T1B

Posted: **Wed Jul 06, 2005 3:36 pm**

Avery can't be the only NHLPA member to think this way:

TSN - The Sports Network

7/6/2005

Los Angeles Kings forward Sean Avery says NHL players were wrong and are sorry for the lockout which cost fans an entire NHL season.

"We were brainwashed," he tells the Los Angeles Times about the decision to follow the union's advice during contract talks with the owners.

"We burned a year for nothing. We didn't win anything. We didn't prove anything. We didn't get anything. We wasted an entire season."

Avery places the blame for hte situation squarely on the shoulders of union boss Bob Goodenow, who he says "embarassed" a lot of players.

"I am furious at Bob (Goodenow)," Avery tells the newspaper. "Bob thought he was bigger than he was. Bob brainwashed players like me."

The NHLPA declined to comment on the story.

Avery claims most of the players did not know what was going on during the talks, did not know the "real story".

"We underestimated how rich the owners were," he said. "Nobody thought they would be willing to burn a season."

"They won. They beat us."
Yeah, nobody saw that coming. :roll: :roll:

Avery says he understands the fans negative reaction towards the players.

"The saddest thing that happened to me during the lockout was the two or three times that fans asked me what was going on," he said. "I wished I could have apologized to them then. I apologize to them now."

"We owe the fans everything, we need to get them back, we need to cross our fingers that they will come back," he said.

Avery is the latest player to come out and criticize the union's position during the lockout in the last week. Detroit Red Wings goaltender Manny Legace, a union representative, called the past year "a farce" and that they wasted a lot of money for nothing.

Avery retracts statement in 5...4...3...

Posted: **Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:02 pm**

Well, if you've been paying attention, Hap, you'd have noticed that these types of quotes are coming out all over the place the last month or so. And no retractions.

The NHLPA goon squad seems to have been laid to rest. No more threats to your family if you go against the grain.

I think the PA is firmly aware of their defeat, and would prefer to just lay low and get the deal done so the entire hockey world can just move on.

Posted: **Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:40 pm**

Rack Avery for speaking up, especially when he has an executive committee member on the Kings in Trent Klatt.

Posted: **Wed Jul 06, 2005 9:47 pm**

Manny Legace ripped the union also. With reports out there about a deal potentially being struck this week, what's the point of bitching now? The deal is getting done, there's light at the end of the tunnel, the game will return...let's work on the healing process between fans and the league instead of players worrying about how much money they lost. They know full well what they were doing so don't cry to us about losing a season's worth of pay. Hammer out this deal and work towards the future...the game will need a lot more help than it has ever needed before.

Posted: **Wed Jul 06, 2005 11:30 pm**

I think it is the players trying to distance themselves from the owners 'we told you so.....we were losing money, but you guys refused to belive us'. The players look completely at fault. They wrecked a whole season because they were greedy. Slice it, dice it, wrap it baloney it still comes out the same.

Kudos to the owners. It isn't their fault at all.

Posted: **Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:15 am**

T REX wrote:Kudos to the owners. It isn't their fault at all.

They aren't all innocent. I'll admit the even our owner in Detroit was part of the overpaying of players. The Wings have plenty money and they weren't afraid to spend it. Who in their right mind would spend $5 million on a broken down Chris Chelios? The Wings will have play on the same plane as Nashville, Minnesota, Pittsburgh and Edmonton where making smart moves will be rewarded instead of just opening the wallet to make a quick fix. Hopefully players will realize that they can't make the same amount of money as basketball, baseball and football players because the NHL just isn't on the same level as them. Through this, I hope we see more responsible money and player management and it will make the NHL stronger from its top team to its lowest team.

Posted: **Thu Jul 07, 2005 2:23 am**

Well, I think it is more about supply and demand. The owners were supplying the money until it dried up. The players wanted status quo without taking any risk at all(by not having salaries directly tied to revenues). The owners may not be all innocent but in any business you try to make a profit not scrape by just to stay solvent. The funniest is when I hear 'they wouldn't pay them that much if they didn't have the money'. Many times a business will invest in hopes of a return on that investment......sometimes it never happens. No TV deals. This is just like any other correction in a free market. The players could have went along willingly to help their sport. Instead they acted like ignorant children.

