The View From Wisconsin

We've got less than 32 hours to go in 2012. Some thoughts as the clock ticks down:

• I know, I'm getting greedy, given that I've already won my public league title, but dangitall, I wanna WIN my private league championship (the Not Quite Ready For Prime Time Football League, now in its 12th consecutive season). I did win the league title back in '03, but I'm hungry for a second one. Unfortunately, the Packers are not helping at the present time. 
• The arguments over the "fiscal cliff" political discussion is strangely like that of the NHL lockout. I don't have any optimism that either issue will be resolved any time soon. I've got my thoughts on possible endgame scenarios with the NHL/NHLPA battle, but I don't foresee any of them resulting in hockey being played before this time in 2013.
• As much as I would love Wisconsin to win the Rose Bowl under Alvarez, I have no thoughts that it's actually going to happen. Stanford has a team that is just that much better than Monte and the boys. 
• I've said it before, and I'll say it again - all I really want to see in Merrill is an Aldi's, a Starbucks, maybe a Pick 'n Save, and a bank or credit union that has an ATM that accepts deposits. And that'll happen two days after I either retire or leave this county. 
• It'd be a nice change of pace if I went in to work tomorrow night and things were quiet. Just sayin'. 
• I've had my fill of snow for the winter. If it didn't snow any more this winter - or did nothing more than the little "dustings" we've had the last week or so - I think I could live with that. Of course, this being Wisconsin (and this being north central Wisconsin, to boot), it ain't gonna happen. 

It's not like this was a horrible year, but there were a lot moments that I'd really like to just scream about. As in, what in the WORLD were you thinking??? 

Let's go backwards.

• Obviously, the one thing that has made me feel like my heart has been ripped out for the last three and a half months has been the NHL lockout. I'm still rather adamant that the NHL has never actually considered "bargaining" with the PA (of course, that might be colored by one of the other topics on this list). The most recent offer is, in my not so humble opinion, a PR move that intends to make it look like the league is trying to negotiate - where the truth is that they're just moving the cards around on the table, three card monte style. I'm convinced that I'll get a raise before the NHL plays another game. 
• Oh, yeah, that raise thing - in case you didn't hear, the GOP is back and in control of the Wisconsin State Legislature. I look forward into 2013 with trepidation, as I openly wonder what they're going to do to make my continued employment in service to the people of the state of Wisconsin more difficult. (A side note: I usually refer to the current state governor as "my boss", but I realized that I really don't work for the governor. I work for the people of the state of Wisconsin; the governor is just the current CEO assigned the position by stockholders. It's not my fault, entirely, that the current CEO is an idiot.)
• Speaking of which - how is it that a state that sent someone like Tammy Baldwin to Washington to represent the state in the US Senate manage to give the GOP control of the legislature - and basically ensure that Mr. Walker remains in office for his entire four year term (and, at the rate the Dems are going, longer than that)? 
• That lawsuit thing is still hanging over the state in regards to Act 10. The various unions essentially won on a lot of things - except mandatory dues withdrawal. I saw that one coming from a long ways off, but I'm still frustrated as to why WSEU has seemingly sat around and done nothing to try to get back into the business of representing state employees under the new rules. I have seen opinions on what should be bargained for in the public sector (great article here on a Federal union member's POV on the state's labor issues), and I agree that money is something that is essentially out of our control. But work conditions, management relations, non-monetary benefits? We need to talk, Scotty. Whether you like it or not. 
• Should the Seattle Seahawks somehow vault ahead of the Packers in the playoff seeding - which would only happen if the Packers lose, Seattle wins and the 49ers lose - you would hear a howl across the state of Wisconsin that hasn't been heard since that little row that happened last year in the Supreme Court chambers. The NFL wrongly states that the Packers have four losses on the year and Seattle has 10 wins. If it would mean that the Seahawks would end up hosting a playoff game - against the Green Bay Packers - I'm pretty sure the entire state of Wisconsin would want to lynch Roger Goodell. 
• Speaking of Seattle - the guys who do UA draws on pro athletes for mandated random drug testing have really taken a beating this year. First, it was Brewers LF and reigning NL MVP Ryan Braun; now it's the Seahawks DB. You get this vision of the same cops who did the sample-taking and crime scene analysis at the Simpson murder investigation. 
• I won't pile on about the whole Ryan Suter/Zach Parise contract thing, as I suspect Mr. Tightwad Johnson-in-law will do everything in his power to keep from actually having to pay those two the contracts that he signed, but I honestly suspect Suter never had any intention at all to re-sign with Nashville. That may very well have affected his play down the stretch - which is somewhat sad, as that would be even worse than anything the Black Sox could have pulled off 100 years ago. 
• Scandals in sports - I remember vividly where I was when the Freeh report was released. Hearing all the stuff that was mentioned and realizing this was Penn State  we were talking about, it just hit me hard. Now, I don't mind the free berth into the Big Ten title game, but to think that some sicko was using the PSU facilities to commit child sex abuse makes me wanna wretch (and that's more than just because of where I work). 

