June 15th and what it means to hockey

According to an article on TSN .. http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=125609&hubName=nhl, the league may issue a drop dead date of June 15th for the 2006 season. The reason being is that this is the sponsors have given the league June 15th as the date they will pull their money from the NHL. With reduced financial incentive the league may believe it is in their best interests to out wait the players.

As bad a negotiating method “outwaiting” the players may seem, is it any different than what the players were banking on this last year+. Clear evidence is that the players waited until this month to talk about finances with the owners. Why is this important? Because the NHLPA had a financial report given to them by the owners, with the opportunity to dissect it and ask questions about it as they see fit, and THE PLAYERS IGNORED IT. Now all of a sudden they’ve dusted off the Levitt report and are looking at the numbers in it FOR THE FIRST TIME. Basically, until this point the players have threatened to they turn blue if the parents don’t give them what they want. The players turned blue and realized the parents weren’t going to give in and are finally asking their parents why they can’t get what they want.

I really can’t understand the NHLPA and Bob Goodenow supporters as the evidence mounts that the NHLPA, not the NHL are the ones who have refused to negotiate, electing to rely on PR moves to get what they want instead of any meaningful dialogues. I do not blame Bettmen for this lockout, he is doing what the owners want him to do, it’s Goodenow and the star players who need $9 mill to feed their dogs even if it bankrupts the league who are the problem. Wouldn’t it be nice if the players position had a sound financial framework behind it? I guess that’s not their problem.

On the plus side, the only issue I agree with the NHLPA on, and one i’m thinking they could get done if they dealt with reality instead of fantasy land, is greater revenue sharing among the teams, which to me is as key as getting a cap.


34 Responses to June 15th and what it means to hockey

  1. 19Yzerman says:

    Your analogy of not giving a child what they are demanding as negative reenforcement does not apply to this lockout situation. If the players do not want a cap then they are well within their rights not to sign a cap inclusive CBA and should not be labeled as a child for their pursuit of life, liberty and $$Happyness$$. There is more to it then what the LeVitt report or the URO of each team shows. The players know it too. This is not about who is right and who is wrong or who will win and who will lose. This lockout is about two sides that both know there is a LOT of $$MONEY$$ to be made and the Billionaires simply cannot agree with the Millionaires about who gets how much from the people who make 5 figures. Now this is A shame because right now is a time of economic struggle and they have the nerve to remain in an infefinite state of finacial dispute. I can’t help but think when I hear the word dispute I think of attourney’s making money off of those who could have done the negociating without them.

    “I do not blame Bettmen for this lockout, he is doing what the owners want him to do?”

    I don’t know how you can think that is true since the there is a Gag order out on any team owner who speaks out. I feel it is the NHL who is trying to get a lopsided deal to make up for the last one which was costly to them and will not settle for anything less than an over even share of the pie with so many clauses that not only will there be unhappy players but, team owners will not be permitted to cheer them up.

  2. TheCoach says:

    The gag owner was lifted before the season was cancelled. And the owners placed it on themselves by voting for it.

  3. TheCoach says:

    I mean gag order.

  4. 19Yzerman says:

    Well thanks for clueing me in on the whole Gag order issue. However I would not completely dismiss the NHL and Bettman from any responsibility of this lockout. Technically this is all about the owners wanting to restrict each others spending habits because they were hurting each other before. The players did not just stop playing and started demanding more money. That is a strike! This is a lockout for which the NHL is the primary source.

  5. mikster says:

    I have to disagree with you.

    Only few owners are happy spenders, and it’s because they can spend. But, for the other teams…players take ridiculous advantage of arbitrations, and they pathetically take advantage of a team’s low financial resources by requesting a ridiculous price tag on them, knowing the team can’ afford that price…..so therefore they are stuck losing the players for nothing and it hurts their team.

    Players get paid too much, they ask for too much knowing that the NHL is not a top sport.

    They are not seeking for happiness, they are obviously seeking for greed and to get as much money as they can without caring for the team or the league itself.

