|
|
Post by Rimmer on Jul 1, 2005 4:25:03 GMT -5
from TSN.caLegace sounds off on union committee
TSN.ca Staff
6/30/2005 12:46:39 PM
With the NHL and the NHLPA slowly inching towards a new collective bargaining agreement, Detroit Red Wings goaltender Manny Legace had some choice words for his union leaders.
''The whole thing is a farce,'' the Red Wings' union representative told the Booth Newspapers group on Wednesday. ''We basically sat out for nothing, wasted a lot of money for nothing. It makes no sense to me.''
With a deal expected to be announced some time in the coming days or weeks, Legace wonders why the 'PA didn't accept a better deal that was offered last winter.
''They (ticked) off all the owners and (the owners) went out to screw the players,'' Legace said of union leaders.
''They had the right intention. They made everyone buy into what they told us. Now it seems like they're giving up everything just to start the season on time.
Legace said he would support the union if they continued to take a strong stance.
''If we're going to give up all this now, why wasn't the union smart enough to get a deal done sooner, instead of saying, 'Screw you,' (to the owners) the whole time?'' Legace told the paper. ''I lost $1.3 million. What was the purpose?
''We hurt businesses downtown, we hurt fans, we hurt everybody - for nothing. I feel bad for those people. I could understand if we were still sticking to a cause. What reason did we sit out for? It doesn't make sense.''
Asked if Goodenow is to blame, Legace said, ''It's not just him, it's the whole (executive) committee.''R. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Jul 1, 2005 7:30:34 GMT -5
I think Legace's comments probably echoed the sentiments of many players. And it might suffice to say those same players may have been thinking this for quite some time; some as early as the beginning of the whole fiasco.
I've seen a few NHLers at the gym here in Kingston. They don't look as content as they used to be. Maybe they already know what their executive didn't get for them, or maybe they're just out of shape, I really don't know. But they ain't happy.
And I also think Legace's comments echo what a lot of fans have been thinking also:
''The whole thing is a farce ... (they) basically sat out for nothing, wasted a lot of money ... It makes no sense to (us).''
I don't know what the cap will be. But I won't be going back to a game until ticket and concession prices are adjusted to reflect that new cap.
Cheers.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 2, 2005 9:30:37 GMT -5
Voices of Dissent...Now, here's what he [Legace] had to say last November: "There's not going to be any hockey," Legace said. "It's a joke. The league doesn't want to negotiate. It doesn't look as if we're going to have a season." "If you ask any player in the league, they'd say the same thing," Legace said after a workout at the Troy Sports Center. "Everybody wants to play. It's that time of year. But the owners don't want to negotiate. "We've given them (the owners) offers, they've said no and they haven't come back (with any counteroffers). All he (Bettman) talks about is salary cap, salary cap. He does not want to negotiate." If Legace were to review his comments from last fall, he'd find the answer to his later questions. It's easy to look back and question why the PA didn't cut a deal months ago, but the fact is, as Legace noted last fall, the league simply didn't want to negotiate.... - entire Spector's Soapbox
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 3, 2005 12:58:45 GMT -5
Snippets from today's "Spector's Soapbox". * ...Here's an interesting comment from reader "m parker" regarding those voices of dissent coming from the NHLPA in recent weeks: "Maybe it's just me, but did you notice that all the players spouting off are over 31? All the things about that 42 million offer that stunk would have had little or no effect on them. There would however have been an extra couple million for teams to have spent on their, especially in the cases of Roenick and Jagr, inflated salaries. It's not surprising that first deal looked better to them." An excellent point. Thus far we haven't heard much, if anything, from NHL players in their twenties. We did hear from 29 year old Vancouver Canucks player rep Brendan Morrison a month ago, but his comments were more of resignation toward the deal. "I guess hindsight is always beautiful and it's easy for people to now say, `Why weren't you guys just resigned to this deal at the beginning of last year?' Well, nobody knew it was going to play out this way." This new CBA is going to benefit younger players, those in their twenties who are either reaching or yet to reach their playing prime. They're the ones who'll reap the benefits, whilst those in their thirties - particularly those on the bad side of 35 - won't. They'll make much less under this new deal, particularly as unrestricted free agents, than they did under the old CBA. For me, that's only proper. Those players in their prime or approaching it deserve to make the most money, not those who are using their reputations - in some cases, fading reputations - as justification for high salaries. This could be the real reason why