Bettman confirms the league is looking at Jan 1st start date

[PaperBagger'14]

This was mentioned in his opening speech at the draft

[Finger Cookin]

Good to have almost a normal length for the offseason.

[lazypucker]

Did Bettman say it will be a full 82-game season or shortened?

[PaperBagger'14]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

Did Bettman say it will be a full 82-game season or shortened?

I dont believe be mentioned anything, it was a very short little quip where he said they believe and anticipate a January 1st start date.

[powderjunkie]

He will keep saying 82 games until he doesn't.

Just like he kept saying they would complete the regular season and playoffs as regular...until he didn't.

[Strange Brew]

Start of training camps or start of regular season?

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by Strange Brew

Start of training camps or start of regular season?

Season, per Tristan Jarry camps could possibly begin mid-November

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

Season, per Tristan Jarry camps could possibly begin mid-November

Not if they're looking to play in January.


I'd guess camps will open around mid-December, then a few exhibition games in the week between Christmas and New Year's and season start in January.

[Strange Brew]

It will be condensed for sure and I expect very few exhibition games. Given some time off for Christmas, I'd expect about three weeks on the calendar from start of camp to game 1.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by getbak

Not if they're looking to play in January.


I'd guess camps will open around mid-December, then a few exhibition games in the week between Christmas and New Year's and season start in January.

Keep in mind a lot of players will have a "summer" twice as long as normal. Almost a quarter of teams didn't take part in the return to play and then those were limited groups.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by lazypucker

Did Bettman say it will be a full 82-game season or shortened?

I don't think they know. I'd guess they're working on a zillion scenarios.
probably the biggest issue is if the border remains closed.

It's my opinion that they just can't do a bubbles for a full season. they're going to have to risk travel.

[Bleeding Red]

One of the pundits reported that a big issue regarding number of games is player's salaries. Right now there is no provision regarding pro-rated pay. The players contend that they should get their full contracted pay regardless if they play 82 or 42 games.

If it comes down to a fight, do those receiving bonuses toss everyone else under the bus? For example, Eichel has already been paid $7.5 mil, what does he care if the last $2.5 is pro-rated.

If there are no fans in the stands till march, and Bettman doesn't want summer hockey (i.e. SC awarded by June 30), while owners are dealing with losses in other businesses, who bets this become a fight?

The border issue is an easy work-around. An all-Canadian division plays x number of games in Canada (two each in each building), then they all move south for the remainder of the season.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

One of the pundits reported that a big issue regarding number of games is player's salaries. Right now there is no provision regarding pro-rated pay. The players contend that they should get their full contracted pay regardless if they play 82 or 42 games.

If it comes down to a fight, do those receiving bonuses toss everyone else under the bus? For example, Eichel has already been paid $7.5 mil, what does he care if the last $2.5 is pro-rated.

If there are no fans in the stands till march, and Bettman doesn't want summer hockey (i.e. SC awarded by June 30), while owners are dealing with losses in other businesses, who bets this become a fight?

The border issue is an easy work-around. An all-Canadian division plays x number of games in Canada (two each in each building), then they all move south for the remainder of the season.

that's a fight worth having. no way the players should get their full pay for a shortened season, especially with the massive revenue drop.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

I don't think they know. I'd guess they're working on a zillion scenarios.
probably the biggest issue is if the border remains closed.

It's my opinion that they just can't do a bubbles for a full season. they're going to have to risk travel.

The NHL has said there is no plan for bubbles moving forward.

It is more likely we see only intra-divisional games and the creation of an all-Canadian division due to the border closure.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by GordonBlue

that's a fight worth having. no way the players should get their full pay for a shortened season, especially with the massive revenue drop.

Actually with a 50-50 revenue split, all a shortened season would do if players want full contracts is make it so they have to pay more escrow. So, the players will lose that salary one way or the other. It's more of a fight for them than the league to play a full season.

[Enoch Root]

Originally Posted by Crown Royal

Actually with a 50-50 revenue split, all a shortened season would do if players want full contracts is make it so they have to pay more escrow. So, the players will lose that salary one way or the other. It's more of a fight for them than the league to play a full season.

Except isn't there already a cap negotiated on the escrow clawback (20% rings a bell to me)?

If so, escrow wouldn't solve anything for the league, if the number of games were significantly reduced. And I believe that is what they are still discussing with the NHLPA.

[powderjunkie]

The league has done a masterful job of keeping the players focused/squabbling over things that are pretty minor to the owners.

Every owner wants to pay out less right now, but the big economic drivers of the league understand that this is a matter of 'when', not 'if'. Eventually 'conceding' here in one way or another saves them from bending on other issues.


On the players side, I do understand why the majority wants as much as possible as soon as possible. There aren't many players who can feel really, really confident that they'll still be in the league through the entirety of this extended CBA.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Except isn't there already a cap negotiated on the escrow clawback (20% rings a bell to me)?

If so, escrow wouldn't solve anything for the league, if the number of games were significantly reduced. And I believe that is what they are still discussing with the NHLPA.

I just haven’t researched this, as I fundamentally don’t understand how you have true revenue sharing with a hard cap on escrow.

If there is a shortfall on revenue in excess of the escrow cap does that get funded by the owners? I thought there was talk about a mechanism to somehow recover over time through future escrow, which means future players would be funding a current year shortfall. Although any future recovery, if such a thing exists, likely wouldn’t extend beyond currently negotiated CBA.

[SOMBRI2]

being first of the big leagues to announce will give the NHL an inside track so they can get TV slots, schedules? Also makes sense to avoid the big tournaments like the Euro 2020, and Summer Olympics?

Who's next, the NBA?

Be interested to see what hybrid bubbles they are thinking to deploy.

[Crown Royal]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

Except isn't there already a cap negotiated on the escrow clawback (20% rings a bell to me)?

If so, escrow wouldn't solve anything for the league, if the number of games were significantly reduced. And I believe that is what they are still discussing with the NHLPA.

My understanding is the cap just limited how much they pay back that season, any more gets deferred but all has to be paid back by the end of the extension.