I remember the 2005 lockout more than you apparently, because I remember the owners saying "cost certainty" was a must. And then when the new CBA was signed everyone said the owners utterly destroyed the players.
- jimbro83

Yes, cost certainty. So, they know that their expenses in terms of salary won’t go over a certain percentage of revenue. Common sense says that it would be the PA that would not want there to be a salary limit, but not a salary minimum. If the league could have a limit, but allow their teams to spend as little as they want, that’s clearly something the PA would take issue with.

well everyone is always going to make excuses for their own team's contracts and criticize the deals other team's give out. That's a given.
- jimbro83

Yet I didn't criticize other team's deals. Again, free agency by nature is an overpay. It's how each team treats free agency within the structure of their organization and also how teams utilize free agency to fill team needs that determines the success and failures of any free agency decision. The Rangers overpaid for Richards, but was it a necessary overpay given the needs of the team at the time. Absolutely. They needed offense and specifically they needed a center. The Flyers offered Weber the deal b/c it was within their financial means and also fit a huge need for them without Pronger. Did I like it? No. Did I understand it? Yes. The Bolts may have overpaid for Carle, but was it a necessary overpay? We needed puck movers on D and that is exactly what Carle is. Each decision has to be judged not only on just the $ involved, but how that $ fits within a team's cap and budget and also how that player fills a team's need. But just b/c a team signs a player in free agency doesn't automatically make each deal a bad signing.

C'mon Jimbo....you're smarter than this.
- Symba007

I am smart, but not "Bettman smart"

http://www.theglobeandmai...s-to-bear/article4595797/

You hate him because there have been three lockouts.

Maybe you should direct some of your ire towards Snider and Jacobs.
- Atomic Wedgie

But Gary is the one who designed the last - failed - CBA. 30 owners don't sit around a table drafting. Gary convinced them that they could get a Cap broke the union and was able to impose a CBA. Unfortunately, it has failed miserably (if we take number of teams losing money as a measure) and here we are again.

But Gary is the one who designed the last - failed - CBA. 30 owners don't sit around a table drafting. Gary convinced them that they could get a Cap broke the union and was able to impose a CBA. Unfortunately, it has failed miserably (if we take number of teams losing money as a measure) and here we are again.
- Canada Cup

“It’s not like a board-of-governors meeting is everyone sitting around exchanging ideas,” said one former club owner who admires Bettman. “A board-of-governors meeting is a three-hour lecture from Gary, a PowerPoint on how we’re doing, you break and that’s it. There’s never once a discussion of what’s going on.”

Bettman is an easy target, but he is nothing more than a frontman to keep the negativity away from the actual owners who are calling the shots
- Eklund

ek if you think all the owners or even a majority of owners want a lock out it proves your "sources" are weaker than christopher reeves legs.

But Gary is the one who designed the last - failed - CBA. 30 owners don't sit around a table drafting. Gary convinced them that they could get a Cap broke the union and was able to impose a CBA. Unfortunately, it has failed miserably (if we take number of teams losing money as a measure) and here we are again.
- Canada Cup

It didn't fail miserably.

It brought in a salary cap.

It brought cost certainty to all teams.

It allowed for an incredible growth in revenues.

From a labour relations point, the salary cap is absolutely huge.

Now that the CBA has expired, a new one has to be created, that addresses the new challenges facing the league.

That's kinda how the system was supposed to work.

“It’s not like a board-of-governors meeting is everyone sitting around exchanging ideas,” said one former club owner who admires Bettman. “A board-of-governors meeting is a three-hour lecture from Gary, a PowerPoint on how we’re doing, you break and that’s it. There’s never once a discussion of what’s going on.”
- jimbro83

Anyone who has worked with Boards will tell you that the guy who controls the agenda and the flow of information has a lot of power - especially in a situation like the NHL where the Board is made up of individual owners who tend to have very different interests.

like the Oilers? (who cry poverty)
- jimbro83

Ya perhaps within this Arena deal still in negotiations - Katz an incredible amount of slime but there is certainly a distinction between that and the league issues right now.

Are the Oilers crying poor during this CBA? Source?

