[Retired] Official Lockout Thread

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

per McKenzie's twitter, CBA talks are done for the day.

[Marty Barry 230]

Wow this lockout is long.

http://www.theonion.com/articles/0405-nhl-lockout-enters-ninth-year,30310/

[AusWing40 61]

Getting real tired of this bulls*** honestly

[Nightfall 871]

What is it about the last CBA that benefited the players the most? I know the owners certainly thought they won big getting that one.

The 57% of revenues

The contract loopholes

The list goes on and on, but I firmly believe that the players have made out very well even with all the concessions they had to take in the last lockout. Hell, the owners were shelling out 76% of their revenues last time to player contracts before the lockouts. So the rollback was huge, but it needed to be.

Remember how we talked about there not being any point in discussing this with each other and not replying ?

I think that's still the best choice.

Yea, I agree. I don't think I replied to one of your posts though. If I did, then I apologize.

Just out of curiousity though, if Fehr did indeed delay the meetings until 4pm when they were supposed to start at 10am, does that seem right to you? I certainly do not like many things either side has done here, but this action by Fehr just seems childish.

Edited November 11, 2012 by Nightfall

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

Yea, I agree. I don't think I replied to one of your posts though. If I did, then I apologize.

Just out of curiousity though, if Fehr did indeed delay the meetings until 4pm when they were supposed to start at 10am, does that seem right to you? I certainly do not like many things either side has done here, but this action by Fehr just seems childish.

You very clearly quoted me one page back in this post.

http://www.letsgowin...40#entry2333848

So you agree with me about us not discussing the CBA situation. But then in the same post you ask me a question and want me to discuss it with you?

Are you kidding me?

Please don't answer that. Seriously.

[Nightfall 871]

You very clearly quoted me one page back in this post.

http://www.letsgowin...40#entry2333848

So you agree with me about us not discussing the CBA situation. But then in the same post you ask me a question and want me to discuss it with you?

Are you kidding me?

Please don't answer that. Seriously.

It wasn't a discussion, just a question. I would be taking your answer and moving on.

You don't have to answer if you don't want though.

[Euro_Twins 4,485]

It wasn't a discussion, just a question. I would be taking your answer and moving on.

You don't have to answer if you don't want though.

I am on here to discuss the lockout, no disrespect to you or the moderator, but shouldn't this be a private conversation? Also a word to the wise, if the moderator says to stop talking/answering him (repeated times) it is wise to obey.

Anyways it appears this lockout is going to continue to carry on, just when I started to believe they were gaining some traction, holding secret meetings, every day all week. Then the nosey ass media has to track them down, and all of a sudden magically everything goes down the pipes... disgusting

Edited November 12, 2012 by Euro_Twins

[Nightfall 871]

Mr. Saunders really hit it out of the park on this one.

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=8619778

I wish I could vote them both out of office.

[Barrie 900]

Why would Fehr be canned?

The NHLPA has been a mess over the years but this seems the most stable they've been in a while.

And though people like to point to Fehr's strike that cost the MLB playoffs in 95 they overlook the massive collusion he busted the league on and the fact that he negotiated to two CBA's after 95 and that there's been labor peace in baseball since that strike.

Right, Fehr is the reason why they'll probably get the CBA right this time, and there will be no more lockouts. This will take a while, because the last CBA was so screwed up!

If they went with the quick fix a month ago, there would have been a lockout in another 6 years, with the owners trying to get the players down to 45%.

[chances14 229]

You very clearly quoted me one page back in this post.

http://www.letsgowin...40#entry2333848

So you agree with me about us not discussing the CBA situation. But then in the same post you ask me a question and want me to discuss it with you?

Are you kidding me?

Please don't answer that. Seriously.

since you seemed to dodge the question, i will ask it. do you think it's right that if the meeting was suppose to start at 10am, that fehr had didn't show up until 4?

now acording to this article, the the only major issue yet to be resolved is the player contracting issues.

