Jan Levine: Guest Lockout Blog A view on the lockout from Rags2Riches

Well written and quite informative but I don't agree that the owners don't want a season or are even willing to sacrifice one. I believe by immediately dismissing the proposals made by the NHLPA without a legitimate review they are trying to force the union to bend closer to their own proposal. I think that is supported by the fact they only cancelled games through Nov. 1 after dangling the carrot of a start date on Nov. 2. It's all about applying pressure to see if you can bend or break the opposition.

I really believe the two sides will get together next week, Tuesday is my guess, and begin to make real progress on a new agreement. To me this was a last-ditch effort by the NHL to strongly wield the leverage they possess to squeeze a little more out of the union. How well it works remains to be seen.

Oh and good to see you again Alex.

Great read, thank you Mr. Guest.

A lucid and well thought out piece. I don't share your view because I want to believe this can be worked out.

That said, it's hard to argue with what you wrote.

Very interesting article Alex. Well thought out, but i hope youre wrong, for all our sakes.

Thankyou very much for a great read.I can only hope that you end up being wrong about the final outcome.Always a wild card in life and hopefully here as well.Corporate America will bale on the NHL and for this reason a deal will get done!

Great read. Thank you, Alex.

"Damn the (Bett)man. Save the Empire!"
-- Mark, Empire Records

Won't the players appear greedy no matter what.

Isn't society's common perception that they are overpaid because they are just athletes. They have fun at their job and that means they are greedy type of logic.

The NHL doesn't need to spin anything saying the players are greedy.

One reason the NHL is in a position of strength is there are
more players that would love to play in the NHL than
number of people with the money and desire to own
a NHL club.

Most owners can afford to lose a whole season.

How many players will never play in the NHL if this season is lost?

My point is the players are of course in a weaker position. It's not the genius of Bettman making them appear greedy and weak.

I think that Bettman dismissed the nhlpa 3 offers is still a tactic and nothing more and I really hope next week is a good one.

Won't the players appear greedy no matter what.

Isn't society's common perception that they are overpaid because they are just athletes. They have fun at their job and that means they are greedy type of logic.

The NHL doesn't need to spin anything saying the players are greedy.

One reason the NHL is in a position of strength is there are
more players that would love to play in the NHL than
number of people with the money and desire to own
a NHL club.

Most owners can afford to lose a whole season.

How many players will never play in the NHL if this season is lost?

My point is the players are of course in a weaker position. It's not the genius of Bettman making them appear greedy and weak.

I think that Bettman dismissed the nhlpa 3 offers is still a tactic and nothing more and I really hope next week is a good one.
- knmdlm

Normally CBA are negotiated by honorable people. There has been nothing honorable about these negotiations. Gary Bettman has resulted to "piss arm" club tatics of the past when labor (labour) was just starting to flourish. He locked the players the moment he could, hasn't spent a collective 30 min examining any of the proposals set forth by the PA. It's not weak or greedy for a person to expect to be paid the money his employer agreed in writing to pay him, as a matter of fact it's extremely honorable. Something Gary Bettman knows nothing about.

Normally CBA are negotiated by honorable people. There has been nothing honorable about these negotiations. Gary Bettman has resulted to "piss arm" club tatics of the past when labor (labour) was just starting to flourish. He locked the players the moment he could, hasn't spent a collective 30 min examining any of the proposals set forth by the PA. It's not weak or greedy for a person to expect to be paid the money his employer agreed in writing to pay him, as a matter of fact it's extremely honorable. Something Gary Bettman knows nothing about.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

I agree. And Bettman walking out on the 3 proposals that the NHLPA gave is just incredibly poor negotiating. The NHLPA was looking at methodology there, and looking for some feedback from the League in a method of getting to 50/50. In the hopes of finding a point to negotiate from to move towards an agreement. And in doing so, Bettman is basically saying he's not interested in negotiating.

Well written and quite informative but I don't agree that the owners don't want a season or are even willing to sacrifice one. I believe by immediately dismissing the proposals made by the NHLPA without a legitimate review they are trying to force the union to bend closer to their own proposal. I think that is supported by the fact they only cancelled games through Nov. 1 after dangling the carrot of a start date on Nov. 2. It's all about applying pressure to see if you can bend or break the opposition.