That's all I have for now. Let's hope 2013 is a good one - without any fear, as Mr. and Mrs. Lennon once said. 

Okay, enough chit-chat, gentlemen. As a duly self-appointed representative of the one side of this little dispute that has NOT had a say in these negotiations, I REALLY have had enough of all this bovine excrement that has been flowing out of these offices since September.

There IS a deal to be done. Mr. Fehr over there (points at Steve Fehr) has even said that if you guys got the main stuff finished, the rest would be completed in a couple of hours.

Well, it's time to get to those couple of hours.

When I have not been trying to completely ignore you buffoons - especially after last week and that "oh we're so close no we're not" crap - I actually have been paying attention to the three main sticking points in the negotiations.

Mr. Bettman, Mr. Daly, you have said that these three are NOT negotiable. I am here to tell you that if you continue to say that, I will PERSONALLY come over there and Gibbs-slap you. (If you don't know what that is, Google it. I'm not here to help you keep up on popular culture.)

Mr. Fehr and... okay, I'm just gonna call you guys Don and Steve, 'kay? Lot easier. Anyways - there are a LOT of things you guys could do better than just focus on avoiding things. Seven years ago, those morons over there (points at the BOG and Bettman) said that there was GOING to be cost certainty via a Salary Cap. Yeah, you and I both know that was a load of crap. Show me a salary cap and I'll show you 100 ways of getting around it.

And oh BOY, did some of these guys get around it. Take DiPietro for example. (turns to watch Charles Wang wince) Hey, it was your idea, Brooklyn. And Lou (Lamiorello), you tried so hard to work the edges. Then old Liarpold over there went and took your bonus baby.

Still, I know what's going on here - these guys (thumbing at the BOG) want to get more concessions out of your collective hides. Not surprising, considering ol' Liarpold over their is buddy-buddy with Scotty Dubya and the Koch brothers. Never met a union he didn't want to bust. And I've had my suspicions.

Busting a union, though it's kinda de riguer in my neck of the woods at the moment, is not gonna look good on your resume, Gary. And what the 32 of you need to realize is you're going to all sink like a stone if you don't get this thing done.

And to do that, you're gonna have to use that "C" word. You know, the dirtiest word in politics today - compromise.

So here's the deal: I'm gonna lay out how you're going to get there. You're going to actually fill in the blanks, because really? I don't wanna sit down, read the (bleep) books about how much money a rotating dasher board ad brings in quarterly and all that. But we're gonna go over, one at a time, the three things you guys can't seem to figure out on your own.

First: the change in shared Hockey-Related Revenues from 70/30 or whatever it was to 50/50. Don, this is just a fact of life. The pie has been increasing over the last seven years - with no help from ANYONE in this room - you too, Sidney. But there's a limit to the amount of pie out there. And the way you guys are flinging them at each other, there ain't gonna be any pie left.

Dangit, Don, don't give me that look. I saw that look. It was that same look you gave Congress during the PED hearings. That's why you're here instead of in the Caribbean, taking in a winter league ball game.

I really don't care how soon you want to implement it - Gary, you said something early on about a phase-in over a two-three year period. Considering the culture shock it's gonna be, I think that'd be a good idea. Just don't plan to implement it this year. These guys behind you have issues trying to figure out which lear jet to take to work.