After a week of negotiations, the N.H.L. and its players association have drawn close to agreement on several key issues, remaining far apart in only one main area: players’ contract rights.

But the two sides have made far more progress toward ending the lockout than is widely believed, according to a member of the union delegation who has attended the talks.

“We’re basically there” in several areas, according to the union delegate, who was granted anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly.

if the league wants a 5% max variance from one year to the next on player contracts (thus preventing cap circumvention, why is the nhl dead set on only limiting contract lengths to 5 years? seems like they should be able to easily give on that issue.

Edited November 12, 2012 by chances14

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

since you seemed to dodge the question, i will ask it. do you think it's right that if the meeting was suppose to start at 10am, that fehr had didn't show up until 4?

I didn't dodge the question. If you've been following this thread at all you'll see why I didn't respond to him.

I honestly don't know about the 4 pm thing and don't really care. If Fehr was sitting there sipping coffee intentionally making the league wait, then obviously yes it was a stupid move. But I don't know what the actual context was, if it was a childish tactic by Fehr, if it's being misrepresented to try and make Fehr look bad. I'm sick of both Bettman and D. Fehr's posturing at this point. If they were paying attention the fans at all they'd sense by now they need to shut up and keep working on a deal if they ever want us to come back. No more finger pointing, no more publicity stunts. Cut the crap and make a deal.

I'm far from thinking Fehr and the union are perfect but any criticism I've had is ignored as some people label me a union slappy anyway.

Why do people care about my opinion on something that may or may not have happened?

now acording to this article, the the only major issue yet to be resolved is the player contracting issues.

if the league wants a 5% max variance from one year to the next on player contracts (thus preventing cap circumvention, why is the nhl dead set on only limiting contract lengths to 5 years? seems like they should be able to easily give on that issue.

On this I completely agree with you.

The owners are still expecting huge concessions from the players and conceding relatively little. As you point out the 5% variance (which I honestly think is a little low) will end the circumvention. So throw the players a bone and give them some job security in terms of contract length, like 8 years.

I'm hoping this isn't true (Larry Brooks is pretty openly for the players as far as I've seen), but he reported this.

For this from an individual in the room for Friday’s negotiating sessions and confirmed word-for-word by Slap Shots by a source across the aisle:

“Near the end of the meeting, Don [Fehr] said to Gary [bettman]: ‘Let me get this straight. Even if the players agree to every single component of the league’s economic plan, we still don’t have a deal unless we also agree to every one of your proposed changes to player contract rights?’ ”

To which, both of our sources reported, “Gary said: ‘Yes.’”

http://www.nypost.co...afgPLGAnT5fPrJN

If that's what's really being said in the room, I don't see how a deal is coming anytime soon.

[Nightfall 871]

http://www.nypost.co...afgPLGAnT5fPrJN

If that's what's really being said in the room, I don't see how a deal is coming anytime soon.

Then on the flip side, you have reports coming out like this.

http://mobile.nytime...le-in-talks.xml

After a week of negotiations, the N.H.L. and its players association have drawn close to agreement on several key issues, remaining far apart in only one main area: players' contract rights.

That area remains thorny and could delay an end to the N.H.L. lockout, which reached its 57th day Sunday and concluded with gloomy news briefings from Bill Daly, the N.H.L. deputy commissioner, and Donald Fehr, the union's executive director. The sides remain divided over when players can become eligible for free agency, among other contract issues.

But the two sides have made far more progress toward ending the lockout than is widely believed, according to a member of the union delegation who has attended the talks.

"We're basically there" in several areas, according to the union delegate, who was granted anonymity because he was not authorized to comment publicly.

So I guess it depends on what you read and who you believe. You have different sources in New York here, both legit news sources, both portraying different types of info. One is totally negative, and the other is positive. I really don't know which one to believe.

Edited November 12, 2012 by Nightfall

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

That article is basically saying the same thing regarding contract rights. Here's the sentences immediately after the portion you quoted.

