Skip to content

Daly calls NHLPA’s tactics “a joke”

Sep 10, 2012, 6:11 PM EDT

Bill Daly and Gary Bettman Getty Images

NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly isn’t very impressed with the NHLPA’s attempts to prevent a lockout by appealing to provincial labor boards in Quebec and Alberta.

“This is a joke,” he told the Canadian Press in an email.

Daly expanded on that thought to The Record’s Tom Gulitti: “[The hearings] will have absolutely zero impact on the broader negotiation, or on the deal we ultimately agree on.”

Daly also told ESPN’s Katie Strang that owners wanted to negotiate during an unproductive weekend.

“We sat around all weekend waiting for the union. Nothing,” Daly said. “Obviously, [they have] a different agenda. Unfortunate.”

Many observers would probably use the word “unfortunate” to describe the current situation.

  1. spongebobsportspants - Sep 10, 2012 at 6:27 PM

    I said it earlier and I’ll say it again, Daily you are an arrogant SOB.

  2. bcsteele - Sep 10, 2012 at 6:28 PM

    Mr. Daly, maybe if you would really negotiate instead of just telling them ‘it is what it is’ and telling them to take your deal…they might actually be more willing to talk.

    While I agree the NHL needs to get it’s finances right, the owners really gave the players a low ball offer. Find a middle ground and let’s play hockey.

    • somekat - Sep 10, 2012 at 6:49 PM

      If you think a 7% move in hockey related income in less than a week isn’t an attempt to “really negotiate”, you should leave your opinions of negotiations to NHL13

      • villi5ed - Sep 10, 2012 at 7:22 PM

        If a steaming turd is presented as an opening offer and then removing 7% of that turd in the next
        iteration seems like r”eal” negotiating to you, you should be careful whom you mock.

      • stakex - Sep 10, 2012 at 7:48 PM


        Yes, but thats how negotiations work. The owners made their “hah, not happening” offer, the players responded, and the owners came back with a better but still not good offer. Its the players turn to step up and make another offer, and it doesn;t sound like they want to.

        Now I keep saying that I agree with the players, but at this point I don’t agree with either side. I just want to watch hockey this fall, and neither side seems interested in seeing that happen…

      • bcsteele - Sep 10, 2012 at 7:49 PM

        I’ll defend my own post; I wont just throw this around without knowing for sure where you stand but I’d guess you clearly haven’t educated on everything in the owner’s proposal.

      • tatdue - Sep 11, 2012 at 1:21 AM

        @bcsteele I think that some think that you are defending the owners with the above post…

      • bcsteele - Sep 11, 2012 at 3:32 PM


        I think your right…please read the first post to see what I’m defending guys. Thanks.

  3. pastabelly - Sep 10, 2012 at 6:48 PM

    Hockey fans are too smart to believe anything from the owners or the league. The owners forced the league to shut down for a season because they wanted this salary cap. Now they are just being pigs. If some franchises don’t have the revenue to support the current cap, just move them or shut them down.

    • somekat - Sep 10, 2012 at 6:50 PM

      Yeah, the union is going to allow the NHL to kill 23 jobs per team, that will happen this century.

      The owners are far from blameless, but to act like the players don’t have a major part in this is ridulous.

      • rockyspond - Sep 10, 2012 at 9:37 PM

        Actually somecat it would be up to 50 jobs per team because each team carries up to 50 pro contracts. Also each nhl team that folded would take an AHL team down with it.

      • tatdue - Sep 11, 2012 at 12:46 AM

        And how many people will be out of work when the greedy owners led by their two goblin turds shut down the league…And to all you people talking crap about the players being greedy just because they make good money remember they devote their lives to their profession day in and day out…they don’t punch in 8 hours a day with days off – it’s a 24/7 lifestyle for them and they don’t deserve to have their salaries chopped by 24% again when the league is raking in record revenues….NOBODY deserves that period! Remember the players haven’t asked for anything and the owners and their false claim of negotiating is nothing more than a big pile of stinking crap. To all the pro owner people out there tell me this..What have the owners conceded to the players in all this negotiating? (and do realize that a concession is the owners “actually giving something up” to the players in return for something that the players have in order to reach a fair contract to both parties – asking for a 20% rollback in salary as opposed to a 24% rollback is not a concession)

