View Single Post
01-22-2013, 09:40 AM
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Nova Scotia
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,632
vCash: 500
Originally Posted by EverettMike View Post
How was the October proposal similar to the one the players ultimately signed?

That was an outright lie.

I don't care about anything else he said. What is he supposed to say exactly besides that? He cares about public perception too. They all do. But the idea that the players waited two extra months for a deal they had in October is a lie. So much for moving forward.
The final deal had some key elements players completely balked at back in October such as variance and term limits on contracts (which players refused to discuss outright), and a 50/50 revenue split right off the hop, probably the two biggest take aways for the NHL. In the PA's offers at the time they didn't get to 50/50 until year 5 of the CBA and only then if revenues continued to increase 5% yearly.

That said, both those key issues looked different in the NHL's October proposal. 5% variance on contracts became 35% with a 50% limit on the highest year. 5 year contract limits on UFA's, 6 for your own RFA's eventually became 7 year contract limits on UFA's and 8 on RFA's. I believe in the October proposal make whole was only at 150 million, which the NHL of course finally had to increase to 300 million in December.

In the NHL's October offer the term of the proposed CBA was 6 years with a mutual option for a 7th. The NHL eventually got this to 10 years because of the additional make whole money. Revenue sharing was also essentially the same as it is now. Trading cap space was also included although specifics not released.

Just for reference

October NHL offer

Players 3 October Counter Proposals

Breakdown of PA's proposal 1 and 2... #3 wasn't even worth analyzing

Kaoz* is offline   Reply With Quote