|
Post by jimmy on Jul 29, 2020 9:04:10 GMT -4
No one is asking him to go against the owners - I am sure had he presented a credible plan as to what would happen under scenario X, Y and Z they would have listened. It is possible he did ... but if he didn’t, and they are just now trying to figure out what will happen if a team has an outbreak and misses a significant number of games, then it does not speak well to his competence and leadership - this is a scenario that should have been anticipated and addressed in advance. If it wasn’t, someone shit the bed. They had protocols in place but the Marlins outbreak was reportedly due to a player sneaking out to a nightclub in Atlanta, the players need to be smarter. I am not talking about protocols - I am talking about what happens if a team can't play for varying lengths of time as a result of an outbreak. That should have been clearly addressed in the plan prior to the start of the season - impact on schedule for opponents, impact on standings, etc ... Same for the other sports ... NHL/NBA have even less flexibility as they are in playoffs ... what happens if a team can't play? Is the whole thing called off? Put on pause? Does the impacted team forfeit their games and the opponent moves on? The time to get everyone to agree on a course of action is prior to it starting - not once it happens. By the time it happens, teams will have vested interests in certain courses of action. At least for MLB, this happened so early in the season, no one is too firmly invested in a solution that favours them (i.e., later in the year, if you are sitting in a playoff spot based on winning %, your view of not playing all 60 games may be drastically different than the team that is sitting just outside).
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jul 29, 2020 9:06:33 GMT -4
They changed the playoff format the day the season started. They are making it up as they go along and any resemblance of a plan seems to be out the window. Its pretty clear Rob "championship is just a piece of metal" Manfred is not a good fit for commissioner. MLB needs a change in leadership. What would a different leader do? Comissioners all work for the owners, they do what the owners want. If not they would be fired. The owners and players had months to negotiate a plan. They couldn't agree on anything so the owners stuck this plan on them with the ability to opt out with no penalty So both the owners and the players are to blame for the state they're in. Especially the unionized players who had weeks and months of data to see how bad the outbreak was in certain regions of the US. The players refused bubbles to the point it got them kicked out of one of their home cities. And even spoke out about not being in bubbles...while they were in a bubble. Then defended it with the words tone deaf. Then went to play a sport in the USA while staying in a hotel before travelling to other American cities for the next 2-3 months. I feel sorry for none of them at this point. But it's also clear that Manfred isn't a leader. As you're saying he's just passing along the owners message. The commissioner needs to hold himself to a higher standard of accountability when lives could be on the line based on his owners decisions. Because he owns them as his own decisions as well thanks to his title.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jul 29, 2020 9:08:39 GMT -4
They had protocols in place but the Marlins outbreak was reportedly due to a player sneaking out to a nightclub in Atlanta, the players need to be smarter. I am not talking about protocols - I am talking about what happens if a team can't play for varying lengths of time as a result of an outbreak. That should have been clearly addressed in the plan prior to the start of the season - impact on schedule for opponents, impact on standings, etc ... Same for the other sports ... NHL/NBA have even less flexibility as they are in playoffs ... what happens if a team can't play? Is the whole thing called off? Put on pause? Does the impacted team forfeit their games and the opponent moves on? The time to get everyone to agree on a course of action is prior to it starting - not once it happens. By the time it happens, teams will have vested interests in certain courses of action. At least for MLB, this happened so early in the season, no one is too firmly invested in a solution that favours them (i.e., later in the year, if you are sitting in a playoff spot based on winning %, your view of not playing all 60 games may be drastically different than the team that is sitting just outside). NHL left themselves no room for error with the rosters. Even normal NHL hockey will see about 1 player lost per team per playoff round. Like you said...what happens is 6 or 10 players catch covid. Columbus for example...if half their guys, like the Marlins, test positive on Friday and Saturday do the Leafs just get a bye? There's no chance a game is played on Sunday and there's zero time to make up any lost games.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jul 29, 2020 9:27:24 GMT -4
What would a different leader do? Comissioners all work for the owners, they do what the owners want. If not they would be fired. The owners and players had months to negotiate a plan. They couldn't agree on anything so the owners stuck this plan on them with the ability to opt out with no penalty So both the owners and the players are to blame for the state they're in. Especially the unionized players who had weeks and months of data to see how bad the outbreak was in certain regions of the US. The players refused bubbles to the point it got them kicked out of one of their home cities. And even spoke out about not being in bubbles...while they were in a bubble. Then defended it with the words tone deaf. Then went to play a sport in the USA while staying in a hotel before travelling to other American cities for the next 2-3 months. I feel sorry for none of them at this point. But it's also clear that Manfred isn't a leader. As you're saying he's just passing along the owners message. The commissioner needs to hold himself to a higher standard of accountability when lives could be on the line based on his owners decisions. Because he owns them as his own decisions as well thanks to his title. I agree with your last point on Manfred, but the owners make sure they hire a guy that will take their side/interests first. If they hired a strong independent thinker, that might blow up in their face.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jul 29, 2020 9:28:47 GMT -4
I am not talking about protocols - I am talking about what happens if a team can't play for varying lengths of time as a result of an outbreak. That should have been clearly addressed in the plan prior to the start of the season - impact on schedule for opponents, impact on standings, etc ... Same for the other sports ... NHL/NBA have even less flexibility as they are in playoffs ... what happens if a team can't play? Is the whole thing called off? Put on pause? Does the impacted team forfeit their games and the opponent moves on? The time to get everyone to agree on a course of action is prior to it starting - not once it happens. By the time it happens, teams will have vested interests in certain courses of action. At least for MLB, this happened so early in the season, no one is too firmly invested in a solution that favours them (i.e., later in the year, if you are sitting in a playoff spot based on winning %, your view of not playing all 60 games may be drastically different than the team that is sitting just outside). NHL left themselves no room for error with the rosters. Even normal NHL hockey will see about 1 player lost per team per playoff round. Like you said...what happens is 6 or 10 players catch covid. Columbus for example...if half their guys, like the Marlins, test positive on Friday and Saturday do the Leafs just get a bye? There's no chance a game is played on Sunday and there's zero time to make up any lost games. I think they believe their heavy testing, the bubble and tight protocols will avoid this...but as we saw with the Marlins, it only takes one player to sneak out to the strip joints for things to go sideways.