I really believe the two sides will get together next week, Tuesday is my guess, and begin to make real progress on a new agreement. To me this was a last-ditch effort by the NHL to strongly wield the leverage they possess to squeeze a little more out of the union. How well it works remains to be seen.

Oh and good to see you again Alex.
- gkmkiller

Definitely a possibility Glen, and I certainly hope you are right. I guess my doubts lie with the possibility that the players will agree to the NHL's latest proposal without an extended lockout forcing their hand. I would be surprised if the NHL "taking a stand," if you will, is enough to cause the PA to suddenly give in. In fact, I would say their behavior had an alienating effect on the players which is not conducive to an agreement. I find it hard to think the NHL believes that this power move will lead to a quick settlement here.

Then again, thats just my view of the situation, and it could be very well that you are correct and it is just another negotiating tactic by the league. But I think we could all agree that it will cause the process to take longer than it would have if the NHL would have given some substantial response to the NHLPA's counteroffers.

Won't the players appear greedy no matter what.

Isn't society's common perception that they are overpaid because they are just athletes. They have fun at their job and that means they are greedy type of logic.

The NHL doesn't need to spin anything saying the players are greedy.

One reason the NHL is in a position of strength is there are
more players that would love to play in the NHL than
number of people with the money and desire to own
a NHL club.

Most owners can afford to lose a whole season.

How many players will never play in the NHL if this season is lost?

My point is the players are of course in a weaker position. It's not the genius of Bettman making them appear greedy and weak.

I think that Bettman dismissed the nhlpa 3 offers is still a tactic and nothing more and I really hope next week is a good one.
- knmdlm

I agree with your point that the NHLPA is in a weaker position, and that the NHLs treatment could be a negotiating tactic, but a very risky one to say the least.

However, I could not agree less on your point about the NHL not needing to spin anything. If anything, I think the outside sees this as a battle of the millionaires vs the billionaires. Rich as they may be, the fans see the players in a weaker position, as you pointed out later in your post.

I think fans have been more sympathetic to the players side, who are fighting against further concessions and being forced to give up what they have had in the past. The owners draw less sympathy, as they are seen as grabbing money from the players and looking to get even more than they had before.

Proof of this would be the news of the NHL's focus group, as well as the way Bettman pretty much mis-characterized the NHLPA's three counteroffers to the media. PR may not be the only factor, but in my opinion it is certainly a big factor in this entire negotation, and as I suggest in the article, in the actions of the NHL from the start.

I agree with your point that the NHLPA is in a weaker position, and that the NHLs treatment could be a negotiating tactic, but a very risky one to say the least.

However, I could not agree less on your point about the NHL not needing to spin anything. If anything, I think the outside sees this as a battle of the millionaires vs the billionaires. Rich as they may be, the fans see the players in a weaker position, as you pointed out later in your post.

I think fans have been more sympathetic to the players side, who are fighting against further concessions and being forced to give up what they have had in the past. The owners draw less sympathy, as they are seen as grabbing money from the players and looking to get even more than they had before.

Proof of this would be the news of the NHL's focus group, as well as the way Bettman pretty much mis-characterized the NHLPA's three counteroffers to the media. PR may not be the only factor, but in my opinion it is certainly a big factor in this entire negotation, and as I suggest in the article, in the actions of the NHL from the start.
- Rags2Riches

I've been surprised how many on this site in particular seem to take the owners side or at least blame the players equally. The Ranger forum is mostly pro-player but elsewhere it isn't so much. My assertion that more fans support the players has been questioned by more than one commenter.

Definitely a possibility Glen, and I certainly hope you are right. I guess my doubts lie with the possibility that the players will agree to the NHL's latest proposal without an extended lockout forcing their hand. I would be surprised if the NHL "taking a stand," if you will, is enough to cause the PA to suddenly give in. In fact, I would say their behavior had an alienating effect on the players which is not conducive to an agreement. I find it hard to think the NHL believes that this power move will lead to a quick settlement here.

