CBC: Cancelled Games in Pro Sports - By the Numbers
View Single Post
12-11-2012, 12:55 AM
Join Date: May 2012
Originally Posted by
You can believe what you want to believe. You want the entire 2004 lockout and resulting CBA in a single link.
As for the cap floor...... how do you think Gary's cost certainty system and resultant parity was going to work unless you had a range (which, yes, would include a floor)??? If you want to practice your revisionism of the universally accepted annihilation of the PA in 2005, fine, have at it. I have better things to do with my time.
The NHLPA, under executive director Bob Goodenow, disputed the league's financial claims. According to the union, "cost certainty" is little more than a euphemism for a salary cap, which it had vowed never to accept. The union rejected each of the six concepts presented by the NHL, claiming they all contained some form of salary cap.
On July 21, the players association ratified the agreement with 87 percent of its members voting in favor. The owners unanimously approved it the next day, officially ending the 310 day lockout. The salary cap would be adjusted each year to guarantee players 54 percent of total NHL revenues, and there would also be a salary floor. Player contracts are also guaranteed. The players' share will increase if revenues rise to specific benchmarks, while revenue sharing will split a pool of money from the 10 highest-grossing teams among the bottom 15. There was a $39 million cap in place for the first year of the CBA
Key points: 1 The PA refused every salary cap system Bettman and the owners offered. 2 There is no mention of a floor until the final agreement is made.
I think it is fairly clear whose trying to rewrite history and it is not me.
There is no need for a floor to have cost certainty. The floor gives salary certainty for the players. Your trying to make it sound like the owners said please don't let me make too much money.
Last edited by Orrthebest: 12-11-2012 at
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by Orrthebest