Now the NHL will have a short and long term business plan/model. Something it did not have before. Sorry, but employees are NOT going to dictate the terms of their employment.....ever.

Posted: **Thu Jul 07, 2005 4:23 am**

http://www.cbc.ca/story/sports/national ... 50705.html

Apparently Goodenow has already been kissed good-bye. He hasn't been at the negotiating table for over a month!!

Looks like the completion of the downfall of Bob Goodenow is down to a mere formality.

Don't let the door hit yer ass on the way out, Bobby!!

Posted: **Thu Jul 07, 2005 5:10 am**

The players are tired of his and the executive committee's act. They need new leadership, Goodenow and the executive committee (Linden,Boughner, Damphousse, Alfredsson, Guerin, Klatt and Irbe), should be fired. Arturs Irbe hasn't been in the league in 2 years, why is he on the committee? Those are all highly paid players, how can they relate to the rank and file?

Posted: **Sun Jul 10, 2005 5:25 am**

Now Legace's comments:

DETROIT (AP) -- Detroit Red Wings goalie Manny Legace criticized players' union head Bob Goodenow on Saturday for failing to reach a labor deal that could have saved the canceled 2004-05 season.

``We lost a season for no reason,'' Legace told The Associated Press. ``We should've crumbled last September when the owners wanted a salary cap.''

Despite at least one report indicating the NHL's labor situation is essentially resolved, the league and the players' association deny that is true.

The Los Angeles Times, citing anonymous sources close to the negotiations, said Thursday the agreement would feature a hard salary cap linked to 54 percent of league revenue, a 24 percent rollback of existing contracts and qualifying offers.

The salary cap would be $37 million and wouldn't include medical and dental benefits and pension payments, the newspaper reported.

``They're not going to announce anything until it's 100-percent finished and I'm sure they're not going to do it before the All-Star game,'' said Legace, referring to baseball's All-Star game Tuesday night in Detroit. ``I'm hearing it's all but done and the lawyers have been looking over it, and that it could take 14 to 20 days.''

Legace said Goodenow did a great job negotiating for the players in 1994, but the NHLPA executive director failed them during the current negotiations.

``It makes no sense what we ended up doing,'' Legace said. ``For years, Bob was telling us, 'No cap. Owners aren't telling us the truth about their books.' Then out of nowhere, he gives the owners a 24-percent rollback and it looked like we were panicking.

``Then after saying we wouldn't even consider a salary cap, he backed down on that at the last minute just before the lockout. It was too late, and now we're taking a worse deal.''

Legace said when he was a players' representative for the Red Wings during the 2003-04 season, he publicly said the union should accept a salary cap.

``Bob came to one of our games and screamed at me in our dressing room after I said that,'' Legace said. ``He freaked out on me. He thought I was showing a sign of weakness.''

NHLPA spokesman Jonathan Weatherdon said the union declined to respond to Legace's comments.

Commissioner Gary Bettman canceled the season Feb. 16 because of the lockout, which started Sept. 16. The NHL became the first major pro sports league in North America to lose an entire season to a labor dispute.

Posted: **Sun Jul 10, 2005 5:31 am**

It is sad that the players held onto the assumption that the owners were lying. They weren't. I guess when the rug was pulled out from under they caved. That was their big contention. Once that was proved, they had nothing to hold onto and looked like the greedy bunch they are. Oops.

Posted: **Mon Jul 11, 2005 5:01 pm**

I saw that story on Manny this weekend.

I love Manny. He's fresh. When is it Manny's turn? :?

Posted: **Mon Jul 11, 2005 9:27 pm**

JD wrote:http://www.cbc.ca/story/sports/national ... 50705.html

Apparently Goodenow has already been kissed good-bye.

And there was much rejoicing.

