NHL Season Start Date: January 13, 2021

[irregularly irregular]

54 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

If they don't care about the Olympics, there is nothing stopping a full season and playoffs.

NHL might not care about the summer olympics, but NBC has a ton of $$$ tied up in the olympics. NBC will make sure the playoffs are over before the opening ceremony, regardless of how the NHL feels about it. 

[Ducky]

If things keep going the way they are wrt the virus, the Jets will be playing elsewhere.

As it is, I would bet that their TC is held somewhere else and they start their first few weeks away from home.

A 48 game season seems the most reasonable.

[PerreaultForever]

15 hours ago, Brawndo said:

 

In the same way that sports leagues are able to procure all the testing supplies they need, I imagine the NFL, NHL, NBA and MLB will be able to gain access to all the vaccinations it needs for their personnel. Once this is complete the NHL could move forward with fewer concerns of an outbreak 

For the record I disagree with this practice wholeheartedly 

You're right, they probably will be moved up in the vaccination line, and it's wrong, but money will probably talk loudest. 

[Palm Trees And Taxes]

Have to believe all the plans (schedule, divisions, etc) are in place to start the season when the league and NHLPA plans to, its all about the CBA negotiations etc and once and if that is resolved, the league and players will be notified right away and they can go forward with the season.

If I had to handicap this, I'd say it is 50/50 as of today.

[Brawndo]

The last sentence worries me a tad bit that the next time we see NHL Hockey will be October 1st, 2021 for the 2021-22 Season. 

[nfreeman]

1 hour ago, Brawndo said:

The last sentence worries me a tad bit that the next time we see NHL Hockey will be October 1st, 2021 for the 2021-22 Season. 

I am interpreting "players owe us more than anyone imagined" as an indicator that the NHL's revenues have taken a huge hit, which has resulted in the players receiving well over their half of revenues for 2019-20 -- i.e. much more than can be made good via the escrowed portion of the players' salaries from last season.  I would also interpret this as the NHL expecting another huge decline in expected revenues for 2020-21, half of which will need to be borne by the players one way or another -- and the measures that the NHL and the players agreed on this a few months ago don't come close to accomplishing this (and it's fair to wonder why the NHL thought those measures would get the job done, when it appears that they have fallen far short of that goal).

I think that we are going to see either no season, or some combination of across-the-board pay cuts or increases in escrow adding up to close to 50% of player salaries.

 

 

 

[nfreeman]

I should add that I think although the players will fight hard against economic concessions, they ultimately will make significant concessions and there will be a season.  Even in a compressed economic climate, both the players and the owners would be throwing away a ton of money if the season were cancelled.

[Taro T]

5 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I should add that I think although the players will fight hard against economic concessions, they ultimately will make significant concessions and there will be a season.  Even in a compressed economic climate, both the players and the owners would be throwing away a ton of money if the season were cancelled.

Yep.

[dudacek]

Yeah, it's not even about monetary concessions

It's basically about are the players willing to defer any more money, and are the owners willing to give them an incentive (ie with interest) to do so.

Playing the season under the current climate puts a small number of teams at risk of not paying their bills in the short term, and puts the players at risk of owing the owners a lot of money over the next few years under the 50-50 split.

They will come up with something because it is in everyone's best interest to do so.

Everyone except a small handful of owners wants to play and that everyone includes Bettman, so it will happen. He's just seeing what relief he can get.

[Marvin]

30 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Yeah, it's not even about monetary concessions

It's basically about are the players willing to defer any more money, and are the owners willing to give them an incentive (ie with interest) to do so.

Playing the season under the current climate puts a small number of teams at risk of not paying their bills in the short term, and puts the players at risk of owing the owners a lot of money over the next few years under the 50-50 split.

They will come up with something because it is in everyone's best interest to do so.

Everyone except a small handful of owners wants to play and that everyone includes Bettman, so it will happen. He's just seeing what relief he can get.

What were the salary cap rules for the 48 game seasons?  Weren't those pro-rated by games played?  Why would an abbreviated season now be any different?

[Taro T]

7 minutes ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

What were the salary cap rules for the 48 game seasons?  Weren't those pro-rated by games played?  Why would an abbreviated season now be any different?

Yes, there were adjustments made for a shorter season.

Why would an abbreviated season be different this time?  Primarily because per game ticket & concession revenue will be essentially non-existent this time for at least a portion of the season.  They have tried to & seem to have come up with a formula that would work for both sides, but reality is they will likely have a much shorter season with significantly fewer revenue streams than they expected back in the spring.

Was (pleasantly) surprised when Bettman & Fehr managed to get on the same page 6 months ago.  Am cautiously optimistic they can get there again soon.

[JohnC]

1 hour ago, nfreeman said:

I should add that I think although the players will fight hard against economic concessions, they ultimately will make significant concessions and there will be a season.  Even in a compressed economic climate, both the players and the owners would be throwing away a ton of money if the season were cancelled.

