Thread: I'm dying
View Single Post
10-18-2012, 01:27 PM
Robert Johnson
bluesman11's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2010
Country: United States
Posts: 777
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Alklha View Post
Does anyone have a link to an article with all the details? Or even better, the bullet points? Everywhere I seem to go only seems to talk about a few aspects.

On the face of it it does seem like a good deal. With the start date included, there is basically a deadline, so hopefully the start of the season is now in sight.

I do think some of the points are overkill though. I like being able to retain salary, I like that if a player retires the team remain on the hook and the extra year of RFA.

However, limiting contracts to 5 years and not allowing anything more than a 5% variance on deals seems like overkill. If you limit the salary variance year-to-year, then there should not be a need for a limit on contract length. I also think 5% hurts smaller teams that might want to defer some money to the following year etc, basically legitimate operational reasons. I'd be happy with no limit on contract length and that a player could be paid no less than 80% of his caphit in any 1 year of his contract.

Not sure I like the full 82 game schedule, and with the Olympics next season it could be 2 seasons in a row the season finishing later. As long as it reverts back, it doesn't matter... but then the Superbowl never went back to January.
Is this part true?

My thought....this rule helps the strength of the league in the long run and because this is designed to stop the extra long contacts that are mostly frontloaded to bring down the salary cap hit, the players are not going to agree to this. I hope I'm wrong because I like it, but I just don't think the players will agree to this because those contracts help bring up the value of all players. Again I hope I'm wrong because I miss hockey and I want the league to realize where they fit in popularity wise amongst all popular sports.

bluesman11 is offline   Reply With Quote