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Jul 29, 2020 10:00:10 GMT -4
Hot take - Gary Bettman is now the best commissioner in the major pro sports. NHL is lucky to have him. I was not a big fan of his at first, but IMO he has really grown into the job.
Adam Silver is also doing a good job. Goodell and Manfred are inept ... partly a result of ownership in their sports getting in the way, partly a result of their own shortcomings.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jul 29, 2020 10:15:12 GMT -4
Hot take - Gary Bettman is now the best commissioner in the major pro sports. NHL is lucky to have him. I was not a big fan of his at first, but IMO he has really grown into the job. Adam Silver is also doing a good job. Goodell and Manfred are inept ... partly a result of ownership in their sports getting in the way, partly a result of their own shortcomings. Goodell is blinded by his own politics. Bettman and Silver have made the other 2 look incompetent.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jul 29, 2020 10:25:18 GMT -4
Hot take - Gary Bettman is now the best commissioner in the major pro sports. NHL is lucky to have him. I was not a big fan of his at first, but IMO he has really grown into the job. Adam Silver is also doing a good job. Goodell and Manfred are inept ... partly a result of ownership in their sports getting in the way, partly a result of their own shortcomings. There have been growing pains, but growing the NHL to 32 teams and having a salary cap has been huge for the NHL, I still remember the years that every big money UFA or UFA to be would end up on 6 or 7 teams 20-25 years ago and small markets were like the Expos. The playing field will never be 100% equal but it's much closer. Bettman deserves credit for all this.
|
|
|
Post by Jack Bauer on Jul 29, 2020 10:43:50 GMT -4
Hot take - Gary Bettman is now the best commissioner in the major pro sports. NHL is lucky to have him. I was not a big fan of his at first, but IMO he has really grown into the job. Adam Silver is also doing a good job. Goodell and Manfred are inept ... partly a result of ownership in their sports getting in the way, partly a result of their own shortcomings. There have been growing pains, but growing the NHL to 32 teams and having a salary cap has been huge for the NHL, I still remember the years that every big money UFA or UFA to be would end up on 6 or 7 teams 20-25 years ago and small markets were like the Expos. The playing field will never be 100% equal but it's much closer. Bettman deserves credit for all this. There's another side of that we will never be able to measure in terms of lost revenue though. By propping up the poor revenue teams you're losing potential growth in your bigger hardcore markets by funneling their revenue to other organizations. I'd argue an NHL where the big markets can spend freely would be better off on a team by team basis then the salary cap system artificially propping up teams that otherwise wouldn't last this long. MLB isn't suffering from not having a cap. And perhaps no sport has had more parity lately. Sometimes what we see keeps us from seeing what the potential might be under a different set of economics. But i'd also argue a healthy 24 team NHL would be the strongest league on the planet competition and parity wise. Nobody gains from a 32 team NHL except the 32 individual owners and the poor revenue teams in a cap system who might have 2 more revenue positive teams to suck money out of over time. Losing 2 full seasons in 25 years(.5 in 95, 1 in 04-05, .5 in 2013) and 1 Stanley Cup playoffs has not been worth keeping teams in places like Arizona to me. MLB is too strong without a cap to not at least entertain what the NHL would be like without one.