  6. 19Yzerman says:

    Who was the last player to pathetically take advantage of a team’s low financial resources by requesting a ridiculous price tag on them, knowing the team can’ afford that price…..????

    I think you will find that most of the last few Contract Holdouts ended up signing with their own team.

  7. nordiques100 says:

    Mike Comrie

  8. Flyers_01 says:

    I disagree with your blanket statement that the league is hiding money and everyone knows it. It’s an unproven accusation, even worse it’s a rumor designed to foster mistrust. Is the league hiding money? I don’t know but what I do know, is the NHLPA has made no attempt to prove it. Did the NHLPA dissect the Levitt report, talk to Levitt, and expose the league as liars? Did the NHLPA take up the league on it’s offer to audit 4 teams themselves? Did the NHLPA make any effort whatsoever to determine what the income and expenses of the league was? The answer to all these questions is NO, NO, NO!

    The question you should be asking the NHLPA is why are they discussing with the league what constitues revenue now, only after a lost season and with the threat of another one? Why is the Levitt report finally being gone over in detail after it being thrown in the trash bin by the NHLPA over a year ago?

    This is why i have a problem with NHLPA supporters. Do I believe the NHLPA is the root of all the league’s problems? No, I don’t but in the matter of the CBA, I wholeheartedly do. The NHLPA depends on intimidation, not reason to succeed. If the 2 sides agree on what constitues revenue and agree to jointly audit the revenue streams you eliminate half the rhetoric the NHLPA has been using to rail against the cap not to mention a major source of mistrust. Finally, the NHLPA is doing some work to become part of the solution.

    Should the NHLPA try to get the best deal they can? Yes, but that deal has come and gone, now they should focus on getting the best deal they can before June 15th before they lose even more and it appears to be what they are doing. A pity they didn’t have the same attitude a year ago when their only agenda appeared to be trashing the owners, we all know how well that worked out.

    As far as the owners getting a lopsided deal, I submit that any deal that approaches fair will appear lopsided to the players because of how lopsided things are in their favor now.

  9. 19Yzerman says:

    Oh I think that blanket has been long since removed and the the number of Zeros that appeared on NHL UROs is not the only good reason for the NHLPA to be disputing over. The revenues from some teams the luxury boxes are being retained by those owners as if its not considered NHL revenue at all. Putting Zeros on UROs and concealing other funds is a nasty habit called fraud which is like any other habit. It is hard for others to trust that your just gonna KICK the habit. The problem is not just who gets how much but, defining what the how much is and where it does or does not come from.So your right If the 2 sides could agree on what constitutes revenue and agree to jointly audit the revenue streams they would be in business once again.

    you ask,” Why is the Levitt report finally being gone over in detail after it being thrown in the trash bin by the NHLPA over a year ago? “

    Because the trash is where one should throw any do*****ent that contains false data and the only reason to retrieve it from the trash is to show those who lie about money do*****entation of those false claims.

    I see no reason to hurry now. The season is gone! What is the hurry now? A deadline is the oldest scare tactic in the history of doing business. Look at what it took to cancel last season. No they have a few months before they any deadlines or time frames need to be spoken. Hows about giving the the NHLPA until next training camp? I think if there is no CBA in place by the next up coming seasons normal training camp dates that the NHL should either take a leek or get off the toilet. Either cancel the 2005-06 season right then or give the players what they want.

  10. ericthered1961 says:

    “Now all of a sudden they’ve dusted off the Levitt report and are looking at the numbers in it FOR THE FIRST TIME”

    BULLCRAP

    LOL….gee I wonder whose side YOUR on

  11. Flyers_01 says:

    Please read the following article ..

    http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/3629412

    Specifically ..

    ————————

    Meanwhile, the clock is ticking — which ticks off some NHL negotiators.

    They point to the fact that last week’s meetings — as well as those on Tuesday and Wednesday — focused, in part, on findings of a report by former Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Arthur Levitt.