some of these guys are sounding off.... * ...Al Strachan wrote today of why the league won't allow teams to re-sign those players they buy out of their present contracts later this summer: "The league wants this clause for the usual reason: it doesn't trust its partners. Let's say a team has a $6-million player. It buys him out for $4 million, then gives him a new deal at $2 million. As far as the cap is concerned, he's a $2-million player. But he's still earning the $6 million he earned before the ' lockout. The NHL is strongly opposed to this kind of cap circumvention." And I agree with the league on this one. Remember what I've said for months now about teams looking for loopholes in the new CBA. This one would've been so big you could drive a truck through it, hence the reason the league is closing it off. That scenario Strachan envisions would've happened, count on it.... * ...Bruce Garrioch comments on what may be coming down in the new CBA, making it sound like gloom and doom for the players. Most of what he reported has already been common knowledge for weeks now, courtesy of the NY Post's Larry Brooks and his direct pipeline to the NHLPA. "The stars in the game are still going to make their money, but a lot less of it. Role players are going to be stuck at the league minimum." But remember, that cap is to be tied to fluctuations in league revenues. As they rise, so too will the limits in the cap system. A $39 million hard cap this season can become $42.5 million within the next two or three seasons if revenues improve over that time, and if they steadily increase, that cap ceiling could rise even higher by the end of the new agreement. Furthermore, there will also be a mandated cap floor, starting somewhere around $22 - $24 million, which could also rise with revenues. That's also going to ensure more money for the players. If the system of revenue sharing is significantly increased as Brooks suggested two weeks ago, that will also work to the players advantage. "The talk around the league is that the NHLPA's executive committee -- and executive director Bob Goodenow -- have been bitterly divided by this negotiation. There is sure to be more unrest when the players see the new deal." It's talk around the league, but we've yet to see or hear of any significant uprising or discontent. Thus far we've only heard from a handful of high profile players and one of them - Mario Lemieux - is also an owner so his opinion holds no merit.... - spectorshockey.tripod.com/July2005_soapbox_archives.html |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 3, 2005 13:03:22 GMT -5
NHL labor deal expected this monthBut Coyotes' Tanabe says players' approval is no guaranteeDavid Vest The Arizona Republic Jul. 3, 2005 12:00 AM The NHL appears destined to reopen for business very soon. Numerous NHL sources on Saturday predicted that a new collective bargaining agreement between the league and the NHL Players Association will be reached by mid-July at the latest. A few said perhaps even this week. The two sides met for bargaining sessions of at least 10 hours Monday through Thursday last week before taking Friday off to huddle internally over the weekend. Talks are scheduled to resume Monday. "The meetings were good and we continue to make progress," NHL Executive Vice President Bill Daly said in a release. "Obviously, we know that time is of the essence in working to conclude a new CBA, and both sides are proceeding on that basis." The negotiations are in the hands of lawyers from both sides, and painstaking measures are being taken to make sure everyone is OK with the language of the agreement that is being drafted. In other words, negotiators know that "an agreement in principle" isn't going to cut it for the league that locked out its players 290 days ago in search of economic certainty. Keep in mind, however, that once the agreement is on paper, it must be approved by the league's Board of Governors and ratified by the 700-plus players in the union. Coyotes defenseman David Tanabe said there is no guarantee that the majority of the rank-and-file members of the union will sign off on the new agreement, which will include a salary cap. "I get a sense that everyone wants to play," Tanabe said. "Whether or not that means a CBA gets done is still up for question. "I still think that a deal needs to get by the players' vote and some are rumoring that it is 50/50 among the players as to whether or not it gets by the player vote." - www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/sports/articles/0703nhllockout0703.htmlBe still, my heart—hope springs eternal.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habit on Jul 6, 2005 9:57:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 6, 2005 10:01:21 GMT -5
Hmmm, there isn't 100% solidarity among the NHLPA?  So Avery had his brain washed, did he? |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 6, 2005 10:25:53 GMT -5
Allen Panzeri; CanWest News Service [excerpt]
A hard salary cap. An immediate pay cut of 24%. The wiping out of 2004-2005 contracts. Greatly reduced entry-level contracts. Buyouts. Qualifying offers without the provision for an automatic 10% raise for players who earn below the league average.
