Differences Between the NHL's October 16th offer and current CBA
View Single Post
01-07-2013, 12:31 PM
**** Cycle 4 Eichel
Join Date: Mar 2011
Originally Posted by
Even if i were to look at it in your model, you cant say its net neutral for the players as a whole. Its maybe net neutral for that one player who had the contract that was affected and rolled back. But for the players as a whole, under the owners initial make-partial offer, their escrow would be based on all of their salaries, plus the what they are representing as the money that was negotiated for escrow at 57% and is now clawed back at 50%. Thats not a $200 mil swing, but nor is it nothing though.
Escrow has nothing to do with this. The offer was 50% every damn year, and you can pay yourselves back later for the haircut you're taking now.
That is zero dollars moving from player to owner.
I seldom come out and talk like this, but here it is: anyone arguing that being relieved of the $211M make whole payment to themselves was any kind of victory for the players is just so dead wrong it's not even funny. You may think you're running towards some obscure, tricky logical victory, but you are knee deep in wrong right now.
View Public Profile
Find More Posts by haseoke39