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, and NHL revenues.

Rob Rossi: An inside look at how Lemieux, Pens tried to save NHL season

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
12-11-2012, 10:05 AM
  #26
therealkoho
Gary says it's A-OK
 
therealkoho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: the Prior
Country: Canada
Posts: 3,949
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fugu View Post
You know, I like Burkle. He seems like a good owner, in it for the right things, avoids the limelight, helped to save the Pens franchise, and so on. From that blurb:
We needed a response on key items that were important to us, but we were optimistic that we were down to very few issues. I believe a deal was within reach. We were therefore surprised when the Fehrs made a unilateral and “non-negotiable” decision—which is their right, to end the player/owner process that has moved us farther in two days than we moved at any time in the past months.
The way this has been reported over the weekend, after all the reporters had their chance to sum things up, was that those three things were not negotiable separately, and were part of the package. What the owners wanted from the players was a Yes or No to that package. The players, at least from how this was set up in the beginning, weren't supposed to 'negotiate' a CBA but explore ideas and options. When they got to that point, take-it-or-leave-it, they wanted Fehr back in the room. They were told that that would change the dynamic and the owners might not stay for that.

Obviously, we're not going to change each others minds on who was playing whom here, and both sides may have done some of that, but I still don't think asking to get your union head back in charge of the process was unreasonable if you still believe he's your leader. The players in that room clearly did so.

the owners obviously thought they had an agreement in principle with the players who btw are on the negotiating committee and so able to make decisions. Fehr is supposed to be their guide much like Bettman is for the owners. Those players were chosen well both Westgarth and Parros are Princeton grads, Hainsey and Winnick both have a couple of years of university. These guys aren't exactly dim nor uneducated and so were fully cognizant of what was happening in that room. Fehr kiboshed any implied agreement's and changed the game, thereby undoing any progress.

There is even some doubt now as to whether any of the owners said or intimated that if Fehr is back in the room the deal is off. What they likely may have said is that the meetings were agreed to by Fehr and Bettman that neither be in the room and why is that deal now off?

just as plausible

therealkoho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 12:11 PM
  #27
hizzoner
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 715
vCash: 500
The NHLPA is spinning this "no Fehr in the room" . The owners were NOT there to get a contract but rather to get some general concensus on issues that they and players would find palatable for discussion. Bettmann and Fehr as the point persons and detested by the opposing sides would rub salt. That was the point of keeping them out of the room. The owners did not want to be negotiating with Fehr--that was the job of Bettman and the lawyers. The players were in and out talking to Fehr--all they had to say was yes this is framework for a deal or not. If not they could keep talking w/o Bettman and Fehr while still getting advice from Steve Fehr and taking breaks to talk to Donald Fehr. The PLAYERS wanted the owners to bargain directly with Donald Fehr and when the owners said that is a non starter the PR war was on to malign the owners for keeping the poor dumb players from getting their much needed legal advice. Since most people including journalists idolize the players-not the individual owners-the players got away with that canard.

hizzoner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 01:23 PM
  #28
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealkoho View Post
the owners obviously thought they had an agreement in principle with the players who btw are on the negotiating committee and so able to make decisions. Fehr is supposed to be their guide much like Bettman is for the owners. Those players were chosen well both Westgarth and Parros are Princeton grads, Hainsey and Winnick both have a couple of years of university. These guys aren't exactly dim nor uneducated and so were fully cognizant of what was happening in that room. Fehr kiboshed any implied agreement's and changed the game, thereby undoing any progress.

There is even some doubt now as to whether any of the owners said or intimated that if Fehr is back in the room the deal is off. What they likely may have said is that the meetings were agreed to by Fehr and Bettman that neither be in the room and why is that deal now off?

just as plausible

Except that's not what was reported. Hainsey made a couple of statements immediately afterwards where he tried to recount the exact words spoken.

Like I said earlier elsewhere, some of the owners probably played hockey at some point, but it's not what they do for a living. They would be outmatched completely if asked to go a round with the players. Likewise, education is no match for experience and men successful enough to own hockey teams as a secondary or tertiary interest, in terms of negotiating business deals, let alone collective bargaining agreements. The owners wouldn't hire a freshly minted lawyer from Harvard and have him run their CBA discussions for them. Try getting that guy 20+ yrs of experience first, and then we'll talk.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-11-2012, 09:49 PM
  #29
AHockeyGameBrokeOut*
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 625
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealkoho View Post
There is even some doubt now as to whether any of the owners said or intimated that if Fehr is back in the room the deal is off. What they likely may have said is that the meetings were agreed to by Fehr and Bettman that neither be in the room and why is that deal now off?
Fehr realized he was losing control of the situation and stopped the talks.