Unless there is a very ripe plum somewhere -- you'd have to think that there is at least one -- the players will be lucky if they don't have to pay for their uniforms.
Last September, and even last February, when NHL commissioner Gary Bettman cancelled the 2004-2005 season, it was difficult to imagine that there would be such an utter capitulation by the players, especially since they were led by Bob Goodenow, a hard man who has never lost a labour negotiation.
That will make the story of how this deal came about as interesting as the deal itself. Did Goodenow get pushed aside by the moderates? Did the players abandon their principles -- the ones that took them to victory in the negotiations of 1995 -- for self-preservation, after underestimating the owners and watching the clock tick on their careers?
If this agreement is as it's been painted, there will be many unhappy players -- in particular, older, expensive ones, who will find themselves getting tossed overboard when teams decide they are too expensive and buy them out.
While it's a slam-dunk that the owners will rubber-stamp the agreement -- possibly as early as Friday at a board meeting in New York -- it is not such a sure thing that the players will.
And even if they do, they'll be looking for blood to spill.
Jaromir Jagr, who lost US$11- million through the lockout and is one of the prime candidates to be bought out by the Rangers, has already said as much.
Last week, he made headlines when he said that the fight against a salary cap was a gamble that didn't pay off.
What wasn't as widely reported was a follow-up question asked by the Czech newspaper Mlada Fronta Dnes: Does he still trust the NHLPA?
"It is important for the players to be united," he said.
"But it can happen that the players will decide among themselves, and we will have somebody else to lead us."
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 6, 2005 10:29:30 GMT -5
Oh dear.
Jagr "lost" $11M, and my dream of a 6 Canadian team NHL is dashed—there always seem to be trade-offs.
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jul 6, 2005 11:53:04 GMT -5
Unfortunate that the players did not come to their senses sooner, they would have had a better deal and we would have had hockey. Oh well, they won't be the first group to be totally mislead by a union leader but the good news is that Bobby-O will leave hockey sooner rather than later. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jul 6, 2005 12:24:27 GMT -5
Dagenais has joined the ranks of those who claim to be misquoted by the media. He claims his original quote was, "I'm just a grain of rice in a bowl of boiling water." |
|
|
|
Post by Habit on Jul 6, 2005 19:03:15 GMT -5
From Sportsnet.ca www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/article.jsp?content=20050706_171050_5180Ok... If the Habs are the the Top 10 in revenue as they were supposed to be last year, then they would have to pay? Even thou their owner stated that they lost money? That does not make sence. This property tax that the habs have has to go. This is the biggest roadblock they have against being competitive. |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 6, 2005 19:35:39 GMT -5
Revenue. Now you see it. Now you
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 6, 2005 20:44:26 GMT -5
This property tax that the habs have has to go. This is the biggest roadblock they have against being competitive. You have been jiggered by creative financing. The Habs don't have a property tax roadblock, the Bell Centre does. Creative financing shows the tax being paid by the Habs, though they are not the only tenant. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 6, 2005 22:38:40 GMT -5
There seems to be activity in Vancouver at Orca Bay, suggesting a Treaty of Versailles hockey version will be signed soon. The Canucks are hiring people, not something they'd do otherwise.