Then again, thats just my view of the situation, and it could be very well that you are correct and it is just another negotiating tactic by the league. But I think we could all agree that it will cause the process to take longer than it would have if the NHL would have given some substantial response to the NHLPA's counteroffers.
- Rags2Riches

It isn't that I think this act itself will draw this to a conclusion; I just think the two sides are closer than they let on and Bettman's reaction to the players proposals might have been done to squeeze just a little more ultimately in the new CBA. We'll see though; Fehr is measured in his approach and has likely seen all the tricks of the trade.

I've been surprised how many on this site in particular seem to take the owners side or at least blame the players equally. The Ranger forum is mostly pro-player but elsewhere it isn't so much. My assertion that more fans support the players has been questioned by more than one commenter.
- gkmkiller

My problem with the players association is that they are pretty much a failure. They Richarded around in 05 for no reason really. Now what are they doing it for? Their contracts are higher now than they were before the first one. They are still rising. And they are holding out for 13%? After 9 games its not even worth it. That percentage will get smaller every year. I just don't see the endgame. There is no way to make back the money lost for these players. They only have one career and for a lot of guys, especially the ones that aren't in Europe, they will be short. This is the owners league. Sometimes sacrifices have to be made.

I say this not really supporting much of what the owners want with the exception of money for the most part.

My problem with the players association is that they are pretty much a failure. They Richarded around in 05 for no reason really. Now what are they doing it for? Their contracts are higher now than they were before the first one. They are still rising. And they are holding out for 13%? After 9 games its not even worth it. That percentage will get smaller every year. I just don't see the endgame. There is no way to make back the money lost for these players. They only have one career and for a lot of guys, especially the ones that aren't in Europe, they will be short. This is the owners league. Sometimes sacrifices have to be made.

I say this not really supporting much of what the owners want with the exception of money for the most part.
- rmdevil313

The endgame is 50/50 as it has been all along. Fehr's job is to limit the damage and keep what the players already got.

My problem with the players association is that they are pretty much a failure. They Richarded around in 05 for no reason really. Now what are they doing it for? Their contracts are higher now than they were before the first one. They are still rising. And they are holding out for 13%? After 9 games its not even worth it. That percentage will get smaller every year. I just don't see the endgame. There is no way to make back the money lost for these players. They only have one career and for a lot of guys, especially the ones that aren't in Europe, they will be short. This is the owners league. Sometimes sacrifices have to be made.

I say this not really supporting much of what the owners want with the exception of money for the most part.
- rmdevil313

The players are very willing to make scarifices in order to strike a deal with the league, that doesn't mean they have to be raped in the process. It's not a matter of 13%, it's a matter of self respect as a group. The greedy money grabbing owners like Jacobs, Katz etc. should honor the contracts they signed in good faith. And yes, that's exactly what they want, money. Money they agreed to pay.

The players are very willing to make scarifices in order to strike a deal with the league, that doesn't mean they have to be raped in the process. It's not a matter of 13%, it's a matter of self respect as a group. The greedy money grabbing owners like Jacobs, Katz etc. should honor the contracts they signed in good faith. And yes, that's exactly what they want, money. Money they agreed to pay.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

I tend to agree with this.

I did a series of case studies on a labor dispute at a food processing company, and every new contract took more and more from labor and gave it to the owners. Yes, its an owners league, and they have all the power, so unless the players take a stand somewhere, they will end up with nothing. Its not like the revenues are dropping and owners need the players to make sacrifices. The revenues are rising and owners want players to make sacrifices so they can get even richer.

My problem with the players association is that they are pretty much a failure. They Richarded around in 05 for no reason really. Now what are they doing it for? Their contracts are higher now than they were before the first one. They are still rising. And they are holding out for 13%? After 9 games its not even worth it. That percentage will get smaller every year. I just don't see the endgame. There is no way to make back the money lost for these players. They only have one career and for a lot of guys, especially the ones that aren't in Europe, they will be short. This is the owners league. Sometimes sacrifices have to be made.

