http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=409129

This stinks, I was starting to get real optimisitc. Hopefully just a bump in the road but that seems like a pretty big gap in ther make whole provision.

When they finally start playing hockey, I'd like to really see the league and the NHLPA address situations of these teams not making money, or else they will be right back where they are once this next deal expires. It's not that they have teams in small markets that need help, i's because they have teams in bad markets.

   I'm guessing, this season is toast.

This time next year, with still no deal signed, we will all be discussing the up-coming olympics, and which players will be on the various teams, and who will be doing the choosing.

In response to biggskye's comment:

I'm starting to agree with this sentiment.Before negotiations started i figured the season would start late but that they would be playing by Nov. or Dec., but now unless Jacob's,Leonsis and the other top dogs totally change their thoughts about the next CBA(i don't think so) then it will be up to the players to capitulate.As far as that happening, i think they will have to lose much more of their paychecks for reality to set in. 

 

3 sides frustrated.  I count all of us as a side in this matter, too.

I still think they get this done and are on the ice by the end of December if not sooner.

It's pure foolishness that it's Nov and these wealthy fools couldn't work out a deal. They had a whole season and it's off season to get this done. I want to be optimistic and say they start by the end of Dec but I think the season is toast. 

In response to kelvana33's comment:

Attendance histories don't really support that argument Kel.  I agree though, a lot of what's being hammered out now should become more of a "constitution", than a temporary work agreement.  The split should be good to go for literally decades.  Free agency, entry level deals....all of that stuff is constant, and shouldn't denigrate to warefare every 4 or 5 years.  If free agency at 27 is a bad idea, it's always a bad idea, not just in 2009 or 2014, or 2155.

50-50 is fair.  Always will be, as long as that is the precedent in pro sport.

 

In response to stevegm's comment:

To me, because there is such a huge gap revenue wise between the top 5 teams and the bottom 5 teams is the biggest reason there is a lockout. I don't know what the average attendance is in Tampa,Florida,Columbus,Pheonix etc..But even if they sold out every game they wouldnt even be close to generating as much revenue as teams like Montreal,Toronto and Boston etc..I dont think the local networks that show their games down there in Sunrise get as much for advertising. Probably not even close. Then you factor in appeareal,merchandise etc..It's gotta be huge, now the owners are askign the players to foot some of the bill in those regards.

For me, like I said, theres a huge difference between a small market and a bad market. NHL has too many teams in bad markets. Small markets can thrive,  Look at the Packers. Just buying a ticket doesnt make anyone a good market. Example: A team in Quebec selling out their 10,000 seat stadium every night is much healthier than a team in Florida averaging 12.000 a night. The overall interest in the smaller market is much greater, thus generating more revenue across the board.

The NHL has had 4 work stoppages in the last 20 years. The single biggest reason for this is expansion. Expansion in bad markets.

[/QUOTE]

Attendance histories don't really support that argument Kel.  I agree though, a lot of what's being hammered out now should become more of a "constitution", than a temporary work agreement.  The split should be good to go for literally decades.  Free agency, entry level deals....all of that stuff is constant, and shouldn't denigrate to warefare every 4 or 5 years.  If free agency at 27 is a bad idea, it's always a bad idea, not just in 2009 or 2014, or 2155.

50-50 is fair.  Always will be, as long as that is the precedent in pro sport.

 

[/QUOTE]


To me, because there is such a huge gap revenue wise between the top 5 teams and the bottom 5 teams is the biggest reason there is a lockout. I don't know what the average attendance is in Tampa,Florida,Columbus,Pheonix etc..But even if they sold out every game they wouldnt even be close to generating as much revenue as teams like Montreal,Toronto and Boston etc..I dont think the local networks that show their games down there in Sunrise get as much for advertising. Probably not even close. Then you factor in appeareal,merchandise etc..It's gotta be huge, now the owners are askign the players to foot some of the bill in those regards.

For me, like I said, theres a huge difference between a small market and a bad market. NHL has too many teams in bad markets. Small markets can thrive,  Look at the Packers. Just buying a ticket doesnt make anyone a good market. Example: A team in Quebec selling out their 10,000 seat stadium every night is much healthier than a team in Florida averaging 12.000 a night. The overall interest in the smaller market is much greater, thus generating more revenue across the board.

The NHL has had 4 work stoppages in the last 20 years. The single biggest reason for this is expansion. Expansion in bad markets.

[/QUOTE]

If someone told you that Tampa, Florida, Phoenix, and Columbus all had better attendance than the Boston Bruins, the year before the salary cap came into effect....would that change your opinion?

Not long ago, the Dallas Stars were one of the more valuable NHL properties.  Does that change your mind any?

