NHL To Make Another Offer To NHLPA


The NHL, who has been spinning hard since last week’s “informal” meetings with the NHLPA reps, is reportedly going to make another offer to the players with the hope of saving the season.

NHLPA reps are already saying they will reject it because it will have a cap in it thus fans aren’t too hopeful there will be a resolution. From what we learned from the comments of NHLPA VP Bill Guerin, the players have little understanding of the business of sports and are seemingly willing to go all the way to canceling the season to try to cling on to the system that made them so rich yet made the game so weak.

If the NHL is smart, they will take a page from the NHLPA’s play book and come in with some WOW factor to their bid. This is not only important to the slim possibility of a deal but it is also important in order to show good faith needed to ultimately break the union.

You might expect to see:

– An announcement of when the season would start, how many games and even who plays who. The NHL has gurus working on this complex issue and when shown the game schedule, it might motivate players to lace up.

– A franchise player tag. It allows teams to hang onto players they draft and allows UFAs to make big money. It isn’t as hard a cap as the owners want but it is a BIG concession.

– (crazy idea warning) Offer the players all of their money back for this year. From the 300 million dollar war chest, offer to pay the players for the time they have spent being locked out. You think player wives and or agents wouldn’t go for this?

This is the 11th hour and the owners need to make their best offer. The player’s offer was a lot of sizzle but very little bacon. The owners need both to woo player, their wives, their agents and the PA’s execs back to the ice in a system that works for both sides.

66 Responses to NHL To Make Another Offer To NHLPA

  1. d_only_Flames_Fan says:

    alright, the owners agree to secretly no longer offer contracts above a certain price, making an unofficial cap

    Do it!

  2. hockeyhead says:

    she might be mellowing out for her but to non celeberties she probably should be in the betty ford.

    yea, her dress fell down at puffy combs 35th b-day……..she was hammered.

  3. 19Yzerman says:

    Its illegal and it is what is known as collusion. The owners know better. They can’t control them selves from shooting each other in the foot when going against each other to get one player anyway.

  4. Aetherial says:

    The latest rumor… apparently from someone between ownership and management level, who is well known..

    Is a cap of 50 million with a significant tax kicking it at 35-40 or so. In addition the owners would take the rollback the players offered.

    Who knows… my guess is that it would not be accepted.

  5. guinsfan4life says:

    I don’t think the owners are wanting the players to play for free; like I said, when they are making millions asking them to take pay cuts of millions is a fair concession. After all, how many cars, houses, vacation spots can one person have??

    The last CBA was in favor of the players, we both clearly agree to that, so I see nothing wrong with the fact the owners are the ones this time wanting things in their favor. However, there are incentives the owners could put in to entice the players to accept a cap. Are they doing that? Probably not.

    Sure, I’ve been watching other programs in the time slots I usually would watch hockey. ON wednesdays, though, they have classic pens games on and I watch them. I’ve turned into a sitcom junkie because of no hockey. Am I proud of that, nope. Is there anything I can do? nope. I don’t think the NHLPA/PA has any leverage with a new TV deal…they need to get back to playing and change certain things about the game if needed and then look at the ratings in a few years…if they are up, then they are in a good bargaining position. If not, they need to look at how they can get the game back into the living rooms of fans.

    I think you can, however spoon feed hockey to markets if you can convince them their team is or has a chance to win the Stanley cup or go deep into the playoffs.

    Last season, the fans of the Pens, Hurricanes, Flames, Panthers, Sabres, Thrashers, Capitals, Islanders, Blackhawks, Blue Jackets, Predators, Predators, Ducks, and Kings all knew their team would have no chance of making the playoffs and competing for a Stanley Cup. Before they even started playing games!!!! Now, some of those teams took steps in the right direction, but didn’t get it done.

    These are the fans who thought their team had what it might take to win a cup-Philadelphia, Detroit, Colorado, New Jersey, Toronto–that is only 5 teams!! Even if you disagree and add a few more, that would be only say 6-7 teams!!!

    YOu have 14 teams that are dead in the water before they even play a game;

    6-7 teams who would compete for the cup–

    and the rest in the middle (9-10)!! This does not generate excitement for the casual hockey fan. For us, it doesn’t matter, but for the casual fan, it does nothing.

