Hockey

League rep: 'No closer than we were six years ago'

Round and round they go, stopping where they began and leaving unknown the answer to: What now?

By TOM JONES
Published February 12, 2005

Over the past three years, the NHL and its union have met 37 times in an attempt to forge a new collective-bargaining agreement.

Some of the talks have been formal. Others have been informal. There have been proposals and counterproposals. Locations have changed. Representatives have changed. Formats have changed.

Yet five months after the lockout began, the sides have not found any common ground.

Union official Ted Saskin said the NHL "has not moved 1 inch from Day 1."

NHL chief legal officer Bill Daly said the sides are "no closer than we were six years ago when we started this process."

And suddenly, the sides are going to hammer out an agreement during the next 24 to 48 hours?

NHL commissioner Gary Bettman set this weekend as a deadline for reaching an agreement and saving the season. But with NHL officials in New York, union officials in Toronto and both saying they will not call the other, the season seems certain to be canceled.

Canada's SportsNet reported Friday that Bettman sent a memo to the 30 teams announcing plans for a conference call with the Board of Governors next week to discuss plans for calling off the season and detailing what the NHL will do after that.

Bettman already has the authority to cancel the season, and other reports suggest he could do so as early as Monday.

Perhaps the most frustrating part for fans (and, perhaps, players and owners) is given the stance of both sides, it's difficult to imagine the lockout ever ending.

"Action should've been taken long before this," said Lightning player representative Tim Taylor, who blames both sides. "I thought a deal would be done eventually within this year and we'd get the season on and continue on. But there's going to be a black cloud over the league forever."

Now not only is this season on its last legs, but next season appears in trouble, too. After all, what would change between now and September? Or December? Or February of 2006?

"If it doesn't go now, no way it's going to go next season," Lightning center Brad Richards said. "What are you going to do? All of a sudden, there's a bright idea and we'll negotiate?"

The NHL made its most recent offer Wednesday. It offered to go with the union proposal from Dec.9 that featured a luxury-tax system and an immediate 24 percent rollback on all existing contracts.

The CBA, however, would kick over to the owners' salary-cap proposal of Feb.2 if it were deemed the union's method was not working. One of four "triggers" could switch the CBA from the players' plan to the owners'. The league was not shocked the union rejected the offer but did seem surprised the union did not offer to negotiate on the "triggers."

"To suggest it was a take it or leave it final offer is utter fantasy," Daly told Toronto's FAN590 radio. "Before we made the proposal, I thought they would come back and say, "We don't necessarily agree with your triggers, but we want to make a proposal based on those triggers.' And you know what? They had no interest in that."

Meantime, the players say their Dec.9 proposal did not have to be fully rejected by the owners.

"We believed it would be a framework that would work," Saskin said. "We didn't submit it as a final offer."

Conversation has been replaced by antagonism. Stubbornness has gotten in the way of compromise. Instead of olive branches, the sides are offering insults.

The question that remains is have both sides given their final, best offers?

The answer likely will determine whether there will be hockey this season.

Times staff writer Damian Cristodero contributed to this report.

[Last modified February 12, 2005, 00:25:13]