Bob McKenzie: NHL doesn't need max contract length
View Single Post
11-13-2012, 12:49 AM
Shark fan in hiding
Join Date: Aug 2009
Originally Posted by
I keep hearing this type of argument against Fehr, but I'm not sure what it means. When have the players got anything and then changed what they wanted. Frankly, I think mackenzie sums it up perfectly, the whole need for 50/50 was to get costs down, and now the owners also need the players to giver up virtually every contract right they have, somebody isn't playing fair and it's not don fehr
The fact that fehr hasnt agreed on one aspect of a linked 50-50, that does or doesnt involve make whole is kind of slowing things down. Once the split and the make whole provision is agreed on, the owners are going to negotiate on the contract terms.
Question, why should the nhl show there cards completely and go all in before the nhlpa even agrees they are going to go in with you?
The nhl has already showed the end game of the split of hrr, 50-50 with the owners paying back the money they have already lost for this season.
Now it is time for fehr to agree, and start the negotiations on the other aspects of the cba.
Last edited by Fugu: 11-13-2012 at
. Reason: he's not the topic of the thread
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Barrie22