    Imposing a salary cap will put more onus on the general managers and owners to spend their money wisely and to draft and develop young talent that will succeed in the league. If I know the penguins are spending the same amount on player payroll as the wings, as a casual fan, that makes me believe there is hope we can compete. And if we can’t, then the general manager and coach need to be held accountable.

    sorry I went off on a tangent there.

  6. habsoverserver says:

    I bash the Rangers mostly because I attend many games at MSG and I am not satisfied with the product.

    I have no objection to the Rangers spending. I object to them spending and sucking.

    The Rangers were not going to start the season with no new free agents. Never has Dolan fielded a team without some fresh talent, either NHL or NBA.

    Yes they dumped players and yes they will sign vets. Look at the Pens. They dumped players and signed vets.

    My point was that Cablevision does not want a cap. Why does that make no sense?

    Rangers fans don’t care about the lockout. Have you listened to sports radio in NYC? Have you read the Post, Times or Daily News?

  7. kicksave856 says:

    for some reason the way you worded “tremendous slut” just knocked me out of my chair. i’m still laughing right now.

  8. kicksave856 says:

    well said.

  9. kicksave856 says:

    see, this is exactly the type of proposal that they just reject as soon as they see it.

    it’s perfect.

    as perfect as a proposal can be anyway. i suppose that’s why it’s called a “proposal”. all a proposal has to consist of to be “perfect” is a feasible starting point that isn’t completely one-sided. you don’t come to the table and say, “here’s the resolution”, you come to the table and say, “here’s the proposal”.

    not only is that proposal perfect, but i am sure that you can come up with a handful of proposals that are “perfect”. you can give and take a few of the items. you can adjust the numbers here and there. you can do whatever you want.

    no one is coming with a proposal that is completely one-sided, that would be a waste of time. i’m sure that there are points in every proposal that protect both sides (obviously, you start with numbers that lean your way and take it from there…).

    there have probably been at least 2 or 3 perfectly feasible proposals rejected, and probably 1 or 2 that were “perfect”.

    the point is: it’s not the proposals, it’s the people involved.

    at this stage of the game it can’t possibly still be the proposals. we’ve heard about salary cap proposals, luxury tax proposals, salary roll-back proposals, proposals of trying one system for 4 years and then the other system for the following 4 years, all types of proposals. proposals of all shapes and sizes. it’s not the combat anymore, it’s the combatants.

    whether through previous personal conflicts, difficulty dealing with one another during these particular discussions, egos, or any number of other possibilities – these people just can’t seem to agree with each other on anything.

    it’s my opinion that the leaders for each side (as well as the people that they are surrounding themselves with) are just too stubborn, uninformed, or incompetent to sit down and get this done.

    earlier on in the discussions, Robert Esche was quoted as saying, “…we’re dealing with a madman.”, in reference to Bettman.

    i don’t think he knew how right he was.

    of course, he also probably wasn’t aware that Bettman can say the same thing.

  10. hockeyhead says:

    am i the only bruins fan? where is Hienzee 57??? well, thanks for my recognition overserver…i appreciate it.

  11. guinsfan4life says:

    Glad I could provide some kicks for you kicksave!!!

  12. GretzNYR99 says:

    It doesn’t matter if they spend and suck, they’re not the cause of this problem.

    Dolan doesn’t care about winning, he cares about putting marquee names on the ice/court so that people will watch.

    No, they won’t sign vets, they’ve only signed 2, Nylander and Weekes, and if they were going to sign vets, they would have done it during the offseason.

    You aimlessly bashed the Rangers, I didn’t see a point in your little escapade. But since you say your point is that Cablevision doesn’t want a cap, I think you’re wrong, and they could care either way. At this point, they’re losing money from NOT having the Rangers on MSG. They’ve resorted to the Ranger classics, Hartford Wolfpack, and college hockey.

    Wrong, again. The Rangers fans care, it’s the fair-weather corporate s***** that go to see the marquee names that don’t care about hockey. I listen to sports radio from all over in New York, and I read the post daily, the Times is a waste of space, and I’d only read it for Jason Diamos’ columns anyway, and the Daily News has only one writer that I’d give any merit to, and that’s Dellapina. The fans care, they’re distraught and angered. They’re not voicing themselves because the topic won’t get much air/radio time until it gets pushed to the forefront again. Maybe now that talks are being started up, you’ll see Rangers fans liven up a little.