      • somekat - Sep 11, 2012 at 2:05 AM

        Who cares? if the system is broken, by definition, one side is going to get a worse deal in order for it to get fixed. You are like the idiots that defend UAW for demanding a guranteed raise for a guy that makes $60 an hour to do idiot work on an assembly line. Or the lady that sits in a booth and sells me tokens, and makes more money than most network engineers. Also, anyone who has an actual career, and doesn’t work at mcdonalds, does a lot more than an 8 hour shift. The only real difference for players is a physical demand and travel.

        The players are getting too much, period. Getting 57% of revenue. That is a dead business, anyway you look at it. You want to talk about ruining the league, how healthy of a league is it when only 5-6 teams are turning a decent profit. If something that costs much as an NHL franchise doesn’t bring in at least 10% of it’s “value” (aka cost), it’s considered a terrible investment. That would describe more than 2/3 of the league. Most of those teams are making about 3-4%. The league’s first proposal was ridiculous, that’s a given. But a 50/50 split of Hockey related income seems about right to me, if not in the players favor. Now I could understand if the players were willing to agree to 50/50, but wanted to gripe about things that were and were not included in hockey related income, but they acted like the offer was some sort of insult.

        Is it much the owners own fault for giving out he contracts? Of course it is, and I’m sure teams like Philly, Toronto, Detroit, Montreal etc would love to keep giving them out. But crying “we gave up stuff last time!” does not fix the problem.

      • somekat - Sep 11, 2012 at 2:28 AM

        For the record, what the owners SHOULD be giving up is free agency. Just like the NBA owners did. They got money back from the players, and in return, you are an UFA after your entry level deal.

        Obviously that woudln’t work in the NHL, because so many guys spend most of the entry level contract in the minors most of the time. But the guys that don’t, still have to put in 6-7 (i forget the number off hand) years before they are UFA’s.

        Players should take 50%. Owners should give them RFA if they have 3 years(but change the compensation to something reasonable), and UFA at 4-5. Sit down, figure out what is and isn’t hockey related income, and sign the dang thing.

        But no, you will get owners who made bad investments that want to have it both ways, and players who have an entitlement, and a chip on their shoulder, so we will get a long, protracted lockout.

    • lostpuppysyndrome - Sep 10, 2012 at 11:18 PM

      As has been shown before, the league is crying poor because they “lost” $240mil over the past 2 seasons. The league also owns the Phoenix Coyotes. In the 2010-11 and 2011-12 seasons, the Yotes spent $50mil and $55mil respectively, for a cumulative total of about $105mil, according to Capgeek. This is not taking into account other team expenses. This is a huge reason why I have a hard time standing by anything the league says at this point, especially when they’ve spent a large chunk of the last couple years raving about how successful they’ve been.

      If the league is going to cry and act like it’s only as successful as its weakest team(s), then they ought to have equal revenue sharing across the board and no team will have any sort of economic advantage. If not, then fold/move the weakest links elsewhere. If the players actually hold out, the big boys who actually make money in the league might start to throw their weight around a bit and reign the whiners in a bit and get something done. We all want the game back but sometimes it’s worth it to hold out for something better.

      • lostpuppysyndrome - Sep 10, 2012 at 11:19 PM


      • tealwithit - Sep 11, 2012 at 3:13 AM

        ‘Fraid that’s very unlikely. The owners are completely united right now… If the union’s hoping to get somewhere with this “divide and conquer” strategery, they’re going to hit a wall. The owners are desperate for change, plain and simple. They don’t want to make the same mistake twice, and end up with a terrible deal in a few years… Now, whether or not they’re smart enough to come up with a CBA that will protect the interests of both sides for any extended period of time, and convince Fehr and the agents to agree, remains to be seen.
        (Don’t thumbs down me, guys. I’m just telling you what I know – not what I think/feel about it.)