And yes, buying a ticket is the biggest single thing.  Certainly bigger than player salaries, when considering a potential location.

We're not mired in a lockout because of expansion.  We're not mired in a lockout because of neccessity either.  This lockout is only about one thing.  MORE. 

In response to stevegm's comment:

Attendance histories don't really support that argument Kel.  I agree though, a lot of what's being hammered out now should become more of a "constitution", than a temporary work agreement.  The split should be good to go for literally decades.  Free agency, entry level deals....all of that stuff is constant, and shouldn't denigrate to warefare every 4 or 5 years.  If free agency at 27 is a bad idea, it's always a bad idea, not just in 2009 or 2014, or 2155.

50-50 is fair.  Always will be, as long as that is the precedent in pro sport.

 

[/QUOTE]


To me, because there is such a huge gap revenue wise between the top 5 teams and the bottom 5 teams is the biggest reason there is a lockout. I don't know what the average attendance is in Tampa,Florida,Columbus,Pheonix etc..But even if they sold out every game they wouldnt even be close to generating as much revenue as teams like Montreal,Toronto and Boston etc..I dont think the local networks that show their games down there in Sunrise get as much for advertising. Probably not even close. Then you factor in appeareal,merchandise etc..It's gotta be huge, now the owners are askign the players to foot some of the bill in those regards.

For me, like I said, theres a huge difference between a small market and a bad market. NHL has too many teams in bad markets. Small markets can thrive,  Look at the Packers. Just buying a ticket doesnt make anyone a good market. Example: A team in Quebec selling out their 10,000 seat stadium every night is much healthier than a team in Florida averaging 12.000 a night. The overall interest in the smaller market is much greater, thus generating more revenue across the board.

The NHL has had 4 work stoppages in the last 20 years. The single biggest reason for this is expansion. Expansion in bad markets.

[/QUOTE]

If someone told you that Tampa, Florida, Phoenix, and Columbus all had better attendance than the Boston Bruins, the year before the salary cap came into effect....would that change your opinion?

Not long ago, the Dallas Stars were one of the more valuable NHL properties.  Does that change your mind any?

And yes, buying a ticket is the biggest single thing.  Certainly bigger than player salaries, when considering a potential location.

We're not mired in a lockout because of expansion.  We're not mired in a lockout because of neccessity either.  This lockout is only about one thing.  MORE. 

[/QUOTE]

 I think the lockout is based on the fact that there are bottom teams, the ones I mentioned, that are losing money and the owners would like the players to pick up more of the tab. If thats what you mean by more than I agree with you. Before the last lockout the league revenues were 2 billion. The owners wanted a salary cap/floor to level the playing field.  Before this lockout the league revenues were 3.3 billion. The owners want the weaker teams to get some of that to ensure a healthier league but they want the players to pay more into those revenues.

I miss my blogging buddies.  I wanna stay positive but I don't think the owners will cave.  It's owners vs owners.  Any deal that is struck should have an immediate end of Bettman.  I read a tweet quote.  "two American lawyers (buttman fehr)ruining Canada's game".  Very true.  

Lets all hope this gets done. Hope everyone is doing well. 

 

I'm not sure why it's Canada's game.  Even in the Original 6 days, most of the team have been in the USA.

Is Fehr ruining the game?  There is more than 50% Canadian in the NHLPA.  They could easily decide to sign any deal today.  They haven't.

Canadian hockey players ruining USA's ice game.

In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

Is baseball the American traditional past time?  Well hockey is way more important to Canadians.  Come visit me sometime and I will take you for a drive through every small town in NS.  Hockey is the blood line to most in Canada.  Bowling is more popular in the US.  

Bettman and Fehr are idiots. Mind you I would want Bettman as my lawyer.  Fact is they are both American lawyers...  MLB nfl bowling roller durby fishing are all more popular than hockey in the US.  Heck high school football has a better following.  

Everyone misses hockey so it wasn't a slight at American hockey fans.  Lets not get the whole Canada vs US thing going.  The tweet was from a former NHL player.  

You still siding with the owners?  They are doing an excellent job.  Signing all those mega dollar and terms and now want them nul n void.  The kicker was all the last minute long term contracts. The players should sue the owners.  

In response to biggskye's comment:

  Gary Bettman is on record as saying he is not yet committed on allowing NHL players to participate in the 2013 olympics. It was suppose to be part of the negotiations of the CBA. With or without a new CBA in order, there is a good chance we won't see NHL players in the olympics next year in Russia.

Jp

watch and see all the Russian players that go regardless of what the league decides.  Bettman is a tool.  NHL players in the Olympics only had over 3/4 of Canadian households tuning in.  Yeah let's get rid of that.  Who wants to watch great hockey.  Owners likely are against it as well.  