I say this not really supporting much of what the owners want with the exception of money for the most part.
- rmdevil313

I can see your point but I have a real problem with owners signing players to rich, long-term deals with the knowledge they were going to push for this type of reduction and with the knowledge that the league as a whole is posting record revenues. I believe the players are prepared to find a deal that will work for both parties but want the owners to honor existing contracts. The owners are insisting on salary relief immediately while also creating a system they thing works for them. I still sympathize more with the players at this point.

Another thing that has to be figured is the NHLPA gave up a lot the last time. If it looks like they cave again that will just further the owners belief that they can push the union around any time they want. Teams that are either in bad markets or that can't manage their franchise responsibly can get bailed out with the players paying their bills for them in essence. That's not a good precedent to set.

I tend to agree with this.

I did a series of case studies on a labor dispute at a food processing company, and every new contract took more and more from labor and gave it to the owners. Yes, its an owners league, and they have all the power, so unless the players take a stand somewhere, they will end up with nothing. Its not like the revenues are dropping and owners need the players to make sacrifices. The revenues are rising and owners want players to make sacrifices so they can get even richer.
- Rags2Riches

Truth is only a small handful of owners are raking in the growing revenues. Many aren't and are losing money or breaking even. The problem, assuming the league wants to save all 30 teams, is systemic; forcing players to give some salary relief now is no guarantee that the current system as proposed by the NHL will work either. That's why the players wanted to emphasize revenue sharing to prop up some of those weaker teams.

The endgame is 50/50 as it has been all along. Fehr's job is to limit the damage and keep what the players already got.
- MJL

Then he should have started negotiating before september.

The players are very willing to make scarifices in order to strike a deal with the league, that doesn't mean they have to be raped in the process. It's not a matter of 13%, it's a matter of self respect as a group. The greedy money grabbing owners like Jacobs, Katz etc. should honor the contracts they signed in good faith. And yes, that's exactly what they want, money. Money they agreed to pay.
- OLDSCHOOL#6

Money they agreed to pay under the rules of the last cba. If the players want these contracts guaranteed they should negotiate a grandfathering clause into the CBA's. Yes owners want money. If you spent nearly 200 million dollars to buy a team, only to not turn a profit, what would you do?

And also, the players can still make more than their contract under the NHL's proposal.

I can see your point but I have a real problem with owners signing players to rich, long-term deals with the knowledge they were going to push for this type of reduction and with the knowledge that the league as a whole is posting record revenues. I believe the players are prepared to find a deal that will work for both parties but want the owners to honor existing contracts. The owners are insisting on salary relief immediately while also creating a system they thing works for them. I still sympathize more with the players at this point.

Another thing that has to be figured is the NHLPA gave up a lot the last time. If it looks like they cave again that will just further the owners belief that they can push the union around any time they want. Teams that are either in bad markets or that can't manage their franchise responsibly can get bailed out with the players paying their bills for them in essence. That's not a good precedent to set.
- gkmkiller

The NHLPA gave up a lot last time, but it didn't necessarily screw the players out either. Player salaries are more now than before the lockout and, barring some radical consequence of the lockout, they will continue to grow. Sure taking a paycut sucks, but if your company is losing money, you can shut down, which hurts the PA, fire employees which isn't an option, or cut pay. But by not taking the paycut, they risk losing even more money. After the last lockout players basically unanimously said it wasn't worth it. THey lost money they'd never get back. I fail to see how this one will be any different.

Then he should have started negotiating before september.
- rmdevil313

That's on both sides... (frank) them for wasting so much time.

Money they agreed to pay under the rules of the last cba. If the players want these contracts guaranteed they should negotiate a grandfathering clause into the CBA's. Yes owners want money. If you spent nearly 200 million dollars to buy a team, only to not turn a profit, what would you do?

And also, the players can still make more than their contract under the NHL's proposal.
- rmdevil313

Irrelevant as long as the value of the team goes up. That's where the real money is in owning sports teams. If franchise value goes down or remains static and you aren't turning a profit you might want to look at how your organization is run and consider whether you made a wise business investment.