|
|
Post by seventeen on Sept 9, 2004 21:39:17 GMT -5
Staying with this theme: If they ever made a movie about the NHL...who would you cast as Gary Bettman? I'd cast Gary Bettman. I don't know if anyone else could capture the sleaziness and insipidness that comes so naturally to Bettman. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Sept 10, 2004 13:21:33 GMT -5
Just heard Ted Saskin on MOJO Leafs' Lunch and he said something very interesting.
According to Ted:
The top brass of the NHLPA (Goodenow, himself, et al) will NOT be drawing any salary during a lockout, nor will there be any retro-active pay for the time lost once/if an agreement is reached.
The NHL top brass, however, (Bettman and Co.) will all continue at full salary. The NHL has set aside a $300 million dollar fund....but has plans to lay off (or has already laid off, I'm not sure which) up to 60% of its support staff.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Sept 11, 2004 10:08:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Sept 11, 2004 11:25:18 GMT -5
When that clock hits 0 and there's a lockout, I'm calling videotron to change my cable system, why pay for RDS for nothing ? |
|
|
|
Post by TheCaper on Sept 11, 2004 23:54:30 GMT -5
Apparently, at the end of the 3rd period of the Canada-Czech game, ESPN switched coverage in their SEC markets to the Mississippi-Alabama game.
I think this shows the royal mess the NHL/owners have gotten themselves into. They’ve made a highly questionable decision to expand into non-hockey markets. A great overtime game, in the semi-finals of the World Cup, cannot compete with the 1st quarter of regular season college football game.
The NHL was charging expansion fees of $80 million. Expand into new markets, new fans = more TV viewers = big TV contract = $$$$$$. What a colossal blunder.
I wish the lockout was about making the game stronger for the future, but I have my doubts. I think it’s more about Bettman saving face, about showing that those $80 million checks weren’t just money down the drain.
The NHL is about to lockout the fans for 18-24 months in the hope that hockey will be able to survive in non-hockey markets. To me, it sounds like another colossal blunder.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Sept 12, 2004 7:37:27 GMT -5
Al Strachan, bless his rumpled synthetic suit, is convinced that this is not at all about negotiation but pure-and-simple union busting by Bettman. However long it takes.
|
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Sept 12, 2004 12:09:35 GMT -5
From Eric Duhatschek in the Toronto Globe and Mail: Here are more of those financial figures divulged by NHL teams that the players association doesn't seem to trust: According to a financial summary released by the Stanley Cup champion Tampa Bay Lightning the other day, the team's profit for the playoffs came in at just over $14 million, which enabled them to turn a modest $3.8 million profit on the season overall. Subtract the playoff revenue and the Lightning would recorded a loss of more than $10 million …<br> More gloom: www.boston.com/sports/articles/2004/09/12/no_faceoffs_just_a_standoff/ |
|
|
|
Post by Rimmer on Sept 13, 2004 6:19:02 GMT -5
Sunday, September 12, 2004:
Column From NHLPA President Trevor Linden
With the current Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) set to expire and an owners’ lockout pending, I want to take this opportunity to write to fans about the players’ efforts to reach a new agreement with the league.
First of all, I want you to know that the players will not strike. We want to play NHL hockey this year and none of us wants the owners to lock us out. In fact, we’ve pledged to play next season while we continue to negotiate, if a new deal can’t be reached before September 15.
Unfortunately, the league has taken a different approach to these negotiations.click here to read the rest R.
