Players Union Caving?

The Anomaly · Post by **The Anomaly** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:19 pm

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=1991361

I wonder how many calls the union was getting from the "average" player. The union will be broken. Rollbacks AND a cap.

Bring me my hockey back with or without the union.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:24 pm

A deal will get done. The union has already started talking about living with a cap. That means they are trying to find a cap amount they can all live with.

The NHLPA better grab that cap amount now, because if the season is cancelled, that means the cap will go down to $35 million or less, and will hold there.

JD · Post by JD » Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:44 pm

It was only a matter of if, not when.

I'm just glad it looks like they might get this done before the cancellation of the season.

On the other hand, I'm at the point where I'd be nearly as relieved to just see them cancel it and put their other foot in the grave.

It's been said that a lot of players are pissed that their union has caved on the no cap thing. I guess it'd be especially maddening for guys like Bryan McCabe and Robert Esche who were defiantly proclaiming that they'd NEVER play under a cap.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 6:49 pm

JD wrote:I guess it'd be especially maddening for guys like Bryan McCabe and Robert Esche who were defiantly proclaiming that they'd NEVER play under a cap.

As a die-hard Leafs fan who witnessed Bryan meldown against the Flyers in the playoffs, I hope he stands by his words.

scritti · Post by **scritti** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:04 pm

they have to bridge the gap...really,but pride can only take so far before realizing that bills have to be paid.

welcome to the real world, NHLPA

MuchoBulls · Post by **MuchoBulls** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:36 pm

If they are only $12 million apart on the cap number, then you have to figure they can come to a resolution today.

I'm still pissed, yet not surprised, that they wait until the last possible minute. This could have been resolved in the three months that both sides didn't even speak.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 7:41 pm

If hockey fans had any balls at all, the NHL would play the entire season and playoffs in front of empty barns.

See You Next Wednesday · Tue Feb 15, 2005 9:25 pm

They should still 86 the season. No on ewill respect or give a damn about a champion this year.

BSmack · Post by **BSmack** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 9:39 pm

See You Next Wednesday wrote:They should still 86 the season. No on ewill respect or give a damn about a champion this year.

Respect has nothing to do with it.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 9:59 pm

If respect or integrity had anything to do with this, Bettman would have made Jan. 1 the drop-dead date for the season. I would have more respect for both sides if, even they agree to a CBA, they cancel the season.

Viper in Vancouver · Post by **Viper in Vancouver** » Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:29 pm

The NHL has filed a counter-proposalto the NHLPA upping the salary cap to $42.5 million as a final offer with no flexibility. The NHLPA must respond to the offer by 11:00am EST time tomorrow. I think the NHLPA may actually take this, because it's the best offer they're ever goona get. Here is the final offer given by Bettman to Goodenow.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=115051

JD · Post by JD » Wed Feb 16, 2005 12:08 am

I think the NHLPA should take it, but I really don't think they will. Time will tell.

fix · Post by **fix** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 1:02 am

Threatening letter much?

Betteman's a joke.

The NHLPA should tell him to go fuck himself.

Oh and if anyone didn't hear Chris Chelios's comments today.. they should.

RACK the Fuck out of him.

Smoked Meat · Post by **Smoked Meat** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 1:22 am

Otis wrote:Oh and if anyone didn't hear Chris Chelios's comments today.. they should.

I'm trying to find a written transcription, a few gems in there

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 1:52 am

Suposedly several player reps went behind the powerful Bob Goodenow's back in order to get the cap proposal on the table.

Bill Guerin had a fit and hung up the phone on the conference call. I'm loving watching the players cave in just like the owners knew they would!!!!

fix · Post by **fix** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:06 am

Cross Traffic wrote:Suposedly several player reps went behind the powerful Bob Goodenow's back in order to get the cap proposal on the table.

And which would also help make their case that they have bargained in good faith should this end up before the NLRB.

At least one side has tried to negotiate. Betteman's going to fall on his sword in the end.

Bill Guerin had a fit and hung up the phone on the conference call. I'm loving watching the players cave in just like the owners knew they would!!!!

Maybe the reports didn't reach you but there's more than a few owners that have done the same thing to Betteman.

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:12 am

Wouldn't shock me that Ed Snider and a few other owners that can't stand him went behind his back as well.

I see Bettman and Goodenow looking for new employers after this is done....7 months of bullshit "We'll never accept a cap." :roll:

Best quote is from Barnaby:

"I'm just a little disappointed that it went this far to play poker and to have someone call your bluff."

The way it looks now, the owners had pocket aces, and the players had a 2 and 4 non suited.

fix · Post by **fix** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:17 am

Cross Traffic wrote:Wouldn't shock me that Ed Snider and a few other owners that can't stand him went behind his back as well.