Posted: **Mon Jul 11, 2005 10:56 pm**

JD wrote:http://www.cbc.ca/story/sports/national ... 50705.html

Apparently Goodenow has already been kissed good-bye. He hasn't been at the negotiating table for over a month!!

Looks like the completion of the downfall of Bob Goodenow is down to a mere formality.

Don't let the door hit yer ass on the way out, Bobby!!

Was it quite by accident that you conveniently forgot to mention that Betteman hasn't been at the negotiating table for over a month too?

Can we then use your logic to safely say that, "Apparently Betteman has already been kissed good-bye. He hasn't been at the negotitating table for over a month!!"

From your article....

According to sources inside the talks, Bob Goodenow, the head of the players' union, and Gary Bettman, the NHL commissioner, have been absent from the main collective bargaining talks for the last month.

Don't let the door hit yer ass on the way out, Gary!!

Posted: **Tue Jul 12, 2005 1:20 pm**

Otis wrote:
Don't let the door hit yer ass on the way out, Gary!!

Psssssssssst. Otis. His side has just won the most lop-sided victory in professional sports CBA history. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Gary to leave.

Posted: **Tue Jul 12, 2005 2:08 pm**

Hapday wrote:
Otis wrote:
Don't let the door hit yer ass on the way out, Gary!!
Psssssssssst. Otis. His side has just won the most lop-sided victory in professional sports CBA history. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Gary to leave.

Pyrrhic victory \PIR-ik\, noun:
A victory achieved at great or excessive cost; a ruinous victory.

Technically it was a victory for the British, who attacked the patriot fortifications -- but a Pyrrhic victory if ever there was: out of 2,200 British soldiers 1,034 were killed or wounded, including one in nine of all the officers the British lost in the whole war.
--Geoffrey Wheatcroft, "A Revolutionary Itinerary," The Atlantic, April 2001

Ferguson argued that British involvement in World War I was unnecessary, far too costly in lives and money for any advantage gained, and a Pyrrhic victory that in many ways contributed to the end of the Empire.
--David Harsanyi, "The Old Order," National Review, May 5, 2003

In short, the Hong Kong government might have won this particular battle against the speculators, just as the Malaysians reckon they have done. But with both administrations' credibility hugely damaged as a result, these are Pyrrhic victories that they may come to rue.
--"Market intervention: Fashionable," The Economist, September 5, 1998

Posted: **Tue Jul 12, 2005 4:03 pm**

A valuable vocabulary lesson if there ever was one.

Rack Bsmack.

Posted: **Sat Jul 16, 2005 4:28 pm**

Hapday wrote:
Otis wrote:
Don't let the door hit yer ass on the way out, Gary!!

Psssssssssst. Otis. His side has just won the most lop-sided victory in professional sports CBA history. I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for Gary to leave.

Not so fast there Hap...

Mike Ulmer - Sun Newspapers

Today's truth is yesterday's heresy, with a little breathing time added in.

It was 11 years ago that Bob Goodenow was being roasted for negotiating a one-sided CBA that gave the owners just about everything they could imagine. Now, after a 301-day lockout, many of the same observers, already proven incorrect, are saying the same thing.

There are a handful of popular beliefs swirling around the soon-to-be ratified deal. I called around to some of my favourite contrarians, inside and around the game, to gauge whether the latest slew of unassailable truths was just that.

Unassailable truth No. 1: This is a terrific victory for the owners.

Bottom line: It was a reasonable correction of the market.

"I think you're overstating the supposed drubbing the players took," one general manager said.

Players making the league minimum will see substantial wage increases thanks to a new bottom of $450,000 US. Thirty million, a rough midway point between the upper and lower cap, divided by 20 players means an average salary of $1.5 million, only $300,000 removed from the untenable days that led to the lockout.

Liberalized free agency means stars such as Rick Nash and Sidney Crosby will be unrestricted free agents when they are 25 instead of 31. The deal is unpalatable only if you take Goodenow and the players at their word that they would not accept a salary cap. What matters is how much money you keep and I'm having a hard time seeing where the players were steamrolled. Especially when you consider...

