I have little hope that there will be NHL hockey in 2012-13. And regardless of how this all ends, there is one person in the mix here, I have to say seems to be the biggest issue preventing a labor peace that is lasting... and that is Bettman.

Interesting that he pulls himself out of the equation.

Three lockouts — 1 of which cost an entire season and playoffs, 1 cost half a season, and the other at least half a season... So as of right now, under the guidance of Gary Bettman as NHL Commish — 2 full seasons of NHL hockey has been lost to labor strife.

The goal of a commish in these kinds of circumstances is to get the best deal possible for the owners, but that has to be balanced with the health of the NHL brand and ability of the league to generate revenue.

Some may see that the damage done is temporary, but outside of Canada, how many are really talking hockey or missing it? Think that is because the lockouts are seen as a blessing rather then a course? And why is that? Is it because league management has failed terribly in marketing the game, and broadening its appeal when it does have a chance to do so?

A $3 Billion industry now is worth exactly $0.00 — as opposed to other leagues with very short or limited labor strife.

Think labor peace has not impacted the value of the NHL's franchises or the NHL as a brand? And that falls on Bettman.
- HyeDray

As much disdain as I have for Gary Bettman, I don't agree with you even a little. Bettman for the most part is acting in accordance with how the board of governors want him to. Do you really think he's going to go against their better interests? Like I said, I don't like Bettman either, but the real problem is Donald Fehr. It doesn't take a genius to see that there is a clear and glaring imbalance in the player salary to franchise profits ratio that needs to be fairly dealt with whether the league is at fault or not. It has to be fixed. Half the teams in the league will become untenable if the players continue to rake in the majority if not all of their franchises profits.

Gary Bettman has made it clear that Fehr is not going to dictate terms to the owners and being a union member myself for over 20 years now, I still agree with Bettman on this one. The players have had it too good for too long, $1.8 billion compared to $250 million is unbelievably unfair and it has to be changed. The 50/50 is more than fair for everyone and that's what Bettman has offered giving the PA all the power they need to end this lockout. I listened to Lou Nanne the other day when he stated that he was certain that the league would give the PA about 99% of the concession they were asking for if they agreed to go to an immediate 50/50, if there's any truth to that, why are we still in a lockout?

2 Words, Donald Fehr.

Decertify already....allowing the owners to bring in replacement players....60 %of the players will cross the picket lines this season , the rest can rot in hell in Minsk
- slade67

No - they would all come back and the same crazy (frank)ing owners being such hardasses right now would be falling all over each other trying to sign them. The last thing the heroic capitalists owning NHL teams want is a free market.

pretty sure most NHL owners are not billionaires dude... do you know how much money $1 billion is?
- scotch_tape

There at least 10 billionaires that own NHL hockey teams.

http://www.forbes.com/sit...-nhls-billionaire-owners/

Terrible idea for the players. Gee, who is going to win this one? The smart, savvy, billionaire owners? Or the generally concussed mostly high school educated players?

Sure, sure there will be lawyers on both sides, but this helps no one.

The NHL should be scared, because the NFL product is pretty damn good, and more Canadians are watching that.

this whole thing started back when the PA voted against the league realignment. The problem is Fehr. He killed a world series, why not another busch league like the No Hockey League?

If that was indeed true, they'd be playing Hockey. And just accepting the losses as tax write offs. Why go through all this for a lil side project? Ask yourself if that makes any sense whatsoever?
- MJL

Most of these guys were Billionaires long before they became sports franchise owners. They are in any business venture to make money be it a hobby or otherwise. People don't own sports franchises in general without already having a net worth in the hundreds of millions.

There at least 10 billionaires that own NHL hockey teams.

http://www.forbes.com/sit...-nhls-billionaire-owners/
- MnGump

so most are not....20 of them.

Bettman's proposal is pure PR posturing - the players would get eaten alive.

No way in hell Fehr agrees to it.

Pretty hilarious, though.
- Atomic Wedgie

I agree that Fehr will probably not agree to it.

That said lets not forget that the last lock out ended when a small group of players met with a small group of owners.

The lockout will end when the players figure ou tlosing paycheck after paycheck is worse than playing on the owners terms. The end.
- Homer

Just like last time and if there is a next time, it will happen again then. Most team don't make enough money for anything other than that to happen.

