Skip to content

NHLPA: NHL said formal meeting would serve “no purpose”

Sep 15, 2012, 5:35 PM EDT

Steve Fehr Getty Images

NHLPA rep Steve Fehr released a statement explaining why the players didn’t conduct a zero-hour formal meeting with the NHL today.

“Today we suggested that the parties meet in advance of the owners’ self-imposed deadline of midnight tonight. Don Fehr, myself and several players on the Negotiating Committee were in the city and prepared to meet. The NHL said that it saw no purpose in having a formal meeting. There have been and continue to be private, informal discussions between representatives of both sides.” – Fehr via Liz Mullen.

Many will key on the “no purpose” line as tonight’s deadline approaches.

As you may recall, the owners accused the players of passing on a negotiating session last weekend, so the PR scuffle continues.

In the mean time, teams are scurrying to sign players to contract extensions according to the soon-to-expire CBA guidelines, although many high-profile RFAs are willing to wait things out.


There won’t be any CBA talks today

No extensions for key RFAs

Fans protest lockout in New York

Brooks Laich criticizes owners

  1. avscanes - Sep 15, 2012 at 5:40 PM

    thank you bettman. you must be proud of your third lockout. i am moving on to nfl and nba. cancelling my nhl season tickets.

  2. sharksfanatic - Sep 15, 2012 at 5:41 PM

    Informal meetings will be the only way to get things moving. Hopefully each side is willing to move. We will know in a few hours.

  3. hockeyflow33 - Sep 15, 2012 at 5:51 PM

    I hate you Bettman

    • phillyphanatic76 - Sep 15, 2012 at 8:16 PM

      I second this sentiment

  4. yourrealitybites - Sep 15, 2012 at 7:09 PM

    You anti-Bettman guys kill me. What business allows employees to have a share of revenues anything close to that being asked by these prima-donna players. Most of these guys would be lucky to have a job sweeping floors at Target without the chance to play a kids game. Lock em out, let em go to Europe. BoooHoooooooo

    • rigatonikid - Sep 15, 2012 at 7:41 PM

      Ummm, it’s the players that make the revenues either with the on ice product or the sweaters on their backs. The pundits are saying that the owners can wait the players out…where did the owners get some of their money in their pockets from? THE PLAYERS! And by the way, pretty sure that the players can sweep the floors at Target, don’t think it could be the other way around with a janitor playing in the NHL. Maybe, just maybe, profits could be a little higher if little Napoleon didn’t keep throwing money away to Phoenix? Just a thought

    • phillyphanatic76 - Sep 15, 2012 at 8:39 PM

      And you pro Bettman guys kill me. This CBA was implemented by the owners, they conceded that percentage because it doesn’t include all types of revenue that ownerships garner. At the time of the deal Bettman spouted that the deal was more than fair. But they miscalculated the amount of revenue the league would bring in, so now that they see the $3.3 billion the NHL made last years their mouths started watering. I’m not saying 57% is fair but Bettman wants to flip the script on the players and get something close to 57% for the owners. He is the most condescending commissioner in sports, and that includes the likes of David Stern. He acts like the fans are uninformed, drones that serve no other purpose than to follow blindly and pay his absurd $8 million salary. He refuses to even acknowledge the idea of revenue sharing because it’s too close to socialism for the supposed free market loving owners. The players need to concede some money but the owners are trying to take them to the cleaners because they know they’ll miss their paychecks. Something the billionaire owners don’t have to worry about. And so many franchises are losing money because Bettman mad the decision to expand into markets where people just don’t care about hockey. I mean do you really have to put a franchise in Atlanta twice to understand you won’t make money. They only care about UGA football there! He’s a weasel that will never admit his mistakes, instead his solution to take back money from player contracts that the owners handed out. What business can hand out a contract then expect the employee to simply give back a portion because said business isn’t making as much money as they want? And the current cba is so evil, according to the league, yet almost every team was scrambling to hand out huge contracts before the current terms expire tonight. It’s all about greed!! Let us see the sport we love! Do these billionaires really need an extra couple million in their bank accounts? That’s why Bettman is the bad guy.