|
|
|
|
Post by Montrealer on Sept 13, 2004 9:10:11 GMT -5
Apparently, at the end of the 3rd period of the Canada-Czech game, ESPN switched coverage in their SEC markets to the Mississippi-Alabama game. I think this shows the royal mess the NHL/owners have gotten themselves into. They’ve made a highly questionable decision to expand into non-hockey markets. A great overtime game, in the semi-finals of the World Cup, cannot compete with the 1st quarter of regular season college football game. The NHL was charging expansion fees of $80 million. Expand into new markets, new fans = more TV viewers = big TV contract = $$$$$$. What a colossal blunder. I wish the lockout was about making the game stronger for the future, but I have my doubts. I think it’s more about Bettman saving face, about showing that those $80 million checks weren’t just money down the drain. The NHL is about to lockout the fans for 18-24 months in the hope that hockey will be able to survive in non-hockey markets. To me, it sounds like another colossal blunder. One question: Would they have switched a broadcast of a World Cup of Baseball game between Cuba and Japan, for example? Or a World Championship Basketball Semifinal between Italy and Argentina? If the answer is yes, then your argument is defeated - baseball is very popular in the United States, even in the territory of the SEC - but if it's not the United States playing, the interest is diminished no matter what the sport. |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Sept 13, 2004 10:59:35 GMT -5
...Most players say they won't play in Europe or elsewhere if there is no NHL season. Most don't need the money. When it was suggested to Modano that he could earn as much as $400 per game playing in some leagues, he looked insulted and answered: "That would pay for my dog's food for a month." - www.nj.com/sports/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-4/1094968258125060.xml |
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Sept 13, 2004 11:29:54 GMT -5
...Most players say they won't play in Europe or elsewhere if there is no NHL season. Most don't need the money. When it was suggested to Modano that he could earn as much as $400 per game playing in some leagues, he looked insulted and answered: "That would pay for my dog's food for a month." - www.nj.com/sports/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-4/1094968258125060.xmlMaurice Richard would have been delighted to play for $400 a game. |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Sept 13, 2004 11:31:04 GMT -5
Fans' reality calling Mike Modano: Based on a minimum of 3 games per week, that's $1200 US. Extrapolated to our proletarian salaries, that would be a very nice $81,026 Canadian per year. If you want our sympathy, don't compare a healthy sum upon which we have to feed, shelter, and educate our families (and, saints be praised, have enough left to go watch a couple of NHL games per year) to Kibbles 'n Bits. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Sept 13, 2004 12:56:07 GMT -5
What the heck do his dogs eat? Gold? If so, where can I can his pooper-scooper?  |
|
|
|
Post by HabbaDasher on Sept 13, 2004 13:48:12 GMT -5
It costs me about $70 CAD a month to feed my Dobe.
Not sure what kind of dog Mike has, or where he's getting his numbers from.
|
|
|
|
Post by blaise on Sept 13, 2004 15:43:49 GMT -5
It costs me about $70 CAD a month to feed my Dobe. Not sure what kind of dog Mike has, or where he's getting his numbers from. Modano and his dog dine out once a week. |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Sept 13, 2004 18:46:11 GMT -5
Did anyone else read that Trevor Linden article ..... what a pile of horse crap!!!
Can anyone really call the luxury tax system in baseball a success and not laugh. When you know six of the eight playoff teams before the season starts and the difference bewteen highest spending and lowest spending is $150 million dollars a year, then how in blazes is that a success. The sport is looking to relocate or contract teams every year and the comissioner is the laughing stock of all sport (and that includes Bettman), again how is it a success. Last year Steinbrenner paid something around 40 million in luxury tax - a whopping 1.5 million pear team. Not enough to pay for one crappy player, let alone a difference maker. No it is not a success in baseball Trevor, and you should have your head examined for thinking so.
What is his point here. There are 20 clubs that are handcuffed every July and every March because they can't afford free agents or trades.
Also, owners are forced to get rid of popular players to be able to reduce losses. Every year there is a fire sale by some team, and more than have of the teams can't afford the FA that may help them. His arguement against a salary cap is basically the same argument the owners are using againstthe current system. It must be nice to be so blind.
|
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Sept 13, 2004 18:51:48 GMT -5
To me, whenever people use a "dog-like" comparison, it's the ultimate snobbish comment...i.e. "You call this a meal? I wouldn't serve this to my dog."
Read Modano's statement again and place the emphasis on "dog"....and you have his meaning.
It's a flippant, spoiled-brat response....something that doesn't make me feel too sympathetic to his cause.