I see Bettman and Goodenow looking for new employers after this is done....7 months of bullshit "We'll never accept a cap." :roll:

Funny you should mention Snider cause those reports came via an interview that was being conducted with 2 hockey insiders from Philly, one a reporter, Al Morganti and the other being Ken Hitchcock.

fix · Post by **fix** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:21 am

Smoked Meat wrote:
Otis wrote:Oh and if anyone didn't hear Chris Chelios's comments today.. they should.

I'm trying to find a written transcription, a few gems in there

You heard it too eh?

Fuck Chelios for insulting Mickey Mouse though.
Mickey's waaay more intelligent than Betteman.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:29 am

A $42.5 million cap sounds reasonable to me...it rests on the player's shoulders now. The players don't have like the owners or Bettman, they have to think about the health of the sport. Be thankful they get to make millions playing a sport that is buried in the back page of most sports sections. How many jobs can you think of where someone can make millions of dollars without anyone caring? Do it for us...there aren't many of us left and we're the only reason that sport has a chance of surviving. If they tell the loyal fans to fuck off, then they should all just move to Europe and enjoy making less money over there.

fix · Post by **fix** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:37 am

Make it $45 million plus benefits and I think it'd be fair.
As long as they also have revenue sharing and luxery taxes included in the agreement.

Even though I am against the idea of a hard cap.
So much for the notion of capitalism and a free market.

Shoalzie · Post by **Shoalzie** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 3:12 am

Otis wrote:Make it $45 million plus benefits and I think it'd be fair.
As long as they also have revenue sharing and luxery taxes included in the agreement.

Even though I am against the idea of a hard cap.
So much for the notion of capitalism and a free market.

Look at how strong the competitive balance is in the NFL and then look at how out of control the MLB is...I think the cap is the only way from keeping the likes of Detroit, Colorado, Philadelphia, Toronto and Dallas from devouring the weak. Granted, they shouldn't have gone to 30 teams in the first place but they've got to find a way to make this work with the clubs they have now since the players won't go for contraction and losing jobs.

The teams with the best management will find ways of working the cap the best and we'll still some familiar names at the top but it'll be good for Florida, Columbus and Atlanta to have shot at being a major player. When top team is tapped out on money from the cap, those extra players go to other less teams with cap room and make them stronger.

This will also hopefully help teams keep some of their own players rather than lose them to the highest bidder. The cap will cause some teams to have to give certain guys up after a point but the mass exodus of free agents from small market teams will hopefully come to an end.

I really hope this does go through...

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 3:24 am

Well well well....the union counters with a lame proposal:

By IRA PODELL, AP Sports Writer

NEW YORK - The players' association countered the NHL's final offer just hours before the season was set to be canceled, proposing a $49 million salary cap on Tuesday night.

Do they not understand what take it or leave it means?

fix · Post by **fix** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 3:41 am

Shoalzie wrote:
Otis wrote:Make it $45 million plus benefits and I think it'd be fair.
As long as they also have revenue sharing and luxery taxes included in the agreement.

Even though I am against the idea of a hard cap.
So much for the notion of capitalism and a free market.

Look at how strong the competitive balance is in the NFL and then look at how out of control the MLB is...I think the cap is the only way from keeping the likes of Detroit, Colorado, Philadelphia, Toronto and Dallas from devouring the weak. Granted, they shouldn't have gone to 30 teams in the first place but they've got to find a way to make this work with the clubs they have now since the players won't go for contraction and losing jobs.

The teams with the best management will find ways of working the cap the best and we'll still some familiar names at the top but it'll be good for Florida, Columbus and Atlanta to have shot at being a major player. When top team is tapped out on money from the cap, those extra players go to other less teams with cap room and make them stronger.

This will also hopefully help teams keep some of their own players rather than lose them to the highest bidder. The cap will cause some teams to have to give certain guys up after a point but the mass exodus of free agents from small market teams will hopefully come to an end.

I really hope this does go through...

But revenue sharing and luxery taxes essentially do the same thing.
The one league you didn't mention is the NBA where the only time a trade gets made is when it's one salary for a matching salary in return.
The NHL has always had that appeal to it where you could acquire a top player in return for top prospects or draft picks, same as MLB.
Consider what the trade deadline in the NHL would look like with a hard cap.
So much for adding that top notch player like a Blake, Coffey, Lang, Chris Chelios and Ulf Samuelsson at or near the deadline to make a run at the Cup without giving up an equally top player because of the need to match contracts in return.

fix · Post by **fix** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 3:46 am

Cross Traffic wrote:Well well well....the union counters with a lame proposal:

By IRA PODELL, AP Sports Writer

NEW YORK - The players' association countered the NHL's final offer just hours before the season was set to be canceled, proposing a $49 million salary cap on Tuesday night.