    • tealwithit - Sep 11, 2012 at 3:00 AM

      Kind of ironic that you started that post with “Hockey fans are too smart…”

  4. xaf605 - Sep 10, 2012 at 7:06 PM

    I think the whole damn things a joke

  5. jaybird22seven - Sep 10, 2012 at 7:14 PM

    The league would have more true talent on every team if they would get rid of the three teams that are being paid for by the rest of the league. If these small markets can’t make money, then swallow your pride Gary and either fold them or move them to Canada!!!

    • rockyspond - Sep 10, 2012 at 9:42 PM

      See above reply to somecat

    • jtrain1966 - Sep 11, 2012 at 3:12 PM

      I totally agree ! And that is coming from an American .

  6. 1943mrmojorisin1971 - Sep 10, 2012 at 7:19 PM

    The chance for the owners to win the PR battle is so far gone that even if what Daly says is true (I’m doubtful) he still looks like a jerk for opening his mouth.

  7. capsrockva - Sep 10, 2012 at 8:48 PM

    just get the dam thing done

  8. bellicosejeff - Sep 10, 2012 at 9:32 PM

    @jaybird22seven NJ, Minnesota, and LA, all hardly “small market” teams lost money this season. Yes, some of the small market teams lost money too. Not all small market teams lost money though. The current system is broken and desperately needs to be fixed. The last CBA was intended to help small market teams and the league as a whole. Some GMs found a loophole in the CBA to lock players up to long term, ridiculous, cap circumventing contracts. The players want to keep the loophole that was never originally intended. The players will kill this league if they get their way. NHL players, under the old CBA got 57% of league revenues. NFL and NBA players don’t get that much. And those leagues are more successful than the NHL is. I’m sorry, this isn’t the popular stance but I’m with the owners here. Contraction isn’t the answer. And not all small market teams need to be relocated. If it’s all based on losing money then there are some large market teams that need to be relocated as well. Then what happens if a team gets moved and they start losing money in their new city? Relocate then again? No, there needs to be a realistic CBA in place that protects the league and makes it stronger over the long haul. They thought they had just that…until the loophole was found.

    • lostpuppysyndrome - Sep 10, 2012 at 11:30 PM

      @bellicosejeff, you make a good point there but I think that’s one of the few points folks would agree with the owners on. I hope this loophole gets closed and contracts get limited to around 5-7 years max. However, this isn’t what’s holding talks up, and it won’t solve the league’s money woes.

      I also believe that, while the teams you mentioned did lose money this past year, they can be very profitable given good leadership, on-ice success, and ownership stability. I rarely think relocation is the simple solution to revenue losses, but with teams like the Coyotes, who have struggled to fill seats despite putting up a very competitive team, maybe it is the key. Teams that cannot be economically viable yet complain about losing money need a wake-up call: shut up or shut down.

    • kitshky - Sep 10, 2012 at 11:38 PM

      First of all, I don’t believe any business that just states losses … and business (from IBM to a sole proprietor) can appear to lose money. That argument is impossible to validate, particularly when the league has notoriously refused to open fully open their books, and should never be the catalyst for an argument.

      Secondly, the players aren’t digging their heels in because they want to keep the loopholes that the owners and GM’s allowed to be exposed. The players want a proper split of HRR, a clear interpretation of what HRR even is, and a deal that will not roll back guaranteed contracts … again.

      I’m not saying any one side is perfectly clean here, but the responsibility for us being here again lies almost squarely on the owners. They’ve been playing under a system designed and implemented by the owners, and yet once again the owners are unable to cope with where their deal has left them / where they’ve taken themselves, and once again the only solution they can come up with is to demand more from the players.

      If the owners want to come up with a solution they need to look long and hard at ways to adjust the system from a balanced point of view, not simply demand roll backs (or escrow payments with a lowered salary cap that come out to be essentially the same thing) from the players.

      You want to balance the budget implement a cap with a luxury tax and allow for more revenue sharing ..computers dying …ahhh

      • tatdue - Sep 11, 2012 at 1:14 AM

        That was very well said kitshky and I wish that I would have read it before I went on my rant because it would have been so much simpler to just agree with you…again very well said!

