Well, here we sit, September 12th, and the current NHL collective bargaining agreement expires on the 15th. I think it’s safe to say most of us are nervous about what’s about to happen.
More on that at the bottom of the post – let’s look at a few pieces of info and interest from around the hockey world today.
Today was Lubomir Visnovsky’s arbitration hearing about his “trade” to the Islanders – he maintained that since he got traded with a no-trade clause on his way to Anaheim (or at least he thought he had one, for some reason), that he still had one, and Anaheim had no right to deal him to a team that wasn’t on his list.
The arbitrator ruled that, sorry Lubo, you’re stuck be a Vislander (get it? Like, “vile?” I just made that up for Visnovsky, hope he likes it). The Ducks get a 2nd round pick in 2013, and the Isles get a guy one year removed from a huge 68 point season from the back-end, as well as help meeting the salary floor. I’m kinda excited about the ruling.
Today I had my attention directed to a fantastic website called “Frozen Faceoff” that has compiled every arena overview of the logo at center from, oh, basically the last two decades. They were then re-created on the computer for posterity.
* Only two teams in professional hockey still opt to go with two logos at center, one facing each way: the Montreal Canadiens, and Philadelphia Flyers (correct me if I’m wrong, that’s all I could find).
* If you go back to about 1991-1992, you see almost every team went with small, double logos. Unsurprising for you throwback fans, the Hartford Whalers did it right from the get-go.
* I only saw one case of a team using a sponsor instead of a logo (PNE), and that was the 1991 Vancouver Canucks. The Kings didn’t use anything that year, just a blank circle. The Penguins did the same in ’90 (though they made up for it with a wicked one in ’95).
And now, the CBA stuff. As you know, the NHLPA (and a billion players) and the NHL met today. The NHLPA’s plan (by the way, I could attribute this info to any of the hundred reporters who were there today and tweeting – Bob McKenzie, Pierre LeBrun, Michael Grange, Elliotte Friedman, Nick Cotsonika…but it all came out at the same time. It is from them, however) was to enter the meeting, see how things go, and if they liked the direction, give their latest proposal to the NHL.
They met, gave them the proposal, and the owners gave it a review. They then gave the NHLPA a counter-proposal (that had been pre-drafted), with the disclaimer “Here’s our latest offer, if you don’t like this one, tough, because they’re only going to get worse from here out.” Guh. That’s scary and unproductive.
There was some good:
Bettman said players’ pay cut would be 7 percent in first year, less on second and zero in third by players’ estimates of growth.
— Nick Cotsonika (@cotsonika) September 12, 2012
The NHL’s initial their original request was 24%, so that’s something. Also, the definition of “hockey related revenue” (HRR) will stay the same, so calculations won’t get wonky.
There was some bad:
Bettman said the players offer wasn’t much different than the previous one, and therefore not acceptable. There’s also the whole “this offer or nothing” thing.
We’ll know more of the details in the coming days. The sand has just about left the top of the hourglass, and if this doesn’t happen soon, I don’t like where this ends.