    Released in February 2004, The Levitt Report said only 11 of 30 teams turned a profit in 2002-03.

    When I interviewed Levitt last winter on MSG Network’s SportsDesk, he made it clear that he had offered to sit down with NHLPA leaders and thoroughly explain his methods, conclusions and answer any questions.

    “They refused,” said Levitt.

    However, now the report is being studied in depth by the union.

    “What took them so long to get around to this?” an NHL negotiator asks out loud. “If they had done this when we had asked them, so much time would have been saved.”

    Who knows? Maybe the time of real deal-making is upon us. (We should be so lucky.)

    ———————–

    Hmm .. looks like I made an informed comment based on an article I read. I guess anything pro owner must be untrue or biased eh?

  12. Flyers_01 says:

    If you have a link to an article by a professional writer that points out specific problems in the Levitt report I’d love to read it, otherwise what I remember is that that the NHLPA dismissed the do*****ent entirely without proving the owners were defrauding anyone. The only other report to come out, one which qualifies as an educated guess, also said the league lost many millions of dollars. Is it 100 percent correct in what i would define as revenue? I don’t know, but you’d think defining what counts as revenue, should’ve been one of the first steps pursued by NHLPA. How can you dispute revenue without first defining what revenue is?

    The NHLPA dropped the ball on the financial side of the negotiations, period. They didn’t pursue a definition of revenue, nor did they make a thorough review of the financial information they had available to them. They figured the rallying cry of “No Cap” would be all they needed.

    The NHL offered joint stewardship over the league’s income in the upcoming CBA a year ago. That sounds like a party that wants to move forward, not just throw stones.

    As far as the levitt report, I’m sorry but i have to disagree with you, they did not dust it off just so they can prove the owners wrong, they dusted it off because they realize it has value now.

    One of the problems with the NHLPA is they want to say the league is healthy and can afford large payrolls by pointing at Detroit and Toronto and on the other hand want show that salaries aren’t out of control by pointing to Carolina and Nashville. The NHLPA doesn’t want to know the financial situation of the entire league because with ignorance they can say anything they want and believe it. The owners are forcing the players to deal with the situation of the entire league and that is something the players association doesn’t like.

    you can read the following article which shows the context in which the levitt report is being taken, http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/3629412.

    I wouldn’t look at what it took to cancel the season, I would look at what it took to uncancel the season. Yes, I’m talking about the lame PR ploy by the NHLPA where they called in Wayne and Mario and arranged a signing party with the league just after the cancellation only to backout and claim that the whole thing was a Bettment ploy. Nice way to try to advance your cause by leaving 2 hall of famers to hang in the wind. I’m sure they weren’t happy WHEN WAYNE AND MARIO EXPOSED THE NHLPA AS LIARS and the main proponents of everything that went on that day.

    The reason to hurry and get a deal now is this, regardless of a deadline, if the sponsors do pull out on June 15th there will be less money. Less money equals lower salaries, lower income for the owners as well, but less money for the players. The longer the players wait the less money they will make because there will be less money available and June 15th represenets a large decrease in the avialable moneys for player salaries.

    If the players want to hurt the league, fine, hopefully tho they realize they are hurting themselves also and realize that any healing needs to begin with them.

  13. 19Yzerman says:

    How can you dispute revenue without first defining what revenue is? That is a very valid point. Somehow there seems to a great need for “NHL team ownership only” revenues to be reformed and governed.There are to many parent and subsidiary companies involved with team ownership. If they can’t sit a well lighted table with all cards in front of everyone then they can’t play. No more walking around each other handing off the roll of cash to one and other at different times.

    Tell me you think that the URO’s are 100% accurate and include all possible revenues!!

    If the players don’t believe the amounts are accurate. Why not just have them run the cash registers for a while. Wouldn’t that be convincing enough being able to monitor the funds as they come in??

    As far as the NHLPA crying “NO CAP” goes. Why is it so hard for the NHL to create a CBA with so many clauses governing all the more costly ill effects of the last CBA but, has no cap??? I mean if that is all the players see why not give it to them if they somehow don’t see what they really need.