|
|
|
Post by yesisaiditfirst on Jul 29, 2020 16:00:13 GMT -4
There have been growing pains, but growing the NHL to 32 teams and having a salary cap has been huge for the NHL, I still remember the years that every big money UFA or UFA to be would end up on 6 or 7 teams 20-25 years ago and small markets were like the Expos. The playing field will never be 100% equal but it's much closer. Bettman deserves credit for all this. There's another side of that we will never be able to measure in terms of lost revenue though. By propping up the poor revenue teams you're losing potential growth in your bigger hardcore markets by funneling their revenue to other organizations. I'd argue an NHL where the big markets can spend freely would be better off on a team by team basis then the salary cap system artificially propping up teams that otherwise wouldn't last this long. MLB isn't suffering from not having a cap. And perhaps no sport has had more parity lately. Sometimes what we see keeps us from seeing what the potential might be under a different set of economics. But i'd also argue a healthy 24 team NHL would be the strongest league on the planet competition and parity wise. Nobody gains from a 32 team NHL except the 32 individual owners and the poor revenue teams in a cap system who might have 2 more revenue positive teams to suck money out of over time. Losing 2 full seasons in 25 years(.5 in 95, 1 in 04-05, .5 in 2013) and 1 Stanley Cup playoffs has not been worth keeping teams in places like Arizona to me. MLB is too strong without a cap to not at least entertain what the NHL would be like without one. it's a long term investment in growth - the grassroots development builds both fan markets and player pools. I think 8 teams equals 200 jobs in the best league in the world and total 600 jobs in top pro leagues as they accommodate AHL and ECHL to support it which raises the entire sport. Southern California in our life time went from no hockey to 3 NHL teams and 5 AHL teams. With growth up the west coast and thd desert and most of it is profitable. But most importantly they have more places to play hockey and generic athletes can choose the game, learn it at home and then advance from there. How else does Auston Mathews become a hockey player. Guys like him would be in baseball probably. We see the data. US in 2018 565000 registered hockey players, Canada 640000, Russia only 112000. The bigger footprint just imagine how many more good athletes will be available for the game. 2 million players world wide supports 32 jobs in top league in the world. And most countries dont even have rinks. These are just the most wealthy countries.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jul 29, 2020 16:24:10 GMT -4
There have been growing pains, but growing the NHL to 32 teams and having a salary cap has been huge for the NHL, I still remember the years that every big money UFA or UFA to be would end up on 6 or 7 teams 20-25 years ago and small markets were like the Expos. The playing field will never be 100% equal but it's much closer. Bettman deserves credit for all this. There's another side of that we will never be able to measure in terms of lost revenue though. By propping up the poor revenue teams you're losing potential growth in your bigger hardcore markets by funneling their revenue to other organizations. I'd argue an NHL where the big markets can spend freely would be better off on a team by team basis then the salary cap system artificially propping up teams that otherwise wouldn't last this long. MLB isn't suffering from not having a cap. And perhaps no sport has had more parity lately. Sometimes what we see keeps us from seeing what the potential might be under a different set of economics. But i'd also argue a healthy 24 team NHL would be the strongest league on the planet competition and parity wise. Nobody gains from a 32 team NHL except the 32 individual owners and the poor revenue teams in a cap system who might have 2 more revenue positive teams to suck money out of over time. Losing 2 full seasons in 25 years(.5 in 95, 1 in 04-05, .5 in 2013) and 1 Stanley Cup playoffs has not been worth keeping teams in places like Arizona to me. MLB is too strong without a cap to not at least entertain what the NHL would be like without one. MLB has the least parity of the pro sports leagues by a mile. Out of the 8 playoff teams each year, 6 and sometimes 7 of the 8 are among the 10 bigger markets. In the NHL a well run team should not bottom out for more than 3 or 4 years max, in MLB some teams have gone 20 years without a playoff spot, I don't have all the numbers, but if you compare the playoff appearances for the top 10 markets to the bottom 10 there is a massive gap. 16 of the last 17 World series were won by big baseball markets. In the NHL cap world, big teams have not been much more successful than small markets. Carolina won a cup, Ahaneim(small hockey market) and Pittsburgh all won cups under the cap. No new York team has, no Phillie, no Toronto or Montreal. Chicago won and so did LA but La is not a big market for hockey like MLB, football or NBA. Not in terms of hockey revenue.
|
|
|
Post by lirette on Jul 29, 2020 23:03:22 GMT -4
Joe Kelly got a longer suspension for throwing behind Astros hitters than any Astros got for cheating
|
|
|
Post by Captain Obvious on Jul 30, 2020 6:58:45 GMT -4
Joe Kelly got a longer suspension for throwing behind Astros hitters than any Astros got for cheating Agree, this is nuts, I'm betting his appeal will get it reduced by half.
|
|
|
Post by jimmy on Jul 30, 2020 8:31:39 GMT -4
Joe Kelly got a longer suspension for throwing behind Astros hitters than any Astros got for cheating Kind of absurd, isn’t it? How long would they have suspended him had he actually plunked someone? 8 games in a 60 game season for buzzing a couple of guys and chirping them seems disproportionate to me. Only thing I can see is doing it twice ... once you can sort of deny, twice it is pretty obvious.
|
|
|
Post by hal on Jul 30, 2020 12:51:53 GMT -4
Another Miami Marlins Player just tested Positive .........Derek Jeter must be Flipping Out down there .
|
|