Greatest idea Bettman had ever
- Dudestar

He is just tired of looking at Fehrs face.

He is just tired of looking at Fehrs face.
- CaptainK

I am tired of both their faces

Hey ek, when they finally cancel the season how optimistic will you be that they might not cancel the season?

And that's not rhetoric? They didn't lose anything. They negotiated a new CBA. The fact their percentage went down from 75 to 57 is irrelevant. It's a total new agreement and in that collective agreement their salaries rose by 90%
- SUPERDOMINO

How is it rhetoric? Rhetoric comes from the two sides involved in the negotiations. The fact that their percentage went from 75% to 57% is indeed relevant. Now no one including the author is arguing that the players should have continued to earn that percentage of revenue. Players earning 75% of revenue is insane. Or that the players didn't make out well in the last CBA. They absolutely did. But the Owners did well also. That's the only point. I disagree with the final statement that the Owner's won the last CBA. I think it's more accurate to suggest that nobody really lost. But if either side gave in the last CBA, it was most certainly the players. The players did give up considerable concessions in the last CBA. The fact that salaries were linked to revenue, and revenue grew at a record pace, helped the players out immensely.

And a simple question. Obviously before the last CBA, there was no salary Cap. So if the Levitt report is accurate, how did the players wind up with 75% of revenue in the period before the last CBA?

Seems like a common theme. Owner's need to lie in the bed that they made. And take some responsibility for their failed business model. Instead of asking the players to pay for all their mistakes.

Valiant effort by the players so far, but this is a no win situation for them. When they realize this, they'll be better off!!!

How is it rhetoric? Rhetoric comes from the two sides involved in the negotiations. The fact that their percentage went from 75% to 57% is indeed relevant. Now no one including the author is arguing that the players should have continued to earn that percentage of revenue. Players earning 75% of revenue is insane. Or that the players didn't make out well in the last CBA. They absolutely did. But the Owners did well also. That's the only point. I disagree with the final statement that the Owner's won the last CBA. I think it's more accurate to suggest that nobody really lost. Even though the players did give up considerable concessions in the last CBA. The fact that salaries were linked to revenue, and revenue grew at a record pace, helped the players out immensely.
- MJL

You said you don't listen to the rhetoric and nonsense. Saying the players lost 3.5B in this CBA is just not true. PA rhetoric and nonsense at it's finest.

You said you don't listen to the rhetoric and nonsense. Saying the players lost 3.5B in this CBA is just not true. PA rhetoric and nonsense at it's finest.
- SUPERDOMINO

The article was written by an writer for the Edmonton Journal. Not from the PA. Not hard to understand. The author's premise is simple. If the players didn't take the 24% rollback, and kept making 75% of Revenue. Which is what the League's own commissioned report stated. They would have earned approximately 3.5B more over the life of the last CBA. Indisputable using the known revenue figures for each year of the last CBA. And using the figure of 75% from the Levitt report.


And a simple question. Obviously before the last CBA, there was no salary Cap. So if the Levitt report is accurate, how did the players wind up with 75% of revenue in the period before the last CBA?

Seems like a common theme. Owner's need to lie in the bed that they made.

[quote=MJL] Players earning 75% of revenue is insane. Or that the players didn't make out well in the last CBA. They absolutely did. But the Owners did well also. That's the only point. I disagree with the final statement that the Owner's won the last CBA



When the deal was completed the owners got what they wanted....nobody thought the players did well and most figured they capitulated......the players tied their future years to growth.....I really think this is how they should approach this deal....it worked out really well for the players.....but this current situation has been all about what the players have to give up.....be it fair or not they will be in a worse position then before when the dust settles.....they need to focus on triggers that could change that going forward....ie growth.

The article was written by an writer for the Edmonton Journal. Not from the PA. Not hard to understand.


And a simple question. Obviously before the last CBA, there was no salary Cap. So if the Levitt report is accurate, how did the players wind up with 75% of revenue in the period before the last CBA?

Seems like a common theme. Owner's need to lie in the bed that they made.
- MJL

Why is it so wrong to make the bed and tuck in the sheets? Still the same bed just a little neater. MAybe even wash the linen, it would be good for everyones health.

If Fehr does agree, does he get a list of what owners will be there so he can hand select his players? I see it as a possibility, the players get some coaching as to what to expect, then dont piss off your star player kind of thing or they will stop performing....look at what AA pilots did this year....

Why is it so wrong to make the bed and tuck in the sheets? Still the same bed just a little neater. MAybe even wash the linen, it would be good for everyones health.
- CaptainK

I'm all for 50/50. That's fair. Just as they shouldn't have continued to make 75% of revenue before the last CBA. They shouldn't continue to make 57% of revenue either. But find a way to give the soft landing that the players want, honor contracts as best as possible. In a way that both sides can agree upon. Seems like it'll take a miracle.