    I really don’t care what happened with Wayne and Mario. Don’t take this as me not having respect for them as HOFers. Its just that who ever invited them or stood them up matters not. It would have been great had something came out of it but, in all reality these two sides need to agree on terms amongst themselves and neither had any business involving Wayne and Mario in the first place.

    Sponsors and TV Networks can take their money and wait. They have done nothing to help hockey during its greatest time of need. No hockey needs help and what do they do to help? Make a bigger mockery of the whole situation. It would not surprise me to hear that networks have been sending subliminal messages to demote hockey.

  14. BWbullies says:

    I agree with the owners except about profit sharing. Why should successful teams have to give up thier proffit. Make the smaller teams build thier franchise up. I think the profit sharing should when a team goes over the cap not before. I also guess you took a shot at john leclair. keep in mind when he was scoring 50 goals three years in a row he did not complain about making the league minimun.

  15. 19Yzerman says:

    Profits should be retained by those teams who earn them and losses should also be retained by those teams who suffer them. Why should strong hockey markets have to pay to spoon feed hockey to regions which do not have an appetite for hockey? Live and let die!! Hey NHL quit trying to use socialist methods to deify the laws of economics.

  16. nordiques100 says:

    if no profit sharing then that means teams like the nashvilles and carolinas and other non hockey region teams will suffer greatly, perhaps suc*****b to bankruptcy and fold leaving several players without jobs. 10 or so teams are in deep trouble and would fold meaning almost 250 players losing their jobs. does this help the PA. this live and let die attitude hurts the PA too. this is why they want revenue sharing cause they know jobs will be lost.

    but alot of players like damphousse, geurin, hull, chelios, the big overpaid millionaires could care less if the fringe player lost their job. remember thse are the guys who stole jobs in europe, the USHL, the ECHL without any remorse.

  17. Aetherial says:

    I am sorry but it IS the players fault for SOOO many reasons.

    mainly:

    Their self-serving attitude from day one when they blamed the owners entirely for the current mess. very convenient when they did everything possible, including holding out, to continually raise the bar higher and higehr and higher. They have ABSOLUTELY NO arguement to explains how, fiscally responsible, previous pillars of the league (Chicago) is also hurting now.

    They refused to look at the numbers. The actual numbers were offered more than a year ago. They simply said “We don’t believe you and we don’t want to see it”

    NOW, they start looking, when it is apparent that their hope to outwait the owners failed.

    They repeatedly posture that they would NEVER accept a cap or linkage… they drag out the whole process and then accept it?

    This was never about future players or principles or fairness. The players have a share so big now that it is not good for the league and they know it. They still wanted things to stay the same though, so they dragged this whole thing out, hoping the owners would cave and lost a season because of it.

    The players did not want linkage because they did not believe the owner’s financial numbers. The owners offer of more than 6 months ago allowed the NHLPA to appoint their own member of an audit teams and provided for stiff penalties in terms of money and/or draft picks to teams that did not report revenue according to the agreement.

    Somehow… this was not good enough for the NHLPA.

    The only rational conclusion is that the NHLPA has known all along that the league was in a mess but they chose to ignore that, hoping that rich owners would continue to lose money and players continue to reap rewards WAY WAY WAY WAY out of line with league revenues, when compared to other pro sports.

    If you somehow can’t see that the whole mess has been the fault of the players, you are really missing something.

  18. Aetherial says:

    I don’t care what you think is hidden revenue or not.

    The owners invited the players to establish guiidelines on revenues AND then let them appoint their own auditor. They offered up stiff penalties (first round picks and/or 1-5 million$ fines.) for incorrect or hiding of revenues eligible under the CBA.

    The union’s response was that they wanted no part of linkage. They refused to work to negotiate with the league what the eligible revenues were… even when they were offered the chance to police it themselves.

    There is no logic or excuse that explains their behavior, sorry.

