If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Boston Herald)   After several days of optimistic talks, the latest attempt to end the NHL lockout was shot down ... not in person during the meeting, but over farking voicemail. Bettman and Fehr REALLY hate hockey fans, don't they?   (bostonherald.com) divider line 54
    More: Followup, NHL, Gary Bettman, NHL lockout, National Hockey League Players' Association, Donald Fehr, NHLPA, mediator variable, Players Association  
•       •       •

753 clicks; posted to Sports » on 08 Dec 2012 at 8:20 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



54 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-08 05:40:41 PM  
Bettman is the owners' lapdog just like any other major league commissioner, and any players' union that hires Donald Fehr is committing institutional suicide. What, they didn't learn anything from the MLB experience in 1994? They knew that the season was dead the moment they got him signed up.
 
2012-12-08 06:11:11 PM  
Fehr is the same asswit that caused the 1994 baseball world series to be cancelled.

He is a cancer. If he is involved in your sport, as a fan you lose no matter what.
 
2012-12-08 06:47:54 PM  
We might as well face it. There;s just not going to be an NHL season this year.
 
2012-12-08 08:23:33 PM  

browneye: We might as well face it. There;s just not going to be an NHL season this year.


It will be interesting to see the consequences of another lost season. Toronto, Montreal, NYC won't notice; Florida, Columbus, and Nashville may not survive.
 
2012-12-08 08:34:01 PM  

browneye: We might as well face it. There;s just not going to be an NHL season this year.


I'll continue to get my hockey fix elsewhere. NHL ain't the only game in town. Die Bettman, die! 

/"the Bettman, the", in German
 
2012-12-08 08:41:16 PM  
If the NHL loses another full season with Bettman as commissioner and they keep him on, the league is ruined.
 
2012-12-08 08:42:57 PM  
Fire Bettman, just ax him...literally.
 
2012-12-08 08:54:16 PM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Bettman is the owners' lapdog just like any other major league commissioner, and any players' union that hires Donald Fehr is committing institutional suicide. What, they didn't learn anything from the MLB experience in 1994? They knew that the season was dead the moment they got him signed up.


Generation_D: Fehr is the same asswit that caused the 1994 baseball world series to be cancelled.

He is a cancer. If he is involved in your sport, as a fan you lose no matter what.


Fehr wasn't around the last time. Remember?
 
2012-12-08 08:59:09 PM  
Go fu(k your ass with a hot poker, Bettman
 
2012-12-08 09:10:03 PM  

MFAWG: Fehr wasn't around the last time. Remember?


He, however, has done it in two sports. He's the Bo Jackson or Deion Sanders of league destruction.
 
2012-12-08 09:17:19 PM  

Pope Larry II: It will be interesting to see the consequences of another lost season. Toronto, Montreal, NYC won't notice; Florida, Columbus, and Nashville may not survive.


Which is actually good for the NHL, unfortunately (for those markets).
 
2012-12-08 09:29:41 PM  
I don't know how every keeps sand bagging Fehr.

I can understand the anger about 1994 world series, but He's been completely open with the players during all of the negotiations and he's making sure they don't get screwed.

As several players have stated, he's doing exactly as they want. And, I believe he wasn't even the one who helped broker the current offer they put out. He just presented it.

The league are the ones who got pissy and decided to take their ball and go home.

fark Betteman and fark that douche Boston Owner.
 
2012-12-08 09:42:26 PM  
As a Boston fan, I have wanted Jeremy Jacobs to sell the team for many years. There I said it. Most of Boston hates the guy. Buffalo should take him back, immediately.
 
2012-12-08 09:43:48 PM  

Dougie AXP: fark Betteman and fark that douche Boston Owner.


If it were up to Jeremy Jacobs, 98% of a player's salary would be rolled into an escrow account that he, and only he, would cherry-pick a small allotment back to the player upon the end of the season before pocketing himself. Zdeno Chara might get a HEFTY 5% of it back if he's willing to help Jacobs out around his house by grabbing things out of the top cupboard shelves in his kitchen.
 
2012-12-08 09:54:01 PM  

a4dzac: Pope Larry II: It will be interesting to see the consequences of another lost season. Toronto, Montreal, NYC won't notice; Florida, Columbus, and Nashville may not survive.

Which is actually good for the NHL, unfortunately (for those markets).


Well, it's good in that they don't have to share the money. It's bad in that it damages the value of the national TV contract in America if the NHL becomes a regional league, and it damages the value of sponsorships.

