2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part IV (UPDATE: "The Union took a step backward")
View Single Post
10-19-2012, 06:41 AM
Join Date: Apr 2004
Originally Posted by
People are not pro-NHL to the extent that they support a hardliner like Jacobs who opposes revenue sharing. They are less pro-NHL and much more "pro-deal". Ever see the episode of South Park where they have to elect a new mascot? Its like that.
The PA's plan to honor existing contracts and have a 50/50 split would require a ridiculous amount of growth this year. About the only argument I could see for that is that the value of the US dollar won't be coming back any time soon. Additionally, if their contracts were honored in full regardless of revenues, the owners would bear 100% of the risk of lockout fallout (players get paid either way). Finally, the players have not been guaranteed every dollar of their deals since 2004. They are essentially proposing de-linkage.
If the PA had approached the exact same goal by asking for 55-56% of HRR in year one and 53-54% in year two to get to 54%/52% in the owners' framework reactions would be different.
Actually, if the PA gets 55% this season and 52.5% next season and than 50/50 down the road, you accomplish that. And that's basically what the PA offered.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Ola