    What do you think they are doing now… exactly what they were offerred 6 months ago, and a year ago.

    Fcuking pathetic.

  19. Aetherial says:

    Your position ignores completely the owner’s need to try to stay competitive to even keep a franchise afloat… AND you conveniently ignore the effects of arbitration. I should not have to explain it to you; think about it.

    The players have taken full advantage of this…

    Then turn around and blame the owners for spending.

    And people like you blindly buy all of this and also chant the “it is the owner’s fault” mantra.

    I posted, clearly, the ways in which salary inflation happens that are very much out of the owner’s control… and nobody successfully challenged me on it, whatsoever. The one person who tried, basically reiterated my points with sarcasm, hoping to make his arguement that way.

  20. Aetherial says:

    Uh, Contract holdouts have no choice of teams..

    but they do BREAK THEIR OWN CONTRACT, and get much more money… and thus raise the bar higher for the next arbitration case with similar numbers…

    and so on and so on.

    Yet, this is all about the owners’ crazy spending is it?

  21. Aetherial says:

    You are missing the point entirely.

    The NHLPA did not even try to help make a definition of revenue. it *could* have been done. The chance was offered to them to work on defining it precisely… exactly like how it is done in other leagues.

    They could have been a part of the negotiating process since day 1… In fact, that is EXACTLY what they are doing now, a whole season later.

    They were given the chance to not only be part of deciding what revenue should be included, they were offered a role in policing the system, with heavy penalties in place.

    They refused to even try.

    They did just decide to rally behind “no cap”, hoping the owners would cave…

    and they gambled away the whole season with their stupidity.

    If you think this was just a poorly played game that cost us all, you have not payed attention.

  22. Aetherial says:

    Yeah, whoever orchestrated the whole sham with Wayne and Mario, matters not.

    Hmmm, how convenient, since it is probably the best evidence we have so far of the true nature of this union and what they are *really* all about…

    and I can tell you it isn’t principles or the future of hockey players.

  23. Aetherial says:

    Profit sharing works great when you have large league-wide guaranteed revenues.

    read NFL, NBA, MLB.

  24. Flyers_01 says:

    No that wasn’t a swipe at John LecLair. If a player is a free agent he is entitled to get as much money as the owners are willing to pay him under the CBA at the time. Although I will make an argument that John LeClair is the perfect argument against guaranteed contracts, something else I wish they’d address in the current talks.

    The shot I took was at Mike Modano who said something to the effect of “I can’t feed my dog on less than $9million/yr” at the beginning of this whole CBA mess (I think McCabe had the other memorable quote). I don’t know what the original quote was exactly because it was so long ago but the players have said alot of stupid things since the lockout started. Anything the players said that was smart since the lockout was immediately ferreted out and squashed (retracted) by the goosestepping Goodenow.

  25. Flyers_01 says:

    I think the levitt report includes the “revenues” as defined by the owners and Levitt. Whether that includes everything that the NHLPA would like to define as revenue is irrelevant. It is a primer on what the league views as revenues and costs and how they relate. It is what it was intended to be, a starting point for financial negotiations dealing with the health of the league as a whole(imo) and something the players wanted no part of.

    As far as having the players running the registers for awhile, that would be like naming the peanut vendor the CFO. I’m sorry if i offended any peanut vendors by comparing them to the mental capacity of hockey players. The players aren’t competant to run the registers, that’s why they have lawyers and accountants. If they can’t trust their own accountants, they are out of luck.

    Complicated=loopholes=exploits.

    Wayne and Mario are relevant and I’ll tell you why, TRUST. The players cry about how dishonest the owners are and how you, me and them, can’t trust them but if you look back on the last year, which side has been dishonest and underhanded? If I had to trust what one side was telling me over the other, the clear choice would be the owners based on the NHLPAs conduct.

    Do I think that Sponsors and Networks would love to pick up hockey coverage at bargain basement prices? Absolutely. If a Network will give $100 million before June 15th and only $50 million after June 15th. Which is better for the Network and which is better for the players?