But it's also good because it makes NHL teams more of a scarcity, and possibly more valuable.
 
2012-12-08 09:54:29 PM  
The owners really come off as petty here. Or like they were hoping to manipulate the players into something.

At any rate, here's my advice:

NHLPA, take the 10-year CBA. The last one worked out pretty good for you. 5 years until this sh*t rolls around again? As a fan, screw that. Not to mention, you may get bled again that much quicker.

League, drop the contract-length demands, or at least go higher. In the end, it is you who signs the damn things. If you've got a problem with 15 year contracts, order your GMs not to offer them. If some teams want to risk it, so be it. Stick to the proposed penalties where they're are on the hook for the life of the thing.
 
2012-12-08 09:58:20 PM  

swahnhennessy: League, drop the contract-length demands, or at least go higher.


Why? The NBA has 'em and people actually watch the NBA. Plus, if you order everyone not to do long contracts,then the NHLPA sues you over collusion.

/there's no reason for anything longer than a 5-year contract
 
2012-12-08 10:07:39 PM  
good riddance. we'll see you next fall
 
2012-12-08 10:42:18 PM  

IAmRight: swahnhennessy: League, drop the contract-length demands, or at least go higher.

Why? The NBA has 'em and people actually watch the NBA. Plus, if you order everyone not to do long contracts,then the NHLPA sues you over collusion.

/there's no reason for anything longer than a 5-year contract


Most likely with the 5% variance rule, this would be a moot point. Teams won't pay the cap hit, players will be wanting that next deal without all the upfront money.
 
2012-12-08 10:48:05 PM  
The NHLPA can't enforce revenue sharing amongst the owners and didn't start this lockout.

They just hired a competent representative after the massive Goodenow fail during the last lockout.
 
2012-12-08 11:06:19 PM  
You can say what you want about Fehr, and I certainly understand the anger over 1994.. hell, I'm still angry, but today the MLBPA is the strongest union in sports, and baseball hasn't had the slightest -hint- of a labor dispute (with the players anyway; the umps get uppity every so often) since then.

Can you really blame the NHLPA for wanting Fehr after they got rolled last time (and the owners STILL said "nah, not good enough.. bend em over again")?
 
2012-12-08 11:17:41 PM  
Bettman came from the NBA where the union is weak, Fehr from MLB where it's strongest. Not surprising they hate each other, or if the NHL losses another season.
 
2012-12-08 11:31:43 PM  
If this season gets cancelled, don't be surprised if there isn't a 2013-14 season either. If they can't get this done in the next 4-5 weeks, it will probably be the end of the NHL as we know it. The current business model is unsustainable; most owners (through their own fault) lose less money by staying shuttered than continuing under the old agreement.

The likely scenario if they can't get it done:

1) More players jump to Europe. The level of hockey in the elite leagues is very good. Adding NHL players will make it even better. Now, suddenly, you have the international football (soccer) model in play: multiple national leagues, all of them featuring star players.

2) The NHL will have a radical overhaul that will see as many as half of the teams dissolve. The Original 6 are safe, as are major market teams with devoted fan bases. The others will get bought out at a reduced rate.

3) NHL will be back in business, but with a new business model that is sustainable. Players previously under contract to the NHL will have their rights retained by their original clubs, but all contracts will be voided. Some sort of scaled salary schedule for players with X or fewer years of experience will replace it. As for the others, if team and player can't come to terms on new contract, player can sign with another club, but original club will have right to match. But now the NHL will have to compete more fiercely with the European leagues to sign players while at the same time being limited by budgetary restraints imposed league-wide. This issue in particular might see younger players (who would be held to the scaled salary schedule in the NHL) jump to the European leagues.

4) Depending on how restrictive those restraints are (for the sake of the model being sustainable), one of the European leagues possibly replaces the NHL as the "best league in the world."

5) TV coverage of any of these leagues will still pull minimal ratings, but you might see a dedicated channel a la Fox Soccer Channel come to fruition for the Euro leagues. Actually, given how many football contracts Fox has lost of late, Fox Soccer Channel could morph into something that covers both.
 
2012-12-08 11:35:07 PM  
What I can't figure out is why the profitable teams -- you know, the ones who are losing money by locking the players out -- are allowing league policy to be dictated by the perennial money-losers. Every other league has "power" teams whose interests dominate (think Red Sox, Yankees in baseball). But for some reason this is not the case in the NHL.

Bettman has done a masterful job of keeping people with very very different interests on the same page. I just can't fathom why Toronto, New York, Montreal, Philly and Detroit are going along with this shiat show. How does this strategy improve their bottom line?
 