Unassailable truth No. 2: Players who are bought out are taking a hit.

Bottom line: Puh-lease.

"Some hit" an agent said when asked about the possibility of Derian Hatcher being bought out so the Detroit Red Wings could keep Steve Yzerman and Nik Lidstrom in the fold. "He will end up making $16 million for one season, plus whatever he signs for this year."

Same deal for Owen Nolan, who would still garner about the $3.5 million of the $5.6 million left on his contract with the Maple Leafs. Unless you are a player with serious injury issues -- Alexander Mogilny and his bad hip come to mind -- the buyout means you can double dip. Plus, since the buyout money does not go against cap, it amounts to a complete windfall for the players.

Unassailable truth No. 3: There will be a new level playing field for all NHL teams.

Bottom line: Don't believe it.

"I'm guessing about 10 teams, maybe fewer, will spend up to the cap," a GM said.

In other words, the big-market teams such as Philadelphia, Toronto and New York, will still have an edge over the Nashvilles and Edmontons. Off-ice marketing opportunities mean the larger, well-established markets retain an advantage. Plus, teams with deeper pockets can compound that advantage by offering longer term contracts than smaller clubs working on a smaller margin.

Unassailable truth No. 4: The fewest players you have under contract, the better off you are.

Bottom line: Maybe not.

Teams will have 10 days after the ratification of the deal, expected next week, to sign their protected players. Then comes the free-agency sweepstakes some time after the July 30 draft. That doesn't leave a lot of time for cool thinking

"Good luck signing 15 players in just a couple of weeks," a GM said.

SMARTER MONEY

Instead, the smarter money may have been spent by Philadelphia Flyers GM Bob Clarke, who inked many of his most valuable players just before the lockout and saw a 24% windfall knock down those salaries further.

Unassailable truth No. 5: The game will take years to recover and players will never see their escrow money.

Bottom line: Hold on.

"Well," the agent said, "since Bob Goodenow endorsed the agreement, you have to believe he liked what he found when he and the league went over previously undisclosed income."

In other words, revenues, such as luxury box fees and the like, discovered and shared by the players and now wrapped into their 54% share of league revenues will help cushion the blow. Does anyone really think people will stop coming to hockey games in the league's top 10 markets? People aren't going to the games in the bottom 10 anyway, so maybe the league's projected revenue of $1.8 billion isn't so crazy after all.

Posted: **Mon Jul 18, 2005 1:41 pm**

Nice spin job on Ulmer.

Is he Al Strachan's son?

Swing and a miss, Otis.

Posted: **Tue Jul 19, 2005 2:36 am**

Hapday wrote:Nice spin job on Ulmer.

Is he Al Strachan's son?

Swing and a miss, Otis.

:roll:

My mistake... I forgot logic escapes you.

Carry on.

Posted: **Tue Jul 19, 2005 1:05 pm**

Otis wrote:
Hapday wrote:Nice spin job on Ulmer.

Is he Al Strachan's son?

Swing and a miss, Otis.
:roll:

My mistake... I forgot logic escapes you.

Carry on.

Still in denial at the owner's victory and the NHLPA beat down I see. No surprise there.

Posted: **Thu Jul 21, 2005 12:03 am**

Interesting well written article.

Link To Article

Fight ends badly for Goodenow

By ANDY BERNSTEIN
Staff writer
Published July 18, 2005

In military terms, it was the Persian Gulf War — a long standoff followed by a complete and overwhelming victory by one side.

The only question left is whether there’ll be regime change.

The NHL and NHLPA did not reveal details of the new six-year collective-bargaining agreement they announced last week, holding off on any comment until the deal is ratified. But it was no secret the league got virtually everything it sought — a salary cap, salary rollback, limits on entry-level salaries and arbitration and, most important, a direct link between revenue and total player compensation set at 54 percent.