|
|
|
|
Post by Habit on Jul 7, 2005 5:27:29 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 7, 2005 7:27:58 GMT -5
"A year lost for nothing"- Patrice Brisebois Wednesday July 06 2005 - (RDS) - The NHL season won't begin before October 5, but already many players have started their on-ice training. Even though they are eager to play again, it's obvious that some of them have the impression that they were strung along by the NHLPA leaders. The players are obviously very anxious to know the details of the next collective agreement, but already some of them are frustrated. That's the case with Sean Avery, who declared in the LA Times that the members of the NHLPA were victims of brainwashing by Bob Goodenow. From his perspective Patrice Brisebois mentioned a few days ago that the players should have accepted the salary cap of 42.5 million which the owners offered. "I said that after a race. I had had a minor crash and I was still pumped on adrenalin. I wanted to say that we all knew that we would be the losers. I think that we lost a year for nothing", indicated the Canadiens defenseman. "We should have taken the offer in February, but in February the salaries of American League and junior league players were included in the cap. They didn't want hockey in February. They wanted to put our backs to the wall. We will be able to compare the two offers when the new collective agreement is signed", explained Colorado forward Ian Laperrière. "They decided to hold fast. It's us who gave more, but in the end we will have hockey and the majority of people will be happy, which is positive", affirmed Philadelphia defenseman Éric Desjardins. As Desjardins so well says, the players are eager to turn the page. The proof, lessons just finished and 26 professionals were on the ice under the supervision of Paulin Bordeleau. As the summer progresses on-ice practices will be more numerous. "You can see that the guys are hungry", Bordeleau underlined. "I expect a good spectacle next season in the NHL. It will be very intense and the guys want to do well. They are eager to play." "The guys are serious. It's time to get into shape", said Canadiens forward Steve Bégin. Obviously, the players must get into shape, but there are nevertheless many who, during the upcoming weeks, will have to reach agreements with their respective teams. There are some who have already decided to test the free agent market. That's the case for Desjardins, among others. "Jeremy is Jeremy"The players present at Rosemère also commented on the remarks made at the end of June by Jeremy Roenick. The latter had stated that fans believing that the players were to be blamed for the lockout should stay at home. Roenick added that people who also thought that the players were spoiled children were simply jealous. "Jeremy is Jeremy", indicated Desjardins. "He will always say what he thinks. Perhaps he was quoted out of context, but nevertheless... it's important to be careful in those situations." "He spoke a little too strongly. These were remarks that he should perhaps have kept to himself. Everyone knows him, he says what he thinks", Bégin added. "Often it's not good to speak the whole truth. I do not think that the fans will avoid the arenas because of what he said", said Brisebois. "I think that there will be more of a personal impact for him. People know Jeremy, they know that he's a guy who doesn't badmouth. Everywhere he goes, he risks having to explain himself", concluded Laperrière. - texte français original
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 8, 2005 8:25:44 GMT -5
Hmmm, there isn't 100% solidarity among the NHLPA? So Avery had his brain washed, did he? I hope it didn't come out smaller. * ...The LA Kings' Sean Avery believes his fellow players were "brainwashed" by NHLPA honcho Bob Goodenow, that Goodenow embarrassed them and didn't keep informed as to how negotiations were going. Makes you wonder if the majority of players believe the same thing? Perhaps they do, but in the wake of Avery's inflammatory comments, some players weren't seeing it the same way: "We knew what we were getting into. " think our executive has done its best. They had to listen to 700 players and get the (pulse) of thewhole group. It's a hard job. It's such a tough situation." "Yeah, we went to those (players' association) meetings and they were heated. It's a lot of players with a lot of different opinions. We knew that the negotiations were going to be tough. Everybody knew that for a lot of years. It's so easy to look back and want to do things differently. I'm sure there's going to be a lot of people looking back -- and there should be -- wondering how we could have done it better and more effectively for everybody involved. But that'll come after." - Jarome Iginla, Calgary Herald, July 7th. "Obviously, Avery is upset, but he should be calling committee guys instead of going off in the media. We're all in this together and nobody wanted a cap, but we all realize we want to start playing again. If you're a real man, you'd say it to (Goodenow's) face. It's frustrating to hear that from Avery because we can call Bob or Trevor Linden at any time. We have our own website, all the phone numbers and all the information you need to learn about what's going on. There's no way someone should not