As Pissed as I am at this bullshit right now, this is the only outcome that will allow me to forgive the NHL. At Dick Bloch... holy shit. Have any of you taken the time to read his ruling. He acknowledges that the CBA says "nothing allowed by the CBA is circumvention of the CBA." He acknowledges that everything in the contract is allowed by the CBA. He then says "but, I dont think he's playing that long, so VOID." Essentially, Bloch was hired to judge the contract against the letter of the CBA. Instead, he decided to judge Kovalchuck's intent. This isn't griping and whining, this is all in his report. The man ignored the letter of the law. Perhaps the biggest assholes in all of this is the NHLPA. What an inept group of fuckups.
You're pissed because you're a massively biased Devils fan. Every other fanbase thinks the deal stunk and was glad it was rejected. The ruling: <a class="postlink" href="http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B4hYOrjFUhfiZjVkMGZkZTEtMTk1ZS00NzhjLThhNzctMWM1ODRmZjA3OGE4&authkey=CNaVz6EG&hl=en" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B4h ... z6EG&hl=en</a> That's the direct wording from the CBA and the ruling. The Kovalchuk contract has multiple things in it that are evidence the team or the player does not intend to fulfil the whole contract, which has the effect of circumventing the CBA. Thus, it can be rejected. 1) 17 years long - The longest NHL contract ever 2) 6 years of 'diveback' years - the most of any contract 3) 6 years of what will be LESS than the minimum NHL wage 4) Contract to age 44 - 6 players in 20 years have played to the age of 42. Saying Kovalchuk WILL be playing at 44 is a stretch, especially considering it's 17 years away. 5) The biggest one that no one pointed out before the ruling - the NMC switching to a NTC for those final 6 years. Which allows the devils to waive Kovalchuk and get his contract off the cap No other contract had as many of these. The Devils pushed the line the farthest and were the ones that got slapped down. I mean...the line has to be drawn somewhere. Otherwise the Leafs/Rangers/Habs can just offer every free agent a deal that's 150 years long and has a cap hit slightly over the league minimum. Or would you be fine with that?
FACTS that CAN NOT be disputed. 1) From Bloch's ruling: “The NHLPA observes, and the League concedes, that the individual elements of this [contract] are in no way proscribed by the CBA,” 2) Article 26.3 of the CBA states " "Any act, conduct or activity that is permitted by this Agreement shall not be a Circumvention." Are these deals bad for the NHL? Probably. Ok. Fine. Yes. Is it ridiculous? Yes. Is there any chance Kovalchuk is going to be playing til he's 44? Not really no. Should any of that matter? No. The CBA states that anything allowed by the CBA is not circumvention of the CBA. The CBA allows every single element of that contract, and the CBA does not disallow any of those elements in conjunction with one another, Bloch admits as much in his own ruling. I understand the contract is ridiculous, I understand the idea that it's bad for the league, but by the letter of the law this is NOT circumvention. The fact remains that we lost AN ENTIRE season 5 years ago in hammering out this CBA, and Bettman decides to go to an arbitrator when he doesn't like a single element of it. Bloch was chosen, essentially, because the NHLPA was inept. The NFLPA fired this guy years ago for being too pro-league, and the NHLPA allowed him to arbitrate the case? This will on it's own cause another lockout. The NHLPA fought tooth and nail during the last lockout to keep term limits out of the CBA, and it was one of the very few things that they won. Now Bettman manages to get a term limit instated two years before the CBA runs out. How can this not lead to another lockout? How is the league going to survive missing another season?
Can we just get rid of Bettman? Or maybe he has a genius plan to sign an exclusivity contract with Lifetime to entice more womenfolk. Fuck, that guy knows how to sink a ship.
I remember reading Bill Simmons theory a while ago about how Stern recommended Bettman to the NHL, because he knew Bettman would destroy them. Two work stoppages with a third on the horizon Going from ESPN to VS which had the lovely effect of allowing Sportscenter to stop covering hockey alltogether. ESPN2 used to have a show on every night about the NHL. not anymore, no sir. Phoenix, Tampa, Florida, Anaheim Atlanta and Nashville? Awesome ideas, asshole. I laughed at Simmons' theory when I first read it. Who's laughing now?
