Dont believe a single thing you hear in those press conferences, nothing has been pulled. Its all for show.
- Gunner Staal

Exactly, but at the same time let's not act like one side is innocently doing it 'all for show' and the other is somehow more sincere or more destructive. It's a return to the same nonsense we'd seen all along, it just stings more after the optimism this week.

Personally, I can't fathom how people are taking one side or another. Neither side is acting purely in the interest of the sport.

Exactly, but at the same time let's not act like one side is innocently doing it 'all for show' and the other is somehow more sincere or more destructive. It's a return to the same nonsense we'd seen all along, it just stings more after the optimism this week.

Personally, I can't fathom how people are taking one side or another. Neither side is acting purely in the interest of the sport.
- BulliesPhan87

Strip away all PR. Facts still remain that NHL has leverage, NHLPA does not. Fehr only really representing top 15-20% and that the majority of players will suffer as this continues.

Deal will be struck, union will start to break. Very predictable path.

I am of the thought process that at this point you let the players lie in the bed they've made. I'm sick of them. If the reports are to be believed that they were ready to sign and they wanted to try and get blood from a rock at the last moment, let them sit out until they succumb to whatever the owners want.

Fully in the owners camp at this point. I don't care how long it takes anymore. Break this stupid union for the better of the league. Get rid of them once and for all. Stop all negotiations until they fully implode. Unless they say they will sign on the latest deal offered, no questions asked, hit the ignore button.
- brianb0422

I guess the owners have done a pretty good sales job. To the extent that I can support either party of guys who have made/will make more in a year than I will in a lifetime, I'm behind the players - the sacrifice here is seemingly all theirs. I thought it was interesting that Daly said the term limit on player contracts is so important that it's "the hill we'll die on". Seriously - how about this : don't sign players to long-term deals (if Leonsis is one of the hawks on this and other issues as is reported, what a jackass he is after signing long-term deals with Ovechkin/Backstrom). The owners can't control themselves, though, so we're left trying to negotiate a CBA which will save the owners from themselves.

Strip away all PR. Facts still remain that NHL has leverage, NHLPA does not. Fehr only really representing top 15-20% and that the majority of players will suffer as this continues.

Deal will be struck, union will start to break. Very predictable path.
- Gunner Staal

The owners need to set a drop dead date for the cracks to show. Set it now! With-in a day or two of that date a deal will be had. Hockey will be played two weeks later.

http://hockeyhurts.com/9-gunner-articles/152-nhl-fehr-driving-nhlpa-over-fiscal-cliff
- Gunner Staal

The owners need to set a drop dead date for the cracks to show. Set it now! With-in a day or two of that date a deal will be had. Hockey will be played two weeks later.
- madmike71

He basically did last night in his press conference. Bettman said he couldnt imagine playing less than 48 games. Somebody said last night that amounts to approx a Jan 11th drop dead date for the season.

Strip away all PR. Facts still remain that NHL has leverage, NHLPA does not. Fehr only really representing top 15-20% and that the majority of players will suffer as this continues.

Deal will be struck, union will start to break. Very predictable path.
- Gunner Staal

We'll see, clearly neither side's representation is acting in the interest of all their members.

I guess the owners have done a pretty good sales job. To the extent that I can support either party of guys who have made/will make more in a year than I will in a lifetime, I'm behind the players - the sacrifice here is seemingly all theirs. I thought it was interesting that Daly said the term limit on player contracts is so important that it's "the hill we'll die on". Seriously - how about this : don't sign players to long-term deals (if Leonsis is one of the hawks on this and other issues as is reported, what a jackass he is after signing long-term deals with Ovechkin/Backstrom). The owners can't control themselves, though, so we're left trying to negotiate a CBA which will save the owners from themselves.
- MadCap2008

Not as easy as that. Collusion lawsuits loom large in that scenario.

The owners need to set a drop dead date for the cracks to show. Set it now! With-in a day or two of that date a deal will be had. Hockey will be played two weeks later.
- madmike71

If you read into it, they did. Wont drop below a 48 game season.

Edit: rawdog beat me to it.

Not as easy as that. Collusion lawsuits loom large in that scenario.
- Gunner Staal

Fair point - I know that baseball owners got in trouble over that in the 80's, though I'm not certain of the circumstances and wheter there would be a parallel here. The owners appear to be winning the PR game at the moment, though I went to Verizon Center last night for the Hershey-Norfolk AHL game and the "Fire Bettman" chants were loud and strong (of course this could be simply attributed to the fact that this guy is just universally hated - the result of any deal should be his exit, IMO - he might be doing the owners bidding, but we've been through this too many times with him at the helm for this to move forward with him in that position).

If you read into it, they did. Wont drop below a 48 game season.

Edit: rawdog beat me to it.
- Gunner Staal

That's still in the abstract. Won't get through the players heads until they see a specified date (preferably the next week or two)......they'll get in more games that way.