be informed. I've talked to Trevor plenty of times and we voted the committee in, so it's surprising to me when players get upset and go to the papers when they could just make a phone call." - Dan Cloutier, Vancouver Province, July 7th. "I don't know the guy and I don't know where he's coming from. He seems to be causing trouble all the time and he has been a mouthpiece in certain situations. We'd all like to know every last detail and we're getting near the end and there's not a lot of information. But I talk to Trevor a lot and I'm on the website every day." - Brent Sopel, Vancouver Province, July 7th. "There's no question that none of us are happy because we missed a year, but I have no problem with Bob Goodenow." - Brad May, Vancouver Province, July 7th. "Everybody's disappointed, but it's easy to say now: 'If we'd done this, if we'd done that.' But these guys were at union meetings and every single player agreed to stick to their guns. The people who are saying things now, stupid things in my opinion, are doing so to look good for the public. As a union, we were all in this together." - Georges Laraque, Edmonton Journal, July 7th. Of course, Avery will probably insist those guys are still brainwashed. - spectorshockey.tripod.com/spectors_soapbox.html |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jul 8, 2005 13:13:20 GMT -5
Bob Goodenow has finally won a concession from Gary Bettman. The NHL teams will continue to sharpen players skates for free. Originally the league wanted to sharpen the skates of players with over 6 years in the league for free and half price for rookies on a sliding scale. Goodenow was smiling after winning the concession saying "The NHLPA has won a major concession for it's members and that it was worth sitting out a year!"
Trevor Linden had no comment.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 10, 2005 6:37:19 GMT -5
From yesterday's "Comments" page in the main section of the Globe and Mail:
Here's the score: Hockey is a losing game
By JEFFREY SIMPSON
Saturday, July 9, 2005 Page A19
It helps not to think of professional hockey as a sport, but as a product sold by an industry.
Thinking of hockey as sport brings emotions into play, and this year-long labour dispute now drawing to a close has been about bottom lines, not emotions.
This product's fundamental trouble has been the bottom line -- for the industry as a whole, most of the franchises that sell the product, and many of the consumers who pay for it.
Almost any other industry this poorly led, with such poisonous labour-management relations and such an overpriced, inferior product, would have been out of business long ago, or, if it were in Canada, propped up by government assistance. Only the egos of gazillionaire owners kept many of the franchises going. But even egos eventually yielded to the cold reality of the bottom line.
This industry's financial woes had been evident for years. You didn't need to study balance sheets to understand them. The yawning acres of empty seats in many arenas, the dwindling U.S. television audiences, the escalation of players' salaries (the largest cost for every franchise selling the product), the bankruptcies of two franchises, the loss of U.S. market share to competing products (other professional sports), all spoke to the desperate condition of the industry's bottom line.
And yet, for how many years did hockey remain in denial? How often did we hear NHL commissioner Gary Bettman's hear-no-evil/speak-no-evil routine? How many times did union boss Bob Goodenow offer the contorted argument that somehow players' salaries had nothing to do with the product's skyrocketing costs? How many commentators bought the line that the economic fundamentals weren't all that bad, and that some magic solution -- expansion to Europe, for example -- might save the product from the market's distress signals?
A labour deal is imminent, but consumers will have every right to be skeptical before buying the product again. For them, the new product must meet two tests. Is it better? Will it be sold at a lower price?
If the industry offers the same clutch-and-grab snoozefests and rock 'em, sock 'em mayhem that defined the previous product, then the industry will have learned nothing and will be greeted with the same market reaction that contributed to the bottom line's problems.
Or, if the industry, having extracted major cost concessions from labour in the form of much lower player salaries, pockets this reduced input cost and passes nothing on to consumers, then the market reaction will be one of betrayal. Fancy marketing slogans and advertising campaigns will not fool discerning consumers.
The Don Cherry-fication of the product contributed to its dwindling market share, because that coarse way of assembling and presenting the product, falsely portrayed as the epitome of manliness, pleased the faithful, much the way large gas-guzzling cars satisfied a certain share of the car market, but turned off new buyers who wanted a better product at a lower price.
There being vast inertia in such a hidebound industry, and there being a commissioner who did not appreciate the product and a union boss who cared much more for the employees than what they were producing, the Cherryfication proceeded apace and the industry headed for the rocks.