If you're demanding exact wording be followed, then the exact wording of article 26.3(a) is: "is intended to or has the intention of defeating or Circumventing the provisions of the agreement..." Bloch's conclusion at the end is: "the System Arbitrator here concludes the SPC terms themselves demonstrate this agreement “has the effect of defeating” the provisions of the CBA," He never mentions Circumvention. So article 26.3(h), becomes irrelevant. And you never answered. Are you fine with teams signing players to 150 year contracts? Because right now they aren't specifically banned from the CBA. The way you're describing this is that the NHL lost a season because the laywers needed so much time to write up the language. The year was lost due to core differences that the league and the PA couldn't agree on. A lockout is still very unlikely. In a lockout, the players lose again. The league will concede on Olympic involvement for the players, the players will either concede on contract term limits, or a restructuring of how contracts count against the cap. And Bettman hasn't managed to get a term limit installed at all. If the Devils try to sign Kovalchuk to a 17 year 150 million dollar deal, it will get approved. Same if the Kings sign Doughty to a 20 year deal. Any deals getting rejected will be for trying to defeat the salary cap.
Ok, pump the brakes here. Third work stoppage on the horizon? Doubtful at worst. Going from ESPN to Versus? Hardly. ESPN wanted the product for free, going to Versus was a smart financial move that kept the product on cable tv. NHL 2night aired at midnight - but I'll give you that one. Tampa, Anaheim, and Nashville are solid markets (not to mention you won't see the first two moving because they have won a cup already). Phoenix, Florida, and Atlanta I'm with you on. Bettman, for all his lack of hockey sense, has done a great job just in terms of numbers (revenues, attendance, etc.) in making the NHL profitable and thus more of an intriguing investment possibility. He should have little to no say about on-ice changes made within the league, but unfortunately beyond that there is not much he should be blocked out of. Change for the sake of change isn't necessarily needed in this situation in my opinion. With the competition committee and more former players/hockey names having more of a say about the on-ice product, just let Bettman (who is jewish, naturally) worry about the numbers. Sports is more about money than it ever has been, and if you want the NHL to stick around and be readily available you're going to have to deal with him for years to come.
Am I fine with it? No, I think it's stupid and bad for the teams. Is it illegal? Nope. No term limits in the CBA. There isn't a rule against this, and the NHL has been allowing these contracts. But now all of a sudden a team goes too far? Think about this from the perspective of a Devils fan. We win a cup with the neutral zone trap, suddenly rules are put in place getting stricter on interference and eliminating the red line for 2 lines passes, neutralizing the trap. The Devils have the best puck handling goalie in the league, suddenly rules are put in place not allowing goalies to go into corners. Chicago, Philadelphia, Vancouver, Boston etc etc sign players to front loaded contracts and Bettman does nothing, the Devils do it and suddenly it's circumventing the CBA? Bullshit. [quote-"LukesBoxHero"]Third work stoppage on the horizon? Doubtful at worst. Going from ESPN to Versus? Hardly. ESPN wanted the product for free, going to Versus was a smart financial move that kept the product on cable tv. NHL 2night aired at midnight - but I'll give you that one. Tampa, Anaheim, and Nashville are solid markets (not to mention you won't see the first two moving because they have won a cup already). Phoenix, Florida, and Atlanta I'm with you on.[/quote] Wait, what? taking the product out of millions of homes and making it so that only people looking for it can find it was a smart financial decision? I'm willing to argue anything with anyone EXCEPT this. The NHL moving to Versus was the dumbest move by a professional sports league... probably ever. The NHL should pay ESPN to show their games and do it with smile. And if Nashville was such a solid market, perhaps they'd actually have a team there. Anaheim isn't as terrible as the rest, but Nashville and Tampa don't draw, don't make money, and have really fucked up ownership situations because of it. But dude. Versus was a good deal? Look, this is going to sound hyperbolic and insulting, and I'm not personally insulting you because I don't know you. But that's just fucking stupid and only someone who's an idiot, or being argumentative would even attempt to defend that decision. Period.
