In every argument there are at least two sides. For the current NHL lockout, it’s the owners and league represented by NHL commissioner Gary Bettman versus the players represented by NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr. As the spokesmen for the two sides, these two are the target of positive and negative opinions towards either side.
Bettman has particularly received a lot of criticism as this is the third work stoppage of the NHL under his leadership. Clearly he’s the common factor, right? Fehr, on the other hand, has helped portray the players as willing to negotiate and desperate to play. The two sides started too far apart to make headway quickly. While the NHL was standing it’s ground, the NHLPA expressed interest in discussing their differences so they could start somewhere.
TSN hockey analyzer Bob McKenzie writes,
It’s fascinating, actually, to look at the difference of how the dueling offers were received. The NHL’s proposal of significantly less than 50 per cent was, quite accurately, portrayed as Draconian. The players’ proposal was widely hailed as creative, imaginative and conciliatory and the players themselves seem to think it’s a generous offer that addresses what needs to be addressed in the NHL.
From what I’ve seen of fans and sports commentators, the public is aligned with the players. This might be by default: the players have been told they CAN’T play by the NHL, rather than saying they WON’T play, as would be the case in a strike instead of a lockout. The players also show a bigger sense of urgency on the issue. We’ve already lost games, yet the NHL refuses to budge and allows days or weeks go by without talks.
The players and Fehr have been clear from the beginning that they players want to play. They don’t want to miss the whole season, and several have made arrangements to play overseas. Hockey fans want to see their favorite athletes play the game, instantly pinning the NHL as the bad guys.
Then there’s the simple numbers behind it. The NHL wanted to cut players salaries from 57 percent down to 43 percent. I don’t care how much or little money you make, losing 14 percent of your salary is significant. As economic times are still tough, that’s a touchy issue for the public, and easily aligns them on the players’ side.
A month into the lockout, the players were seen as the victim. Then the NHL issued a game changer. They presented a new proposal, the most significant difference a 50/50 split. In one day, the NHL has gone from the bad guys to the potential heroes.
While the NHLPA has not yet responded, the NHL has now poised the players to be the bad guys if they refuse the offer. Fans will suddenly shift their allegiance to the league and wish the players weren’t so greedy. The proposal not only meets in the middle of what the players had before (57) and what the league initially wanted (43), but it also cuts it down the middle between the league and players. Neither side will have the upper hand as they are splitting the revenue equally. To a fan that misses the game, it seems fair.
Should the NHLPA choose to decline the offer, how they do so will be critical for the public opinion moving forward. They can be seen as greedy and stubborn or as victims and underappreciated.
I haven’t read all the details of the new proposal to form a solid opinion as to whether it should be accepted, I just know it’s been 4 months without hockey and football just doesn’t cut it. I can’t help but let my hope for a season grow. After weeks on end of no discussions at all, I feel like we’re finally making progress.
The puck is at the players’ sticks to determine the next move.
One More Hockey Thing 