2012-12-08 11:47:06 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.com

Hi, I'm Gary Bettman. You may remember me from such lockouts as the 1994-95 lockout, the 2004-5 lockout, and the 2012-13 lockout.
 
2012-12-08 11:58:11 PM  

december: I just can't fathom why Toronto, New York, Montreal, Philly and Detroit are going along with this shiat show. How does this strategy improve their bottom line?


A lot of those teams are owned by bigger interests who would barely notice their hockey team not performing.
The Rangers are owned by Cablevision, the Leafs by the two biggest telecoms in Canada, etc.
 
2012-12-09 12:09:15 AM  
I...see. We're trying to blame the 1994 MLB strike on Donald Fehr now, instead of the owners forcing the players to take a stand? OK then. Me, I look it as Fehr helped lead a necessary strike against bad demands by ownership and the MLBPA came out stronger, and now we've had 18 years of labor piece in MLB.
 
2012-12-09 12:09:33 AM  
Hate Fehr all you want, but it was the owners who, at just the suggestion of Fehr coming bac to the table, became hostile during this last round. They called it "a deal breaker".

Stop and think for a minute here: the owners said that if the players brought their chosen representative back to the table, that it was a deal breaker. This is union-busting pure and simple. The players are LEGALLY ENTITLED to their chosen representative, and the owners used the threat of non-cooperation to try and make them forego it.

If you can support the owners after that, don't bother responding, because I don't know what I'd even say to you.
 
2012-12-09 12:12:36 AM  

JosephFinn: I...see. We're trying to blame the 1994 MLB strike on Donald Fehr now, instead of the owners forcing the players to take a stand? OK then. Me, I look it as Fehr helped lead a necessary strike against bad demands by ownership and the MLBPA came out stronger, and now we've had 18 years of labor piece in MLB.


Exactly. The 1994 strike was the endgame of 20+ years of relentless bullshiat from management during every negotiation. The difference was in 1994, the owners didn't have a Walter O'Malley in their ranks to slap sense into them.
 
2012-12-09 12:50:06 AM  
I only watch the NHL during the Stanley Cup Playoffs, though I'm hoping to become more of a fan if (when?) Seattle gets a team.

However, I like following labor disputes. My understanding of this dispute is that the owners want the players to save them from themselves, thus the five-year contract limits and growing salary cap restrictions.

What I want to know is this: If Gary Bettman ends up losing a second season in a decade to an OWNER-LED lockout rather than a player's strike, when does everyone just realize that the owners want him and this sort of shiatty relationship with the players?
 
2012-12-09 01:16:22 AM  
and any players' union that hires Donald Fehr is committing institutional suicide. What, they didn't learn anything from the MLB experience in 1994?

You mean a much better league for the players and all future players? If that's what you mean, then yes.
 
2012-12-09 01:37:00 AM  
Fehr's going to squeeze them for as much leverage as he can until the NHL sets a nuke date.
 
2012-12-09 01:58:15 AM  

swahnhennessy: NHLPA, take the 10-year CBA. The last one worked out pretty good for you. 5 years until this sh*t rolls around again? As a fan, screw that. Not to mention, you may get bled again that much quicker.


Agreed. It would hurt some current players to take the rollback the owners want, but those losses would be regined in a matter of a few years.

These NHL owners and GMs are some of the dumbest "business" people on the planet. They'll start spending like drunken sailers in no time. Today's victory for the owners would be forgotten by 2015 because by then they'll be back to throwing money around without a care.
 
2012-12-09 02:26:55 AM  

FiendishFellow05: Hate Fehr all you want, but it was the owners who, at just the suggestion of Fehr coming bac to the table, became hostile during this last round. They called it "a deal breaker".

Stop and think for a minute here: the owners said that if the players brought their chosen representative back to the table, that it was a deal breaker. This is union-busting pure and simple. The players are LEGALLY ENTITLED to their chosen representative, and the owners used the threat of non-cooperation to try and make them forego it.

If you can support the owners after that, don't bother responding, because I don't know what I'd even say to you.


Well put.
 
2012-12-09 02:29:52 AM  

Troy McClure: swahnhennessy: NHLPA, take the 10-year CBA. The last one worked out pretty good for you. 5 years until this sh*t rolls around again? As a fan, screw that. Not to mention, you may get bled again that much quicker.


Agreed. It would hurt some current players to take the rollback the owners want, but those losses would be regined in a matter of a few years.

