View Single Post
Old
10-26-2012, 01:00 PM
  #811
NYRFAN218
Mac Truck
 
NYRFAN218's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Country: United States
Posts: 11,884
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by BrooklynRangersFan View Post
Oh please. This is so disingenuous.

Any offer that does not tie the cap to revenues is kicking the hornets nest. Any offer that demands every penny of every individual underlying contract on time, with no deferral, no escrow and no risk is kicking the hornets nest.

We've been over and over, round and round on this. The moral "honor the individual contracts" stance is bullsheit. Everybody on both side went into all those deals with eyes wide open.

The NHL will never accept any deal of any kind that does not have some form of linkage (i.e. costs as a percentage of revenues). The PA's "new" offers were ALL fixed cost or significantly fixed cost. They knew this. They knew they were nonstarters. It was a joke to present them.

The moment the PA is willing to discuss a deal that is primarily based on tying the cap to revenues, the gears will engage and the process will kick into gear towards a settlement. Will that deal need to include some form of phasing down to 50/50 and/or make-whole? Of course. But the players need to indicate acceptance of the basic concept of linkage before there will be progress.

The irony of all this is that the PA's inflexibility on the existing contracts is THE main stumbling block right now and yet, if they don't move on them, then the first year of those deals will go away anyway and it'll be a moot point and a season cancelled for no gain.
Nailed it. Couldn't have said it better myself.

__________________
http://hfboards.com/image.php?u=53946&type=sigpic&dateline=1320361610
NYRFAN218 is offline