2012 CBA Negotiations Thread

[bustaheims]

If I'm the owner of the Rangers/Leafs I have a very real financial reason for wanting the NHL to be being played.

I'm not sure about the financial situation of Mr Dolan, but, I'm pretty certain that even the Leafs' hefty revenues pale in comparison to what Bell and Rogers take in on a monthly basis. The Leafs may have the largest revenues in the league, but they also have the wealthiest ownership group in the league. The minority partners on the MLSE board may have significant financial interest in getting the team back on the ice, but, that money is a drop in the bucket for the guys who own the overwhelming majority of the organization. The money isn't going to be a big deal to them.

 

[Kin]

I'm not sure about the financial situation of Mr Dolan, but, I'm pretty certain that even the Leafs' hefty revenues pale in comparison to what Bell and Rogers take in on a monthly basis. The Leafs may have the largest revenues in the league, but they also have the wealthiest ownership group in the league. The minority partners on the MLSE board may have significant financial interest in getting the team back on the ice, but, that money is a drop in the bucket for the guys who own the overwhelming majority of the organization. The money isn't going to be a big deal to them.

I'm afraid you sort of stumbled into the trap of my phrasing there. Regardless of the fact that both the Leafs and Rangers are profitable entities in their own right both the Leafs and the Rangers ownership also own the cable networks that broadcast a large percentage of the team's games so their financial reason for wanting the NHL to be playing isn't only reflected in the Leafs/Rangers revenues but also in those of networks like Sportsnet, TSN and MSG.

But even ignoring that, or if you want to argue that the Leafs/Rangers are relatively small potatoes for their relative owners both as individual entities and as media properties, then they just fit back neatly into the other category I mentioned of owners for whom the difference between the owners position and the players position is largely irrelevant to them financially.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

This is a good read from the almost always great Grantland:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8432442/a-guide-nhl-six-people-meet-lockout-hell

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

This is a good read from the almost always great Grantland:

http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/8432442/a-guide-nhl-six-people-meet-lockout-hell

Thanks, that was a good read.

From the above, this is sorta where I am:

Your mileage may vary, but my own solution is just to take the whole thing in, in its messy and horrible glory, like the moment when you're on a super-delayed airplane and you just give up and secretly enjoy the spectacle of everyone freaking out around you. Bask in what are sure to be monumental moments of idiocy and/or awkwardness. Revel in everyone's tendencies to blow each and every development, good or bad, completely out of proportion.

 

[Bonsixx]

A hell of a quote from Bill Daly:

"In retrospect, I look back at it, and while we were all hopeful during the course of the summer that there was plenty of time to get a deal done, maybe the fault lies in the fact that we didn't start negotiations until June 29.

Uh, gee, ya think?!

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/story/2012/10/11/sp-nhl-lockout-talks-new-york-nhlpa-gary-bettman-donald-fehr-steve-fehr-bill-daly.html

 

[Deebo]

I work in the same building as the NHLPA office, whenever I see somebody push that button in the elevator, I want to punch that guy in the face.

 

[GhostofPotvin29]

I think with what the NHL wants to do, if I understand it correctly, they'll just be repeating this all over again a few more years down the road.

 

[Bullfrog]

But at that time they'll definitely start negotiating earlier.  :-X

 

[WhatIfGodWasALeaf]

A hell of a quote from Bill Daly:

"In retrospect, I look back at it, and while we were all hopeful during the course of the summer that there was plenty of time to get a deal done, maybe the fault lies in the fact that we didn't start negotiations until June 29.

Uh, gee, ya think?!

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/story/2012/10/11/sp-nhl-lockout-talks-new-york-nhlpa-gary-bettman-donald-fehr-steve-fehr-bill-daly.html

This is basically what Lupul said in the opinion piece he wrote recently, lockout is the owners and Bettman's preferred negotiating method.

Disgusting.

 

[lamajama]

Both sides are idiots. Unfortunately if the owners decide to hold on they can outlast the players.

Then after this CBA and 50/50, they'll demand to go down to 45/55 etc etc.

It'll never stop as long as Jeremy Jacobs, Ed Snider - who are among the
worst (certainly Ed Snider) are anywhere near the game.

Until it's settled, I'd love the media to just ignore it.

I firmly believe that this time  the NHL will face a backlash in terms
of revenue - and certainly any future sponsor deals will have a no-play we do-not-pay clause in their agreements. That alone might get the league's head out of their butts in the future.

 

[Derk]

A hell of a quote from Bill Daly:

"In retrospect, I look back at it, and while we were all hopeful during the course of the summer that there was plenty of time to get a deal done, maybe the fault lies in the fact that we didn't start negotiations until June 29.

Uh, gee, ya think?!

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/story/2012/10/11/sp-nhl-lockout-talks-new-york-nhlpa-gary-bettman-donald-fehr-steve-fehr-bill-daly.html

What was missing from that quote that has usually been there was "because the players wouldn't come to the table sooner".

 

[Frank E]

A hell of a quote from Bill Daly:

"In retrospect, I look back at it, and while we were all hopeful during the course of the summer that there was plenty of time to get a deal done, maybe the fault lies in the fact that we didn't start negotiations until June 29.