Having a meeting without Bettman and Fehr has a better chance of ending the lockout, the players from NHLPA are more concerned about hating Bettman with their Puck Gary hats right now.

then why did the players refuse to sign a CBA in october? they already lost more money than if they would have signed that CBA. you disagree?
- joshs

Everyone that keeps citing how much money the players stand to lose forgets that the next CBA sets the tone for every CBA to follow. It's not as if had they signed Bettman's "best deal" than he'd be so happy he'd bend over for them next time, he'd just try to screw them over again. Maybe if they lose another season or more, the owners will try negotiating a little nicer in the future.

Everyone that keeps citing how much money the players stand to lose forgets that the next CBA sets the tone for every CBA to follow. It's not as if had they signed Bettman's "best deal" than he'd be so happy he'd bend over for them next time, he'd just try to screw them over again. Maybe if they lose another season or more, the owners will try negotiating a little nicer in the future.
- golfingsince

But it's not as though holding out exactly worked for the players last time. They lost a season, and still ended up with a worse deal than they were offered a year earlier.

If Bettman is intent on bending the players over (though obviously an overstatement), it is going to happen. The players are simply delaying the inevitable, a delay which is costing them salaries, and killing careers.

what happened to the ek-meter??? and what's your source (head chef at golden corral) saying???

As much disdain as I have for Gary Bettman, I don't agree with you even a little. Bettman for the most part is acting in accordance with how the board of governors want him to. Do you really think he's going to go against their better interests? Like I said, I don't like Bettman either, but the real problem is Donald Fehr. It doesn't take a genius to see that there is a clear and glaring imbalance in the player salary to franchise profits ratio that needs to be fairly dealt with whether the league is at fault or not. It has to be fixed. Half the teams in the league will become untenable if the players continue to rake in the majority if not all of their franchises profits.

Gary Bettman has made it clear that Fehr is not going to dictate terms to the owners and being a union member myself for over 20 years now, I still agree with Bettman on this one. The players have had it too good for too long, $1.8 billion compared to $250 million is unbelievably unfair and it has to be changed. The 50/50 is more than fair for everyone and that's what Bettman has offered giving the PA all the power they need to end this lockout. I listened to Lou Nanne the other day when he stated that he was certain that the league would give the PA about 99% of the concession they were asking for if they agreed to go to an immediate 50/50, if there's any truth to that, why are we still in a lockout?

2 Words, Donald Fehr.
- MnGump

Here's the flaw in all of that. That many want to ignore. Fehr didn't have anything to do with that imbalance. But you know who did? The Owners themselves. When their GM's, or Team Presidents, or maybe even the owners themselves, negotiated contracts with the individual players. And then the Owners signed off on the deals. They created this imbalance. Fehr had zero to do with it. And as far as 250M to 1.8B. There are over 700 players and only 30 Owners. That alone will lead to an imbalance. And I'll again state that the split is about revenue, not profit.

Terrible idea for the players. Gee, who is going to win this one? The smart, savvy, billionaire owners? Or the generally concussed mostly high school educated players?

Sure, sure there will be lawyers on both sides, but this helps no one.

The NHL should be scared, because the NFL product is pretty damn good, and more Canadians are watching that.
- Fisticus

What about those Ivy League players that Fehr is always proudly displaying to show player solidarity and representaton in the process?

Terrible idea for the players. Gee, who is going to win this one? The smart, savvy, billionaire owners? Or the generally concussed mostly high school educated players?

Sure, sure there will be lawyers on both sides, but this helps no one.

The NHL should be scared, because the NFL product is pretty damn good, and more Canadians are watching that.
- Fisticus

You mean those smart savvy billionaire Owners who create their own problems year after year. And again need a bailout from the players to protect them from themselves?

So the players didn't earn their contracts with their play on the ice? Someone held a gun to the Owner's heads and forced them to sign the players to those contracts? According to James Mirtle, the players lost 3.5B in salary over the last lockout. Don't get me wrong, the players still made out well. Very well in fact. Players aren't asking for more! They're asking for what they negotiated for in good faith.
- MJL

Yeah, but that was one small step backward for a giant leap forward. The average annual player salary grew something like 38% from the year BEFORE the lockout to last year.

How many of you have had that kind of salary increase betwen 2003 and now? Most of the people I know have had 5 years or more of wages freezes, or extremely low raises far less than inflation over the same period.

