Quote:
Originally Posted by Rutkowski
Why is the fact that the owners said the deal was off the table as soon as Fehr was involved being ignored here? Seriously, a bunch of really experienced and business-savvy businessmen tried to tell a bunch of guys, most of them without even college education, to sign a contract without letting their lawyer see it first. Is this okay to you guys?
|
Steve Fehr was in the room.
Despite being vehemently anti-player in this dispute, I do have some concerns over the three main points that Daly listed off as hills the owners will die on.
1. CBA term (10yr w/ 8yr out)
2. Individual Contract Term Limits (7yr home team, 5yr new team - 5% annual variance)
3. Transitional process (no amnesty buy-outs or payments outside system - no soft cap in yr 1)
Number one I completely understand and hate the players passionately for not outright accepting.
Number three, I think the owners are exaggerating their die on hill stance and would actually allow for some transitional softening.
It's number two that I see as particularly contentious among the two sides, and I'm not sure why. I don't get why the owners need 5yr limits AND 5% variance limit.
Wouldn't 6yr (new team) and 8yr (same team) work just as well? Wouldn't it work exactly the same with 10%? I don't see how 6yr/8yr and 10% doesn't level the playing field every bit as much as they are hoping.
If you sign a 6yr UFA contract with a new team, and there is a 10% variance limit, your last year is going to still be at least reasonably close the the average of the deal. It's fine.
1. 10.0m
2. 9.00m
3. 8.15m
4. 7.35m
5. 6.65m
6. 6.00m
47.15m total / 7.85avg
To me, that's good enough. Every year is reasonably close to the average. That's not a ridiculous variance that gives hugely unfair competitive disadvantages to certain teams.