The Business of HockeyDiscuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Franchise sales, valuations, TV contracts, ratings, expansion, relocation, the CBA and work stoppage discussion goes here.
Lockout II - Moderated: Talk about your plenty, Talk about your ills...
I'm FINE if things need to take a while. Take until friday, take one week after that if you have to. Just for the LOVE of Easter-loving Christ, don't let Bill Daly say he's "disappointed".
Well that may still happen. Apparently Daly is going to meet with the media and use the mysterious podium from earlier.
Bruce Arthur @bruce_arthur
They're using the podium!
Darren Dreger @DarrenDreger
Bill Daly is about to speak to the media.
Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Daly to address media shortly. And yes, he will use the podium
Last edited by CanadianPirate: 12-06-2012 at 12:12 AM.
Reason: media not medium
Christmas games are cruel to the athlete. That day is ment for family not trying to ram someone head first into the boards.
A lot of things in this world are something different than they were meant to be. They've taken Christmas off for 40 years. In the past it may not have been the case, but in 2012, you leave money on the table by sitting out Christmas.
A lot of things in this world are something different than they were meant to be. They've taken Christmas off for 40 years. In the past it may not have been the case, but in 2012, you leave money on the table by sitting out Christmas.
I'm only going to say it so someone does. But you leave money on the table by missing the first 2.5 months of hockey.
Pierre LeBrun @Real_ESPNLeBrun
Bill Daly at the podium. Says good candid dialogue. Says still remains critical issues between sides.
Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Daly: had a number of meetings today...good candid dialogue, some critical issues remain between two parties and we understand union..
Yeah I fully support letting the players have Christmas off.
However, I'd make an exception for this year. I bet there are plenty of hockey wives out there that were glad for the extra family time but by now can't wait to kick those bums out of the house.
Yeah I fully support letting the players have Christmas off.
However, I'd make an exception for this year. I bet there are plenty of hockey wives out there that were glad for the extra family time but by now can't wait to kick those bums out of the house.
Is it really that much of a big deal to give the players 2 days back to back off? I mean really. Give them the days off, and then give them a bunch of back to back games to make up for it.
I'm honestly not sure I'd even tune in for a Pens/Philly game that was on Christmas day - and I'm a huge Pens fan.
__________________ "It’s not as if Donald Fehr was lying to us, several players said. Rather, it’s as if he has been economical with information, these players believe, not sharing facts these players consider to be vital."
Make Whole, to me, is essentially owners using money they already agreed to give players as a bribe to take far worse contracting right and revenue share %. Is that fair to say? The more that # ticks up, the more they are winning in other areas.. but its all money they were obligated to pay previously ANYWAY. This is kind of brilliant in an evil way.
The conversation went something like this. "Let's leave," said Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs, turning to NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly.
"It's up to you," replied Daly.
At that point during the talks between the NHL and NHL Players Association on Wednesday, a day that began as a continuation of the momentum generated on Tuesday, both sides were at the precipice, and the 2012-13 season was in jeopardy. Earlier, Buffalo Sabres goalie Ryan Miller had angrily vented when the owners said they were disappointed with the players responses to an earlier offer and threatened to pull everything off the table. But with Jacobs poised to abandon the talks, other owners spoke up, and then both sides dramatically backed away from the precipice. When talks ended close to 1 a.m. Thursday morning after more than eight hours of talks without NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and union executive director Don Fehr, it certainly seemed from the outside they were getting closer and closer to a deal to end this ugly lockout.
"We had a series of candid discussions," said player rep Ron Hainsey, summing up the union's positon before announcing the two sides would continue talks later on Thursday afternoon.
Make Whole, to me, is essentially owners using money they already agreed to give players as a bribe to take far worse contracting right and revenue share %. Is that fair to say? The more that # ticks up, the more they are winning in other areas.. but its all money they were obligated to pay previously ANYWAY. This is kind of brilliant in an evil way.
Of course it is, but it's more evil than brilliant since the people who needed to see through it did.
Of course it is, but it's more evil than brilliant since the people who needed to see through it did.