You know, Bill Watters is saying (and I'm tending to agree) that the players' salaries make up around 75% of the owners' expenses, and it cannot continue. In the NFL it's 63% and in baseball and basketball it's in the mid to high 50's. And they all have lucrative TV contracts.
The NHL has no TV contract in the States to speak of...so it's basically a ticket-driven league. It's not a viable business opportunity in the mid-to-small markets. Salaries have to be lowered or a cap instituted....otherwise we're looking at a huge contraction...or the breaking of the NHLPA and the start-up of a new league.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Sept 14, 2004 17:15:59 GMT -5
Non-traditional NHL cities on thin iceShutdown could hammer fan bases in already-faltering markets The Associated Press Updated: 1:12 p.m. ET Sept. 14, 2004 TORONTO - When the National Hockey League arrived in Nashville in October, 1998, a crowd of 2,000 lined up outside the arena more than three hours before the first regular-season game. Players walked into the rink on a plush red carpet and country music stars Vince Gill and Amy Grant were among the capacity crowd of 17,298. Six years later, the novelty has worn off. Last season, the Predators, whose owner originally paid an $80 million expansion fee, drew on average 13,157 fans a game, 28th among the NHL's 30 teams. If team owners and the players don't agree on a new contract by midnight Wednesday, the billion dollar hockey industry faces the prospect of a long shutdown. "The players and owners are skating on thin ice by shutting down the game, pardon the pun," said Paul Susce, owner of a Nashville ticket brokerage across the street from the Gaylord Entertainment Center. "Hockey's just not important here. We don't need it." There's the rub for the NHL. - msnbc.msn.com/id/6000935/
|
|
|
|
Post by NWTHabsFan on Sept 14, 2004 17:19:36 GMT -5
When's the Contraction Draft? Maybe we will get Vokoun back.  |
|
|
|
Post by CentreHice on Sept 14, 2004 22:41:05 GMT -5
I have to say that after watching CBC's Lock-Out Special (interrupted with the World Cup Final)....I am feeling sweet-bitter.
Sweet: Canada backs up their Olympic Gold with the World Cup.
Bitter: I really don't know if I'll come back to the game if it gets mired for a long time. The fans always lose....lose interest, lose respect, lose the childlike magic-eye through which we view the game. When the Habs took out Boston last year...for me it was 1971 all over again...and for that few days it was magic.
Perhaps it will be rekindled in me once a resolution/new league takes shape. I'd like to think the game is bigger than the owners/players.
I live close to Kitchener....the OHL is great hockey. The Cambridge Sr. A Hornets play in a fast, in-your-face league. And in those old rinks, any closer to the action and you'd be on the bench. You don't see the game played "by" the best...but you still see the game "at" its best.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Sept 15, 2004 6:08:27 GMT -5
Hockey is here to stay. The NHL maybe not so much.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Sept 15, 2004 9:08:58 GMT -5
The longer the lockout goes the less likely I am to be an at-the-game participant. I've been a six-pack (times 2) holder here in Ottawa for some years (the way to get tickets to a Habs game of my choice) but this year they moved us up to a twenty ticket purchase. I bit the bullet and did it but am questioning it . . . most likely will go to the games when there is a season (and not necessarily the games I'd choose to go to but the way the thing is set up stinks) but in years to come will just pick and choose a few games (maybe move down to better seats; maybe not).
Maybe. The longer no hockey, the stronger my resolve: I will not go just because I am relieved there is an on-ice game and drool and bow at the feet of the owners nor the players just because they deemed us worthy to pay their exhorbitant salaries.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Sept 15, 2004 9:29:29 GMT -5
To gauge U.S. interest in the NHL and the possibility of a shutdown, league and union representatives needed only to look around the Newark, N.J., airport hotel at the most recent negotiations. Three NHL teams are in the New York area, and seven daily newspapers cover them, but no reporter from any of those papers was at the hotel. In fact, not one American newspaper or television reporter was there. If it were baseball or the NFL, the lobby would have been packed. If there is that little interest in the United States about whether the league will come to an agreement, how much concern do NHL commissioner Gary Bettman and NHLPA executive director Bob Goodenow think there will be if the league shuts down? - msn.foxsports.com/id/2686156 |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Sept 15, 2004 9:45:39 GMT -5
No agreement in place for NHL, CHLCanadian Press 9/14/2004 It appears major junior hockey is a passenger in the back of the bus driven by the NHL and its players' association, wondering where this labour trip is headed. The agreement under which the Canadian Hockey League and the NHL do business expired back in June and was never renewed because the NHL has been preoccupied with the expiration of its collective bargaining agreement with its own players' association. - www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=98713* No agreement with the IIHF. A desperation agreement, subject to ludicrously penurious terms, with US television networks. "Get your Tutsi-Frutsi ice cream!"