Fehr and Commissioner Gary Bettman met Sunday afternoon at the N.H.L. office in New York along with their deputies for less than two hours of discussions on contract rights. Afterward, the two delegations broke to leave for Toronto and Monday's Hall of Fame induction ceremony.

Daly told reporters that "contract rights issues are very important to the clubs" and that because of the wide gulf between the two sides on those issues, "I don't know where to go."

Fehr said he did not "see a path to an agreement" on contract rights.

[Nightfall 871]

That article is basically saying the same thing regarding contract rights. Here's the sentences immediately after the portion you quoted.

Ah, you are right. I was more commenting on the overall positivity or negativity of the article though. In one, there seems to be a negative tone, and in the one I linked its more positive.

[chances14 229]

So I guess it depends on what you read and who you believe. You have different sources in New York here, both legit news sources, both portraying different types of info. One is totally negative, and the other is positive. I really don't know which one to believe.

that is true. but then you also have fehr saying in the leaked memo that they were far apart on the make whole provision. but then he comes out 24 hrs later and says that they are closer on economics than even the nhl thinks. so who knows whats really going on behind the scenes.

[rrasco 1,312]

Is this still going on? I wasn't aware.

[sleepwalker 512]

but then you also have fehr saying in the leaked memo that they were far apart on the make whole provision. but then he comes out 24 hrs later and says that they are closer on economics than even the nhl thinks. so who knows whats really going on behind the scenes.

Yeah, and? Is your contention that only one of those statements can be true?

They probably still are pretty far apart on the make whole, but at the same time, its likely they are probably closer overall economically than the NHL thinks and claims, when the math is done. Or perhaps not, but its not like only one of those statements can be true at the same time.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

From Sportsnet:

It has come to this:

Even people on Gary Bettman's side no longer know what they're fighting for.

Three league executives contacted Monday all gave the same general answer when we asked why Gary Bettman should care how the players' money gets split up, as long as he gets them to 50-50 with the players.

To a man, the three voices echoed the same sentiment (and we paraphrase): "Get rid of the back-diving contracts, because those work against the spirit of the cap. After that, player contracting rights matter very little to me."

...

[GMRwings1983 8,802]

What is the deadline date before the season is cancelled?

[rrasco 1,312]

Speculatively, January-ish.

[chances14 229]

Yeah, and? Is your contention that only one of those statements can be true?

yes because negotations went nowhere the day after that memo leaked. yet somehow at the end of that day the pa and league were closer on the economic issues.

What is the deadline date before the season is cancelled?

well in the last lockout, the season wasn't cancelled until mid february, so i would say by late janurary at the latest

From Sportsnet:

yea i don't really understand why bettman would need both a max 5% contract variance and a max contract limit when either one of them will do just fine in ending the cap circumvention.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409346

A new NHL labour deal might not be as far off as it seems.

Steve Fehr, special counsel to the NHL Players' Association, believes the collective bargaining agreement can be wrapped up in a hurry once the sides make a breakthrough in negotiations.

"One thing (deputy commissioner) Bill Daly and I agree upon is that when the moment is right the deal could be done very quickly," Fehr said Monday during a panel discussion at the PrimeTime Sports Management Conference. "One days, three days or whatever."

Asked later if he agreed with that assertion, Daly replied: "I hope he's right."

Edited November 13, 2012 by chances14

[Dabura 12,228]

"One days, three days or whatever."

I think I've found the problem.

[cusimano_brothers 1,655]

Sidney Crosby: motivational speaker? Interesting.

[Guest RedWingsDad]

So basically, the NHLPA's position from the start is that they would ultimately agree to the 50/50 split if they owners forced them to.... but would never concede on contract rights issues. Got it.

Edited November 13, 2012 by RedWingsDad

[haroldsnepsts 4,826]

So basically, the NHLPA's position from the start is that they would ultimately agree to the 50/50 split if they owners forced them to.... but would never concede on contract rights issues. Got it.

link?