NHL to Cancel Season

[Your Paragon of Virtue 0]

I agree with the owners if only because a salary cap makes up for all the teams that can't be competitive and keep up with the rest, like Edmonton or something. I know Calgary was one OT goal away from the Cup last year, but parity is what makes the NFL so great, knowing that there is a level playing field. I think that's one of the reasons why the NFL is so popular. But whatever, I already know how most hockey/baseball fans feel about the cap, so let's not bring THAT up again.

[Guest Ether]

One thought I would like to see is one I read from Mark Cuban a couple years ago: all teams must independently make a profit - or the league investigates. From a cost containment and competitive standpoint, do you think the Red Wings and Rangers can bloat up their payrolls as much if they can't dip into the Little Caesar's and Cablevision's revenues, respectively? For the player's benefit, it would make teams report the revenue that they have been accused of not reporting (like the Blackhawks and luxury box revenue).

[Red Baron 0]

You can boycott Little Caesars pizza if you hate the Red Wings.

 

You know the Union could agree completely with the owners and the owners would reject the offer and visa-versa. I am sure most of the owners wanted to kill the NHL since most of them were losing money. If you go on the NHLPA's website, Ed Belfour makes a cool 8 million, Jaromir Jagr makes 11 million, and etc. It was the owners' fault because they listened to the agents of these players.

You can't blame one without the other.

 

No one in the league is worth eight million, let alone five.

[Lightning Flik 0]

I'd like to know what Al thinks about the PA's sudden change of stance.

 

As for the deal to save the season, it won't happen. This is only the first step on the negotiating table. There's still too much else that needs to be discussed to save the season. So I think if any deal happens, it happens for next season.

[Red Baron 0]

Its all about money.

 

The actual game needs to change too to market it better.

[Guest MikeSC]

I'd like to know what Al thinks about the PA's sudden change of stance.

 

As for the deal to save the season, it won't happen. This is only the first step on the negotiating table. There's still too much else that needs to be discussed to save the season. So I think if any deal happens, it happens for next season.

Unions, yet again, seem to overstate their worth. I would rank the NHLPA's actions this year as being SLIGHTLY better than the infamous MLB Umpire's Unions disastrous mass resignation plan --- but this is bad. It might well kill the NHL --- it's hard to justify putting them on TV, considering how poor the ratings are compared to almost everything else ESPN airs in its place.

-=Mike

[CanadianChris 0]

Here's what the proposals were (again from TSN.ca):

 

Sources say the NHLPA proposal is as follows:

 

- A cap of $52 million but with provisions for teams to spend as much as 10 per cent more than that on three occasions in a six-year period, with a luxury tax incorporated. The luxury tax rates would be 25 per cent on $40-44 million; 50 per cent on $44-48 million; 75 per cent on $48-52 million and 150 per cent on $52-$57.2 million.

 

Sources say the NHL proposal is as follows:

 

- A hard cap of $40 million, with a 50 per cent luxury tax on $34-40 million.

 

As for the possibility of negotiations, sources on the NHLPA side are suggesting the union will only negotiate off the $52 million figure if the NHL presents a detailed, meaningful revenue sharing plan.

 

On the NHL side of the equation, sources are suggesting the league isn't prepared to go much higher than the $40 million cap figure.

[Red Baron 0]

Well Gary, time to eliminate some teams then.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

The owners just won. It won't be time enough to save this season, but the Union just opened Pandora's Box by offering a cap. They won't be able to get off of it now.

[Lightning Flik 0]

Yeah Kahran, the NHLPA might as well just said "ok, fuck, we lost".

 

For them to admit they were willing to take a cap, after going on all year about not taking it and all the other stuff (like leaving for Europe to play), the backlash will be huge by fans.

 

That Pandora's box the PA opened is gonna be one that will haunt them for quite some time.

Edited February 15, 2005 by Lightning Flik

[Guest Vitamin X]

You can boycott Little Caesars pizza if you hate the Red Wings.

And give up $5 large pepperoni pizzas? Fuck off.

 

I hate the Red Wings quite a bit being an Avs fan, but that's just too much you're asking of me there. I also hate Pepsi.

[BHK 0]

I'd like to know what Al thinks about the PA's sudden change of stance.

 

As for the deal to save the season, it won't happen. This is only the first step on the negotiating table. There's still too much else that needs to be discussed to save the season. So I think if any deal happens, it happens for next season.

Unions, yet again, seem to overstate their worth. I would rank the NHLPA's actions this year as being SLIGHTLY better than the infamous MLB Umpire's Unions disastrous mass resignation plan --- but this is bad. It might well kill the NHL --- it's hard to justify putting them on TV, considering how poor the ratings are compared to almost everything else ESPN airs in its place.