Let me clarify a couple of things... What I meant by the "smart financial decision" comment was the fact that Bettman went to Versus for one immediate reason (getting paid by a network to show the product) and one long-term reason (basically knowing that after a couple of years the league would be in better shape). Therefore, by not giving/paying ESPN to show the games the NHL holds more power than ESPN when the contracts expire, which is coming up soon. That's why like I mentioned before as much as Bettman makes some of us pull our hair out, he knows what he is doing business wise because he isn't always just living in the now looking for the big cash-in. So let me extend my original statement: Versus was a good deal in 2005 for the NHL because of their situation coming out of the lockout. Should they go back to Versus now? Probably not, but Versus has seen good growth since the NHL partnered with them and the relationship between the two can't be bad business-wise. ESPN has publicly stated they want the NHL back, but if it's going to be treated like a fill-in it should hold out longer until ESPN truly shows they want hockey back. Also, I'm not sure if you keep up on the business of hockey very often, but the Nashville and Tampa Bay Ownership issues are basically a thing of the past now. Nashville just recently bought Del Biaggio's shares and Tampa was sold to Red Sox minority owner Jeff Vinik back in February. I'm not gonna argue attendance because all pro sports are guilty of inflating attendance figures, but Nashville has a very strong following and I know that for a fact because I've been there twice (once for a game). Look, while it seems you're worried about the NHL getting more exposure on ESPN or being more in the public eye, I just want the league to keep its momentum and improve the on-ice product. The NHL is arguably in one of its better states in its history, and I'm perfectly content with that. I'm a Rangers fan, and if every dumb blonde around my town/college was wearing a Rangers hat or shirt like they do with the Yankees I would want to kill someone. Hockey is a unique sport and I'm perfectly fine with it not being covered by the idiots of ESPN 24/7. Major media outlets in the US don't appreciate the difficulty, tradition, and overall lifestyle of the game; and therefore shouldn't be covering it like they do (ex: the use of the phrase "active stick" on NBC. Shut the fuck up, Pierre McGuire).
None of this came as a suprise to the Devils. They were explicitely told that the contract would not be allowed and went ahead and did it anyway. Lou was practically begging the NHL to reject the contract at the press conference for the signing. As for the "League hates NJ" thing. The Devils first won the cup using the trap in 1995. The rules were changed after 2005. This wasn't the league rushing to screw the Devils, the league had as a whole been changing over a decade from offense to every team playing a slow grinding defensive style. Which is boring and fuck and was ruining the game. Every league changes the rules to make the game more exciting. Football changed the holding and defensive contact rules. NBA stopped calling travelling and calls more touch fouls. Baseball injected everyone with steriods (and lowered the mound, etc). I'm a Leafs fan. So no, I have no sympathy that the rules were changed on you after you won 3 cups. I seriously disagree with you here. A year or two ago the team had to buy several thousand of it's own tickets to meet an arena lease agreement so the team couldn't be moved. They may have a small loyal following, but not enough.
New Kovy-Devils contract revealed. Decision by 5 PM EST coming from the NHL. <a class="postlink" href="http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_daddy/post/Will-the-NHL-approve-this-Ilya-Kovalchuk-contrac?urn=nhl-266528" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://sports.yahoo.com/nhl/blog/puck_d ... nhl-266528</a> Should be an interesting call here. On one hand, they have re-structured the sucker to be more along the lines of the previous contracts that have passed. On the other hand, they may not have taken quite enough off to make an easy call for the league. It's a coin-flip in my book, but I'll be more surprised if it doesn't get approved. The way the contract swings back up, never drops below $1 Million, and the fact that no one else seems to want him might be enough. As a Ranger fan, I will just laugh if it does get shot down, though.
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/devils/nhl_gives_players_assn_ultimatum_UEbYgwfB6I4E4y7xGbE1OP" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.nypost.com/p/sports/devils/n ... 4y7xGbE1OP</a> NHL gives ultimatum to NHLPA on the recent front loaded contracts. First impression is the demands are pretty logical and reasonable, but there's no way this goes well.
quick little story. sorry if it's not exactly on topic. a few weeks back, my aunt was out walking as she always does. a guy in a large truck pulls up beside her and rolls the window down: guy in truck "Hello Mrs. MacDonald, remember me" (my aunt is a retired teacher, so she runs into a lot of her old students) Aunt "I remember all of my students. How are you Sidney?" (she taught him in grade school twice) She had a nice long conversation with Sidney Crosby on the side of the road. My aunt has always had a great sense of humour and she told me the first questions she asked him was "So what have you been up the past few years?"
Wow, the Devils are fined $3 million and 1st and 3rd round draft picks for circumvention of the CBA. The third rounder will be next year while the first round pick will be in one of the next four years. Pretty steep price to pay for basically exploiting a loophole in the CBA. .
1. I prefer Yahoo for fantasy... 2. The Rangers fan in me says they blatantly took it too far with the first deal, but if I take that bias out it is a little steep. I can understand a fine and a 3rd - but a first rounder? fuck...