The 600-page agreement is a soaring victory for NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman and an equally bitter defeat for NHLPA Executive Director Bob Goodenow.

“It’s a deal that, until recently, the players never anticipated they’d be playing under,” said Bob Murray, the agent for Bill Guerin, a member of the NHLPA executive committee. “I think at some point the owners realized the players were willing to accept a cap and the players might not be prepared, as a group, to sit out another six months or a year. At that point, the leverage went to the owners.”

Most observers believe the same deal could have been made a year ago had union leadership recognized that deep-pocketed owners would hold out far longer than players, something many had predicted from the beginning.

Now, the more than $1 billion in salaries that players gave up this year will be gone forever, and so might Goodenow.

The pivotal moment of the epic labor battle came in mid-May, when Goodenow was essentially overruled by the NHLPA player executive committee and the union’s negotiating stance took a sharp and conciliatory turn.

There is no known organized effort to oust Goodenow. He has a six-year contract signed in late 2001 that reportedly pays him more than $2.5 million a year. But the turn of events has left his credibility in shambles, according to many player agents and hockey insiders. He had vowed never to accept a salary cap and said repeatedly that players wanted their salaries to be determined by the “marketplace,” not by a formula linked to revenue. His critics say he never had an endgame and never really had a chance.

“It’s all on Bob’s watch,” said an agent who spoke on the condition of anonymity. “It’s the biggest, most dramatic strategic mistake in the history of sports, resulting in the most lopsided loss in the history of sports.”

The agent, who echoed the sentiments of several others interviewed for this story who did not want to be named, said Goodenow “failed to understand the nature of the leverage needed to win the battle.”

Goodenow had won the players’ trust and loyalty by helping triple their average salaries over the last 10 years. That trust lasted exactly one full unplayed season. Players were not willing to sit out a year and a half to two years, the length of time Goodenow publicly told them to prepare for before the lockout started.

Thinking players could outlast well-heeled and determined owners was Goodenow’s most significant miscalculation, many observers say.

“He went into war unarmed and got killed,” the agent said. “It was nuclear weapons versus pop guns.”

The “Get Goodenow” sentiment is by no means universal among players and agents. Some pin the outcome not on the union boss but on a handful of star players, such as Jeremy Roenick and Jarome Iginla, who publicly broke ranks, or the many players who privately lobbied the NHLPA executive committee to get a deal at any cost.

Players had ample opportunity to tell Goodenow they couldn’t hold out the two years he warned of, and none ever did, his supporters say.

Regardless of where the blame lies, though, there is widespread agreement that the tipping point came when players on the executive committee took control of the negotiations. The shift evolved over a three-month period starting when the season was canceled in February, and then fully materialized in May, according to multiple sources.

According to a story related by several agents, there was a day in May when Goodenow wanted to break off a bargaining session, and NHLPA President Trevor Linden, a player whose role and influence increased throughout the lockout, demanded that Goodenow and the negotiating team stay.

That moment, perhaps more than any other, marked a turn of events that led the sides down a slow but steady path toward resolution.

At one point, in a caucus among the executive committee and the union leadership, a vote was taken. Everyone was asked if he believed the players could get a better deal by waiting until the following winter. Of the eight people in the room, six said the deal would not get any better. Only Goodenow and Artus Irbe, a veteran player on the verge of retirement, voted to wait.

League officials had long accused Goodenow of intentionally standing in the way of progress.

In April, it had appeared a middle ground might be found as the union suggested a system that would put a floor and a ceiling on team payrolls linked to revenue, but the total amount paid out to players would not be based on any revenue formula. This sort of “hybrid” deal represented the philosophical compromise that would save face for both sides, and the league said the concept seemed workable.

But just when compromise appeared to be in reach, the union was slow to return to the table, prompting accusations from the league that Goodenow was intentionally stalling. Then when talks finally did resume, Boston Bruins owner Jeremy Jacobs ended a session with a remark that any deal ultimately would have to keep salaries at 54 percent of revenue. Goodenow tried to turn that into a rallying cry, posting it on the players-only Web site and pointing to it as evidence that the league was unwilling to bend.

