Your daily dose of bad NHL news

Your daily dose of bad NHL news

Last week, the NHL and NHLPA agreed to allow representatives from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service to sit in on lockout meetings.

Guess what. After two "grueling" days, it didn't work.

Here's the statement from NHL Deputy Commisioner Bill Daly:

"Today, we concluded two days of mediation with FMCS mediators and representatives of the NHL Players' Association. After spending several hours with both sides over two days, the presiding mediators concluded that the parties remained far apart, and that no progress toward a resolution could be made through further mediation at this point in time. We are disappointed that the mediation process was not successful."

And the statement from NHLPA Executive Director Donald Fehr:

“Today, players and NHLPA staff, along with representatives of the league, concluded a second day of mediation under the auspices of the FMCS. This afternoon, the mediators informed the parties that they did not think it was productive to continue the discussions further today. The mediators indicated that they would stay in contact with the league and the NHLPA, and would call the parties back together when they thought the time was right.”

No matter which side you agree with in this whole negotiation, it's becoming clear that the players are not going to get anything close to what they are seeking.  At this point, it may be in their best interest to accept the best offer they've been given, and just start playing.

To me, it seems like the owners, who are so unhappy with the long term deals they approved and signed, did so knowing the CBA would expire and they'd never have to pay the full amount.  The league and owners are not bending here, and are not giving an inch.

Comments

Leave a comment
  • Both statements are essentially worthless, since neither indicates what chasm the mediator was unable to bridge.

    Your last two paragraphs are also inconsistent. You are saying that the owners brought this on themselves, knowing that they wouldn't have to honor their contracts, but then the players should give in. Sine the owners locked the players out, apparently not playing hockey is economically advantageous to them, so the other players should join Kane in Switzerland, or go to the Russian league.

  • In reply to jack:

    It's not inconsistent. They are 2 separate opinions. Opinion 1. The owners knew all along they wouldn't have to pay the entire Hossa, Luongo etc. deals, and they won't budge until they don't have to. 2. With that in mind, the players won't get what they're after. Not sure what the confusion is.

  • In reply to Jay Zawaski:

    Your basic disconnect is that because the owners provoked the lockout, apparently to avoid contractual obligations they voluntarily made, the players should give in.

    Maybe the owners should lift the lockout and negotiate under a contract extension pending reaching a new contract. That would be the more logical conclusion, since it is the owners who are demanding givebacks, and apparently don't believe that a contract is worth the paper they signed.

    In any event, signing contracts you list without the intent to fulfill them is at least bad faith, if not fraud.

Leave a comment