The misconception is that the lockout is being caused by lower earning teams like Pheonix. It is not. Its a league-wide salary problem.
- Buffalo--Sabres

Absolutely not. The problem is systemic. In the NFL, visiting teams get 40% of the gate. ALL TV contracts are negotiated directly by the league itself and the revenue is shared equally among the 32 clubs. In a system like that, with so much revenue equality, an across the board salary cap makes sense. NHL, not so much.

Are you really trying to say that the Sabres, Penguins, Coyotes, and Senators all had to declare bankruptcy because salaries were too high for the Leafs, Habs, Wings and Rangers? Really?

By the way, don't believe these guys when they all cry poverty. If the NHL counted revenue the same way the NBA and NFL does, the players were already getting 50% under the old agreement.

The NFL players and owners were further apart, and they got a deal done. The NBA players and owners were further apart, and they got a deal done. It will be a disgrace if yet another season gets cancelled because of this. I will struggle to come back to the league if it happens again.

Welp, no season. No playoffs. Nashville calls dibs on the Cup. Woohoo! PREDS... STANLEY CUP CHAMPS!! Called it. No take backsies.

2004-5 was obviously about the salary cap, & the termination of Goodenow was the end all for the owners.
I truly believe that the day the players hired Fehr, the owners planned on digging in their collective heels & were only too happy to continue as such, until we see his demise. They knew with Fehr at the helm that a 12% haircut on salarys (50/50), would never fly, & all the crap that the players stated, (Brooks Laich calling Fehr a shark), only fueled the owners to continue their stance.
I have lost a ton of respect for the players in this whole situation, from Running to Europe & stealing jobs, to all the whining in the press, (I always thought hockey players were different).
Imagine Snider, & Jacobs, & Ilitch, etc, looking across the table at Donald Fehr, imagine that picture. The players hiring him, made their situation what it is, and they are drinking the cool aid, as well Fehr is telling them that a better deal will be had while standing their ground, really?, a better deal is coming?
And people say the soap opera that is pro wrestling is stupid, this is worse than anything the WWE has ever put out, and its all a reality.

The NFL players and owners were further apart, and they got a deal done. The NBA players and owners were further apart, and they got a deal done. It will be a disgrace if yet another season gets cancelled because of this. I will struggle to come back to the league if it happens again.
- niedermayer27

right......... but we have Fehr

Interesting tidbit of information.

Andy Strickland ‏@andystrickland

Sources say #NHL pulled latest offer from the table partly because not every owner liked the deal. Several clubs weren't on board
- MJL

Yes, I heard this this morning/afternoon on the Fan590

There are some moderate owners, not even the hardcore ones, who felt that Bettman gave up too much when he offered 50%.

They were crystal clear on the radio that this could be very bad news and the NHL could very well offer less next time.

2004-5 was obviously about the salary cap, & the termination of Goodenow was the end all for the owners.
I truly believe that the day the players hired Fehr, the owners planned on digging in their collective heels & were only too happy to continue as such, until we see his demise. They knew with Fehr at the helm that a 12% haircut on salarys (50/50), would never fly, & all the crap that the players stated, (Brooks Laich calling Fehr a shark), only fueled the owners to continue their stance.
I have lost a ton of respect for the players in this whole situation, from Running to Europe & stealing jobs, to all the whining in the press, (I always thought hockey players were different).
Imagine Snider, & Jacobs, & Ilitch, etc, looking across the table at Donald Fehr, imagine that picture. The players hiring him, made their situation what it is, and they are drinking the cool aid, as well Fehr is telling them that a better deal will be had while standing their ground, really?, a better deal is coming?
And people say the soap opera that is pro wrestling is stupid, this is worse than anything the WWE has ever put out, and its all a reality.
- puckhead17

That's funny, I said much the same thing yesterday.

The players made a HUGE tactical error right when they hired Fehr. It immediately sent a clear message that the players wanted a fight. There is NO OTHER REASON to hire Fehr.

Fehr responded immediately by refusing to negotiate for 7 months.

I think right then, that the owners had already had enough. The FACT is that the offer made by Bettman was giving more than a majority of the owners wanted to give.


It was the stupidest move imaginable. The players are trying to bully the owners into the deal the players want. That is truly astonishing.

That's funny, I said much the same thing yesterday.

The players made a HUGE tactical error right when they hired Fehr. It immediately sent a clear message that the players wanted a fight. There is NO OTHER REASON to hire Fehr.

Fehr responded immediately by refusing to negotiate for 7 months.

I think right then, that the owners had already had enough. The FACT is that the offer made by Bettman was giving more than a majority of the owners wanted to give.