 

 

[/QUOTE]


To me, because there is such a huge gap revenue wise between the top 5 teams and the bottom 5 teams is the biggest reason there is a lockout. I don't know what the average attendance is in Tampa,Florida,Columbus,Pheonix etc..But even if they sold out every game they wouldnt even be close to generating as much revenue as teams like Montreal,Toronto and Boston etc..I dont think the local networks that show their games down there in Sunrise get as much for advertising. Probably not even close. Then you factor in appeareal,merchandise etc..It's gotta be huge, now the owners are askign the players to foot some of the bill in those regards.

For me, like I said, theres a huge difference between a small market and a bad market. NHL has too many teams in bad markets. Small markets can thrive,  Look at the Packers. Just buying a ticket doesnt make anyone a good market. Example: A team in Quebec selling out their 10,000 seat stadium every night is much healthier than a team in Florida averaging 12.000 a night. The overall interest in the smaller market is much greater, thus generating more revenue across the board.

The NHL has had 4 work stoppages in the last 20 years. The single biggest reason for this is expansion. Expansion in bad markets.

[/QUOTE]

If someone told you that Tampa, Florida, Phoenix, and Columbus all had better attendance than the Boston Bruins, the year before the salary cap came into effect....would that change your opinion?

Not long ago, the Dallas Stars were one of the more valuable NHL properties.  Does that change your mind any?

And yes, buying a ticket is the biggest single thing.  Certainly bigger than player salaries, when considering a potential location.

We're not mired in a lockout because of expansion.  We're not mired in a lockout because of neccessity either.  This lockout is only about one thing.  MORE. 

[/QUOTE]


I'm with Kel, in principal anyway. The bad decisions (expansion) which the owners participated in (and got paid for) are a big part of the issue and why they "need" a better deal in the CBA. Solid market teams are objecting to having to share so much revenue to suport the weaker market teams. But they aren't about to let those teams sink so how do they share and get more revenue? By taking it out of the player's share.

Decent attendance in PHX doesn't translate into revenue the way it does in a good hockey town. You can probably go to a Coyote's game for $20 where the same ticket in Boston or Toronto or Detroit is $90. Think those hockey rabid fans of the sun belt would pay that? The barn would be empty.

shupe- to your point about fishing, SI came up with it's list of 100 greatest photos ever. Bobby Orr's goal was 80th - a picture of a rainbow trout was #34.

In response to red75's comment:

That series wasn't about the event, but the photo.

 

I know (and the trout was actually a good shot) but most of the photos ahead (like Grezky's 802 goal at number 9 or Jordan's jump shot at number one) aren't superior photos.

In response to Not-A-Shot's comment:

Ringette ? 

.......and on the other side of the negotiating table over 50% of the owners are American. They could easily decide to sign the deal today also. Americans and Canadians equally ruining the game of hockey loved a bit more north of your border. 

This post has been removed.

chowda.  Huge difference in how hockey is received in both countries. We are all bruin fans but how many people in non hockey markets in the states are hockey fans?  No matter what teams or level of play.  New England has a massive hockey following.  But I'm talking about 3/4 of the US.   Hockey is very very far down in popularity.   Anyway.  It was meant as a joke more then a slam at US fans.  Really had nothing to do with that at all.  

I agree Bon your owners comment.  

  Owners wanted cap.  Got it against players will. Players given freedom with structure Olof that CBA. 

-2012. Owners over this period find ways to beat their own cap and rich teams bury contracts in the minors.  Now the owners are asking players to give away contract freedom and age when they Can cash in.  Essentially the owners want everything.  And Bettman won't bend.  As much as I miss hockey I have no issue if players say we are done for the year

Me thinks the owenrs are correct to hold the line.  Historically they are holding the line for those mid90s dreams of granduer.  Those have failed, dreams of sugar $$$ dancing in thier head.  Now do the players need to pay the penalty, no.  Yet how many players made a bucketload in those days gone awry. So these are twin bedmates of disaster!!!  So if the owners are holding onto the fiscal restraint attitude, then I think the players should capulate.  If any one knows my true basic attitudes, then the owners are TARP like, their argument is toast.  The players are lagging behind the financial world of the owners.  All said millionaries are arguing with billionaries, so in honor of Nick Cave in Grinderman, GET IT ON!!!! I want my NHL!!!!!  If you understand anything above then retort. 

In response to jpBsSoxFan's comment:

Without a CBA,and locking them out, I don't think the NHL could stop players from playing in the Olympics, any more than they can stop them from playing anywhere else.

In response to shuperman's comment:

The NHL doesn't earn a penny for having players in the Olympics.  I'm 100% all for it, but it's not a boon for Bettman and the boys.