If Fehr does agree, does he get a list of what owners will be there so he can hand select his players? I see it as a possibility, the players get some coaching as to what to expect, then dont piss off your star player kind of thing or they will stop performing....look at what AA pilots did this year....
- KOS

What coaching does he need to give them? I thought Fehr just sits there and stares then occasionals shakes his head.

I guess Fehr could give every one of his players an ear piece and coach them during the meeting from the "pizza van" around the corner.

I think its a great proposal by Bettman.

Let's hope it works because I still want hockey.

I miss it !!

I think its a great proposal by Bettman.

Let's hope it works because I still want hockey.

I miss it !!
- BuffaloHardHat

So true

please keep the players out of this negotiation, the only guy who has made an ounce of sense is Hamrlik....everyone else is towing the same line-the line that is sinking.

as a lifelong diehard Habs fan, last lockout, all i cared about was the league coming back. never wavered. never uttered those "i'm done with the league" threats.

as this one drags on, i'm starting to seriously consider whether or not i'll come back if this thing does consume the season. which frankly shocks me because i just assumed i'd be another in a long line that got kicked in the nuts by the league and then lined up to give them my money once the nut-kicking stopped.

i don't say this as a threat to the league. i know i'm insignificant. but i say it because i wonder, if i feel this way, as a diehard and someone who has grown up in Montreal knowing nothing allegiance to the Habs, what are more casual fans going to do?

i'm a casual NFL fan. i watch football, follow the sport, spend on merchandise now and then, contribute to those massive TV ratings, etc. but if the NFL was conducting itself the same way the NHL is, i would absolutely say "(frank) it" and never watch another game again.

my point is that the NHL and the NHLPA assume fans will be back, all fans, and revenues will be stable and continue to grow. they wouldn't be in this position otherwise, regardless of what the owners say through this process. they're not afraid of fan (revenue) backlash. but i'm not so sure. i might be in the minority but i really do think the NHL will be very heavily damaged by this lockout.

frankly, i hope it to be the case at this point.

Eklund: Mediation Ends. Bettman Proposes Sides Meet Without Bettman and Fehr.
- Eklund

Silly question, I know, but if both sides are better off without Fehr or Bettman than why does either still have a job?

If a deal, by some miracle, gets done without either of them then they should both quit and acknowledge that the whole lockout was a lame pissing match between two egomaniacs.

Apple

Thats what is brilliant about Bettman's proposal. If Fehr says no, players look like the one side that doesnt want to negociate.
- soad_live

Anyone who thought about it for just a second would realize the players say no because they are not equipped to handle a negotiation. They're hockey players, not businessmen or negotiators.

And a simple question. Obviously before the last CBA, there was no salary Cap. So if the Levitt report is accurate, how did the players wind up with 75% of revenue in the period before the last CBA?
- MJL

Because owners/GMs cannot help themselves. They let their egos get in the way. The only time they "care about the business" is when it comes time to negotiate a new CBA. Once it is signed they go back to their drunken sailor spending ways.

They thought they fixed the problem in '05. Guess what? Can't fix stupid. They dug themselves another hole and now we are where we are. The problem is self inflicted. The players/agents did not force the owners to dole out $98 million dollar contracts. Their egos wouldn't let them do anything else.

Seems like a common theme. Owner's need to lie in the bed that they made. And take some responsibility for their failed business model. Instead of asking the players to pay for all their mistakes.

Yep.

Silly question, I know, but if both sides are better off without Fehr or Bettman than why does either still have a job?

If a deal, by some miracle, gets done without either of them then they should both quit and acknowledge that the whole lockout was a lame pissing match between two egomaniacs.
- tmlfan69

if i had to pick one of these sides to support, it would be the owners. but that said, Gary Bettman has been commissioner for 20 years. he has negotiated 3 CBAs. and despite consistently growing revenues, the league is not financially healthy. so i have to ask, after 20 years, this guy hasn't been able to stabilize the NHL financially. why is he still the commissioner? could it be that we're not being told the truth about league/team finances?

Last time a Russian was taken number one we were locked out for the whole season. Same thing now.

Because owners/GMs cannot help themselves. They let their egos get in the way. The only time they "care about the business" is when it comes time to negotiate a new CBA. Once it is signed they go back to their drunken sailor spending ways.

They thought they fixed the problem in '05. Guess what? Can't fix stupid. They dug themselves another hole and now we are where we are. The problem is self inflicted. The players/agents did not force the owners to dole out $98 million dollar contracts. Their egos wouldn't let them do anything else.



Yep.
- Scoob

The players are fighting a fight they have absolutely no chance of winning....

The players are fighting a fight they have absolutely no chance of winning....
- Barx

So are the owners.

once Crosby bolts for Europe, we know it'll be over.

and....fehr the fehr.