Uh, gee, ya think?!

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/story/2012/10/11/sp-nhl-lockout-talks-new-york-nhlpa-gary-bettman-donald-fehr-steve-fehr-bill-daly.html

What was missing from that quote that has usually been there was "because the players wouldn't come to the table sooner".

Yeah, that quote is misleading...here is the entire quote from TSN:

"In retrospect, I look back at it, and while we were all hopeful during the course of the summer that there was plenty of time to get a deal done, maybe the fault lies in the fact that we didn't start negotiations until June 29. That goes back to the level of urgency maybe with the players' association and not being prepared to have those discussions."



http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=407184

 

[Rebel_1812]

Damien Cox ‏@DamoSpin
Pretty sure NHL owners would be willing to swap salary cap for end to guaranteed contracts. In a heartbeat.

That's interesting. How would this help smaller markets though?

LOL.  Because "helping the smaller markets" is just the sales pitch to convince the poor to get poorer while the rich get richer.  The same sort of thing is happening in europe with the sales pitch of "austerity measures" and "we've had it too good for too long".

 

[Kin]

A hell of a quote from Bill Daly:

"In retrospect, I look back at it, and while we were all hopeful during the course of the summer that there was plenty of time to get a deal done, maybe the fault lies in the fact that we didn't start negotiations until June 29.

Uh, gee, ya think?!

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/story/2012/10/11/sp-nhl-lockout-talks-new-york-nhlpa-gary-bettman-donald-fehr-steve-fehr-bill-daly.html

Honestly, I don't think so. The two sides could negotiate 24 hours a day but if there's not a material change in the positions of their relative constituencies then there's no reason to think that there would have been a resolution via those negotiations. It's easy to take a hardline stance when you're not missing paychecks.

 

[Frank E]

A hell of a quote from Bill Daly:

"In retrospect, I look back at it, and while we were all hopeful during the course of the summer that there was plenty of time to get a deal done, maybe the fault lies in the fact that we didn't start negotiations until June 29.

Uh, gee, ya think?!

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/story/2012/10/11/sp-nhl-lockout-talks-new-york-nhlpa-gary-bettman-donald-fehr-steve-fehr-bill-daly.html

Honestly, I don't think so. The two sides could negotiate 24 hours a day but if there's not a material change in the positions of their relative constituencies then there's no reason to think that there would have been a resolution via those negotiations. It's easy to take a hardline stance when you're not missing paychecks.

That is exactly why there is a lockout. 

It's very easy to take a hard stance when it's just business as usual.

 

[jdh1]

Both sides are idiots. Unfortunately if the owners decide to hold on they can outlast the players.

Then after this CBA and 50/50, they'll demand to go down to 45/55 etc etc.

It'll never stop as long as Jeremy Jacobs, Ed Snider - who are among the
worst (certainly Ed Snider) are anywhere near the game.

Until it's settled, I'd love the media to just ignore it.

I firmly believe that this time  the NHL will face a backlash in terms
of revenue - and certainly any future sponsor deals will have a no-play we do-not-pay clause in their agreements. That alone might get the league's head out of their butts in the future.

I think if the teams could get a deal where almost everyone is making money...They would not keep pushing the players every cba to except less.

That means the teams have to revenue share more and the players taking less,untill it's fair for everyone.Outside of that,there might have to be a contraction of teams.

 

[Kin]

That is exactly why there is a lockout.

Well, I'd argue that the reason that there is a lockout, if it can be boiled down to any one reason, is that the NBA and NFL negotiations proved pretty emphatically that regardless of the financial circumstances of a dispute a lockout is a pretty good negotiating tactic on the part of a league.

 

[Bonsixx]

A hell of a quote from Bill Daly:

"In retrospect, I look back at it, and while we were all hopeful during the course of the summer that there was plenty of time to get a deal done, maybe the fault lies in the fact that we didn't start negotiations until June 29.

Uh, gee, ya think?!

http://www.cbc.ca/sports/hockey/nhl/story/2012/10/11/sp-nhl-lockout-talks-new-york-nhlpa-gary-bettman-donald-fehr-steve-fehr-bill-daly.html

Honestly, I don't think so. The two sides could negotiate 24 hours a day but if there's not a material change in the positions of their relative constituencies then there's no reason to think that there would have been a resolution via those negotiations. It's easy to take a hardline stance when you're not missing paychecks.

Maybe, but it might help the PR spin a little more if they made any attempt to look like they wanted to avoid a lockout, even if it was inevitable.

Not that it matters. As soon as the NHL is back, so are the fans. It's almost enough to drive me nuts, if I wasn't going to be one of those fans that are back immediately.

 

[Hampreacher]

Stop the spin and get down and negotiate. Both present new offers in which they make serious concessions from their previous proposal. Not just playing the shell game as the Owners have.

 

[Kin]

Maybe, but it might help the PR spin a little more if they made any attempt to look like they wanted to avoid a lockout, even if it was inevitable.

So they should have gone through with sham negotiations with both parties entrenched in their positions for the sake of future PR spin? I get the frustration but the sad reality is that the lockout was almost certainly coming regardless. If they'd spent more time staring across the room at each other people would probably just be more angry at them for an unwillingness to move off their positions.