Quote:
Originally Posted by DAChampion
OK, so then back in 2004 the players should have accepted the owners' offer of a fixed 42.5 million/year... oh wait, no. That would have been a disaster for the players.
Back in September, the players should have accepted the owners offer of a fixed 43% of HRR, oh wait no. That would have been a disaster for the players.
Or maybe they should have accepted the owners' offer of 50/50 with no make-whole... oh wait no.
Fact is it is not in the players' interest to just instantly cave to what the owners want on the basis that "the more powerful always win". If they do that they'll be down to 20% of HRR within 15 years.
Those who have no pride end up as slaves real quick.
|
Everyone knew and Betmans even said that the 43% he gave was the first offer to get to a 50-50 that everyone knew was going to happen.
As for the other issues they're a matter of give and take. The entire make whole is what the owners are giving back in return for the 50-50. It's a good faith give by the owners who didn't have to offer it. All contracts are contingent on the CBA that is in place. These guaranteed contracts do not mean that the player will get the full face value of their contract. If revenues drop, so will their share of it rises, so will their pay. It's not a static number, hence the escrow payments.
As for capping long term contracts, the NHL already conceded RFA ages etc. there has been give and take on both sides but the moment Fehr got involved everything fell apart. Even the most moderate owners who want badly to play were completely turned off. That's a HUGE problem for the PA. If the Leafs are saying to GFO, image what the Hawks are thinking. This is not a Bettman problem. This is a Fehr problem.