Do they not understand what take it or leave it means?

Do you not understand that they are only proposing their own final offer of take it or leave it to Betteman?

Betteman's offer was a joke to begin with. Even the talking heads up here said the same thing, it was done not to negotiate, but to raise the ire of the NHLPA who have already made huge concessions.
What the fuck has the league conceeded?
Negotiations are supposed to be a 2-way street where you agree on something in the middle.

scritti · Post by **scritti** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 3:51 am

both sides are too prideful..., what else can be done.

Viper in Vancouver · Post by **Viper in Vancouver** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 4:04 am

You can tell the NHLPA is getting desperate with that counter proposal. Otis I have to disagree with you on this one, and say that the owners offer is more than fair. The players are never going to get a better offer, so they should take this one if they're smart.

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 4:07 am

Didn't take long for the count to reject that offer.

scritti · Post by **scritti** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 4:55 am

exactly...someone's gotta do a hiri-kiri soon.

JD · Post by JD » Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:02 am

A lot of bluffing going on tonight...

But none by Bettman. He's gonna stand firm on their last offer and make the players take it.

If they don't, they'll get something a lot uglier from their perspective whenever they do solve this thing.

Goodenow HAS to know that. Doesn't he?

Cross Traffic · Post by **Cross Traffic** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 6:39 am

The count has pocket aces, the players are looking at a 2 9 unsuited..

Blitzkrieg · Post by **Blitzkrieg** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 9:30 am

Shoalzie wrote:Look at how strong the competitive balance is in the NFL

Sure, the NFL has a good system for those that choose to be competitive. The NHL has teams that blatantly do not try to be competive(Chicago). My problem with a cap system in the NHL is that I'm not convinced that the dynamics of an NHL roster are similar enough to that of an NBA or NFL roster to be succesful.

Also, the NHL isn't interested in competitive balance. At all. They're interested in money and only money.

look at how out of control the MLB is...

2 teams(Bos, NY) over the luxury tax limit doesn't seem that bad. Also, the MLB owners have been granted the legal right to collude amongst themselves to set the market for everything, salaries, ticket prices. Everything.

No other major US sport has that power.

The teams with the best management will find ways of working the cap the best and we'll still some familiar names at the top but it'll be good for Florida, Columbus and Atlanta to have shot at being a major player. When top team is tapped out on money from the cap, those extra players go to other less teams with cap room and make them stronger.

Will it? I still don't see Bill Wirtz putting together a winner.

This will also hopefully help teams keep some of their own players rather than lose them to the highest bidder. The cap will cause some teams to have to give certain guys up after a point but the mass exodus of free agents from small market teams will hopefully come to an end.

Hopefully.

Viper in Vancouver wrote:The players are never going to get a better offer, so they should take this one if they're smart.

I disagree. The players are certainly much poorer, but by this time they really don't have as much to gain by caving in. If the season were cancelled the majority of them would find work somewhere albeit at a much reduced salary. Sure they're making a lot less money, but the owners are making NO money, at least not from hockey.

Hapday · Post by **Hapday** » Wed Feb 16, 2005 2:26 pm

Otis wrote: So much for adding that top notch player like a Blake, Coffey, Lang, Chris Chelios and Ulf Samuelsson at or near the deadline to make a run at the Cup without giving up an equally top player because of the need to match contracts in return.

Wrong. Owners will leave enough romm under the cap so they can get those players if needed. You can still get a rent-a-player for a cup run. A cap won't change a thing there.

JD · Post by JD » Wed Feb 16, 2005 4:07 pm

Blitzkrieg wrote:2 teams(Bos, NY) over the luxury tax limit doesn't seem that bad.

That's only because MLB's luxury tax system is an absolute joke.

I disagree. The players are certainly much poorer, but by this time they really don't have as much to gain by caving in. If the season were cancelled the majority of them would find work somewhere albeit at a much reduced salary. Sure they're making a lot less money, but the owners are making NO money, at least not from hockey.

And the owners are losing NO money, at least not from hockey. That's a better situation than before.

As for the players, the owners took linkage to revenues away from the bargaining table as their deadline concession. In that situation, if the NHL takes some time to get its fanbase back, the players aren't on the hook for it. If the season is cancelled, you can bet your ass that linkage is going right back on the table, and you can bet your ass that league revenues will be miniscule when it returns to the ice.

The players' time is now. They'll never get a better deal.