2012-13 Lockout Discussion Part VIII: "The 11th Hour" Edition
View Single Post
12-06-2012, 11:52 AM
Join Date: Mar 2004
Originally Posted by
This is ridiculous. The long-term cap circumventing deals are effectively stealing from the average player through escrow. Those long-term deals really only benefit the best. And I don't believe in a trickle down effect either. Which players are we even talking about, that will suddenly get shorter deals? How many mid- to low-profile UFAs got 4+ years before? I don't think that really an issue.
And CBA length? Didn't the NHLPA learn from these two lockouts? The players would've gladly kept the old CBA in place, so a longer CBA will most likely benefit them. They can't really believe that they will suddenly get a bigger share next time, can they?
The owners should increase the make whole like was suggested here and maybe offer 6/8 as contract limits. And then let's drop the puck please. If these issues are the reason for a lost season, that has to be the dumbest decision in sports ever.
There is no need for a contract term limit. Simply implement a strict policy preventing the salary from deviating by more than 10% or 20% per year (compared to ~50% at present) and the issue of cap circumvention is essentially resolved. Furthermore, require that any years beyond a certain age count against a team's cap, like the over 35 contracts now. If a team still wants to offer a lifetime contract to a player why should anyone have a problem with that? The only reason the owners want to implement all these limits is to protect them from themselves...but that's their problem.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by broadwayblue