    • tatdue - Sep 11, 2012 at 1:08 AM

      ” The players will kill this league if they get their way” – What’s their way…what have they asked for? The owners are the ones who give those contracts…why can’t you see the total idiocy in what you say? Yes there are issues and the players want to fix those issues but the only fix that the owners want is to take back money already given to the players. The owners stance is “give us back 24% of your earnings and then we will talk”…Is that fair in your eyes? As for your pitch about the NFL and the NBA you are absolutely correct that they receive about a 50/50 split in revenues in their leagues and that is still more money than the NHL’ers get in actual dollars! You are right about one thing though, that there needs to be a realistic CBA in place that protects the league and the players and makes it stronger over the long haul. Let’s hope that the owners and the two turds that represent them come to their senses and get it done….

      • somekat - Sep 11, 2012 at 2:19 AM

        Why does it matter that the nhl player get less money in actual dollars, but it doesn’t matter that the nhl owners get less money in actual dollars? They get it from the same pot. 50/50 is 50/50, the amounts don’t matter. NHL’ers don’t make as much money because the NHL doesn’t produce as much money.

        as far as the “owners are the ones who gave out the contracts” agrument goes, see above. That is just “whaa we gave up stuff last time”. It fixes nothing. Want to pick about what is and isn’t considered as hockey related income, fine, that’s more than reasonable. Act like you are being asked to give up your first born child because the owners of the business would like to keep 50% of the money (and they still have plenty of other expenses to cover, this is income, not profit) that comes in, is at best juvenile and unrealistic. If you expect the league to survive. There are literally 3rd line players in the NHL that come home with a bigger profit at the end of the season than the guy that signs their checks.

        I’m sure there are 8-10 owners taht wouldn’t mind keeping it right where it is now. Maybe if the players are willing to cut 2/3 of their jobs, they can keep the 57%, and everyone will be happy. But as long as they want to keep all the teams they ahve now, it’s not an option. Even if you move the worst teams, that takes the large chunks of losses out, but you still have most of the leagues revenue condensed in 5-6 markets.

        I mean, I’m a Flyers fan, so if it’s a spending war, my team is going to win out most of the time. In the NHL, I’m all for no cap from a personal standpoint. But if the league, and the players (as they claim) want every team to truly have a chance every year, and not have their players walking to the same few teams once they become FA’s, player cost HAS to come down for a lot of teams, half of the league at least. I for one, would not want the NHL to become MLB

  9. sampulls - Sep 10, 2012 at 9:37 PM

    Teams are losing money…..just saying!

  10. capsfan19 - Sep 10, 2012 at 10:42 PM

    Sadly already rampin’ up for baseball, football, b-ball, and mls cause this isnt going to happen. As a fan after the lock-out i cant imagine how people made it through the first one. Its just so rediculous… Im a recent college grad with no money and am getting by. I think both sides are effed. Almost as terrible as our congress…

    • jtrain1966 - Sep 11, 2012 at 3:38 PM

      Almost ? I think they’re the exact same ! I think that Bill Mahr said it best : America is stupid ! It’s the same thing going on w/ politics, that is going on w/ hockey if they spew out as much as they can at a rapid rate people will forget that each side is contradicting themselves ! Maybe i’m just venting but, people need to quit saying they’re going to do this, & going to do that . If people would have the conviction to stand behind what they said , i believe this labor dispute would’ve ended long before it began . But as it sets now , the League, & NHLPA know the fans will forgive, & forget !

      So here is to the biggest suckers in all of the land,


  11. manchestermiracle - Sep 11, 2012 at 1:19 PM

    Pot calling the kettle black. Guess this yahoo would be the expert on “jokes.”

  12. ram11273 - Sep 11, 2012 at 3:22 PM

    U said Bettman was a douches so I guess he’s DOUCHES # 2!

    • ram11273 - Sep 11, 2012 at 3:28 PM

      My bad…. I said THEYRE DOUCHES…

  13. donnersr - Sep 12, 2012 at 12:11 AM


    The economy suxs,

    Masses are unemployment

    and all we want to see is our HOCKEY !!!!

    When we are all employed and too busy… than squabble… Right now we need you to play.


    • jtrain1966 - Sep 12, 2012 at 2:14 AM

      AMEN !

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1608)
  2. P. Kane (1570)
  3. M. Richards (1350)
  4. P. Datsyuk (1198)
  5. N. Backstrom (1085)