View Single Post
Old
11-13-2012, 08:41 AM
  #76
Leafsman
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,469
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by ULF_55 View Post
The owners locked them out and are trying to decrease everything the players have.

Players didn't walk out demanding more. You have it all wrong, they aren't trying to increase their bargaining power whatsoever.
Their fighting like hell so they don't lose any though.

I'm not saying they should just give in on every contract demand but elimination of cap-circumventing contracts is a valid concern and a valid issue to resolve.

Increasing the UFA age by a year is not such a bad idea either. I mean the owners could be asking for non-guaranteed performance based contracts in which players would actually have to fulfill their full duties to get the agreed upon full contract amount but they aren't

They just want it so owners have an extra year to evaluate players so undeserving players aren't getting ridiculous contracts. If players don;t do well they still get paid the full amount, if teams don;t do well they lose money. The players make out winners in all scenario's.

I'd keep the year-by-year variance rule and the rules of retiring contracts staying on the books. I'd eliminate the 5 year contract length.

Leafsman is offline