My understanding is that the TV contract is up after this year. It's in both the players and the owners interests to have a season in whatever form (abbreviated or not/no fans or limited fans) in or order to negotiate a more lucrative deal with the TV side of the industry. If this season is scrapped while other pro sports find a way to salvage a season then hockey will fall to the bottom of the totem pole. When starting off you are already considered a niche sport falling out of view puts you in a very precarious position from a fan and financial situation.  

[dudacek]

1 hour ago, Marvin, Sabres Fan said:

What were the salary cap rules for the 48 game seasons?  Weren't those pro-rated by games played?  Why would an abbreviated season now be any different?

Well, essentially they are, just indirectly. It's prorated by the income collected, not the amount of games played.

Bottom line with the cap system is that the owners and the players will eventually split the income equally, no matter how much is made.

The argument is about when each side gets their share of the money.

[nfreeman]

3 hours ago, dudacek said:

Yeah, it's not even about monetary concessions

It's basically about are the players willing to defer any more money, and are the owners willing to give them an incentive (ie with interest) to do so.

Playing the season under the current climate puts a small number of teams at risk of not paying their bills in the short term, and puts the players at risk of owing the owners a lot of money over the next few years under the 50-50 split.

They will come up with something because it is in everyone's best interest to do so.

Everyone except a small handful of owners wants to play and that everyone includes Bettman, so it will happen. He's just seeing what relief he can get.

I agree with most of this, but I think the bolded might be a bit imprecise.  If you mean "are the players willing to effectively put more of their salaries into escrow, and thus available for ensuring they don't exceed their half of total revenues" -- then I agree.  But simply deferring a portion of salaries and repaying that portion in full in a couple of years, doesn't do anything to enforce the 50/50 split, which is IMHO the critical issue, and which will require true economic concessions.

[Taro T]

3 minutes ago, nfreeman said:

I agree with most of this, but I think the bolded might be a bit imprecise.  If you mean "are the players willing to effectively put more of their salaries into escrow, and thus available for ensuring they don't exceed their half of total revenues" -- then I agree.  [b]But simply deferring a portion of salaries and repaying that portion in full in a couple of years, doesn't do anything to enforce the 50/50 split,[/b] which is IMHO the critical issue, and which will require true economic concessions.

Would have to relook at how HRR are defined, but a lot of essentially fixed costs will remain if there is a season whether or not there are fans in attendance though revenues will be slashed.  Even though the players only get 50% of the actual HRR, giving them what they end up due on the originally agreed schedule MIGHT not be feasible.

Players deferring compensation out a year or 3 might just be the difference in some teams not declaring bankruptcy as cash flows will be seriously out of normal. 

[nfreeman]

A nugget from Elliotte Friedman:

 

[WildCard]

Please, bring us back hockey.

[bob_sauve28]

1 hour ago, WildCard said:

Please, bring us back hockey.

Everyday that goes by with hearing almost nothing makes me feel less and less positive about this situation getting resolved 

[dudacek]

From Lebrun's report, on the table in yesterday's talk: Jan. 2 camp opening, mid-January season start, 52 or 56 games.

Also,

"The seven-day voluntary pre-camps for the seven teams not involved in the postseason remains on the table, a source said. But another source said it wasn’t 100 percent it could happen, that both sides need to figure that out. The NHL definitely wants it. The pre-camps for the Ducks, Kings, Sharks, Senators, Red Wings, Sabres and Devils, under this new timetable, would be slated to open in late December."

[Sabres Fan in NS]

An early January training camp and mid-January season start seems a bit far fetched to me.

If things keep up like they are now, I think we are more realistically looking at October 2021 for a 2021/22 season start.

What happens to all the 1 year contracts in that case?  Are they pushed to the 2021/22 season?

[LGR4GM]

Just now, New Scotland (NS) said:

An early January training camp and mid-January season start seems a bit far fetched to me.

If things keep up like they are now, I think we are more realistically looking at October 2021 for a 2021/22 season start.

What happens to all the 1 year contracts in that case?  Are they pushed to the 2021/22 season?

I don't think so. It would just be a lost year. Those contracts would just expire without payout. 

[Sabres Fan in NS]

6 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

I don't think so. It would just be a lost year. Those contracts would just expire without payout. 

DAMN!!

We may never see #taylorhall4 in a Sabre uniform.

[dudacek]

Right now, the Vancouver Canucks would not be allowed to play a home game, period, full stop. I don't think they can even practice.

The B.C. government has banned all adult team sports, and i expect that will continue throughout the month, and likely until we are safely past a post-holiday incubation period.

[WildCard]

4 minutes ago, dudacek said:

Right now, the Vancouver Canucks would not be allowed to play a home game, period, full stop. I don't think they can even practice.

The B.C. government has banned all adult team sports, and i expect that will continue throughout the month, and likely until we are safely past a post-holiday incubation period.

Same with some of the California teams I would think.

[bob_sauve28]

Not a very encouraging article 

 

https://www.wgrz.com/article/sports/sabres-nhl-bettman-fehr-season-nhlpa-buffalo-wgrz/71-77f6e3d4-f3c7-4ec7-b55e-ccfc28114984