Funny SOS mentioned the TSN crew in NY... I saw their last web hit and wondered why it was a two camera shoot? Ud think that if this was just another bs meeting they wouldn't send that much... Cover it from their studios in T.O. And have the reporters check in via 1 cam.
Then I remembered the Board of Governor meetings tomorrow.
Hopefully the reason SOS gave is why.
I think they have to meet again tonight and get this done. Speculation but I think some of the owners, like Dolan, who were not invited to the meeting let Bettman know that something better get done before the board meeting and thus the secret meeting in Boston. If SoS is right Bettman probably kept Jacobs as one of the owners involved so he could try and look like he helped.
When this is over I'll tell everybody the timeline of events that I heard. I think it's over early morning tomorrow morning. I was told we are going to see a Fehr and Bettman "no sleep press" conference at noon tomorrow. This is what my buddy told me about a minute ago...
I was also told TSN has it's full crew in Manhattan. Look you can slap an E4 on this. I'm not an insider, I know if I was reading this I'd be like "********" but I've been friends with this guy since High School. I went to his wedding. He's in my fantasy football league. He has no reason to BS me. What I'm trying to say is this isn't a casual friend or some dude online...
Also, I don't want you guys to think this was done yesterday. It sounds a lot like the big meeting in Boston yesterday was with a few owners
Bettman and the Fehr brothers led to the breakthrough we have been waiting for. I'm sure anything can happen and if I'm wrong I'm sorry. I really debated sharing this info because I don't want to jinx it and I don't want to look like an *******...
You wouldn't look bad at all, IMO. You shared information that you were told. And we are appreciative for it.
I need hockey back. Just thought I'd share. Giants piss me off. Knicks are fun to watch, but basketball is not hockey. Hope this is true. Losing my mind. Trade rumors board is getting boring. Need to play more hockey.
Yeah I've lost it.
That draft rigging comment that looks like Mushmouth from Fat Albert is hilarious though.
Yeah, I heard that the press conference or whatever was planned before this meeting.
BM-2cWtfN2gqGPpJ6zREgpgmpbJCbiDCQuDZY NHL Standings Under Different Point Systems @HockeyStandings
Hey SOS thanks for sharing that. I've actually been hoping to see someone on here post something. I figured with how many people post on here on all the forums that somewhere someone had to know a little something. So thanks for that!
SoS making me cautiously optimistic. But he's not the only one. These other reporters are as well.
That being said, I'm trying to take everything with a grain of salt. You just can't trust these idiots in the NHL/NHLPA. I think the most realistic and best scenario we can hope for is that they come out closing the gap $$$ wise and made SOME player concessions. Maybe contract lengths to 7yrs, arb still, things like that, and hopefully a deal is in sight.
I will say though - everything is lining up to make it a perfect time to start. Christmas coming. This is when NBA started to finalize a deal. NHL BOG meeting tomorrow. It is indeed, perfect timing. And wouldn't they have enough games to keep the sponsorship $$$?
I was waiting for one of the other attorneys here to explain this, but let me give this one a try since everyone seems to be driving themselves nuts with the whole no-Bettman, no-Fehr thing.
This is a relatively standard negotiating technique. Lawyers and other negotiators use it all the time. Certainly not most of the time, but there are times when it makes sense to get the lawyers to back off and the parties to talk to each other.
You have cases where both parties are telling their lawyers, "go get me X" and the lawyer knows that it is unrealistic and that no resolution is possible this way, but it's their job to go and try. If you try to explain to your client that what they are asking for is unreasonable, some clients will understand, while others think that you are on the other side.
The favorite phrase of every lawyer that all of us always mock is, "I paid you money, you have to get this for me now" as if paying the attorney means he should now do magic. This is particularly true with unsophisticated clients who think that if they paid money for something, then mountains must now move, God must speak directly to them, and money must now fall from the sky directly into their pockets.
At some point, you figure that it would be best if the clients spoke to each other to understand how the negotiating process works. This works if the two of them aren't overly hostile, so it can be tried, for example, in a contract dispute where it is just about money than, for ex., in a divorce the two just hate it each.
You get the two parties into the room and let them talk to each other. It looks crazy because each side always brings up irrelevant things:
- "I once fed your dog when we were in high school, and now you dare to tell me that your shipping company is not responsible for the damage?!"
- "Why should my shipping company be responsible? I drove you home when you got drunk in college, and later you came to my house for Thanksgiving and left before we even started carving up the turkey as if I'm not really your friend."
But after a bunch of this craziness, if they have someone guiding them, people get to the point enough to recognize that they need to compromise and telling someone "go and get me my money" is not a strategy for success.
However, before the final t's are crossed and the i's dotted, the lawyers jump back in to make sure that the final agreement is legal and that the parties are not forgetting most of the things that need to be in the agreement.
This is probably what happened the last few days.
This is also why mediation was needed: before you let the parties bark at each other, you try to have them negotiate with a professional. Sometimes the judge in court will walk the lawyers into the chamber (or just do a bench conference off the record) and force them to compromise. Since that wasn't possible here, a moderator was needed.
When that failed, the next rational technique would be to have the players speak to the owners.
While it may seem like there's a lot of wasted time, what has transpired is the usual trajectory of any negotiated settlement with two very stubborn parties.