2012/2013 realignment

[Madferret]

Not tricky at all. I came up with those four names in two seconds. I can't think of more deserving names than those.

I don't know. I can think of a name that's on the Cup that's on the cup roughly twice as often as those four names combined.

Nik. Is that name Stanley?

Pocket Rocket?

 

[Deebo]

NHLPA rejected the re-alignment, it will not go through.

 

[bustaheims]

NHLPA rejected the re-alignment, it will not go through.

I'm not really surprised, to be honest. My guess is the PA is saving this as something to dangle in the negotiations of the new CBA.

 

[CarltonTheBear]

NHLPA rejected the re-alignment, it will not go through.

I'm not really surprised, to be honest. My guess is the PA is saving this as something to dangle in the negotiations of the new CBA.

Yeah it seems like they're just trying to flex their muscles. The next CBA discussion are going to be rough.

 

[L K]

NHLPA rejected the re-alignment, it will not go through.

I'm not really surprised, to be honest. My guess is the PA is saving this as something to dangle in the negotiations of the new CBA.

Yeah it seems like they're just trying to flex their muscles. The next CBA discussion are going to be rough.

Mind you, some of the comments from Bettman/Daly were pretty idiotic in their press release.

"It is unfortunate that the NHLPA has unreasonably refused to approve a plan that an overwhelming majority of our clubs voted to support, and that has received such widespread support from our fans and other members of the hockey community, including players," Daly said in the statement.

I really wish the front office would stop pretending it knows the in depth knowledge of its fanbase.  I certainly didn't see a lot of hatred of the deal, but I don't think there was very much support that indicated it was a great fix to the league set.  There were flaws, the 8 and 8 vs. 7 and 7 structure in the East vs. West; some conferences still having way more travel than others, etc. 

I think there are legitimate concerns with the way the league would be structured and while 98% of this is going to be Fehr letting the NHL know that he won't be a pushover as leader of the players association, player support runs through the PA.  The PA rejected the system without changes that the NHL appears unwilling to make, so that is NOT widespread support from your players.

"We believe the union acted unreasonably in violation of the league's rights. We intend to evaluate all of our available legal options and to pursue adequate remedies, as appropriate."

And this kind of stuff just seems like inflammatory posturing that lays down groundwork for labour unrest.

 

[Rebel_1812]

Listen to the following:

"Gary Bettman said the NHLPA had expressed concerns but that the league didn't need the union to sign off on the changes"

"We asked for the reasoning and that reasoning was not produced. They were not open to discussions about it"

""It is unfortunate that the NHLPA has unreasonably refused to approve a plan...We believe the union acted unreasonably in violation of the league's rights. We intend to evaluate all of our available legal options and to pursue adequate remedies, as appropriate"

source - http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/story/?id=384427

I found it funny how the league accused the side that wanted to talk about things as being "unreasonable".  Whether you think the league is right or wrong you have to admit their tone and actions are full of condescension and  arrogance.  The league time and again keeps acting like pricks to their own self detriment.

 

[maplesyrup]

As a hockey fan, I'm thinking "Oh, crap... Not good..." Very bad foreshadowing here. As a unionized employee though, I'm thinking "Good for them." 

That said, if this does indeed lead to another lockout, I'm not sure how I'll handle it this time around.  :-\

 

[maplesyrup]

haha!...

DownGoesBrown Down Goes Brown
The NHLPA is concerned about excessive travel, and so they've voted down realignment to help ensure that next year there won't be any.

 

[Kin]

I'm a little confused. Does the NHLPA have a say here or not? If they do then they have a right to say no, right? And they probably should have been involved in the negotiations beforehand.

If they don't then signing off on it is irrelevant, I'd think.

 

[Bender]

I'm a little confused. Does the NHLPA have a say here or not? If they do then they have a right to say no, right? And they probably should have been involved in the negotiations beforehand.

If they don't then signing off on it is irrelevant, I'd think.

It does strike me as a bit odd as well, and your line of reasoning makes perfect sense. Either the NHLPA has to consent to realignment and they have a right to refuse consent, or they don't and the NHL doesn't need sign off in the first place.

So why are we hearing differing stories?

 

[L K]

I'm a little confused. Does the NHLPA have a say here or not? If they do then they have a right to say no, right? And they probably should have been involved in the negotiations beforehand.

If they don't then signing off on it is irrelevant, I'd think.

It does strike me as a bit odd as well, and your line of reasoning makes perfect sense. Either the NHLPA has to consent to realignment and they have a right to refuse consent, or they don't and the NHL doesn't need sign off in the first place.

So why are we hearing differing stories?

NHL front office spin doctoring.  If you can make the PA look like evil people who don't look like they care about the fans/game then all is well when you start a lockout (in the event that there would be one).  Take a look at the NBA where they rallied around half-truths and how evil LeBron James was for leaving his team as a free agent.

I think this is par for the course speak that comes out of Bill Daly's mouth.  He says an awful lot of stuff that seems to be along this line when dealing with league negotiations.

I have a very hard time seeing how the league structure doesn't have a requirement to be OK'd by the players association given how much it would affect travel.  The cost of flights might be of more concern to the Winnipeg ownership group, but it doesn't mean that the players don't want the system fixed.  They also probably want to win and I'm sure that the teams in the West where thrilled that they would continually have worse odds of making the post-season.

But this wouldn't be the first time that a league front office ran through changes without consulting the required people only to throw a hissy fit when things don't turn out the way you want.  This goes entirely on the NHL marketing committees/GMs/ownership groups for talking up a system that didn't have consent from the guys who make the league exist.

 

[Tigger]

...from the article

Fehr added the league had set a Friday deadline for the union to approve the plan.

Why a deadline if you don't need their consent? Doesn't add up to me.