    The reason the players haven’t signed a new agreement isn’t for “love of the game”, honor, integrity, or “future players”. If that had been the case they would’ve accepted the cap last year and made their stand with revenue sharing and lowering the ages on UFA. If I had to boil it down to one single reason, I’d say it’s Bob Goodenow’s pride. He’s never lost a negotiation with the owners, and he’s done it by making unreasonable demands and waiting for the owners to crumble. He’ll have to be removed most likely for a deal to be made.

  26. 19Yzerman says:

    Nashvilles and Carolinas and other non hockey cities are like stores with employees which never had any customers therefore there never really was any jobs there in the first place.That hot cocoa stand on south beach in Miami which no one is walking up to buy from is not giving its employees a since of job security. So why should its affiliate in Alaska have to support it?

    Players stole jobs without any remorse? Your kidding right? It is the nature of the business for players to contend with one and other for roster spots. They learn this at a very young age and become quite used to it by the time they become PROFESIONALS and teams choose who they will for what they feel is in the best interest of that team. To object to North American players going Europe and not object to European players playing in the NHL or any other league in North American for that matter is hypocritical.

  27. nordiques100 says:

    obviously you could care less about players like mike commodore or andrew ference or pierre daigenais who have worked hard to earn nhl work and would lose their jobs thanks to several of the aformentioned teams folding. more teams mean more jobs which is GOOD for the PA. i cant see how discarding these teams is good for players. there is value in having these teams because it brings in more money for players.

    europeans who come over and are good enough to play in the nhl deserve to play in the nhl. the nhl is the best league so all the best players in teh world should play there regardless of where they came from.

    i always thought the players were all brothers and stuck together no matter if they were nhlers or not. it is kind of like unwritten code. obviously we can see that nhl millionaires could care less about those who have no chance to make it to the nhl and have to play in lower level leagues.

    there are players around the world who are simply not good enough at all to make it to the nhl. this is why they go to europe or play in lower leagues like the ECHL. they are trying to make a living there. they dont make close to millions like the nhlers do and it is crippling when nhlers who dont need the money and taking their jobs. there were some who went to europe, took jobs away and then quit soon after due to being homesick or for some other reason. they took jobs away for no reason and made some players over there suffer for it. you find that being ok? if you were one of those players playing 4th line in bratislava slovakia and then found out guys like palffy and gaborik were joining your team just for the hell of it and you lost your job i dont think you would be happy one bit. you know these players are not going to stay. and keeping you on the sidelines without earning a living is going to cripple you while you see these millionaire nhlers taking your job until it is convinient for them to return to their real jobs in the nhl. hey if these nhlers were going to stay there for good and forget about the millions and their spot in the nhl then fine, all the power to them, but you and everyone else knows it was just a part time thing, so how fair is that to the unknown 4th liner trying to make a living there?

    this was not just restricted to europe. even here where those red wing players who played in a very low level league took jobs away for no reason and cost others their livelihood. there is a difference in competing for jobs with comparable players and stealing jobs from inferior players for the hell of it. they did show no remorse becuase these are the same people who were very critical of replacement players and even put threats out there to anyone who chose to be a replacement. so it is ok for the nhlers to go and to take jobs away from lesser players but not ok for these lesser players to take jobs in the nHL? you did say it is the nature of the business so this would be ok right?

    it is only hypocritical to support nhlers stealing jobs from others when they dont need the money while criticizing the use of replacement players.

    i dont think it was in the best interest at all for those teams to bring in these nhlers. they only got lucky the nhl season was cancelled. say if there was a season by november, signing all those nhlers would ahve been a waste of 2 months. then they would have had to bring back all those players they fired earlier due to nhlers taking their roster spots.

    look at that team in russia who brought in about 15 nhlers. it didnt benefit them one bit.

