Gary Bettman on The Hour - **LINK INSIDE**

[Duffman100]

Hey Guys,

Just wanted to let you guys know that we have Gary Bettman on the show, Thursday February 5th, 11pm on CBC.

He's talking about fighting, international development, and a few other hot topics.

here's the interview

http://www.cbc.ca/thehour/videos.html?id=1024232373

and the uncut interview

http://www.cbc.ca/thehour/videos.html?id=1024154659

[sh00n]

You should ask if he thinks he's done a good job with the NHL, what with every arena booing him when he makes an appearance.

[timd1218]

Ask him why he has yet to fire every NHL ref and start fresh so penalties are called right?

[burn1down]

The ONLY, (and i am being literal with ONLY) thing i have any morcel of respect for Bettman is the fact that he has brought the game down, destroyed a US base, alienated the Canadian base, lost a year of the game for basically nothing, upped prices to see games, had league wide jersey changes. . then upped jersey prices. . . . is HATED by most who even see him. . . .. . . . .yet, he stays his course, sticks to what he says, and stands in front of all of it.

Is he a guy i would want anywhere near a company i worked for? No
Would i ever want to see him in person (with a police presence)? No
Do i think he has added to the game in any way? No

But he doesnt shy away. . .you have to give him that

[timd1218]

The ONLY, (and i am being literal with ONLY) thing i have any morcel of respect for Bettman is the fact that he has brought the game down, destroyed a US base, alienated the Canadian base, lost a year of the game for basically nothing, upped prices to see games, had league wide jersey changes. . then upped jersey prices. . . . is HATED by most who even see him. . . .. . . . .yet, he stays his course, sticks to what he says, and stands in front of all of it.

Is he a guy i would want anywhere near a company i worked for? No
Would i ever want to see him in person (with a police presence)? No
Do i think he has added to the game in any way? No

But he doesnt shy away. . .you have to give him that

I hope that is just a joke.

[burn1down]

The ONLY, (and i am being literal with ONLY) thing i have any morcel of respect for Bettman is the fact that he has brought the game down, destroyed a US base, alienated the Canadian base, lost a year of the game for basically nothing, upped prices to see games, had league wide jersey changes. . then upped jersey prices. . . . is HATED by most who even see him. . . .. . . . .yet, he stays his course, sticks to what he says, and stands in front of all of it.

Is he a guy i would want anywhere near a company i worked for? No
Would i ever want to see him in person (with a police presence)? No
Do i think he has added to the game in any way? No

But he doesnt shy away. . .you have to give him that

I hope that is just a joke.

Joke?? Why would you hope this is a joke?

Attendance is down
Viewership on TV is down
Contracts are as high as they have ever been
Teams are losing money like crazy, and already talking of moving

If you can tell me what exactly the fan of hockey gained by the lockout. . i am all ears

[WEFFPIM]

-Attendance is down in the NBA, too. I know we've talked about how the NHL is outdrawing the NBA in most of the markets with both leagues in them.
-TV viewership, can't disagree with you there.
-Contracts are absurdly high in every sport.
-The Coyotes, the Islanders, and the Lighting are all I can think of. Teams in every league lose money, granted, not nearly as much as the Coyotes. But every league, especially in baseball, you see teams fail to make a profit.

[timd1218]

The ONLY, (and i am being literal with ONLY) thing i have any morcel of respect for Bettman is the fact that he has brought the game down, destroyed a US base, alienated the Canadian base, lost a year of the game for basically nothing, upped prices to see games, had league wide jersey changes. . then upped jersey prices. . . . is HATED by most who even see him. . . .. . . . .yet, he stays his course, sticks to what he says, and stands in front of all of it.

Is he a guy i would want anywhere near a company i worked for? No
Would i ever want to see him in person (with a police presence)? No
Do i think he has added to the game in any way? No

But he doesnt shy away. . .you have to give him that

I hope that is just a joke.

Joke?? Why would you hope this is a joke?

