Deadbolt
Well-known member
So...pretty much silent today. There's a conference call for the PA today to update the players on the status, but that's it. If they just let the season go, I'm going to be about as pissed as I could possibly be.
2. One thing about 2012 that is different than 2004: there's not as much of a desire in the NHL or NHLPA to blow up the season (with one caveat to come). While there are hardliners, it's nowhere near as widespread - including in the league office. The players were also more militant eight years ago. They don't like what's going on now, but they want to play.
3. That said, there is some talk Bettman will cancel the entire schedule if things don't go well this week. A month's worth of games? Yes. Garroting everything while we're still in the 2012 calendar year, without any lengthy bargaining sessions? I just don't see it. He's much more concerned about P.R. than I've ever seen him.
4. Here's the caveat mentioned in Thought 2: the commissioner is under the most pressure of his NHL tenure. You can see it on his face. The hardliners are serious about the givebacks they expect. There are a few teams who would rather cancel the season than get a bad deal. There are others who don't want a season cancelled at all. It's a delicate balancing act, and if a month does get cancelled, a lot of them will be extremely emotional.
Good sign: There appeared to be cracks in the owners' solidarity during one meeting, when one of biggest lockout hawks got into a shouting match with one of the guys who's always irresponsibly throwing money around.
Bad sign: Order was eventually restored when everyone told Craig Leipold that he was talking to himself again.
Good sign: Experts agree that the actual gap between players and owners has become so small that the league would have to be run by complete idiots to cancel the season now.
Bad sign: Everyone who says that immediately trails off, looks around awkwardly, and then mutters "So… see you next year."
Doesn't the memo say not to talk about the proposals? Not to mention the reason for this memo seems to be that the players were contacting GMs and not the other way around.Silent in terms of negotiations, but players continue to sign in Europe. No way they're accepting the current deal. I thought this was interesting from Friedman's 30 Thoughts:
First, LOL that this is Bettman at his most concerned over PR. Second, sounds like the only way Bettman can make everyone on his side happy is to get the players to sign off on this agreement (or something close to it) and soon. He must be feeling pressure from sponsors and NBC as well - NBC can't be happy that they are paying millions to broadcast hockey on the re-branded NBC Sports network and have nothing to show. Which may explain why the NHL was so desperate that, after muzzling owners all summer, it allowed owners and GMs a 48 hour window to discuss the CBA with the players directly to circumvent NHLPA leadership:
Here is the NHL’s memo to GMs, owners allowing them to talk to players about lockout proposal
Shady, Gary. Very shady.
Doesn't the memo say not to talk about the proposals? Not to mention the reason for this memo seems to be that the players were contacting GMs and not the other way around.
We understand that some of you are being contacted by one or more of your Players and that your inability to respond substantively is creating some awkwardness in your relationships
Also, in case anyone missed it last night, the NHLPA is saying they requested a meeting, and the NHL turned it down and said there was nothing to discuss. (Remember when they promised to negotiate around the clock?)
The sport we love is being held captive by five year olds.
Still saying unless the PA is willing to take their proposal with only minor tweaks, they're done dealing. Tomorrow is going to be a sad day for all of us fans.
If Bettman is fired, it should be because he had the PA on its knees in 2004 and he fucked up. Any NHL commissioner is going to have to drive a hard bargain because NHL players live in a fantasy world when it comes to their league. A few months playing in Europe, sleeping in shit hotels, traveling by bus/train/aeroflot, and miniscule stipends should be a nice dose of reality for a lot of them.This has to be the end of Bettman, right? I mean, three lockouts and he's completely lost the players. I don't suppose would be any better, but can a guy be that disliked and untrusted and keep on in that position?
I don't know what the the legal avenues are, but are these cities really going to go after what is often their arena's biggest tenant? A tenant who employs thousands and is a boon to nearby businesses when they're operating. I guess it might depend on the city/team and the lease that is in place, but some might need to tread lightly.At what point do cities start suing the NHL owners for not fulfilling their contracts? I would think that failing to have games played would result in a substantial loss of income for a city. Given that the arenas had those games scheduled and then had to plan other events around that schedule including passing on events if the scheduling didn't work out, I'd think that they would have a legitimate complaint. Obviously, that doesn't work for teams who own their arenas, but how many of those are around? Even though it is a labor issue, it is the owners locking out the players, so it is ultimately their responsibility.
It sucks for the thousands with season tickets driving to games from Nassau and Suffolk county, but I think most Isles fans would be optimistic about the move.
There's some good food in the Atlantic/Pacific area.
So I am guessing there is 0% chance (or close to it) that a deal gets done tomorrow...correct?