The people who needed to see through it did, but Don doesnt get to set the opinion of all 700 guys. Im generally pro player on a few different levels, but it seems like the writing is on the wall. 300 million dollars of bribe money to current players to severely restrict all players entering the game after this point seems like a sound investment.
How much sponsorship money do they stand to lose? If it's like $20m, then not much point in rushing back. It's also a way to give the sponsors a break. Call it a good faith peace offering.
I really think the players should concede on the contract term limits. I like the idea that current teams get to offer their FA's an additional 2 years (something I suggested a while ago). Gets a little murky though when you consider trades. A team shouldn't be able to sign a player for 7 years and then immediately turn around and trade him. Perhaps in this situation a player must stay with the signing team for the first two seasons.
I can see why it would be a sticking point though. It's a hard earned right that the players are giving up, but it's something that every team in the league is going to be pretty united on. Way too much risk with these long term contracts.
The issues really aren't that huge. I'm thinking it might make more sense to flip a coin on each issue to determine which side wins. At least this would make a lot more sense than what they're doing now which is costing both sides hundreds of millions of dollars.
__________________
I told ya so. I was right all along!
Looks like he got shut down. To me, that's probably the most positive sign to come out of the day.
The difference in make whole isn't going to doom the season or probably even delay the start of the season.
The contract limits are the biggest remaining impediment, obviously. But the NHL has a good case to make here, one that hopefully the players will be receptive to. And ultimately, it's only a very small percentage of players who are going to be affected by this in any major way.
Make Whole, to me, is essentially owners using money they already agreed to give players as a bribe to take far worse contracting right and revenue share %. Is that fair to say? The more that # ticks up, the more they are winning in other areas.. but its all money they were obligated to pay previously ANYWAY. This is kind of brilliant in an evil way.
That is money they were obligated to pay under the previous CBA, not necessarily under the CBA being negotiated.
As long as the league gets the 5% year to year restriction, I don't see a need for 5 year term restriction as well. The percentage kills cap circumvention. Given that the league has averaged 8% growth, the 5 year restriction will likely end up costing owners more. At 20% of the cap as a maximum salary and a cap of $50 million, the most a player could earn in year 1 would be $10 million. With 5% per year, they would be at maximum $12.76 million without term restriction in the sixth year of a contract. With a new deal in year six and 8% cap growth, the cap would be up to $73.4 million and a maximum salary would be $14.7 million.
The owners won't lose an entire season just so they can get 5 year contract limits instead of 7 or 8. That would make no sense. And the players won't lose an entire season to have 10 year maximums when 7 or 8 is plenty.
It would be pathetic if that is the issue that costs a season, this isn't fighting for/against a salary cap its the term of contracts. It isn't that huge.
Katie Strang is saying some in the union feel as though the current format is a ploy to divide membership. Apparently they would like to see no restrictions on who's in the room tomorrow. For the final act a reentry of Gary and Don?
Katie Strang is saying some in the union feel as though the current format is a ploy to divide membership. Apparently they would like to see no restrictions on who's in the room tomorrow. For the final act a reentry of Gary and Don?
Probably the worst thing they can do at this point.
Is player safety the elephant in the room regarding CBA negotiations? It seems to be a forgotten portion.
At times last season more than $50mm of salaries were on IRs around the league due to concussion. Eliminating concussions might go a long way to cutting down the $182mm difference reported between league and union.
Are there any implication regarding the liability associated with the NHL knowing that concussions cause long term brain damage and the NHL did nothing to contain that if there no longer is a players Union?
The owners won't lose an entire season just so they can get 5 year contract limits instead of 7 or 8. That would make no sense. And the players won't lose an entire season to have 10 year maximums when 7 or 8 is plenty.
It would be pathetic if that is the issue that costs a season, this isn't fighting for/against a salary cap its the term of contracts. It isn't that huge.
If the owners would be all on the same page this would not be an issue. They would make a gentleman agreement with each other that they would not offer longer contracts and the issue is solved.
Lets see who would be the first one to break it and how other owners react. They just do not trust each other or are on the same page.
