2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part IV (UPDATE: "The Union took a step backward")
View Single Post
10-19-2012, 09:01 AM
Change is good.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Brooklyn of course
Couple of thoughts:
1) The players have made a win with their constant "honor those legal contracts you signed, you thieving ********!" which the general public seems to have bought. Please. Those are subsidiary agreements subject to the master agreement, the CBA, and everyone involved in negotiating them knows that (whether or not the agents are truthful with their clients about it may be another story). Both sides had their eyes wide open negotiating what they could this past summer knowing EXACTLY what was coming. The reality is that it's as much BS as the rest of the bluster going on.
2) Fehr blundered by insisting on building off of his proposal rather than engaging on the league's document. There is no question that the league blundered first with their initial offer - however, since then they've made two more to the players' one and they also had made the last one. Theirs was the last on the table and they've been begging for a counter offer for a month. Well, you get what you want by making the league make the next move, but you've also given them control of the document if you want to move forward. Going back to your old structure is a guaranteed roadblock.
3) Delinking the cap from league revenues and/or relying on growth to ensure reaching your proposed split is likely a non-starter for most of the teams in the league. Stop trying for it.
4) Likewise, I see the PA's point about "make-whole" eating into the available funds in years 2-x until the first deals have been paid off. If you've got 50% of the pie, but a portion of that is going to pay Nash's/Crosby's/etc's escrow payments from 3 years ago, that effectively brings your percentage for that year down.
5) After sleeping on it, I do agree that it was likely that anything other than mere tweaking of the NHL's offer would likely have garnered negative public reaction from the league. They're controlling the spin war now and they're not going to let their feet off the pedal.
6) Both sides describing 50/50 as the ultimate goal is progress.
7) Having gone through this 7 years ago, I have to believe that the players realize that if they get to the point that they cancel 10/20/30% of the season, that's not recoverable in any incremental gains they make in any deal they strike thereafter, no matter how close to their current proposal(s).
8) They're not THAT far apart.
9) If they keep talking, we're in good shape.
10) There are ways to get this done if they put their creativity to negotiating rather than posturing:
- a floor to protect the owners if growth doesn't meet the players' projections.
- split at 50/50 and allow an extra 1% in every year to cover make-whole over and above until the current contracts are paid out.
- or, simply going back on the league's proposal and pushing for higher numbers in years 1 & 2 as others have suggested.
Just keep talking, fellas.
Last edited by BrooklynRangersFan: 10-19-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by BrooklynRangersFan