And before anyone says that you can't compare hockey players to the rest of us, isn't that what they do constantly?

You mean those smart savvy billionaire Owners who create their own problems year after year. And again need a bailout from the players to protect them from themselves?
- MJL

But MJL, we've talked about this before. The system is broken, admittedly. The owners need to be saved from themselves, agreed.

And by the way, you can't blame all of the owners for the sins of the few. So here is an analogy. You are hanging out with 4 other friends. Two of them decide to shoplift. You're saying that ALL five of you are guilty.

And frankly, I don't even blame those few who did offer outrageous contracts, because the RULES allowed it. And frankly, those owners were probably making smart business decisions FOR THEMSELVES. In other words, Snider would have made money even if he signed Weber, probably even MORE money if he did sign Weber. So at a micro economic level, he made a smart decision. At a MACRO economic level, for the good of hockey it was a bad decision.

But it is not Snider's responsibility to police himself. Have you ever heard of the Prisoner's Dilemma? Even if he restrains himself, there is no guarantee that the next owner will do the same. Frankly The league (and other owners) need to do it. The ONLY way to do that is through the CBA.

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

Damn Russians!! ....Frenchie, do something!

Yeah, but that was one small step backward for a giant leap forward. The average annual player salary grew something like 38% from the year BEFORE the lockout to last year.

How many of you have had that kind of salary increase betwen 2003 and now? Most of the people I know have had 5 years or more of wages freezes, or extremely low raises far less than inflation over the same period.

And before anyone says that you can't compare hockey players to the rest of us, isn't that what they do constantly?
- TheGreat28

What who does constantly?

Here's the flaw in all of that. That many want to ignore. Fehr didn't have anything to do with that imbalance. But you know who did? The Owners themselves. When their GM's, or Team Presidents, or maybe even the owners themselves, negotiated contracts with the individual players. And then the Owners signed off on the deals. They created this imbalance. Fehr had zero to do with it. And as far as 250M to 1.8B. There are over 700 players and only 30 Owners. That alone will lead to an imbalance. And I'll again state that the split is about revenue, not profit.
- MJL

Too...many....pauses....

But MJL, we've talked about this before. The system is broken, admittedly. The owners need to be saved from themselves, agreed.

And by the way, you can't blame all of the owners for the sins of the few. So here is an analogy. You are hanging out with 4 other friends. Two of them decide to shoplift. You're saying that ALL five of you are guilty.

And frankly, I don't even blame those few who did offer outrageous contracts, because the RULES allowed it. And frankly, those owners were probably making smart business decisions FOR THEMSELVES. In other words, Snider would have made money even if he signed Weber, probably even MORE money if he did sign Weber. So at a micro economic level, he made a smart decision. At a MACRO economic level, for the good of hockey it was a bad decision.

But it is not Snider's responsibility to police himself. Have you ever heard of the Prisoner's Dilemma? Even if he restrains himself, there is no guarantee that the next owner will do the same. Frankly The league (and other owners) need to do it. The ONLY way to do that is through the CBA.
- TheGreat28

Your missing the entire point. I agree the League needs to do it. But they need to take responsibility for it. They need to pay the price for their mistakes. Not try and force the players to pay for the same mistakes they make over and over. In every CBA negotiation. It's a simple premise. Owners are saying we screwed up again, so the players need to pay for it!

But MJL, we've talked about this before. The system is broken, admittedly. The owners need to be saved from themselves, agreed.

And by the way, you can't blame all of the owners for the sins of the few. So here is an analogy. You are hanging out with 4 other friends. Two of them decide to shoplift. You're saying that ALL five of you are guilty.

And frankly, I don't even blame those few who did offer outrageous contracts, because the RULES allowed it. And frankly, those owners were probably making smart business decisions FOR THEMSELVES. In other words, Snider would have made money even if he signed Weber, probably even MORE money if he did sign Weber. So at a micro economic level, he made a smart decision. At a MACRO economic level, for the good of hockey it was a bad decision.

But it is not Snider's responsibility to police himself. Have you ever heard of the Prisoner's Dilemma? Even if he restrains himself, there is no guarantee that the next owner will do the same. Frankly The league (and other owners) need to do it. The ONLY way to do that is through the CBA.
- TheGreat28

Did you turn a blind eye, or distract the cashier while they filled their pockets?