-=Mike

I'll agree with you on the Union point, but I hardly think this will kill the game. Low ratings and revenues now? yes. That, however, is nothing a few changes and excellent marketing can't fix. Would that take a long time? yes. But I can't really see the NHL dying, per se.

[Prophet of Mike Zagurski 0]

The NHL will have to rebuild its fan base just like baseball had to.

[Crimson Platypus 0]

Damn, they just won't learn from baseball's mistake will they?  I JUST now have been sloooooowly getting back into baseball from their BS in what was it? 1994? Yeah, good luck getting me to buy tickets to Red Wings tickets now assholes.

Most baseball fans returned in 1995. Most statistics quoted from sportswriters use the attendance numbers of the pre-Strike year of 1993 as a basis of comparison. The problem is, those numbers are skewed because baseball's attendance in Colorado hit nearly 4.5 Million, and Florida drew a hair over 3 Million. The National League averaged more fans per game in 1995, immediately after the strike, than they did in 1992. The Strike probably stagnated attendance, but it hardly killed the game, and baseball recovered fully within five years.

Of course the difference being that Baseball is America's National Past-time...

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Pasttime? Pastime? Why doesn't that look correct at all?)

[Vern Gagne 0]

They'll have alot more work to than baseball ever did.

[lomasmoney 0]

why can't both sides just meet in the middle at a 46 million dollar cap. The one thing I will say is the massive increase in team salaries. I believe in the 1992-93 season, Pittsburgh had the higest payroll at get this 15.2 million dollars. Just over 10 years later, the highest payroll was Detroit at 77.8 million dollars. You also had players like Alexi Yashin, Keith Tkachuck and Doug Weight making almost as much or more than entire teams did just 10 years earlier. The players should accept the fact that their market value is not as high as that of baseball, basketball, or football players because their sport does not bring in as much revenue and advertisment money as the NBA, MLB, and NFL. Hockey teams carry what 25 or so players at a time. A 46 million dollar cap would equal out to teams spending about 1.84 million dollars per player. Now keep in mind you have your superstar players whom would command 5-6 million salaries max ( Forsberg, Lemieux, and the other top tier players). Then you could have Tier II players ( Maybe a guy like Dany Heatley, or a Marian Hossa, good players who arent yet super-duper stars) and these guys would get paid anywhere from 3-4 million dollars a season. Figure each team has maybe one top level guy and two second level guy and they are paying out at max 14 million to those three guys which would leave 32 million for 22 players which would still leave an average of about 1.45 million to pay out to each guy and of course you would have guys of varying skill levels who would command market values above and below that 1.45 million dollar mark. The 46 million cap would not be too low of a figure considering in 2003-2004 the average team salary was 44.0 million

[GreatWhiteNope 0]

HOLD THE PHONES!

 

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=stor...hkn_nhl_lockout

 

NHL, Players Give Ground in Negotiations

 

36 minutes ago 

 

By IRA PODELL, AP Sports Writer

 

NEW YORK - In what could be a last-second breakthrough, both sides of the NHL lockout have given significant ground: The players' association will accept a salary cap, and the league has backed off its demand for a link between revenues and player costs.

 

Now they just have to figure out the money, and time has all but run out.

 

Even while the negotiations were going on, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman already had planned to announce the cancellation of the season Wednesday, a source close to the negotiations told The Associated Press on condition of anonymity Monday.

 

Bettman was slated to speak Wednesday in New York, but the NHL declined to give details beyond the time and location.

 

The NHL offered to give in on linkage, a "significant move in the players' direction" the union said early Tuesday following a meeting in Niagara Falls, N.Y.

 

But when the players offered to accept a cap at $52 million in return — the first time they came off their opposition to a ceiling on salaries — the offer was rejected by the NHL. The league insisted on a salary cap that topped out at $40 million per team.

 

"It is indeed unfortunate that with the major steps taken by both sides we were unable to build enough momentum to reach an agreement," players' association senior director Ted Saskin said.

 

The NHL had no comment Tuesday on the union's statement.

 

No new talks were immediately scheduled, but with the philosophical differences now bridged, there appeared to be room for the sides to negotiate dollar figures.

 

"We probably could've gotten this thing done in the summertime," Chicago forward Matthew Barnaby said. "Am I mad, no? I want to get back to work. But at the same time, I'm just a little disappointed that it went this far to play poker and to have someone call your bluff."

 

The 24 percent rollback on all existing contracts, originally offered by the union on Dec. 9, as well as more aggressive luxury tax rates and thresholds, were included in the players' counteroffer.

 

Buffalo Sabres (news) player representative Jay McKee was surprised Tuesday when he heard the union would accept a cap.

 

"If that's where we were going, I wonder why now," he said.

 

With the major stumbling blocks now out of the way, the sides are only $12 million apart on what each team's cap should be. With the salary rollback, only eight of the 30 teams would be above $40 million.

