View Single Post
11-15-2012, 12:49 AM
Registered User
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 821
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by Scurr View Post
I understand the system. It was put into place to give the owners cost certainty, not so they didn't have to honour those contracts. If they couldn't afford them at 57%, they shouldn't have signed them.

Yes, 57%. Anything less is a pay cut.
No changing the value of a players contract is a pay cut. Escrow does not change the value of the contract it only changes the amount that gets paid towards that contract in each year.

Plus I don't know why your arguing about something the NHL has agreed to cover. The PA keeps offering deals that need 7.2 growth to reach 50/50 and yet they are now worried there might not be 5% growth. They want to have guaranteed raises with no risk.

Orrthebest is online now   Reply With Quote