It was the stupidest move imaginable. The players are trying to bully the owners into the deal the players want. That is truly astonishing.
- NightTrain_AlMo

much of the consensus is that the owners have the "bully" image, but really, I wonder what may have been if the players hired a more conservative rep, or at least a rep that doesn't come with the "shark like" ballsy image that Fehr came with, or at least a player rep that the owners or Bettman respected, because I truly believe this ordeal is now more about making Fehr cave in than making the players cave in.

much of the consensus is that the owners have the "bully" image, but really, I wonder what may have been if the players hired a more conservative rep, or at least a rep that doesn't come with the "shark like" ballsy image that Fehr came with, or at least a player rep that the owners or Bettman respected, because I truly believe this ordeal is now more about making Fehr cave in than making the players cave in.
- puckhead17

While I think Fehr's approach (refusal to negotiate until late summer, etc...) is part of the problem, I am pretty sure the owners would still be driving for the same deal in somewhat the same manner and we would likely be in a similar situation.

The only thing that might be different is that with Fehr at the helm, the resolution to this mess will take a lot longer to be finalized.

much of the consensus is that the owners have the "bully" image, but really, I wonder what may have been if the players hired a more conservative rep, or at least a rep that doesn't come with the "shark like" ballsy image that Fehr came with, or at least a player rep that the owners or Bettman respected, because I truly believe this ordeal is now more about making Fehr cave in than making the players cave in.
- puckhead17

None of those qualities are character traits that the players should consider in hiring their representative. They hired exactly who they should have hired. This ordeal for the NHL is to get the deal they want. Stating that is just about making Fehr cave in, is absurd in my opinion.

http://espn.go.com/nhl/st...rs-offer-contracts-afford

no poop sherlock and you knew that was going to happen before and if your really that damn stupid then it just shows how delusional you are

http://espn.go.com/nhl/story/_/id/8556769/ryan-suter-minnesota-wild-defenseman-says-owners-offer-contracts-afford

no poop sherlock and you knew that was going to happen before and if your really that damn stupid then it just shows how delusional you are
- dmarsden2988

I'd like to know when it became okay for someone to go back on their word, or to not honor a contract signed in good faith, just because the other party knew that it couold, or was a possibility that it could happen?

When games in January get canceled, the season is done, fans will be switching to NBA and NFL.

I'd like to know when it became okay for someone to go back on their word, or to not honor a contract signed in good faith, just because the other party knew that it couold, or was a possibility that it could happen?
- MJL

owners should pay for what was agreed upon, but for suter to complain about it makes me sick, theres a reason why he/his agent made sure to get 10mill signing bonus to cover it (same with parise) the top players should get paid but he should have known there was a good chance of something like this was going to happen, if not then he is a dumbass and to female dog about it after signing for 100mill is well

owners should pay for what was agreed upon, but for suter to complain about it makes me sick, theres a reason why he/his agent made sure to get 10mill signing bonus to cover it (same with parise) the top players should get paid but he should have known there was a good chance of something like this was going to happen, if not then he is a dumbass and to female dog about it after signing for 100mill is well
- dmarsden2988

So your going to get screwed, and since you should of known it was going to happen. It's on you, and how dare you talk about it. Everyone wants to judge from afar and from the sidelines. But put yourself in those shoes. See how you would feel. There is such a thing as principal. And we all know this is business and it's a bad, mean World. And no doubt regardless of what happens, Ryan Suter will be just fine. But how dare he state how he feels about the situation. What an abomination. The nerve he has.

I'd like to know when it became okay for someone to go back on their word, or to not honor a contract signed in good faith, just because the other party knew that it couold, or was a possibility that it could happen?
- MJL

Their word, their honor and "good faith" included an understanding shared by all parties concerned that a rollback might be part of the next CBA.

You are alone if you think that is not true.

So... when one party suddenly will not accept a rollback, (especially the ones who got a fat huicy signing bonus)...

Then who was not negotiating in good faith.

NHLPA...

"Yeah Yeah give me money up front since we know there will be a rollback"

2 months later...

"We ain't taking no rollback, you have to honor the contracts we signed, in full"

You can spin it any way you want, but you lost this one because your arguement applies perfectly against you.

I'd like to know when it became okay for someone to go back on their word, or to not honor a contract signed in good faith, just because the other party knew that it couold, or was a possibility that it could happen?
- MJL

While I have no issues with players being pissed off about this, I am starting to wonder if Fehr's refusal to negotiate was to ensure all these contracts got signed before any negotiations started.

If the NHLPA had started negotiating beforehand, I would wonder if the players would have taken the chance in signing those deals or if the owners - likely the UFAs would have, but I wonder about the RFAs or guys still on entry level contracts.