These NHL owners and GMs are some of the dumbest "business" people on the planet. They'll start spending like drunken sailers in no time. Today's victory for the owners would be forgotten by 2015 because by then they'll be back to throwing money around without a care.


You know what the really stupid part is? The richest team in hockey(Toronto) is the only one with a GM who came out and said he'll never sign deal longer than five years, meanwhile teams that are crying bankruptcy can't stop forking them out. The owners complain about the salaries constantly spiking but conveniently forget it's the front loaded deals that are artificially inflating contracts.
 
2012-12-09 04:35:34 AM  
Does that mean it's time we all start watching AHL games?
 
2012-12-09 04:51:49 AM  
healthhabits.files.wordpress.com
 
2012-12-09 05:05:14 AM  

Generation_D: Fehr is the same asswit that caused the 1994 baseball world series to be cancelled.


No, the owners caused that. The players were right. The whole thing ended because they won in court.
 
2012-12-09 06:19:39 AM  
Fehr's got two options then, and both of them he should write on his dick when he whips it out at the next session and puts it on the table:

1) Decertify.
2) Players form their own league

Both options mean the death of the NHL owners and likely the NHL.

If Bettman insists on playing the Republican strategy to the bitter end, he should be reminded that the Republicans lost.
 
2012-12-09 07:04:44 AM  

IAmRight: Why? The NBA has 'em and people actually watch the NBA. Plus, if you order everyone not to do long contracts,then the NHLPA sues you over collusion.

/there's no reason for anything longer than a 5-year contract


I could have been clearer, but I was talking about individual teams choosing not to sign long-term contracts. No collusion. As I said, in the end, it is the teams themselves that bear that responsibility. And if measures are added to make the current loophole shenanigans a bit less of a cheat, that could go a long ways in saving the league from itself while still giving teams the freedom to go hog wild, if they want to risk it.

As for a 5 year max being plenty - personally, I agree. I'd cap it at 7 at the most, but that's just me. Obviously, the PA feels otherwise. And while I might disagree with them, it seems a concession that the owners can make considering that the buck ultimately stops with them. No one is forcing them to sign 20-year contracts.

There's got to be a compromise somewhere along the line from 5 years to forever. Maybe longer than (some of) the owners want, but shorter than "signed for life at 22".
 
2012-12-09 07:07:10 AM  

Ishkur: Fehr's got two options then, and both of them he should write on his dick when he whips it out at the next session and puts it on the table:

1) Decertify.
2) Players form their own league

Both options mean the death of the NHL owners and likely the NHL.

If Bettman insists on playing the Republican strategy to the bitter end, he should be reminded that the Republicans lost.


The players should be reminded, should they choose to go the way you suggest, that running a league is an expensive proposition. It always comes up as a suggestion, and yet it's never been seriously considered. Why? Because the players don't want to risk their own money on something so outrageously expensive. They just reserve the right to demand that someone else do it for them.
 
2012-12-09 07:13:50 AM  
Could the NHLPA De-certify then sue because the owners are not negotiating in good faith?
 
2012-12-09 07:16:59 AM  

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Because the players don't want to risk their own money on something so outrageously expensive.


They're own money?

My dear sir, what is the first rule of business? ....never spend your own money. Here is a proven product, of about 600 entertainers putting on about 1000 shows a year, that can generate $3.3b in revenue. That is capital, that is leverage, and no bank would turn down an opportunity like that.

Finding the money is actually the easiest logistic in starting their own league.
 
2012-12-09 08:07:48 AM  

december: What I can't figure out is why the profitable teams -- you know, the ones who are losing money by locking the players out -- are allowing league policy to be dictated by the perennial money-losers. Every other league has "power" teams whose interests dominate (think Red Sox, Yankees in baseball). But for some reason this is not the case in the NHL.

Bettman has done a masterful job of keeping people with very very different interests on the same page. I just can't fathom why Toronto, New York, Montreal, Philly and Detroit are going along with this shiat show. How does this strategy improve their bottom line?


Huh? Jeremy Jacobs / Bruins is FAR from a money loser.
 
2012-12-09 08:11:02 AM  

soupafi: Could the NHLPA De-certify then sue because the owners are not negotiating in good faith?


Not really sure. The NHLPA is a Canadian entity. Problem is you have to determine what falls under Canadian law and what falls under US law.

/IADNAL
 
2012-12-09 08:21:43 AM  

wooden_badger: The NHLPA is a Canadian entity.