      • tatdue - Sep 16, 2012 at 2:03 AM

        @phillyphanatic76 – What you just said is right on the money. I can’t believe that anyone would side with the owners in this situation. If this was tried on anybody else in any other job they would be up in arms as well, I know I would. It’s easy for everyone to complain because the players have a lot of money but that shouldn’t matter, what’s fair is fair. The big guys pushing the small guys around is never a good thing…

      • phillyphanatic76 - Sep 16, 2012 at 4:37 AM

        Tatdue- It’s really truly absurd. Bettman and the league owners have the gall to tell us fans that they’re doing this for the good of the game. It’s not broke but they intend to fix it. The greed of big business isn’t just a nuisance, it’s severely impacting the economy and unemployment in this country. The nhl fails to mention the trickle down effect this lockout will have on people who rely on the revenue from sporting events. But in the end they’re taking away a sport that was on the brink of collapse just 7 years ago, but today is a booming industry NOT because of ownership, NOT because of Bettman, but because WE brought it back to life. And the most important part of that last sentence is “booming industry”… why would Bettman be dumb enough to completely shut down a business at its most profitable point?

        I would urge you readers of this site to go to and read this short article. Very well written and breaks down the absurdity of this whole thing.

      • hockeydon10 - Sep 16, 2012 at 7:34 AM

        One of the important things is that the players ARE giving up that 57% share. Their latest offer has them going down to 52.3%, with more room still to negotiate. They don’t want to immediately give back 19% (or whatever) and who would? They’re willing to gradually bring things close or at 50/50.

      • phillyphanatic76 - Sep 16, 2012 at 11:40 AM

        That’s what I’m hoping will make this lockout very short. The players are willing to concede a pretty hefty percentage to save the season and ensure they get paid. People who have seen the latest union proposal say it’s 52.3% but during Bettmans press conference on Thursday he said that it’s nowhere close to that. So if the owners won’t even agree on the percentage being offered then that’s a problem. That’s why I think the owners will hold this process up until they get most of the crazy things they want. 52/48 would be very fair but the league doesn’t see it that way.

      • hockeydon10 - Sep 16, 2012 at 12:26 PM

        Yeah, that claim that it’s not close to 52.3% is Bettman trying to be extra clever in two ways.

        The NHL used a redefined HRR that the players haven’t agreed with, which takes out a few specific items and reduces the dollar amount heading the players’ way.

        The other way is that he disputes a growth rate of 7.1%, which is the growth over the last 7 years. The PA proposal is structured such that if growth is less, they get less; if growth is more, they get more.

        What Bettman doesn’t realize is that whining about the specificity of both of these things is irrelevant because they’re negotiable. I’m sure the numbers can be played with to both agree on what constitutes HRR (which was not 100% of the money taken in during the now expired CBA) and what a normalized growth rate might be.

  5. stakex - Sep 15, 2012 at 9:42 PM

    Ok lets be clear about this. We all know the players have no desire to move from their current position. So if the NHL isn’t going to accept that position… why bother meeting? Now we can fight all day about who is actually right in the debate, but make no mistake… this was a PR stunt by the players. Nothing more, nothing less. If they were really serious about getting something done today, they would have offered to move in the direction of the middle, which they didn’t.

    Afterall, all the meeting and talking in the world isn’t going to get anything done unless one side is willing to cave or at least start moving in a positive direction. Now I don’t give a damn who caves…. I just want to watch hockey.

    • hockeydon10 - Sep 16, 2012 at 7:38 AM

      What position is it they’re unwilling to move from? We know they’re willing to reduce their share of HRR. It goes down to 52.3% with their current offer, with more room left to negotiate.

      The one where the money they were paid on the previous CBA, they now have to give back a huge amount to the owners. That means the owners wanted the old CBA, gave the players the contracts (and not just this past summer) and now want a kickback from the players.

  6. firemarshal1 - Sep 16, 2012 at 12:06 AM

    No Fans equals NO REVENUE, which means no salaries for players. Who wins, NO ONE. Oh wait, the fans WIN, we save our hard earned money. Hmm, just saying. Tic, toc, that’s your NHL career passing you bye.

    As fans, we need to call Comcast, Directv, and Dish demand a partially monthly refund no NHL games on NBC Sports Network.

    This way us fans aren’t getting screwed by the players or owners.

  7. shortsxit - Sep 16, 2012 at 1:53 PM

    Gotta wonder why the owners are scurrying to sign players under the terms of the current CBA when they’re about to lockout the players because they don’t like the terms of the current CBA. Hypocrites much?

Top 10 NHL Player Searches
  1. P. Kessel (1636)
  2. P. Kane (1286)
  3. S. Matthias (1137)
  4. D. Carcillo (1051)
  5. C. Ehrhoff (1027)