  28. 19Yzerman says:

    Any money spent to situate people within view of an NHL game is revenue. Luxury Suites are revenue. There are team owners who have been keeping that money as though it somehow is not revenue. Now thats pathetic!!!

    police it themselves? yea right like the NHL is going to say players we are going let you run the cash registers and run the deposits to the bank so you can monitor every penny.

  29. Aetherial says:

    In being devil’s advocate, you are cossing the line of reasonableness now.

    The league and the NHLPA NEGOTIATE what is eligible revenue and what is not.

    The NHLPA has audit access to the books. To cook them is fraud.

    For this not to work, you are suggesting that the league not only would deceive the NHLPA purposely, but that they would engage in fraudulent accounting practices in order to do so…

    There is a HUGE risk in that when you are subjecting yourself to outside *hostile* auditors.

    Remember the financial scams of the past 5 years have been as much about auditors with conflict of interest, or sheer incompetence as they have been about deceptive accounting practices.

    That is what Sarbaines-Oxley is all about.

    I think you are reaching into the *unreasonable*. making up scnearios out of thin air and “what if”… so you can justifiy what is an untenable position you have taken.

    EXACTLY, like the NHLPA did.

  30. 19Yzerman says:

    I pay 250 dollars to play in an adult league so I have no worries of someone coming to take my roster spot. Our league has rules that govern the skill level which would keep over skilled players out of our league. Our league evaluates players and puts them into the apropriate league based on skill. If these pro leagues do not have such rules then it is not the fault of the players who go there but, the commisioners of those leagues for not having such rules. However we are not evaluated based on wealth so I don’t see where a player needing money is relevant to them being allowed into a league. I am sure that these leagues are making more money off those NHLers then those players who you say had their jobs stolen. Did you ever stop to think that there might be a positive impact for those lower tier players upon their return? Like improved facilities? improved Fanfair like we used to have?

  31. 19Yzerman says:

    Reaching into the *unreasonable* making up scenarios out of thin air ????

    Come on man!!

    read this paragraph and find it in this article which I have the link to at the bottom.

    So how then does the league explain Ozanian’s finding that the N.Y. Islanders only reported half of the $17 million it got last year for its cable broadcasts? Or that William Wirtz, owner of the Chicago Blackhawks, who also owns half of his team’s home arena, the United Center, didn’t report $15 million in luxury suite sales?

    Sounds like fraudulent accounting practices to me.

    http://msn.foxsports.com/nhl/story/3159016

  32. guinsfan4life says:

    That thinking is exactly what is wrong with the National Hockey League and why it is where it is. The success of the National Hockey League should be determine based on the profit of ALL teams, not just the ones with more capital. When the focus changes, the popularity and marketability of the ENTIRE league will go up and all teams will benefit from that.

  33. guinsfan4life says:

    Couldn’t agree more. In the coming weeks as an agreement gets closer, it will come out and questions will be asked of Goodenow;

    1. Why didn’t you just take the cap in the first place instead of wasting time?

    2. Why didn’t you look at the Levitt report 6 months ago?

    3. Why wouldn’t a system of the owners reporting their financial gains have been sufficient then?

    Because the players thought it would be easy to break the owners; and continue the way things were under the old agreement.

  34. guinsfan4life says:

    Using behaviorist term to describe a lockout…a special education teacher’s dream come true.

    I don’t believe it was negative reinforcement that was being used; for nothing was taken away and there were no aversive stimuli present.

    I belive the term is extinction. The behavior of the players of wanting more, more, more, which is truely their right and the owners holding pat is them ignoring their behavior to place it on extinction. Which is more likely to occur if you follow behaviorism.

    While I agree with most of your points, especially the main one about money. That is what this is about, money. And along with that comes greed, which more importantly describes the situation. I think to a point, all CBA issues in any line of work all fall back on money. I guess the difference is the amount of money.

    I don’t belive Bettman is doing what the owners want him to do, but rather what they NEED him to do. The owners have shown more solidarity throughout this entire process than the players have; evidenced by questions of several players questioning Goodenow’s timing in acceptance of a cap.

Leave a Reply