 

Until now, Bettman insisted that the 30 teams know what their costs will be each season. The only way, he said, that could be achieved was to tie to the amount of player costs to a percentage of league revenues.

 

That was a solution the players' association refused.

 

NHL chief legal officer Bill Daly was the only other person involved in the meeting that wrapped up early Tuesday. The NHL reported that no progress was made, but didn't reveal any details of what was discussed.

 

If a deal is not reached quickly, the NHL would become the first major professional league in North America to lose an entire season because of a labor dispute. The Stanley Cup has been awarded every year since 1919, when a flu epidemic canceled the finals.

 

But more than two-thirds of the season and the All-Star game already have been lost to a lockout that started Sept. 16.

 

Bettman said the sides needed to start putting a deal on paper by last weekend if the NHL was going to hold a 28-game season and a full 16-team playoff. The regular season normally is 82 games.

 

Even a session with a federal mediator Sunday in Washington couldn't produce an agreement. But it did lead to the breakthrough in talks Monday.

 

Bettman had said teams needed to have cost certainty to survive and the only way he could guarantee that was with a salary cap that linked league revenues to player costs. Now that position has changed for the first time since the NHL started gearing up for the lockout in 1998.

 

The league has said teams lost $273 million in 2002-03 and $224 million last season, and an economic study commissioned by the NHL found that players get 75 percent of league revenues. The union has challenged those figures.

 

A cap had been an automatic deal-breaker for the union even though it agreed that the financial landscape was flawed. The players' association contended that there are many other ways to fix it.

 

"There is no question the system has to change," said New Jersey Devils (news) president Lou Lamoriello, who took part in earlier negotiating sessions. "We just have to keep working to find a solution. It's unfortunate we have to come this.

 

"If the season does end, we can't stop. We have to continue working at this and get it rectified as soon as we possibly can."

 

Monday, the 152nd day of the lockout, was to have been the last day of the All-Star break; the festivities in Atlanta were called off months earlier. Through Monday, 824 of the 1,230 regular-season games have been lost.

 

"Everybody has to take responsibility," Lamoriello said.

 

The sides have traded proposals throughout the lockout, but the salary cap had always been the sticking point. Other issues such as arbitration, revenue-sharing, and rookie caps never reached the true negotiating stage because the sides couldn't agree on the big issue.

 

In recent days, the union and league seemed adamant that they wouldn't budge.

 

"We're done," Saskin said Thursday after talks broke off.

 

On Sunday, Daly said: "We will not be reaching out to them."

[CanadianChris 0]

^

 

Holy nine hours ago, Batman.

[Matt Young 0]

Hockey's the one sport that I never really watched much, but I will watch if and when they resume play. The playoffs last year entertained me, and it was always fun watching the NAHL's Springfield (IL) Junior Blues back when I lived there.

 

Maybe I'll get to check out a Ducks game after all...

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

Sportscenter just reported that sources close to the league are saying that tomorrow's press conference with Bettman will involve him announcing the lockout is over and an abbreiviated season will be played.

 

This isn't confirmed, of course, but even a rumor of it is good news.

[sfaJack 0]

I'm not a hockey fan in any way really, but I understand that if they play, the season will be, what, 30 games + regular playoffs? What's the point of that? How can you determine anything in a 32-team league by playing only 30 games?

[Dr. Tyler; Captain America 0]

28 game season, actually.

 

And it's basically to save the sport with a sprint to the finish. It'll be a blast to watch, IMO, but I'm not a traditionalist, either.

[Guest Smues]

I'd prefer a full league tournement over just a 28 game season.

[Vern Gagne 0]

That's what Mr.Mullet Melrose said during Fact or Fiction.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

According to the Score & TSN the NHL has made a final offer at a $42.5 million cap, and the Union has until 11 AM to respond.

[lomasmoney 0]

if they bump it to 44 they would have a deal guaranteed.!!!

[treble 0]

I think it's a $42 million cap with another $4 million or so in incentives (or whatever the term they used is).

 

They better not be getting my hopes up, again.

[iggymcfly 0]

I'm not a hockey fan in any way really, but I understand that if they play, the season will be, what, 30 games + regular playoffs? What's the point of that? How can you determine anything in a 32-team league by playing only 30 games?

Well, you can weed out a few shitty teams which is all you ever do anyway. In every sport that over half the teams make the playoffs, the regular season is more of a chance to show the fans games than a serious portion of determining a champion.

 

Besides, football has a 16-game season and they seem to do all right.

 

I'm actually really excited about the prospect that they'll save the season, and I think a 28-game schedule will work just fine.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

A 28 game season isn't credible, but they will be able to start over fresh next year with no questions. It is the lesser of two evils. If we get no deal, then next year would probably be badly damaged anyways.

[Vigo 0]

A 28 game season works for me because every game will actually mean something.