Rock Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 ESPN.com: NHL Tuesday, November 16, 2004 'I'm getting tired of watching reruns of our games' http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/print?id=1924271&type=story -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- By Terry Frei Special to ESPN.com On Monday, ESPN.com regular contributor Terry Frei, also of The Denver Post, visited the National Hockey League offices in New York for an exclusive interview with Commissioner Gary Bettman. Below is an edited transcript: TF: Does the Forbes Magazine report undercut you on the trust issue? Bettman: The Forbes magazine article is not based on the facts. They did not have access to the underlying financial material that they would have needed to opine, as they did. It probably makes good rhetoric in some quarters, but we know what the losses are and we know that (the Levitt Report) and the 2,000 hours that they spent, including with team auditors, is the accurate picture of our economic condition. Other than its rhetoric value for some, it's not something we have concern about and it's nothing we intend to focus on. Gary Bettman on the negotiating process: "It's not about locking yourself in the room." TF: The NHLPA says it's waiting for the league. You've said, essentially, don't hold your breath. Is this a childish staredown? Bettman: No! The fact of the matter is that the union has told us they have no intention of negotiating over the types of solutions we have proposed. We know of no other way to address in a significant, meaningful and reliable way the problems we have, to put this league on the right economic footing. We said that whenever you have something you want to talk about, perhaps you can enlighten us, give us a call and we'll be happy to join you at any meeting. But we have nothing new to add at this point. TF: But how specifically does that have to be spelled out in any new approach they make? Bettman: There are no preconditions to us meeting. We have at this point -- based on their response to us -- we have nothing that they are prepared to talk to us about, so if they have something they want to talk about, all they have to do is ask and we'll be there ... If they want to talk, we'll be happy to talk, but based on their response to what we told them we need, they told us they have no interest in talking those things. So we haven't seen any reason to ask for a meeting. But we've told them we'll meet anytime, anyplace. TF: To put it another way, do they have to say they'll talk about a salary cap? Bettman: No, if they want to talk, we'll be happy to talk. But in response to what we've told them we need, they've said they have no interest in talking. So we haven't seen any reason to ask for a meeting. TF: Perhaps it's oversimplistic to say lock yourself in a room and get it done, but why can't it be done? Bettman: Because we are talking about different things that don't bear any relationship to each other. The union is talking about modifying an existing system, which is a system that we believe to a certainty is fatally flawed. The system doesn't work, and we don't believe that there's any way you can rectify the problems of this system. We need a new system. We've proposed six, and the union refuses to negotiate over any of them ... It's not about compromise for the sake of compromise. It's about making the right deal. I got asked in a chat session, "Well, if your average salary figure is 1.3 million and they want to keep the 1.8, why can't you split it in the middle?" The answer is we have no interest in continuing to bleed lots and lots of money. We want a solution that will enable all of our franchises to be viable and competitive ... and with affordable ticket prices. It's not about locking yourself in the room. We are, to quote myself, speaking two different languages. That's where we find ourselves. TF: Why do you have to be speaking the same language to be locked in a room and negotiate? Bettman: The union turned a deaf ear (to the NHL's invitations to negotiate since 1999). We've been at this process since 1999, so the fact that we haven't met for two months, I don't find remarkable. They've refused to address the problems for five and a half years. And couple that with something you can either agree with or disagree with, but we believe this is a union that bargains by confrontation. In 1992, striking on the eve of the playoffs. In '94, refusing to negotiate in a meaningful way until the season was about to be canceled. So this isn't, based on the union clock, a time for meaningful negotiation -- which is evidenced by the fact that the offer they made on Sept. 9 was a watered-down version of one they had made 15 months ago. They basically made one offer a year ago in June, and the only time they varied from it was to make it worse. It's a framework that I believe wouldn't work, and I don't think they think it would work because of their first reaction when they proposed it in June 2003. I said, 'I don't believe this will work, but if you're prepared to guarantee the results that you have outlined here, your estimates, we have something to talk about.' Their response was, 'We're not guaranteeing anything.' I took that to mean they believed or knew it wasn't going to work. Why are you smiling? TF: Well, why can't you have Colin Powell, who has nothing to do now, or ... Bettman: It's not about mediating. Mediation is when the sides don't understand each other. We understand each other fully. They want to maintain the current system, which they contend is a free market, which it's not. We want to make them partners, we want to share in the revenues, as (the revenues) currently are and as they grow, and we want to have a predictable, enforceable relationship between revenue and expenses. That's what happens in collective bargaining, in virtually every other collective bargaining relationship on the face of the earth. Look at what happened with Delta Airlines in the last week! The pilots reduced their salaries by 30 percent and agreed to no raises for five years to save the company a billion dollars a year because they knew the airline wasn't healthy! Now, I'm not drawing the parallel between Delta Airlines' economics and ours. Don't think I'm suggesting that, and I'm not even comparing our players to airline pilots. The point I'm making is that in collective bargaining, the employer and employee, management and union, negotiate over what is the fair share of the pie for the members of the union. And that's something this union refuses to do. It's not about the difference between 1.3 and 1.8, it's about a difference between whether you play in daytime or nighttime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derek21 Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 I have just one simple question for Gary. If the league isn't willing to sit down in the same room with the PA and try to negotiate, then how is this thing going to get resolved? This is the commisioner whose reputation is two lockouts in a decade and no good network TV deal and zero marketing. And it's also a guy who came over from the NBA. He's in over his head and the results prove it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rock Posted November 17, 2004 Author Share Posted November 17, 2004 ESPN.com: NHL TF: You aren't offering any olive branches here. Does this represent a hardening of your position? Bettman: The position we're in and what we need to do is the same as it was in 1999. We haven't hardened ... By the way, and I want to be clear about this. Our players are the best, on and off the ice. We don't begrudge them anything they got under the old CBA. We made the deal, they did great, and that's nobody's fault. But once the agreement expired, we were under no obligation to keep sustaining the losses, and that's what this is about. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> To me, the most telling answer in the whole interview. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LOTCB Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 How about no more pro hockey, Id rather watch high school hockey then these greedy scumbags anymore...and the owners can $Hove it too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJD Jester Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 Bettman: "We want a solution that will enable all of our franchises to be viable and competitive ... and with affordable ticket prices." That ship sailed a loooooooooooooong time ago, douchebag. As if the owners would EVER pass along the savings to the fans. You know they'd charge full price for the scabs, too. <JESTER> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hattrick Posted November 17, 2004 Share Posted November 17, 2004 I have just one simple question for Gary. If the league isn't willing to sit down in the same room with the PA and try to negotiate, then how is this thing going to get resolved? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Because, like he said, the players and owners are not speaking the same language. If there is no common ground, why bother. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.