More proof that there's not a deal to be had given the way the players are handling the situation.
More proof that millionaire players and billionaire owners don't GAF about the eateries that surround their arenas that forecast their payroll and their revenue all on 41 games a year being played, and their legion of fans that either are STH's or someone going to a single game. Eagle Street laid off 15 people and are down to just 8 working the days. That is just really sad to here, and I"m sure the rest of the places around there are just in as bad of shape.
It's a damn shame... I remember hearing that on the news.
And like someone said in the main NHL lockout thread, I can imagine how many people who work at or around the arenas had to skip out on presents for family and friends this yr due to the lockout.
I've been pro owners I suppose but when you hear and read about those who are affected that are not players and owners... I can't help but be pissed at both parties. Enough with the antics and just get a deal done. For **** sake.
[Jim] Quinn, who spent almost two decades as the NBPA's lead outside counsel and had a good working relationship with NBA commissioner David Stern...played a pivotal part in brokering a deal, thanks to several phone conversations with the particulars and a marathon 15-hour bargaining session.
Quinn's firm -- Weil, Gotshal and Manges LLP -- is advising the NHL Players' Association on legal issues.
The only criticism he delivers is that owners making "take-it-or-leave-it proposals ... doesn't work with professional athletes," so the opposite approach makes more sense.
He has not been asked by either the NHL or NHLPA to take a more active role in this gong show. Initially, his efforts in the NBA stalemate were rebuffed. But both sides wisely changed their minds and it is apparent during our conversation that he wants the NHL opportunity, too.
This could be a nice exit strategy.
It really does seem like the NHL and PA need a neutral party involved. There seem to be serious problems on either side:
1. The NHL keeps offering take-it-or-leave-it proposals rather than negotiating on each issue. This is counter-productive and turns the union off, making them harden their stances. This has happened time and time again and always results in a blowup and a week or two until they start talking again.
2. Whenever the PA gets Donald Fehr involved, the owners get turned off and shut down. His presence just kills momentum in the talks. I don't know if this is fair or not, but they need to get someone else involved.
When the two sides started to talk about the issues by themselves rather than looking at proposals, they found common ground. If they can get a third party involved, it might help both sides save face (which stupidly enough seems to be a concern) and get closer to that common ground.
And if the PA can keep D-Fehr out of the room until they believe they have a final proposal, that would keep things moving along too.
I don't think that's a necessity at all. I can definitely see the league ignoring all linked proposals, even saying "we're not going to talk about anything until we agree on linked revenues", but to go that extra step and say "we're not going to talk about anything until you agree to X and Y and Z and 1 and 2 and 3" is a waste of time.
That's why I'm linking (get it) the all-in-one proposals and D-Fehr...both of them seem to just waste time and stall talks.
In the end, the league isn't going to happen unless/until it gets to the point where it's stable and profitable. The league wants a handful of things to go their way so it can get to that point. It is their league after all, and I think it's well within their right to have sticking points on a few different places of interest. It's up to the players to find a deal and make their hay beyond that. If they can't do that and are still fighting basic principles that just aren't up for debate, that's on them and their leadership.
There's plenty of hockey to be played around the world. They can feel free to travel Europe, get paid less, use their medical staffs, etc. if they don't wish to play in this league anymore.
Yes, for repeated violation of site rules. We have a good group that can discuss and even debate things without getting personal, throwing insults, or shouting each other down.
If this lockout wasn't so depressing it would be hilarious. A week ago coaches were trying to call the players to get them back into town...36 hours later there was the complete meltdown at the podium...today we hear they're going back for negotiations.
The closest thing would be if the union decertifies and the thing starts to worm its way through the courts.
My understanding of the situation is that if the NHLPA de-certifies, we can kiss hockey goodbye until October of 2014.
The NHLPA cannot de-certify and re-form in the 24 hours period. I forget why, but the steps were explained in numerous lockout articles when it first came up. Basically, the legal mechanism by which a union can de-certify and re-form immediately isnít available to the PA. They would have to dissolve entirely. At which point, anti-trust cases would be filed against the NHL. The NHL would win those cases based on current legal precedence. The players would then need to decide whether or not to enter into agreements with individual teams or create a new union.
The results of which would be that all current contracts are nulled. Every player becomes a free agent, even though that term would not be applicable to them any longer. They would just be bound by contract law as negotiated by their agents. Those contracts would be able to take the form of pretty much anything, meaning guaranteed contracts are up to the individual player to negotiate.
Fortunately, this would only be the option if the NHLPA and the players want to just say screw you to the league. They donít.
The disclaimer of interest is on the table, though, which wouldnít bog the entire process down in a legal battle which would take over a year.
Another Grantland.com op-ed about the lockout. Mostly it's an op-ed piece that savages the owners and defends Fehr.
I thought this quote was cute:
The owners, who got practically everything they wanted the last time they blew off a season, once again are asking the players to bail them out because (a) they were stupid in the way they sited their franchises, and (b) some of them were stupid enough to offer deals so long that the contracts will reach puberty before they expire.
I know i'm going to piss some people off but...Bloggers are not necessarily writers. He's the type of blogger that has success (continued employment) despite his flaws because he brings clicks. Would he ever make it writing "serious" articles? Who knows? Maybe. What you're reading is a persona. Totally okay with him for entertainment value after despising him for a long time. He's an offensive cartoon; I laugh sometimes and just shake my head and turn the channel other times.
Ryan Lambert over at Yahoo comes to mind... Still have no clue how he has a soapbox that big... He a) can't write and b) can't use logic in anything he writes.
Lambert has his soapbox because his pieces create debate and controversy, which in turn mean more clicks (which means more ad $$$). Kind of the internet version of newspaper columnists for better or worse.
Blog: First Round Bust: A Cast of Thousands celebrating a rather dodgy track record of Minnesota Wild Drafting.
"Will beats skill when skill doesn't have enough will."
Wow, I actually take back my comment.The guy who wrote that pro-Fehr Grantland article isn't a sports writer. He's a political writer writing a pro-union political rant not based on facts. Yes, if you think unions should always win in everything, of course you are going to come to the conclusion that Fehr is a genius and Bettman is evil.
However, the problem with the NHL-NHLPA fight isn't that its an owner vs. union fight. It's problem is that the union is terribly run and screwing over its own players. Had a reasonable person been running things instead of Fehr, the players would have gotten a better deal back in September. But now that there has been so much lost money, there is no upside from finding a bargain that is win-win.
If Fehr was not in charge and the NHL wasn't so aggressive with their initial offers, we might have had a deal in September...but it was clear from that 43% offer that Bettman was going to make the players sweat, so they decided to do the same thing with the league.