Post by Pitbull on Mar 9, 2005 1:03:45 GMT -5
This is just plain funny. Yet it should be done. Bettman has sent out what almost seems like a vote on what to do in terms of how to run next season. The next thing is to make the owners do homework to ask them what kind of deal they would like made. I still wonder why the NHLPA won't just do a vote themselves if they say they're so united. Of course there will a few malcontents if what Goodenow says is true but that would only be maybe 5%. Not 50%+ which I think is more accurate.
Anyways, below is what was on TSN.ca.
---------------------------------------------------
Let's go way out on a limb and predict this weeks' resumption of CBA talks won't necessarily lead to a neat and tidy settlement in time to start next season on time. What then?
Well, that's best illustrated by the take-home assignment NHL commissioner Gary Bettman gave his 30 owners last week, with a six-pack of options or scenarios that could be reality come October. Each club was asked to examine and analyze the choices, work up economic models or projections for each of them and decide what works best for their respective franchises and provide that feedback to the league.
The first two possibilities are rather obvious.
Number one is a negotiated settlement with the NHLPA in time to start next season. Do you believe in miracles?
Number two, and perhaps the least likely option given the strident remarks of Bettman and other owners last week who said they'll be playing this fall come hell or high water, is simply to continue the lockout into next season or for as long as it takes to end the standoff.
Now it gets interesting.
Number three is to play an 82-game schedule next season using exclusively replacement players, that is, any players outside of the NHLPA membership who want to play under whatever terms and conditions the NHL decides to set. A collective bargaining agreement would not have to be in place. In fact, no NHLPA member, even if he wanted to, would be permitted by the league to cross a line and play in this circumstance.
Number four is the same as number three, but a reduced 60-game schedule, which might make more economic sense.
Number five is to play an 82-game schedule next season by declaring legal impasse, implementing a new CBA and using a combination of replacement players and whatever NHLPA members who would cross the line to play.
Number six is the same as number five, but again, with a reduced schedule to 60 games.
The NHL also told its owners they are considering a "selective" lockout, which, for example, could mean the league would end the lockout or open its doors to all NHLPA members making less than a million dollars per year. There is precedent for that "selectivity" in other industries but it would certainly be challenged by the NHLPA. That strategy would be employed with option five or six in an attempt by the league to deepen the pool of potential replacements.
Whether any of this would work remains to be seen, but the 30 teams are doing their homework, crunching the numbers to see what works best for them, practically and financially, and from that, some decisions could be made
---------------------------------------------------
Replacements could work but that could send the AHL into a tailspin for sure. Taking so much talent away would drain the teams greatly. I think the AHL might even try to contract their players to only play in the AHL. Probably won't succeed simply because the NHL means way more than the AHL. Of course there are other leagues like overseas. Maybe I'm thinking it's going to be really hard. There should be enough players. Of course the quality could be somewhere in between AHL and the European leagues. Maybe some juniors put in there too.
Everyone has to watch how this could hurt those players chances of getting into the NHL after the lockout ends. The NHL would have to make the NHLPA sign a declaration that would not punish the replacements.
Anyways, below is what was on TSN.ca.
---------------------------------------------------
Let's go way out on a limb and predict this weeks' resumption of CBA talks won't necessarily lead to a neat and tidy settlement in time to start next season on time. What then?
Well, that's best illustrated by the take-home assignment NHL commissioner Gary Bettman gave his 30 owners last week, with a six-pack of options or scenarios that could be reality come October. Each club was asked to examine and analyze the choices, work up economic models or projections for each of them and decide what works best for their respective franchises and provide that feedback to the league.
The first two possibilities are rather obvious.
Number one is a negotiated settlement with the NHLPA in time to start next season. Do you believe in miracles?
Number two, and perhaps the least likely option given the strident remarks of Bettman and other owners last week who said they'll be playing this fall come hell or high water, is simply to continue the lockout into next season or for as long as it takes to end the standoff.
Now it gets interesting.
Number three is to play an 82-game schedule next season using exclusively replacement players, that is, any players outside of the NHLPA membership who want to play under whatever terms and conditions the NHL decides to set. A collective bargaining agreement would not have to be in place. In fact, no NHLPA member, even if he wanted to, would be permitted by the league to cross a line and play in this circumstance.
Number four is the same as number three, but a reduced 60-game schedule, which might make more economic sense.
Number five is to play an 82-game schedule next season by declaring legal impasse, implementing a new CBA and using a combination of replacement players and whatever NHLPA members who would cross the line to play.
Number six is the same as number five, but again, with a reduced schedule to 60 games.
The NHL also told its owners they are considering a "selective" lockout, which, for example, could mean the league would end the lockout or open its doors to all NHLPA members making less than a million dollars per year. There is precedent for that "selectivity" in other industries but it would certainly be challenged by the NHLPA. That strategy would be employed with option five or six in an attempt by the league to deepen the pool of potential replacements.
Whether any of this would work remains to be seen, but the 30 teams are doing their homework, crunching the numbers to see what works best for them, practically and financially, and from that, some decisions could be made
---------------------------------------------------
Replacements could work but that could send the AHL into a tailspin for sure. Taking so much talent away would drain the teams greatly. I think the AHL might even try to contract their players to only play in the AHL. Probably won't succeed simply because the NHL means way more than the AHL. Of course there are other leagues like overseas. Maybe I'm thinking it's going to be really hard. There should be enough players. Of course the quality could be somewhere in between AHL and the European leagues. Maybe some juniors put in there too.
Everyone has to watch how this could hurt those players chances of getting into the NHL after the lockout ends. The NHL would have to make the NHLPA sign a declaration that would not punish the replacements.