Attendance is down
Viewership on TV is down
Contracts are as high as they have ever been
Teams are losing money like crazy, and already talking of moving

If you can tell me what exactly the fan of hockey gained by the lockout. . i am all ears

Maybe the thing called the salary cap is the reason why they needed to take the year off. If the NHL didn't have a salary cap right now, Sidney Crosby, Alex Ovechkin and Geno Malkin would not be playing on their currents teams beyond 3 years. The NY Rangers would have offered each of them at least $15 million a year to play on their team.

The salary cap has allowed teams like the Pens, Sabres, etc.. (small market teams) to be in competition with the big markets teams and be able to keep franchise players like that.

Attendance is down in every sport. The economy is terrible. Attendance prior to this season as been great. When attendance is up, salary cap goes up.

Viewership, I could care less about because the NHL makes their money off of the internet. The NHL and Bettman did the right thing by going on Versus at that time because ESPN screwed them over with the contract offer.

Contracts are high because when the NHL makes money, the salary cap goes up. When the NHL makes money, teams make money.

There are teams in all sports that lose money and end up moving. Basketball just had a team move because they couldn't keep the franchise there. It happens in all sports.

At least Bettman had the balls to stand up to the Players Association and continue to fight to get the salary cap. Without the salary cap, the NHL would be 10 times worse than what it is now.

[burn1down]

Let me start by saying normally, i really like your posts. You have a clear knowledge, and passion for the game.
Here, you are wrong
Yes Sid and Ovechkin are staying. . but there are still players bolting. You should know, the Pens gave up a ton for Hossa, and offered a lot of money. . he still left. Players do that sometimes, and players greed in a lot of cases has most to do with it. That is true in all sports. .with or without a salary cap. In addition, i dont think 12+ years of multi million dollar contracts is doing the league or owners any favors. . .ask Islanders fans.

There is arguably no player as important to their team as Jarome Iginla. He has had many chances to bolt for more money. . before and after the lockout. He did not. Calgary cannot be considered a top market. Players make these choices. Edmonton could have kept Smyth. They didnt want to offer thier franchise player 5.5 mill. . .then the next off season offered Vanek 8. . . . thats bad managment, not a bad system. The NHL lockout did nothing to solve bad managment.

Attendance is down in every sport. . yes. Prior to this season great?? Perhaps in a market or two, but league wide, attendance has been down considerably and steadily since the lockout.

I dont care if you could care less about viewership. . but its very important. Yes the net has had an influenct, yes ESPN was playing hard to get. . . .but when Hockey Night in Canada double headers are down 19% in the first game and 30% in the second. . . . i have a hard time believing these people would rather watch on thier computers. ..

You said contracts are high cause the league is making money? Really? With low attendance, low viewership, and an economic crisis, the league is making money? Fact is, owners have paid no attention to the upcoming crisis and changes in the league and players out of control contracts are getting even more out of control. This is not a reflection of a league with so much money coming in it has to pay some out.

Yes there are teams in all sports that move. . . but basketball did not just move because they couldnt keep the franchise. Seattle had more than enough support, simply a terribly greedy owner and commishioner with an agenda. This had nothing to do with support. In fact, they left the 14th best market in America which filled stadiums (and had the cities support to build a new arena) to the hometown of a new owner with the 49th best economic market. That had nothing to do with support.

I am sorry, but if you believe the lockout helped the NHL, you are wearing blinders. NOTHING has improved league wide. Like i said. . .maybe some markets, not suprisingly your Pens, have been better. . .league wide, they are in much more trouble than they were at the begining of the lockout.

All you have to do is look at the latest vote. The owners were the supposed winners of the lockout, yet the players union (who were cashing in before) voted at over 95% to keep on the current agreement. That has to tell you something.

[UTMCretin]

There is arguably no player as important to their team as Jarome Iginla. He has had many chances to bolt for more money. . before and after the lockout. He did not. Calgary cannot be considered a top market. Players make these choices. Edmonton could have kept Smyth. They didnt want to offer thier franchise player 5.5 mill. . .then the next off season offered Vanek 8. . . . thats bad managment, not a bad system. The NHL lockout did nothing to solve bad managment.