The NHLPA and Fehr continually pushed off negotiations to get these deals they know would not likely be possible under a new CBA, certainly if there was a restrictions on contract length and reduction in cap/revenue share.

Stop making the players out to be martyrs - they knew exactly what they were getting into and the NHLPA helped them get as much as possible before the clampdown came.

The guys who signed their long-term deals 3-4-5 years ago have a reason to female dog - none of these guys do.

So your going to get screwed, and since you should of known it was going to happen. It's on you, and how dare you talk about it. Everyone wants to judge from afar and from the sidelines. But put yourself in those shoes. See how you would feel. There is such a thing as principal. And we all know this is business and it's a bad, mean World. And no doubt regardless of what happens, Ryan Suter will be just fine. But how dare he state how he feels about the situation. What an abomination. The nerve he has.
- MJL

it justs comes across as whining

So your going to get screwed, and since you should of known it was going to happen. It's on you, and how dare you talk about it. Everyone wants to judge from afar and from the sidelines. But put yourself in those shoes. See how you would feel. There is such a thing as principal. And we all know this is business and it's a bad, mean World. And no doubt regardless of what happens, Ryan Suter will be just fine. But how dare he state how he feels about the situation. What an abomination. The nerve he has.
- MJL

Why do you think the recent signings of the bigger UFA's contained so much bonus money?

It's a little disingenuous to complain after the fact... when you knew damn well it was coming.

While I have no issues with players being pissed off about this, I am starting to wonder if Fehr's refusal to negotiate was to ensure all these contracts got signed before any negotiations started.

If the NHLPA had started negotiating beforehand, I would wonder if the players would have taken the chance in signing those deals or if the owners - likely the UFAs would have, but I wonder about the RFAs or guys still on entry level contracts.

The NHLPA and Fehr continually pushed off negotiations to get these deals they know would not likely be possible under a new CBA, certainly if there was a restrictions on contract length and reduction in cap/revenue share.

Stop making the players out to be martyrs - they knew exactly what they were getting into and the NHLPA helped them get as much as possible before the clampdown came.

The guys who signed their long-term deals 3-4-5 years ago have a reason to female dog - none of these guys do.
- JDJ

It is worse than that... the NHLPA is, in fact, the ones who never did bargain in good faith since they now refuse to bargain on the reality that they knew would happen AND influenced their contract negotiations in the first place.

Why do you think the recent signings of the bigger UFA's contained so much bonus money?

It's a little disnigenuous to complain after the fact... when you knew damn well it was coming.
- NightTrain_AlMo

I agree about the up-front bonus part... Suter and Parise will each get $25M of signing bonus money.

It is worse than that... the NHLPA is, in fact, the ones who never did bargain in good faith since they now refuse to negotiate on the reality (rollbacks) that they knew would happen AND influenced their contract negotiations in the first place.

It is worse than that... the NHLPA is, in fact, the ones who never did bargain in good faith since they now refuse to bargain on the reality that they knew would happen AND influenced their contract negotiations in the first place.
- NightTrain_AlMo

Well, it could be argued that the NHL has refused to bargain in good faith too.

I think neither side has done any negotiations, the difference being that the NHL is fine with losing the season and will eventually get everything back with with lower salaries when it is all said and done.

The players can;t win this one, especially given they are fighting on principal rather than logic of trying to lose the least amount of cash.

owners should pay for what was agreed upon, but for suter to complain about it makes me sick, theres a reason why he/his agent made sure to get 10mill signing bonus to cover it (same with parise) the top players should get paid but he should have known there was a good chance of something like this was going to happen, if not then he is a dumbass and to female dog about it after signing for 100mill is well
- dmarsden2988

yeah yup. how dare he complain, the principal of the situation says it all, better to take 100% of nothing than $7.5 million minus 12%, for principal of course.
not saying what the owners are doing isn't nasty, or underhanded, but really, how much will you lose sitting out a whole year? the ones who did it 8 years ago have already said it.
Fehr is saying the longer they sit, the better the deal, how can any player not see the bull$hit in that??? really??
anyone seeing the owners caving in??? how about Bettman???
how many options are there???
all for principal

Well, it could be argued that the NHL has refused to bargain in good faith too.

I think neither side has done any negotiations, the difference being that the NHL is fine with losing the season and will eventually get everything back with with lower salaries when it is all said and done.

The players can;t win this one, especially given they are fighting on principal rather than logic of trying to lose the least amount of cash.
- JDJ

AND they are being led by someone whose primary goal is to put the finishing touches on his own image, who is just leading them down the garden path.