View Single Post
Old
09-25-2012, 08:00 PM
  #30
Tawnos
Moderator
BoH Mod Only
 
Tawnos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Charlotte, NC
Country: United States
Posts: 11,249
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
We're currently at 47% on the owners' side and 57% on the players' side (with room to move down if the league grows revenues by a significant amount). The owners have 3 points to close to the best case end point while the players have 7. The owners made the last proposal.
I thought the last players proposal delinked the cap.

Your characterization of the whole process omits a bunch. The last thing the league did, in terms of offers, was to give an ultimatum. Putting something on the table with the comment of "take this or else it will be worse later" is not a proposal.

I agree that both sides need to compromise and I agree that the players should most likely move further off their position that the owners (since the league has the leverage), but the idea that the owners have been the reasonable ones here is flat out laughable. The NHL and Bettman's stance has been to bully and cajole the players into accepting a deal that represents a massive concession of a 20% cut in salary immediately (whether there's a rollback or an escrow increase, it's the same effect). They've refused to do anything more than touch on the issues that could have gotten some traction and good will between the two sides (although that seems like it's going to change on Friday), citing the need to resolve the core economic issue first, as if all of these issues didn't need addressing up front.

Both sides are being obstinate, but in the case of the players, my feeling is that, right now, they have a right to be. They're the one's who got run over in the previous negotiation (whether or not they benefited overall isn't the point. They would've benefited even more without the steamrolling). The NHLPA hired Fehr specifically not to have a repeat of that history and right now, they're showing their resolve; proving a point. This tactic is as much about the CBA they'll negotiate this year as it is about the next one. Look, I want them to compromise too, but I don't want the PA to cave. It's in the union's best interest that as many teams in the league be profitable. It's not the union's responsibility to make that profitability idiot proof.

Tawnos is offline