Are we headed for another NHL lockout?

Before the lockout that wiped out the 2004-05 NHL season, there was a sense of impending doom. I’m getting that feeling again.

In 2004, the league made it clear that they wanted to implement a salary cap that really wasn’t necessary (the NHL is not the MLB) as well as impose other measures to ensure the success of their clubs regardless of how they were run or how suitable their markets were for the league. They called this “cost certainty.”

Gary Bettman, the maniacal commissioner for the league, made it clear from the beginning that if he was going down, he was taking the league with him. That gave the league a lot of leverage. Since the players made it clear that they wanted to play, it was obvious that they would gradually cave in to the league’s demands. A lockout was probable, and I expected the head of the players’ association and the commissioner to lose their jobs after an agreement was reached.

The league started by making their demands. The players made counterproposals that were primarily thrown away by the league. At one point, they offered a salary rollback in hopes of getting a little back from the league. The league responded by adding the rollback to their last proposal, effectively giving the players back an offer that was worse than their last.

Later in the negotiations, the league came up with a “compromise.” They would accept the players’ offer as long as it worked identically to what the league was offering. If anything was different, the league’s offer would take over. It was established that the players’ offer would immediately deviate, and the league’s offer would immediately take over. The players were predictably insulted and broke off contact. The league went to the media as a PR move insisting that the player’s rejected their own offer and broke off contact because they were the bad guys in the negotiation. (This is similar to a tactic that we saw recently in the T"E"A’s illegal teacher strike.)

It took some time for the league to unilaterally implement their way, but they were successful. For the most part, it played out as expected. The one thing that I was wrong about was that Gary Bettman somehow managed to keep his job.

The upcoming labor negotiation have been something that I have been dreading since the end of the last lockout. The labor issues were not actually resolved last time due to the league’s handling of the situation. This was followed by years of the players’ association being in shambles. During that time, the league just kept pushing the players around. The players are not going to want the league bullying them any more, and I think that they actually found leadership. They even leveled the playing field by finding someone who doesn’t actually care about the sport (like Bettman).

On the league’s side of the issue, the evil and corrupt Gary Bettman still calls the shots and maintains that enormous ego. With the Coyotes struggling, he can use them as a bargaining chip in the negotiation (perhaps the reason that they haven’t relocated). Many people were predicting that the league would demand that players would have their share of revenues cut to 50%. It’s hard to imagine the players willing to accept less than what they already have this time around (for the reasons that I have already mentioned), but the league seems unwilling to budge off of the idea of more sacrifices from the players. Both sides seem poised to take on a hardline stance.

We are now hearing reports about the league’s initial proposal:

1. Reduce players' hockey-related revenues to 46% from 57 %.
2. 10 seasons in the NHL before being eligible for unrestricted free agency.
3. Contracts limited to 5 years.
4. No more salary arbitration.
5. Entry-level contract are 5 years long instead of 3.

So much for 50/50. I’m not going to go point by point, but any hockey fan who sees this knows that there is no way that the players would accept anything like it. This proposal is quite a bit worse than I was expecting. Perhaps the league is actually willing to provide a little leeway this time. That would be out of character for them, and there is no way to be certain. Regardless, that impending sense of doom is in full force right now. In many ways, this setup is even worse than last time.

If this is how the league is going to act, I don’t see any way to avoid a work stoppage. I could be wrong. Perhaps the reports regarding the proposal are inaccurate. Maybe the players learned their lesson and will just cave from the beginning. There’s even a possibility that the league is willing to move off of their initial proposal.

The good news is that I can handle a lockout much better this time than last time. After all, the league’s on-ice product has become mediocre thanks to all of the misguided rule changes. Despite my years of support, I really wouldn’t miss the 2012-13 season if the league decides not to let it happen.