The owners never said anything like that.

The reason the talks were stopped is that they were going too favorably for Fehr's tastes - he's trying to cement a legacy here before he retires. This is his last rodeo.

AHockeyGameBrokeOut* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 09:04 AM
  #30
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,667
vCash: 500
The owners ended the meeting when the players wanted to re-introduce Fehr to the discussion.

My question

"What are the owners afraid of if they also thought they were close to a deal"

Why is his presence in the room a deal breaker?

I assume it's because he is their intellectual equal and in most cases their superior as it pertains to these discussions but they had no problem playing the intellectual superior role to the players.

The whole thing was a complete end around and it didn't work, so then we get a CLEARLY rattled Bettman at the podium spouting off BS.

The owners are funny and pathetic at the same time.

Quite amusing.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 09:17 AM
  #31
pld459666
Registered User
 
pld459666's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Danbury, CT
Country: United States
Posts: 16,667
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hizzoner View Post
The NHLPA is spinning this "no Fehr in the room" . The owners were NOT there to get a contract but rather to get some general concensus on issues that they and players would find palatable for discussion. Bettmann and Fehr as the point persons and detested by the opposing sides would rub salt. That was the point of keeping them out of the room. The owners did not want to be negotiating with Fehr--that was the job of Bettman and the lawyers. The players were in and out talking to Fehr--all they had to say was yes this is framework for a deal or not. If not they could keep talking w/o Bettman and Fehr while still getting advice from Steve Fehr and taking breaks to talk to Donald Fehr. The PLAYERS wanted the owners to bargain directly with Donald Fehr and when the owners said that is a non starter the PR war was on to malign the owners for keeping the poor dumb players from getting their much needed legal advice. Since most people including journalists idolize the players-not the individual owners-the players got away with that canard.
Sorry, but the Owners and players made headway. Both sides admit that. The session was not a negotiating session (let me repeat that) it was NOT a negotiating session. So when the owners that were in the room were looking to get the players to concede on issues that should have been brought up as a talking point ONLY, the players defererd to their Union Leadership.

The fact is, this was Bettman's way to try to have the players make a decision in a room without having their Union leader there and it didn't work.

When tat didn't happen, you get the owners theatrics of ending the discussion saying that his involvement was a non-starter.

Either be prepared to negotiate or not, but don't try to tell me that they (the owners) were not negotiating during what should have been a general exchange of ideas trying to see if some middle ground could be broached.

Once the players wanted to bring Don back in the room considering they were close to a deal, the owners (thinking themselves that they were close to a deal) should have done like-wise and brought Gary into the room to hammer out the remaining portions of the deal.

Instead, the owners that were in there tucked tail and ran off.

I wonder why that it?

It's ok to try to negotiate with guys that are clearly inferior in the art of negotiating and closing sound contracts (regardless of their educational pedigree) but not whit someone your equal?

If it walks quacks like a duck...it's a duck.

pld459666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 09:21 AM
  #32
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by therealkoho View Post
the owners obviously thought they had an agreement in principle with the players who btw are on the negotiating committee and so able to make decisions. Fehr is supposed to be their guide much like Bettman is for the owners. Those players were chosen well both Westgarth and Parros are Princeton grads, Hainsey and Winnick both have a couple of years of university. These guys aren't exactly dim nor uneducated and so were fully cognizant of what was happening in that room. Fehr kiboshed any implied agreement's and changed the game, thereby undoing any progress.

There is even some doubt now as to whether any of the owners said or intimated that if Fehr is back in the room the deal is off. What they likely may have said is that the meetings were agreed to by Fehr and Bettman that neither be in the room and why is that deal now off?

just as plausible
I see many that suggest that the players agreed to something in principle. I don't see it that way. I think the owners offer was the attempt to agree to something in principle which is why I think they asked for a yes or no answer. I think it's assumption that the moderate owners were brought in to strike a deal. I think they were brought in to facilitate discussion between both sides. My theory is that the league wanted to hear from the players to know where and what they could get them to flex on without Fehr in the room to possibly filter things. It worked, the PA's proposal shows that the PA has flexibility and it's a matter of whether the league wants to bend them to get exactly what they want or will they compromise somehow in the oustanding areas. On the flip side, the PA got a lot of the discussions as well because they now know for certain exactly what issues the league is looking at and that gives them the opportunity to get creative with solutions and/or use those areas as a bargaining chip to try and get something more.

