It's insane.
In an article from... someone a couple of months ago he listed teams that he assumed weren't hardliners, I'll try and find it. I personally don't think so though, what do we gain? We're a profit-making team who have a very young roster who need to play together to develop properly, we need to be playing.
Speaking of Avs and the lockout, is anyone concerned that no Avs players have been at any of these meetings?
@TSNBobMcKenzie: What NHLPA definitely won't like about NHL offer: 5 year term limit on contracts (except 7 for own UFAs).
@TSNBobMcKenzie: BTW, some have asked, just to clarify, ability to sign your own free agents to 7 year contracts would apply to both UFAs and RFAs.
I like it. No more ridiculous contracts being given out in free agency and it gives players a reason to stay with their original team. Sounds like it won't be happening though.
