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.
From what was stated at the presser it was Bettman who refuses to negotiate and accept a deal
Lemme guess - Fehr was saying that Bettman refuses to negotiate? Colour me stunned that a union representative is shifting blame to an employer during a labour dispute.
Not doing what the owners want him to do. Plain and Simple!
Yup.
See Fay Vincent, Commissioner of Baseball from 1989-1992. He was essentially forced to resign after an ownership vote of no confidence went heavily against him because he wasn't tough enough on the players and not being aggressive enough in pursuing TV deals.
I doubt Bettman would get fired because he's not being soft on the players at all and most owners are probably happy about that but here's a pic I made. Don't want to embed it because it could be considered graphic...not sure.
He has cultivated the most adversarial and dysfunctional relationship with the PA imaginable. Just as the Versaille Treaty caused the rise of Hitler, the 04 lockout made the union hire Fehr. Rightly or wrongly, Betman makes the PA lose their minds. Failure
His strategy is always "let's torch our cities and they will starve first.". But this galvanized the PA by making it an allout war. No way this should have gone on this long. Failure.
he is a terrible face for the league. His condescending, arrogant, elitist, demeanor makes him easily
disliked. Perhaps unfair, but true.
How has he cultivated that adversarial PA relationship? What is it that he has done that makes the union lose their minds? He made the exact same revenue offer in August as the NBA did in their negotiations a year ago, raised the offer steadily by 2 week increments or so, which is, I'm sorry, text book negotiation strategy. You're saying people hate him so he must be doing something wrong without giving a reason why people hate him. I'm more inclined to think if I see one rational actor and another losing their minds, the fault probably lies with the side losing their minds.
Lemme guess - Fehr was saying that Bettman refuses to negotiate? Colour me stunned that a union representative is shifting blame to an employer during a labour dispute.
Actually Bettman himself said there was no negotiating their offer, take it or leave it.
But I guess that's just Fehr brainwashing Bettman into saying what he wants right
I doubt Bettman would get fired because he's not being soft on the players at all and most owners are probably happy about that but here's a pic I made. Don't want to embed it because it could be considered graphic...not sure.
If I were an owner then I woulda complained around 2000-2004 on how the product has gone downhill and he's done nothing about it (eg giving the competition committee more power). Now we've entered the 2nd dead puck era under this idiot's watch and I wouldn't be happy about that as an owner because it's hurting my product and preventing it from growing.
They just came off a very prosperous stretch under Bettman. Not happening. I wish posters would understand he's a figurehead for the owners, not the ringleader.
__________________
George McPhee....The Teflon GM. 15 years of failure and counting....
6 - Number of playoff series the Capitals have won since George McPhee took over as General Manager in 1997 (which makes him the third-longest-tenured GM in the League), three of which came in McPhee's first season on the job.
The players are mega greedy. This time, it's not Bettman's fault at all.
I don't understand this logic at all. This ENTIRE negotiating has been about how much the players have to give back. Everyone agrees including the players, how they have to give back on the total share of the pie, the contract length, etc. If the players don't want to give up everything the owners want then they are greedy? How does this make any sense?
I don't understand this logic at all. This ENTIRE negotiating has been about how much the players have to give back. Everyone agrees including the players, how they have to give back on the total share of the pie, the contract length, etc. If the players don't want to give up everything the owners want then they are greedy? How does this make any sense?
They only have to "give back" because they already had way more than they should have. The players are like a fat kid who took 7 slices of pizza from the pie and the owners are asking them to "give some back." The players in the NHL currently get a bigger share of revenue than the players in any other major sport.
You've definitely fallen for Fehr and the players's flawed catch phrases. "Give back." Please.
They only have to "give back" because they already had way more than they should have. The players are like a fat kid who took 7 slices of pizza from the pie and the owners are asking them to "give some back." The players in the NHL currently get a bigger share of revenue than the players in any other major sport.
The amount was agreed to at the time by both parties. It was not as if the players held a gun to the head of Bettman.
Even still, no one is arguing this fact. The players have agreed to 50-50. So why are they not playing? because they are greedy?
You've definitely fallen for Fehr and the players's flawed catch phrases. "Give back." Please.
Honestly, both sides agreed to a split of 43-57 originally. Now the owners have stopped hockey until it is 50-50 and as of yesterday, it was 50-50. The pie has now been adjusted and the players have given up 7% of their share of the pie. I don't think I've fallen for anything, this is the reality of it all. Why is there STILL no agreement?
Honestly, both sides agreed to a split of 43-57. Now the owners have stopped hockey until it is 50-50. And as of yesterday, it was 50-50. The pie has now been adjusted and the players have given up 7% of their share of the pie. I don't think I've fallen for anything, this is the reality of it all. Why is there STILL no agreement?
Because there's more issues than just the revenue split (and the fact that they aren't even in complete agreement on the economics)?
Because there's more issues than just the revenue split (and the fact that they aren't even in complete agreement on the economics)?
Ok, so not only are they greedy in terms of the piece of the pie, they are greedy in terms of contract length which essentially is job security, arbitration rules, and contract dumping which is a tool teams use to free up cap space.
So unless the players give up on all of these other points, then they are greedy. Is that the logic that everyone here is using?
The players are mega greedy. This time, it's not Bettman's fault at all.
I don't think you understand the issues that Bettman raised yesterday and how they're detrimental to the game. Understand them before you spew this stuff.
It's more the owners' fault than the players. The middle range of players makes up the majority of the union. If a proposal from the NHL negatively affects that large a percentage, you can't accept that deal.
I love how gullible people are in listening to the league's propaganda through their media fonzies. You have to try to understand the economics of the issues down to the dollars and cents. I bet you believe the US is still the greatest country in the world too