As for what was said in the room, both sides characterized the situation differely. League said that the PA insisted that anyone could come back into the room without specifically referring to anyone while Hainsey said that the owners said if Fehr comes back into the room then it could be a deal breaker. As far as I'm concerned, both sides are always telling half truths so I suspect the truth is that somewhere in between both accounts.

Ari91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 09:33 AM
  #33
Kingbobert
HFBoards Sponsor
 
Kingbobert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Montreal
Country: Greece
Posts: 4,683
vCash: 500
Fehr, Bettman and owners like Jacobs and Leipold are what has caused us to lose this many games.

Nice to see that not all owners are oblivious though. By Bergevin being there, i would assume Montreals ownership is also not one of the hardliners.

You have montreal and toronto willing to negotiate (2 of the 3 teams that accounted for the supposed 83% of league revenue) and then you have morons like Leipold who hand out 90M$+ contracts to 2 players on one day and then turn around and say "we cant have these ridiculous contracts" and Jacobs who's never cared about anything but his pockets.

When players see someone like Leipold how do you think they feel? You gave us giant contracts, and now you dont want to honor them.

Kingbobert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 09:37 AM
  #34
Ari91
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 9,470
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingbobert View Post
Fehr, Bettman and owners like Jacobs and Leipold are what has caused us to lose this many games.

Nice to see that not all owners are oblivious though. By Bergevin being there, i would assume Montreals ownership is also not one of the hardliners.

You have montreal and toronto willing to negotiate (2 of the 3 teams that accounted for the supposed 83% of league revenue) and then you have morons like Leipold who hand out 90M$+ contracts to 2 players on one day and then turn around and say "we cant have these ridiculous contracts" and Jacobs who's never cared about anything but his pockets.

When players see someone like Leipold how do you think they feel? You gave us giant contracts, and now you dont want to honor them.
Throw in Dolan. By all accounts I've read, the big 3 (Toronto, NY, Montreal) are moderates in these negotiations. However, that's not surprising since under any capped system, these three markets are practically guaranteed huge revenue and huge profits.

Ari91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-12-2012, 03:15 PM
  #35
Fugu
Administrator
HFBoards
 
Fugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Pac NW
Posts: 29,933
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by pld459666 View Post
The owners ended the meeting when the players wanted to re-introduce Fehr to the discussion.

My question

"What are the owners afraid of if they also thought they were close to a deal"

Why is his presence in the room a deal breaker?

I assume it's because he is their intellectual equal and in most cases their superior as it pertains to these discussions but they had no problem playing the intellectual superior role to the players.

The whole thing was a complete end around and it didn't work, so then we get a CLEARLY rattled Bettman at the podium spouting off BS.

The owners are funny and pathetic at the same time.

Quite amusing.

It was an end-around for the most part.

Fugu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 04:43 AM
  #36
Master Shake
Registered User
 
Master Shake's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kazakhstan
Posts: 1,765
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHockeyGameBrokeOut View Post
Fehr realized he was losing control of the situation and stopped the talks.

The owners never said anything like that.

The reason the talks were stopped is that they were going too favorably for Fehr's tastes - he's trying to cement a legacy here before he retires. This is his last rodeo.
Hopefully the Fehr brothers are gone after this. They are leeches. They could care less about the financial viability of every franchise. Long as they can generate ridiculous and overpaid contracts from most teams.

Master Shake is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 08:29 AM
  #37
limite*
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 76
vCash: 500
The whole thing is classic Mario. He stays in hiding until there's a chance that he will lose money. Then suddenly he appears. He's done this since the day the Pens drafted him.

He has to be the greediest person in sports.

limite* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
12-13-2012, 08:35 AM
  #38
theicebox
#MonixWatch
 
theicebox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Pittsburgh
Country: United States
Posts: 1,830
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by limite View Post
The whole thing is classic Mario. He stays in hiding until there's a chance that he will lose money. Then suddenly he appears. He's done this since the day the Pens drafted him.

He has to be the greediest person in sports.
Um, I won't let you do that. No he is not.

theicebox 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 05:49 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.