Fair point - I know that baseball owners got in trouble over that in the 80's, though I'm not certain of the circumstances and wheter there would be a parallel here. The owners appear to be winning the PR game at the moment, though I went to Verizon Center last night for the Hershey-Norfolk AHL game and the "Fire Bettman" chants were loud and strong (of course this could be simply attributed to the fact that this guy is just universally hated - the result of any deal should be his exit, IMO - he might be doing the owners bidding, but we've been through this too many times with him at the helm for this to move forward with him in that position).
- MadCap2008

The baseball owners also agreed to keep contracts to three years or less. I think there's a big difference between that and NHL owners not offering very long-term contracts, at least as far as proving collusion. Then again, I neither know the mechanisms of the law nor am a lawyer.

In 6-10 years from now (whenever the next CBA is up) the players will look back at yesterday and say they should have taken the deal. Just like every retired NHL player that went through this type of thing before has said about past CBA lockouts. Im not sure what makes them think this time is going to be different. Oh wait. Yea its Fehr.

This has nothing to do with what side Im on. It everything to do with what would be best for both long term

In 6-10 hours from now (whenever the brainwashing wears off) the players will look back at yesterday and say they should have taken the deal. Just like every retired NHL player that went through this type of thing before has said about past CBA lockouts. Im not sure what makes them think this time is going to be different. Oh wait. Yea its Fehr.

This has nothing to do with what side Im on. It everyything to do with what would be best for both long term
- Deadstar

Fixed.

I've also given up on this season after yesterday. I dont think it gets played.

Not as easy as that. Collusion lawsuits loom large in that scenario.
- Gunner Staal

I guess what I dont understand is why are the length of deals being scrutinized? If the year 1 to final year variance in $ is capped, then the length shouldnt matter as it would avoid cap circumvention. The problem is the variance in back diving contracts ala Kovalchuk.

I guess what I dont understand is why are the length of deals being scrutinized? If the year 1 to final year variance in $ is capped, then the length shouldnt matter as it would avoid cap circumvention. The problem is the variance in back diving contracts ala Kovalchuk.
- Rawdog9755

The way I picture it is, having player contracts continually be longer than the average length of a CBA is an issue. Every time a CBA comes up you have players with 10-13 year contracts who are fighting for givebacks on a system that has run its course. Limit the length of contracts and you limit the amount of dispute every CBA.

I've also given up on this season after yesterday. I dont think it gets played.
- Deadstar

I think there will be a season. I just think it will be a crappy half season that nobody is going to give a flying (frank) about.

The way I picture it is, having player contracts continually be longer than the average length of a CBA is an issue. Every time a CBA comes up you have players with 10-13 year contracts who are fighting for givebacks on a system that has run its course. Limit the length of contracts and you limit the amount of dispute every CBA.
- Deadstar

Personally, I'm hoping there's a limit on contract years. I don't like the five year number currently out there, though. I'd prefer to see something like eight to ten years, along with the variance. I think teams should have the ability to commit to a player, just not for the sake of cap bending.

The way I picture it is, having player contracts continually be longer than the average length of a CBA is an issue. Every time a CBA comes up you have players with 10-13 year contracts who are fighting for givebacks on a system that has run its course. Limit the length of contracts and you limit the amount of dispute every CBA.
- Deadstar

But if the owners are hellbent on a 10yr cba, then I dont see the issue. Its not like every tom, richard, and harry are getting 7+ yr deals.
The issue I have with the approach to variance currently is that it is year to year 5%. The longer the contract goes, the more the 5% comes into play. The limit should be on both year to year and overall(year 1 compared to final year). The problem with year to year only is that you could have significant variance on a 5 yr contract which would still allow for circumvention to some extent.

In 6-10 years from now (whenever the next CBA is up) the players will look back at yesterday and say they should have taken the deal. Just like every retired NHL player that went through this type of thing before has said about past CBA lockouts. Im not sure what makes them think this time is going to be different. Oh wait. Yea its Fehr.

This has nothing to do with what side Im on. It everything to do with what would be best for both long term
- Deadstar

Actually, given the history of Bettman's tenure, we will hear from him in 6 to 10 years telling us that whatever deal is ultimately negotiated here is untenable.

Actually, given the history of Bettman's tenure, we will hear from him in 6 to 10 years telling us that whatever deal is ultimately negotiated here is untenable.
- MadCap2008

Thats the trick though. Every time the players were "crushed" in negotiations, it ends up working out incredibly well for them. Thats why when they got some concessions, I dont see why they would reject yesterdays deal.

Thats the trick though. Every time the players were "crushed" in negotiations, it ends up working out incredibly well for them. Thats why when they got some concessions, I dont see why they would reject yesterdays deal.
- Deadstar

There is a "relativity" factor involved here. Yes, ANY deal that the players get is going to look great to the average guy who is struggling to make ends meet and sees NHL players at the minimum salary as being extremely well compensated. This doesn't mean to say that the deal for the players was a good one in the bubble of the sports world.

There is a "relativity" factor involved here. Yes, ANY deal that the players get is going to look great to the average guy who is struggling to make ends meet and sees NHL players at the minimum salary as being extremely well compensated. This doesn't mean to say that the deal for the players was a good one in the bubble of the sports world.
- MadCap2008

Not the initial one Bettman and the owners offered at the beginning of this process. That was a non-offer, offer. This one was very fair. The league was a 74-26 split in revenues back in 04. Now its 57-50. With all other sports being 50-50, what are the players trying to accomplish getting more while losing paychecks?