  13. SabresAreCool says:

    we also have resident Sabres fan…..even though i live a mile from canada…..Brooks is a quack

  14. ericthered1961 says:

    Gary Bettman hurts hockey and needs to be replaced by someone who both knows and treasures the sport.

    The talent pool is diluted- we need to close 6 teams to improve the product. Finally- we need to stop trying to win over the American fan with the present inferior product.

    History has confirmed this as a Canadian sport- we’ve tried, unsuccessfully for years to win US fans over and it didn’t work so lets take our Canadian product back and please ourselves and US hockey cities who DO presently love the game. I believe this strategy will ultimately win over the elusive new US fan. Without the clutch and grab made necessary by the “Bettman growth years” dilution of the available talent pool.

  15. GretzNYR99 says:

    Gretzky for Commish…

    Won’t happen though, he’s happy in Phoenix.

  16. kicksave856 says:

    You believe that strategy would ultimately win over the elusive new US fan because it would.

    Not only would it win over the new US fan, it would also win back the old US hockey fan who has given up on the sport because they no longer find it enjoyable.

    There was a time – before the over expansion of this league, before the over commercialization of this league, before the clutching and grabbing – that may possibly have gone down as the “Golden Age” of hockey (had it not been for the 50’s and 60’s). Some of the greatest superstars ever were playing on some of the greatest teams ever in the era of hockey that abruptly ended when the clutching and grabbing began. And the product was exciting, fast, and quite possibly the best hockey ever played.

    I don’t know that there can be much of a grudge held against American hockey fans by Canadian hockey fans, because the American hockey fan had no power over this and didn’t even see it coming. But if all of the attempts by the league to get teams in American cities (some of these attempts are just ridiculous, by the way) and to push the poorly suffering product in all of these new markets are products of the league trying to “Americanize” the product, then yes that is a problem.

    Hockey was at its greatest when no one was bothering to try to market it to Carolina. Hockey was at its greatest when there were fewer teams. Hockey was at its greatest when the stars were permitted to be stars – no 240 pounder holding him by the back of his jersey.

    Hockey was much, much better off before all of these things started happening and when no one ever really cared that it was the “#4 sport”. All they really did by trying to unnaturally overgrow the product and by marketing it so aggressively was

    -Over extend the talent pool by spreading the sport around in places that it has no business being, resulting in the clutching and grabbing and the slow boring style of play.

    -Bring the public eye to the fact that their efforts failed miserably and that now it’s probably not even #4 anymore.

    How embarrassing.

    If the product is defective, the product is defective. You can’t hook people in Atlanta by offering a defective product and saying, “Isn’t this exciting? It’s the coolest game on earth, you know?”. It doesn’t matter how or where you try to sell a bad product, no one is going to buy it anywhere!

    And people who liked the product before are LEAVING! You’re actually going backwards.

    If you want to gain new fans (not to mention get the old fans back), fix the product. Put it back the way it was and let it evolve from there. You tried to take it in a certain direction, and you almost killed it. Take it back to the place you found it, the last place it thrived and had any chance of growing and being healthy, and let it out in the wild. Give the damn thing back before it’s too late.

    If you could offer the type of hockey that was played in the era that was referred to earlier, the sport would begin to grow. Maybe it wouldn’t grow at the unrealistic rate that you wanted it to grow, but it would grow. Besides, it definitely couldn’t get any worse than where it is right now. What is there to lose? If you want any chance of gaining even one new fan, you need to offer the better of the two products. If you want your old fans back, you need to offer them the product that they loved. This is common sense. Compare and contrast.

    How realistic is it to lop off a chunk of teams and get back to the old brand of hockey? Not very. But this is what’s wrong with the game. It all stems from what can, rightfully or wrongfully, be perceived as “the over-Americanization” of the game.

    I am from a suburb of Philadelphia, and I can tell you that the American fan is just as outraged as the Canadian fan over the product that is being put out on the ice. We want the old hockey back too. And I, personally, would be more than willing to trade in Atlanta, and Columbus, and Carolina etc. to get that old product back.

    Everyone wants the old product back.

    You know, Mario Lemieux left the sport because of what it had become (that, and some pesky back thing), why wouldn’t the plumber that lives on the corner do the exact same thing?

Leave a Reply