A. The purpose of the NHL lockout wasn't to outright solve bad management, and in theory there wouldn't be any need to; bad management should punish itself. But in absence of a fair playing field, there was nothing to keep more affluent owners from simply spending their way to success (barring of course a certain level of organizational competence - sorry, New York). What the implementation of the salary cap provided was an even playing field, one in which bad management actually would be punished. That doesn't mean poor team management would go away entirely - hindsight is 20/20, and it's ridiculous to think that every team will suddenly be imbued with equally intelligent leadership - but it has punished teams who tie up their money unnecessarily, and as a fan of a small-market team in the pre-lockout era, I view this as an overwhelmingly positive development.

B. The Oilers offered Vanek $7 million per year, not $8, and I would really disagree with that being an example of bad management. Letting Smyth go was more of an example of Lowe underestimating the eventual increase in the salary cap (on account of the league doing better than anticipated, which doesn't really help your argument), and not wanting to tie up what at the time was considered to be superstar money on an aging veteran. Personally, I would gladly spend an extra $1.5 million to get a highly skilled star player locked up for the prime of his career over what essentially amounts to a veteran presence on the downside of his. Certainly Buffalo doesn't regret matching the offer, and it's no wonder with the promise Vanek has shown, on his way to another 40+ goal season.

You said contracts are high cause the league is making money? Really? With low attendance, low viewership, and an economic crisis, the league is making money?

Yes. $2.65 billion in revenues at last estimate, which would actually mean a slight increase to the salary cap for next season. This doesn't mean the league has no reason to worry financially, but the NHL is certainly in no danger of spending themselves dry.

[burn1down]

Maybe we just fundamentally disagree on the Smyth debacle. Where i see your point, a Vanek in his prime is worth more than Smyth on his way down. .. but Smyth was that franchise. He was their identity. They (Lowe in particular) handled that situation very poorly. . even to the point that i am sure Lowe addressed the handling.

As for the cap going up, i heard next season it stays the same, and the following year it drops. Based on the fact they use #'s from this season to influence 2 years in advance. . .hopefully more of a balance instead of an up and down by the year cap.

I guess my main point overall is. . . .more paridy in the league was not worth a full year off. . .imo

[timd1218]

Maybe we just fundamentally disagree on the Smyth debacle. Where i see your point, a Vanek in his prime is worth more than Smyth on his way down. .. but Smyth was that franchise. He was their identity. They (Lowe in particular) handled that situation very poorly. . even to the point that i am sure Lowe addressed the handling.

As for the cap going up, i heard next season it stays the same, and the following year it drops. Based on the fact they use #'s from this season to influence 2 years in advance. . .hopefully more of a balance instead of an up and down by the year cap.

I guess my main point overall is. . . .more paridy in the league was not worth a full year off. . .imo

You also can't blame just Gary Bettman for the lockout. What about the players and the players union for being greedy?

[burn1down]

Maybe we just fundamentally disagree on the Smyth debacle. Where i see your point, a Vanek in his prime is worth more than Smyth on his way down. .. but Smyth was that franchise. He was their identity. They (Lowe in particular) handled that situation very poorly. . even to the point that i am sure Lowe addressed the handling.

As for the cap going up, i heard next season it stays the same, and the following year it drops. Based on the fact they use #'s from this season to influence 2 years in advance. . .hopefully more of a balance instead of an up and down by the year cap.

I guess my main point overall is. . . .more paridy in the league was not worth a full year off. . .imo

You also can't blame just Gary Bettman for the lockout. What about the players and the players union for being greedy?

No questions there were a lot of issues, and there is a lot of responsibility. Gary is the captain of the ship though. If it sinks, you dont blame the 1st mate. . . . . .

[UTMCretin]

As for the cap going up, i heard next season it stays the same, and the following year it drops. Based on the fact they use #'s from this season to influence 2 years in advance. . .hopefully more of a balance instead of an up and down by the year cap.

Well, they'll likely keep the cap as is, in the interest of cushioning the eventual blow, but the point remains that with current revenue predictions, they don't have to. (Although I agree that they should just leave it where it is rather than risk unnecessary fluctuations.)