Also, if you're going to trumpet a new system maybe you should have all your ducks lined up, just a thought nhl.

 

[Frank E]

NHLPA rejected the re-alignment, it will not go through.

I'm not really surprised, to be honest. My guess is the PA is saving this as something to dangle in the negotiations of the new CBA.

I think you're dead on Busta.

Pure posturing on both sides I'd say.

 

[bustaheims]

DarrenDreger: NHL has 60 days to file grievance.Would seek declaration PA withheld consent unreasonably in violation of CBA.Would seek damages for teams.

 

[L K]

DarrenDreger: NHL has 60 days to file grievance.Would seek declaration PA withheld consent unreasonably in violation of CBA.Would seek damages for teams.

I'm actually really confused by this.  What are the NHLPA refusing to consent to if they don't have any power/say in the matter?  Are they refusing to play under the system?  Can you hold someone accountable for actions they haven't done yet? 

To me it's pretty silly that the NHLPA asked for a sample schedule under the new format and the league wouldn't give them one.  How do you not have a business model that runs those numbers to show improved/worse travel time?  And if you have even the slightest iota of intent to have a partnership with the PA, how do you expect someone to trust you when you won't show them your work.  Hell, you learn that in 3rd grade math when you lose marks for not showing your work.

It's the league financial books all over again. 
NHL: "We're losing money"
NHLPA: "Then show your books so we can see the losses"
NHL: "No, but here's some other sheets that say how much money we lost"
Fans: "NHL players are greedy"

 

[bustaheims]

Well, the issue is that the PA believes they do have the power to veto the decision, and the league, in this case, is covering its backside by not trying to force it through without getting clarification on the matter from an impartial arbitrator (if they choose to fight the decision, at least). My guess is going to the PA for consent was more about trying to prevent a potential lawsuit more than actually feeling it was something they actually needed to make the changes happen. I also don't believe they thought it would be rejected - and, if it wasn't for the upcoming CBA negotiations, I wouldn't have thought it would have been either.

 

[Kin]

Well, the issue is that the PA believes they do have the power to veto the decision, and the league, in this case, is covering its backside by not trying to force it through without getting clarification on the matter from an impartial arbitrator (if they choose to fight the decision, at least).

That doesn't really jive with what Daly said though. If this is an actual dispute as to whether or not the PA has input then you wouldn't say they "unreasonably" withheld consent, you'd say that they didn't have the right to withhold consent. By making the statement Daly did he's essentially admitted the issue is whether or not the PA is behaving reasonably, not whether or not they're legally right.

 

[bustaheims]

That doesn't really jive with what Daly said though. If this is an actual dispute as to whether or not the PA has input then you wouldn't say they "unreasonably" withheld consent, you'd say that they didn't have the right to withhold consent. By making the statement Daly did he's essentially admitted the issue is whether or not the PA is behaving reasonably, not whether or not they're legally right.

Well, then Bettman and Daly need to get on the same page:

Shortly after the plan was approved, commissioner Gary Bettman said the NHLPA had expressed concerns but that the league didn't need the union to sign off on the changes.

 

[Kin]

Well, then Bettman and Daly need to get on the same page:

Shortly after the plan was approved, commissioner Gary Bettman said the NHLPA had expressed concerns but that the league didn't need the union to sign off on the changes.

Which I think is part of why people are expressing confusion. The league's actions right now aren't consistent with the belief that they don't need the Union's approval and their actions a month ago aren't consistent with the belief that they do.

It's like LK says. How in the world did the league expect the PA to give any sort of opinion without seeing a sample schedule that would actually let them know how travel would be affect individual players or what it might mean for the economics of the game?

If nothing else it reveals the utter sham that the NHL tried to sell when they claimed their league would be a partnership with the players.

 

[L K]

Well, then Bettman and Daly need to get on the same page:

Shortly after the plan was approved, commissioner Gary Bettman said the NHLPA had expressed concerns but that the league didn't need the union to sign off on the changes.

Which I think is part of why people are expressing confusion. The league's actions right now aren't consistent with the belief that they don't need the Union's approval and their actions a month ago aren't consistent with the belief that they do.

It's like LK says. How in the world did the league expect the PA to give any sort of opinion without seeing a sample schedule that would actually let them know how travel would be affect individual players or what it might mean for the economics of the game?

If nothing else it reveals the utter sham that the NHL tried to sell when they claimed their league would be a partnership with the players.

Is it honestly that hard either?  You could just take the arena availability dates from the post-lockout years and create a handful of hypothetical schedules.  It wouldn't necessarily be perfect or fit in line with 2012-2013, but it would be something. 

The fact that the NHL wouldn't show the NHLPA that kind of report indicates one of two things
1 - The NHL didn't even bother to make one
2 - The NHL is hiding behind the "just trust us because we aren't showing you anything" mantra

Either way, it's negligent to make that kind of drastic change to your league without that kind of planning and/or cooperation with your product.

I've seen quotes from a half dozen players that raised concern about the playoff odds and they weren't all PA reps.  I'm sure with more interest in finding obscure articles I could find more player quotes that had concern with the plan.

You can go back though this thread to see concern raised by fans.

And the initial reactions when the BoG approved the plan seemed to be generally positive, but I remember a lot of comments like "it will be good to have rivalries and play in all the arenas".  I completely agree with that...in fact we used to do that and then Bettman told us that we needed intra-divisional rivalries more than things like Toronto vs. Detroit/Western Canada.

It will be good to play all the teams home/away each year, but what would be even better is if they did that without making a strange playoff format that weights small groups heavily despite creating a more league-balanced schedule.  In theory you could have the 8th ranked team in one of the Western divisions be the 8th highest ranked team in the West and they would be FOUR teams out of a playoff spot.  What kind of logic is that.