Their offices are in Canada. They're registered as both Canadian and American.

wooden_badger: Problem is you have to determine what falls under Canadian law and what falls under US law.


That is true.
 
2012-12-09 10:39:09 AM  

wooden_badger: soupafi: Could the NHLPA De-certify then sue because the owners are not negotiating in good faith?

Not really sure. The NHLPA is a Canadian entity. Problem is you have to determine what falls under Canadian law and what falls under US law.

/IADNAL


Yes they could. And it has been much talked about on the Canadian radio stations. There is a sticking point with this though. Fehr has said from day one that if the owners push him to use that "Nuclear" option. he will go ALL THE WAY in the lawsuit right until a judgement. Which is NOT what the owners want at all. because it will set a precedent for the other leagues.

The pros to the NHLPA decertifying seems to be that it would instantly make the lockout illegal in which case the players could sue the league for damages (they arent pulling in revenue so that is a double hit for owners). This falls under the antitrust laws that the owners in EVERY sport cling to like the last apple on the tree. Losing that would be armaggeddon for them. Total damages can be up to tripple lost pay and lawyer fees.

Because of the above, if you go the decertification route it is guaranteed the season is over and depending on court timing it may even eat into next season as well.

Two fairly major grey areas. One the NHL will likely try to play as a defensive card. IS that since the NHLPA has never tried to use this in the past, or even mentioned it (as others above have stated they are a dual country organization but actually consider themselves more canadian than other). You cannot hide under US anti trust law only when it suits you. So why they didnt use it in the past might be a point of contention. However depending on the judge that might go over as well as "i never used a gun in the past but now i feel its necessary".

The other point for players is that once they are no longer a union. assuming the courts start forcing the league to start up again, any unsigned players would not have any "league" minimums or bargained for rights in their contracts. These would have to be individually bargained for on a per player per owner basis which leaves many players open to getting much less than they currently are. However one would imagine the top flight NHL players wouldnt have a hard time demanding money from owners. These idiots have already proven they cant stop themselves even in the face of bankruptcy.
 
2012-12-09 11:16:23 AM  

poisonedpawn78: wooden_badger: soupafi: Could the NHLPA De-certify then sue because the owners are not negotiating in good faith?

Not really sure. The NHLPA is a Canadian entity. Problem is you have to determine what falls under Canadian law and what falls under US law.

/IADNAL

Yes they could. And it has been much talked about on the Canadian radio stations. There is a sticking point with this though. Fehr has said from day one that if the owners push him to use that "Nuclear" option. he will go ALL THE WAY in the lawsuit right until a judgement. Which is NOT what the owners want at all. because it will set a precedent for the other leagues.

The pros to the NHLPA decertifying seems to be that it would instantly make the lockout illegal in which case the players could sue the league for damages (they arent pulling in revenue so that is a double hit for owners). This falls under the antitrust laws that the owners in EVERY sport cling to like the last apple on the tree. Losing that would be armaggeddon for them. Total damages can be up to tripple lost pay and lawyer fees.

Because of the above, if you go the decertification route it is guaranteed the season is over and depending on court timing it may even eat into next season as well.

Two fairly major grey areas. One the NHL will likely try to play as a defensive card. IS that since the NHLPA has never tried to use this in the past, or even mentioned it (as others above have stated they are a dual country organization but actually consider themselves more canadian than other). You cannot hide under US anti trust law only when it suits you. So why they didnt use it in the past might be a point of contention. However depending on the judge that might go over as well as "i never used a gun in the past but now i feel its necessary".

The other point for players is that once they are no longer a union. assuming the courts start forcing the league to start up again, any unsigned players would not have any "league" minimums or bargain ...


So basicly this season and possibly next is farked right?
 
2012-12-10 07:44:04 AM  

soupafi: So basicly this season and possibly next is farked right?


basically, this is the end of major league professional hockey in North America except in a few northern cities.
 
2012-12-10 08:35:46 AM  
I really can't fault the players in this as it sounds like they're not asking for anything but for a continuation of the existing deal. The owners sound like they want to take an ax to the existing deal and really screw the players.

The solution to the teams that don't make a ton of money is more revenue sharing. From what I've heard, baseball and basketball have revenue sharing of around thirty percent while the NHL is nowhere near that. The rich teams may hate the idea of giving up money but without other teams to play, they aren't worth anything.

I don't get the hard line being taken by the owners as they are really doing serious damage to their brand. Even if they get the players to agree to their deal, I bet they end up making less money than before due to the fans getting fed up and not returning.
 
Displayed 50 of 54 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report