Worse than that, they are also completely acting against the best interests of their own compatriots. If the differences are as some bloggers have indicated:

Contract length - 6 years vs. 8 years - how many players would even ever get 6 year contracts, let alone 8?

Contract varience - 20% vs. unlimited - again, really affects only long term contracts - and how many players would this affect?

CBA length - from what I've read, 10 year / 8 year opt out vs. 10 year / 7 year opt out - my God, no difference here that would stop anything

Salary cap next year - $60MM vs. $65MM - here I side with the players - if the difference would go against the escrow anyways, what would the league be losing by being at $65MM for a year? I don't think their broadcast partners really want to see good teams broken up - they don't want parity, they want stars they can market.

Amnesty - 2 but counting against players' share vs. NOT counting against players' share - how much money is really involved here? How many teams would wind up amnestying players - the ones close to the cap, maybe.

If the players gave in on all of these issues except the salary cap, the vast majority of players wouldn't be giving up much, if anything - certainly not nearly as much as losing a whole season (maybe 2, if this season winds up being cancelled).
- StLBravesFan

Agree, well said.

It seems like the owners are conceding a lot to get the season rolling immediately....

If the season is canceled wouldn't that make the owners more likely to really stick it to them?
- fattybeef

If I'm an owner and this season is cxl'd...There is no way my next proposal is nearly as good.

If this doesn't end soon Fehr will have overplayed his hand because time will not end up being on his side.

Worse than that, they are also completely acting against the best interests of their own compatriots. If the differences are as some bloggers have indicated:

Contract length - 6 years vs. 8 years - how many players would even ever get 6 year contracts, let alone 8?

Contract varience - 20% vs. unlimited - again, really affects only long term contracts - and how many players would this affect?

CBA length - from what I've read, 10 year / 8 year opt out vs. 10 year / 7 year opt out - my God, no difference here that would stop anything

Salary cap next year - $60MM vs. $65MM - here I side with the players - if the difference would go against the escrow anyways, what would the league be losing by being at $65MM for a year? I don't think their broadcast partners really want to see good teams broken up - they don't want parity, they want stars they can market.

Amnesty - 2 but counting against players' share vs. NOT counting against players' share - how much money is really involved here? How many teams would wind up amnestying players - the ones close to the cap, maybe.

If the players gave in on all of these issues except the salary cap, the vast majority of players wouldn't be giving up much, if anything - certainly not nearly as much as losing a whole season (maybe 2, if this season winds up being cancelled).
- StLBravesFan

Here is my take...

Contract length should be within reach of compromose...6 yrs or 7 yrs and 8 yrs for you own players. This does matter as does variance.

If varaince gets to 25-30% stars will still get a big big payday and every other player will benefit by some degree.

CBA length is a non issue...Players would be stupid not to want a longer agreement seeing they lose something with each new CBA.

Salary cap decline is about owners protecting themselves from each other as are other issues.

A $10 mill drop is too much in one yr. Adding another buyout hurts players more than owners. Once again should be some middle ground.

The bottom line is if Fehr doesn't overplay his hand this should end soon...

If he does the PA and the sport is in deep trouble...

If I'm an owner and this season is cxl'd...There is no way my next proposal is nearly as good.

If this doesn't end soon Fehr will have overplayed his hand because time will not end up being on his side.
- Al

Right on. Fehr has played the NHL masterfully in all of this. He has put the league in the position of negotiating against itself the entire time. He just needs to know when that game is up, because if the season gets cancelled, there will be no way the PA gets as good a deal as they have in front of them now.

Deal gets settled next week I think.

Here is my take...

Contract length should be within reach of compromose...6 yrs or 7 yrs and 8 yrs for you own players. This does matter as does variance.

If varaince gets to 25-30% stars will still get a big big payday and every other player will benefit by some degree.

CBA length is a non issue...Players would be stupid not to want a longer agreement seeing they lose something with each new CBA.

Salary cap decline is about owners protecting themselves from each other as are other issues.A $10 mill drop is too much in one yr. Adding another buyout hurts players more than owners. Once again should be some middle ground.

The bottom line is if Fehr doesn't overplay his hand this should end soon...

If he does the PA and the sport is in deep trouble...
- Al

The owners needing salary cap protection from themselves puzzles me when we all know that no matter what they come out with they will try to figure out ways to circumvent it.

Right on. Fehr has played the NHL masterfully in all of this. He has put the league in the position of negotiating against itself the entire time. He just needs to know when that game is up, because if the season gets cancelled, there will be no way the PA gets as good a deal as they have in front of them now.

Deal gets settled next week I think.
- Return of the Roar

Really? I guess I fail to see how having your constituents forfeit $800M and counting in earnings is "masterful."

Really? I guess I fail to see how having your constituents forfeit $800M and counting in earnings is "masterful."
- MartiniMan

Agreed, no matter how good of a deal Fehr gets the players are out the $800mil. They won't make up that loss and as with the last lock out some of his constituents have probably played their last game in the NHL.

Agreed, no matter how good of a deal Fehr gets the players are out the $800mil. They won't make up that loss and as with the last lock out some of his constituents have probably played their last game in the NHL.
- jhawk159

Fehr, with all his gamesmanship, can milk this for another week or he will f this up totally for his constituents, with reports surfacing in the last 48 hours that the league is ready to invoke the nuclear option if no deal is finalized by next Thursday. It would be a shame, a guy like Teemu Selanne deserves so much better than to have to go out like that.

The owners needing salary cap protection from themselves puzzles me when we all know that no matter what they come out with they will try to figure out ways to circumvent it.
- jhawk159

That has what happend in the past you are correct...

But having a business model whereby 2/3 or more of franchises lose money isn't good.

That really is sad. Is it mismanagement or hockey just isn't that popular? I know it is the least popular of the big 4 by far. I wonder how many teams lose that much money in all the other sports? I think the majority of owners in hockey really do love the sport.

Of the other prospects you mentioned I think Ouellet has propelled himself to near the top of Detroit's prospects. I'm also anxious to see what Pulkinen can do in GR. Might see him in GR next year from what I've heard.
- Vladdie_Kon1

Yeah, and when I watched the USA Canada gameagain, Ouellet really exposed himself as unable to defend stay with even pke check on two USA goals where he was soundly outskated maneuvered and beat.

Back to Tatar, and I now look like a total hawk prejudice freak, but for oh so many years I have seen guys that are terrific in the AHL, and everyone asks/comments what a bright future in the NHL, because they score in the A, and they in most cases end up unable to make that jump and even when they do, they lack complete game, where their "sponser NHL club" isn't interested in keeping them to continue trying to round out.
Just look at one of the success stories like former Islander now Colorado wing PA PARENTEAU they have goal scoring, but they lack full game.

That has what happend in the past you are correct...

But having a business model whereby 2/3 or more of franchises lose money isn't good.
- Al

Having a business model whereby 1/3 or more of franchises are in locations (or with owners) where they can't possibly MAKE money isn't good.

Having a business model whereby 1/3 or more of franchises are in locations (or with owners) where they can't possibly MAKE money isn't good.
- StLBravesFan

This is a problem. Heck there are cities that couldn't support a MLB or NFL team either and it seems those sports have enough sense not to put teams in those situations. The NHL and Bettman not so much. Where does he want to put a team next Omaha, Albuquerque....