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Sept 15, 2004 14:56:32 GMT -5
To me, whenever people use a "dog-like" comparison, it's the ultimate snobbish comment...i.e. "You call this a meal? I wouldn't serve this to my dog." Read Modano's statement again and place the emphasis on "dog"....and you have his meaning It's a flippant, spoiled-brat response....something that doesn't make me feel too sympathetic to his cause. Exactly, CH! Ungrateful players like Modano, Ya$hin, and many others do themselves absolutely no favours whatsoever when they say things like this. Moreover, if it isn't what they think it should be, then some of these guys will sit out until they either get what they want, or are moved. What's worse, they end up honestly believing they deserve that kind of money for what they do. They can stay out as long as they want to as far as I'm concerned. It's all about money all of the time. Heaven forbid that some of these players will have to use low-grade gas instead premium, or in the absolute worse case, their water should be hard. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Sept 15, 2004 20:35:44 GMT -5
...Most players say they won't play in Europe or elsewhere if there is no NHL season. Most don't need the money. When it was suggested to Modano that he could earn as much as $400 per game playing in some leagues, he looked insulted and answered: "That would pay for my dog's food for a month." - www.nj.com/sports/ledger/index.ssf?/base/sports-4/1094968258125060.xmlFrom what I read, Modano had already said that he would not play in Europe when he was asked if he would reconsider for $400 a game. Obviously, that money is nothing to him - if he had decided not to play for other reasons (like having to move to another continent and live somewhere where English is not the main language, risking a career ending injury in the process), I think it's quite reasonable that he would be offended by the suggestion that he should do it anyway just for the money, especially when the money is so comparatively little. His response wasn't the most diplomatic but I think it's clear he was being baited in an attempt to get a good quote. |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Sept 15, 2004 20:45:08 GMT -5
Does anyone know if teams can still sign players even though the CBA has expired? I'm assuming no....
|
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Sept 15, 2004 21:20:13 GMT -5
I was stunned when I read this: A few years ago they were losing millions. If this is true then Burke is even better than I realised. How come they are doing so much better than we are? Vancouver's a smaller market, they have a smaller arena, a larger payroll, and don't have the tv deal that we have with RDS (though they have games on Pay-Per-View). Source: www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=98673 |
|
|
|
Post by Skilly on Sept 15, 2004 21:24:44 GMT -5
I was stunned when I read this: A few years ago they were losing millions. If this is true then Burke is even better than I realised. How come they are doing so much better than we are? Vancouver's a smaller market, they have a smaller arena, a larger payroll, and don't have the tv deal that we have with RDS (though they have games on Pay-Per-View). Source: www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=98673Well they make the playoffs more than we do, and they aren't paying out 9 - 11 million in building taxes. Subtract the taxes Montreal pays on the Molson Centre, and give them a million for each home game of last year's playoffs and that is a 14-16 million swing. |
|
|
|
Post by MC Habber on Sept 16, 2004 4:06:44 GMT -5
Well they make the playoffs more than we do, and they aren't paying out 9 - 11 million in building taxes. Subtract the taxes Montreal pays on the Molson Centre, and give them a million for each home game of last year's playoffs and that is a 14-16 million swing. That's true about the building taxes, but I thought we needed to go deep into the third round to make money last year. They only got 4 games at home (1 less than we did) and yet even if you subtract the taxes they still made 14-16 million while we supposedly lost at least 3 million. |
|
