Thread: OT: NHL vs. NHLPA
View Single Post
Old
10-23-2012, 02:11 PM
  #147
TheHudlinator
Registered User
 
TheHudlinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria,BC
Country: Canada
Posts: 19,834
vCash: 354
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkGio View Post
Dollars are dollars. The cap is just a word. Even if your "cap" is placed at 50 million dollars but you're spending 70 million in salaries because that's what you signed on for, the split is 57% for atleast year one IF the owners honor the contracts. No matter what fancy accounting you do, you still have to accept a 57% split in year one to honour contracts. Unless players are being bought out. You could backload a contract or extend the years, but that's not what player's signed.

That's why a soft landing makes sense. Players get their contracts honoured, owners get a 50/50, and everyone's happy.


As far as the team's that need immediate cap (salary) relief, that's a problem of the overall system. The rich teams need to start sharing with the poor ones.
Yes that is what the owners have said year 1(this year) has a cap of 70 million which gives teams a year to trade/ buy out players and no roll back so players earn 100% of their contracts. The reason this is immediate help is that it lowers the basement so smaller market teams don't have to overpay free agents and restricted free agents to reach the cap. I agree that revenue sharing needs to be fixed as it is not working.

Other than the 5 year cap on contracts the owners offered what you are suggesting I don't understand how the players found it unfair.

TheHudlinator is offline   Reply With Quote