It has been blindingly evident for a long time just how poorly this industry and union were being led. Both the commissioner and the union boss should be shown the door, and the sooner the better.
The employees lived somewhere in la-la land, egged on by their union to believe that their grossly inflated remuneration had nothing to do with the industry's dilemmas. What a shock it must therefore have been to many of these young men, when, during negotiations, their union suddenly offered a 24-per-cent cut in salaries, and also turned down a much better deal than the one that will be unveiled shortly.
The owners, admittedly hamstrung by U.S. laws preventing collusion, had neither the individual self-discipline nor the collective sense of how to stop their industry's slide. Some of them tolerated stunning incompetence -- general manager Glen Sather of the New York Rangers being Exhibit A -- and almost all of them stood by while the false gospel of Cherryfication eroded quality, an erosion many of them apparently believed could be obscured by wrapping the product in ever-louder rock music, new uniforms, new franchises, fresh gimmicks such as bobblehead-doll giveaways, and their commissioner's bland assertions that hockey had never been so healthy.
So sick had this industry become that only a prolonged period of mutual suffering might, just might, knock some common sense into both sides. One year without the product might actually prove not to have been long enough to inflict sufficient pain to produce what consumers have every right to demand: a better product at a lower price.
Failure to deliver on quality and price, as every industry eventually discovers, spells trouble.
*
An excellent summary by Simpson of why I pinned my hopes on Goodenow and his prediction of a 2 year lockout.
I have little confidence that the signing of a new CBA in the very near future, with its attendant promises of improvements to the game, will amount to anything more than a 6 year postponement of the NHL's death sentence.
What this game needs in order to resurrect itself is the kind of total disaster a 2 year absence would have provided. I don't think the present case of goosebumps will be sufficient to save the situation. Initially there will be an outpouring of well intentioned rhetoric about change for the better, and a temporary movement toward it—but as some of us know from our experiences with severe hangovers, the promise to straighten up and forever fly right has its expiry date.
"I want to believe."
Show me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bob on Jul 10, 2005 11:07:26 GMT -5
Al Strachan's latest article blames the players for caving into the union. He puts Goodenow on a pedestal and crows that the players could have won this lockout had they held out longer.
Sometimes I wonder why I still read this guy from time to time.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Jul 10, 2005 11:49:37 GMT -5
Al Strachan's latest article blames the players for caving into the union. He puts Goodenow on a pedestal and crows that the players could have won this lockout had they held out longer. Sometimes I wonder why I still read this guy from time to time. Goodenow, many players, Bettman, several owners, and unknown numbers of people in related industries would have suffered financial or job loss, but the Game would have come out for the better because of it all—of that I remain convinced. |
|
|
|
Post by Habs_fan_in_LA on Jul 10, 2005 14:07:18 GMT -5
Al Strachan's latest article blames the players for caving into the union. He puts Goodenow on a pedestal and crows that the players could have won this lockout had they held out longer. Sometimes I wonder why I still read this guy from time to time. The NHL owners revenue, the NHL players salaries, Al Strachan's brain, and George Castanza swimming in the ocean; They all suffer the same problem: SHRINKAGE! |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 12, 2005 6:43:23 GMT -5
Juninor hockey phenom Sidney Crosby has signed a multi-year endorsement deal with Gatorade. He signed a deal with Reebok in March. Meaning he has two more endoresment deals than the NHL has games played in the last year. [Elliott Harris, Chicago Sun-Times]
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Jul 12, 2005 6:46:15 GMT -5
NHLer Sean Avery only half right with claim players were "brainwashed" into thinking they'd win dispute with owners. Got hosed, all right, but brains were never engaged. Tighten those helmets, guys. Or, as owners call them: salary caps. [MacLean's]
|
|
|
|
Post by Doc Holliday on Jul 14, 2005 18:22:48 GMT -5
...it is with great, great pleasure that I remove the "sticky" from this thread.  |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on Jul 15, 2005 0:42:44 GMT -5
....and the crowd goes wild. |
|