Second thing on the docket - contract limitations. Sigh. Can we just admit that 10 year deals are just insane? Don? You saw it happen with Bud and MLB? There is no reason why anyone should be locked up to a contract for that long - unless it happens to be an agreement between you morons. THAT is one thing I'm demanding, right now - you are GOING to have this thing last until September of 2023, no ifs, ands or buts, got it?

All right, contracts: Five years max, with an option for a sixth, at the player's option. Figure out how to do it. Maybe go end of Stanley Cup finals to June 30th for the period of determining it. Say, player makes the offer for the sixth season, team has until July 1st to accept. If team doesn't take the offer for the sixth season, he's a free agent and can be signed by anyone else until October 1st. 

Only one catch to all this - that sixth season will have to be at the same salary as the lowest salary year in the previous five. You have a guy signed to a $1.1, $1.2, $1.4, $1.6, $1.8 million deal? Guess what: if the player opts for year six, that salary goes down to $1.1 million. Only exception is if it's below the league minimum, then it gets bumped up to league minimum.

See, Gary, that gives your guys an option in a bad deal. They don't have to take the offer. And Don - if your guys sign a five-year deal, they need to keep an eye on that low year.

Look, I know this isn't like figuring out a salary cap and a salary floor and midpoints and what not, but it's got possibilities.

Now, let's tackle the one thing that I really think is what is keeping you idiots from dropping the puck - Don would call it "making whole" while I think Mr. Liarpold over there would call it "market adjustment".

I would just call it "breach of contract", myself.

See, that's what really burns me, Craig. You went out and signed Suter and Parise to those huge deals with absolutely no intention of actually paying those huge salaries. And YOU, Mister Snider. YOU intentionally poison-pilled that contract for Shea Weber by making it damn near impossible for the Predators to match. Well, as much as I feel for Mr. Cigarran over there, I suspect both of you felt exactly the same way that old Johnson-In-Law over there felt: "I ain't gonna pay that."

I would really suggest that the Board of Governors consider the legal ground they would be standing on if they demanded returns on salaries. I think Donny boy over there is smart enough that he would sue the NHL over pulling the biggest Hostess Twinkie switcheroo in sports history.

So the bottom line? You guys made your bed, now you sleep in it. No salary rollbacks, no "escrow" payments, none of that. You are going to pay out those salaries.

Now, don't get so smug over there, Don. These idiots gotta have an out, or ol' Charlie Brooklyn over there is going to have a conniption fit. So here's the carrot on a stick: No current contracts can extend beyond the last year of this CBA. Since we're already going to make this a 10-year deal, it means contracts that go beyond that get terminated after the 2023 season.

Since that just made Tom and ol' Jeremy Jacobs start to hyperventilate, I think it's time for them to get an out. Here's the deal: If you have a DiPietro situation (would you PLEASE stop that, Mister Wang?) where a guy loses 80 consecutive games in a season due to injury on one of these long-term contracts, or if he loses a combined consecutive total of over 100 games at any point before 2017, then the team has the ability to walk away from that contract at that point. If a guy gets hurt in the 2017 season, but the consecutive total wouldn't hit 100 if he was out the rest of 2017 and all of 2018, the team can - after reaching game 100 - walk away from the contract. But ONLY for the rest of the contract (2019 and beyond). A guy gets hurt in 2018 - well, them's the breaks.

Oh, and so the players don't have to worry about things - anyone who has one of these contracts that extend beyond 2018 will have right of refusal on any trades for the first two years of the contract.

Unfortunately, as a Gibbs-smack for not getting this season started on time, that will get extended through the end of the 2015 season, not the 2014 season. Oh, look, Rocky finally figured it out. How neat.

And to appease Mr. Wang - if a player is already over the 100-game total after you idiots finally drop the puck? You can notify the player that you're walking away from their contract at season's end. Like that a bit better, Charlie? Good.

All right. Sit down and figure out how you're gonna implement this. If you don't, I'll come back in here and Gibbs-smack the lot of you.

Especially you, Craig. Thanks for nothing.

Oh, and Tom? I'll see you sometime next year, hopefully.