But Gary is the one who designed the last - failed - CBA. 30 owners don't sit around a table drafting. Gary convinced them that they could get a Cap broke the union and was able to impose a CBA. Unfortunately, it has failed miserably (if we take number of teams losing money as a measure) and here we are again.
- Canada Cup

Do you think there is a CBA that they can come up with that will last forever? They’re finite agreements for a good reason. They made major progression in the direction they wanted to go, the league’s revenue went way up. You likely consider it a failure because there is a lockout right now. I’m not so sure they would consider it a failure.

Anyone who has worked with Boards will tell you that the guy who controls the agenda and the flow of information has a lot of power - especially in a situation like the NHL where the Board is made up of individual owners who tend to have very different interests.
- Canada Cup

anybody who thinks Bettman is a puppet is just 100% wrong. There is just nothing that could further from the truth.

ek if you think all the owners or even a majority of owners want a lock out it proves your "sources" are weaker than christopher reeves legs.
- ploubo

Rogers and Bell just spent a billion dollars to get a chunk of MLSEL.

Do you really think they are going to bow to the wishes of Bettman?

Please think about that for just a few moments...

It didn't fail miserably.

It brought in a salary cap.

It brought cost certainty to all teams.

It allowed for an incredible growth in revenues.

From a labour relations point, the salary cap is absolutely huge.

Now that the CBA has expired, a new one has to be created, that addresses the new challenges facing the league.

That's kinda how the system was supposed to work.
- Atomic Wedgie

It tied the payroll of the Phoenix Coyotes, NJ Devils, NY Islanders, etc to the revenue generated by the Leafs, Habs, etc. Under this fabulous system, teams are losing money in a world of incredible revenue growth

Ya perhaps within this Arena deal still in negotiations - Katz an incredible amount of slime but there is certainly a distinction between that and the league issues right now.

Are the Oilers crying poor during this CBA? Source?
- Salvo

I love when somebody says "source?"

it's funny

Ya perhaps within this Arena deal still in negotiations - Katz an incredible amount of slime but there is certainly a distinction between that and the league issues right now.

Are the Oilers crying poor during this CBA? Source?
- Salvo

Look at the operating income...Oilers are profitable, no reason to cry

http://www.forbes.com/nhl-valuations/list/

It tied the payroll of the Phoenix Coyotes, NJ Devils, NY Islanders, etc to the revenue generated by the Leafs, Habs, etc. Under this fabulous system, teams are losing money in a world of incredible revenue growth
- Canada Cup

So now they are going to change it.

Do you think there is a CBA that they can come up with that will last forever? They’re finite agreements for a good reason. They made major progression in the direction they wanted to go, the league’s revenue went way up. You likely consider it a failure because there is a lockout right now. I’m not so sure they would consider it a failure.
- prock

Of course the agreement is finite but I don't see the owners trying to fix the fatal flaw -- cap and floor in a league with too much economic disparity -- they built into it.

So now they are going to change it.
- Atomic Wedgie

they will, mostly because 57% of 3.5B is a lot more than the owners intended to give the players.

So now they are going to change it.
- Atomic Wedgie

But not fix it. Cap and floor stay.

they will, mostly because 57% of 3.5B is a lot more than the owners intended to give the players.
- Symba007

After breaking the union, they accidently wrote in too high a number?

YAWN

Of course the agreement is finite but I don't see the owners trying to fix the fatal flaw -- cap and floor in a league with too much economic disparity -- they built into it.
- Canada Cup

So, you think there should be no salary cap, is that what you’re saying?

After breaking the union, they accidently wrote in too high a number?
- Canada Cup

"cost certainty"

After breaking the union, they accidently wrote in too high a number?
- Canada Cup

57% of 1.5M vs 57% of 3.5B.....HUGE difference in salary cap when it comes to the small markets. Because 5-6 teams are generating over 70% of the revenues....they skew the system. Cap is now too high for most teams except a few, unsustainable system.

So, you think there should be no salary cap, is that what you’re saying?
- prock

I'm saying that the huge win for the owners created more problems for themselves than they had before.

They choices are:

* no cap and competitive disparity as some teams can spend more or

* cap and economic disparity as basket case franchises try to keep to the floor.

Salary roll backs help the money makers make more and give the losers a bit of breathing space as they die a bit more slowly