Now What?

 

 

So, a deal is done.  Does that mean we forgive and forget?  The answer to this question is no.  I am not proposing we boycott the games, or even turn off the television, or give up the season tickets you've had since you were a child.  I am talking about making some kind of stand.

What that means for people going to the game is a boycott on the merchandise and concessions.  Wouldn't it really hurt them more if they didn't sell any popcorn, or beer, or jerseys?  Wouldn't you be sending an important message that you love hockey, but you don't have to support the marketing, the merchandising, or the price gouging.

Yes, we will be hurting some of the little people by this action, but I don't see a way around it.  Sorry concession stand worker.  We've got to stand up for ourselves and not just meekly go back and suck it up.  We have to show them that we've been the ones hurt in this.  We're the ones that need some kind of compensation.

I don't know what part of merchandising and food sales are included in "hockey related revenue" but I suspect this action will have an effect on both sides. I still side with the players on this deal, but they need to know they are not innocent.

No shirts, no pucks, no family sized cokes, no programs.

Time to take a stand.

Ego and Greed

 

So, after all this time, there is finally movement.  I guess the whole point was to wait until there was no time left to finally get a deal done.  Are these negotiators like high school students waiting until the last minute to do their essays?

Nothing is certain yet, but there seems to be more optimism than at any time this year.  At the very least, sports commentators finally have something to talk about.  Until now, there really hasn't been a lot to report on.   They've talked to every possible person they could.  They've talked to players, to owners, to fans, to the dentists of the players, and even the dog walkers of the players.  If nothing else, I hope this stops.

If it takes a couple of days to get this deal done, then, most likely. they'll talk to all these people again to get their reactions, and fill up air time.

Should it have taken this long?  No, of course not.  Did I think it would take this long.  Yes.  Congratulations ego, greed, and strategy.  You ruined the season for all of us.

A Deal? Now?

Well, there seems to be an offer on the table to end the lockout of NHL players.  Great!  The sooner the better.  I miss hockey, and would love to see it again. (now I know you're wondering where I am going to go with this.....aren't you?)

The newspapers all mentioned how shrewd a movie this was of Gary Bettman.  Shrewd.  When I read that in several newspapers, it gave me pause to think.  If this was as shrewd as reporters have mentioned, then why are they telling me it is shrewd?  They make it sound like it was underhanded (this is Gary Bettman after all). If this is so shrewd, then if really isn't bargaining in good faith, is it?  Trying to back someone into a corner and forcing a deal on them doesn't really look or sound like a team effort to get people back on the ice.  I guess I am just unclear why bad faith is shrewd?  Shouldn't the papers be trying to find out why this deal is happening now?  Shouldn't these papers be dissecting the deal line by line.

I am already tired of the games, the brinkmanship and everything else that has come with this lockout.  I still can't see the owners side of anything--my view is blocked by those massive contracts they handed out before they had to lock out the players so that they didn't really have to pay for those contracts.

I am not going to follow this in the news until the day it is settled.  Until then, there has to be something on the sports channels. 

Changing Cable Packages

If you needed proof that I have given up....look no further.  Today, I changed my cable channels.  I opted to reduce my sports channels in favour of movies.  Even if they do play hockey this year, I won't be watching it on TV.  Actually, I could still watch Hockey Night in Canada (but that's an institution) but there is no guarantee that I would.

Last time there was a lockout we were treated to one year of poker, followed by several years of poker.  As it turns out, it was pretty good to watch.  It's popularity is still quite strong, and I am sure there will be more poker on TV during this lockout.

I generally like it, but I don't love it.  The problem is that they tend to over show some TV poker moments.  I think I have see the one with Daniel Negreanu vs. the loose cannon in pink shirt more than 15 times.  That is probably 13 more times than I needed to see it.

Maybe this time they will find a new sport to showcase.  I suggest Australian Rules Football, or Hurling, or at the very least, bring back the Red Bull Air Race.

As for me, I will do my best to catch up on the movies I have missed.  I'll let you know how it works out.

Optimism? Really? Really!?

Another day on hockey?  I didn't really mean to do it.  I had planned on attacking some other group of hapless  do nothings, but I was forced into this position.  And besides, it isn't the NHL that I am going after today.  It's the media.

I opened up the paper and was greeted with the words that there was optimism amongst everyone involved that this lockout could be solved quickly.

What?

Who are these people with optimism?  It couldn't be with the two sides that aren't talking to each other.  It couldn't be with the media people who were busy high fiving themselves due to their success (ahem) in predicting the lockout.  It couldn't be with the fans, because their emotions are more closely akin to disgust and rage.

I then wondered if this was a cheap ploy to sell more newspapers.  Ridiculous, in fact, because I was reading this in the free commuting newspaper.  I suppose it might help sell advertising, but my anger over the whole mess doesn't really put me in a shopping mood (and that will include any future purchases of hockey paraphernalia when the sport resumes--I have a long memory and I won't forget this time)

So who's optimistic?

at least someone is happy

Players who are Europe bound might be optimistic about a diet of Swiss chocolate, or fine German beer.... but optimism for this mess?  I think not.

I could forgive the media (but I won't) for putting us through this, but I am sure that when they finally get to report on the thing being done for real they will try too hard to make themselves look like geniuses.

No Sympathy

The NHL locked out the players this week.  Big surprise.  We all saw it coming, we all knew it was inevitable.  Like the hockey fans we are (or maybe now were) we tried to pretend that it wouldn't happen.  We tried to pretend that much like our beloved teams, they could stage a late rally and win it all.

Foolishness.

My thoughts on this are many.  I sympathize more with the players than the owners.  While the players make more money in one season than I will likely make in a lifetime of work doesn't bother me as much as I think it should.  There are lots of overpaid people (Gary Bettman for one) in all industries, not just pro sports.  If only we could lock out some political leaders or senators.

Hockey players want to play the game of hockey.  They've been doing it all their lives. and now that simple thing is denied them (along with their large salary)  Some will go play in Russia or parts of Europe.  Hopefully some of those games will be broadcast on TV for me to watch.

Watching the owners of well to do teams sign players to long term deals on the eve of the lockout seems to me to be dealing in bad faith.  You know that the players are eventually going to have to take some kind of rollback, so if that was calculated in the contract....that seems a little dishonest, or at least a little nudge nudge, wink wink, say no more kind of way.  I can't really stomach them claiming that they have no money when they sign these contracts.  The hypocrisy is mind-bending.  Maybe they need to learn a little thing called restraint.

It is like watching an obese person claiming they want to lose weight while overeating.  Yes, there might be psychological problems that cause this behaviour--the desire to win is a strong one, but in this analogy the players are the super extra large pizzas.  Neither the food, nor the players are to blame.  Bettman's idea is to lock the fridge, but that won't change the behaviour.  It didn't work last time, why would it work this time.  You're going to unlock the fridge eventually.

Some teams are too poor, or play in markets where they don't draw a crowd.  There are only three choices.  Fold, relocate, or get the richer clubs to share their revenue.  Bettman doesn't like the first two because he keeps hoping that hockey will get the same ESPN deal that the NFL got.  As far as pipe dreams go, that is a pretty good one.  As for sharing revenue.... the rich owners certainly don't want that.  However, it can be don.  If they paid a 100% luxury tax for exceeding the cap, the money that they overspent could be sent to teams that qualify for financial support.

I would love to hear what everyone thinks.  As you know, since there won't be any hockey on television, I have plenty of time to talk about it.