This, say many hockey insiders, was typical Goodenow, always looking for ways to drive a wedge between the players and management and keeping players unified in the process. But as the days went on, he was starting to lose his grip on the union membership.

Players on the executive committee were getting barraged by calls from the rank-and-file, pleading with them to resolve the lockout in any way possible. Many players’ wives — a surprisingly influential group, according to some agents — had little sympathy for the union’s philosophical arguments against a salary cap or a linkage-based deal, and just wanted their husbands to get back to work.

“A large portion of the executive committee felt they had a mandate to get a deal done and, within that framework, get the best deal done they possibly could,” said Murray, whose client Guerin was considered one of the more moderate members of the executive committee.

“In the past, things had pretty much been dictated by Goodenow,” said another agent. “There came a point where [players] started asking questions. I think when ... there was no satisfactory answers from Goodenow, they decided they were going to do things in a certain way.”

Once the balance of power shifted, things started moving quickly, sources say. NHLPA senior director Ted Saskin and director of business affairs Mike Gartner took over the negotiations, and on May 18 and 19 the sides were talking about a deal that would link total payroll to total revenue.

On June 3, according to sources, the first written framework was signed.

The finger-pointing raises the natural question of why the players didn’t start asking more questions of Goodenow earlier in the process.

Goodenow’s critics say it was his heavy-handed tactics and intimidation that led people to stay silent. But his supporters say it’s absurd to blame Goodenow for players ignoring his advice and failing to persevere.

“I know there’s been speculation about what could have been accomplished in February or [last] October,” said agent Steve Mountain, who represents several NHL veterans. “To me, both sides made it clear they were prepared to sit this out for a year. I think the owners were unified and I think the players probably needed to either get it done earlier or be more patient.”

As for Goodenow’s future, he said players should not be short-sighted.

“Bob Goodenow has done a terrific job for the union,” Mountain said. “He’s made the players a lot of money. I think his entire body of work has to be considered.”

Some agents said the league forced Goodenow and the players into taking a combative stance because the league never engaged in any language of compromise, and Goodenow responded in kind.

“You’re dealing with a party on the other side that didn’t care if the season happened or didn’t happen,” said agent Todd Diamond, whose agency represents several of the league’s top international players.

Goodenow and the NHLPA offered many concessions, most notably the 24 percent salary rollback. He conceded that the economics of the game needed to be adjusted but said the best way was through payroll taxes and revenue sharing, not a salary cap.

A recent published report about the success of MLB under its new payroll tax and revenue-sharing based deal — earning $104 million last season compared to a $418 million loss in 2002 — may lend some credence to the NHLPA’s position that a salary cap was unnecessary.

The players, though, abandoned that position, and Goodenow.

“Hockey players will fight for anything as a team,” said Neil Smith, former general manager of the New York Rangers. “They were convinced they could win on this thing and it wouldn’t go as far as it went. I think they got very bad advice.”

Posted: **Thu Jul 21, 2005 8:10 am**

At one point, in a caucus among the executive committee and the union leadership, a vote was taken. Everyone was asked if he believed the players could get a better deal by waiting until the following winter. Of the eight people in the room, six said the deal would not get any better. Only Goodenow and Arturs Irbe, a veteran player on the verge of retirement, voted to wait.

Figures Idiot Bob and Arturs "I haven't played in the NHL in 2 years" Irbe would be the ones thinking it would get better....LOL

Posted: **Thu Jul 21, 2005 1:00 pm**

I'll file that article under 'no shit, Sherlock.'

The only thing the players won, is that they will now become a free agent at a younger age and be able to dictate where they want to play.

It's only a minor victory though, because the NHL still wins. Stupid GM's won't be able to grossly overpay these free agents like they have in the past, and due to salary restrictions, free agents will get paid on a 'what can you do for me now' basis instead of paying players for past achievements.

T1B

Kiss Goodenow goodbye

Kiss Goodenow goodbye