HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Eastern Conference > Metropolitan Division > New Jersey Devils
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Notices

TSN's Burke proposes lockout solutions.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
01-12-2005, 08:03 PM
  #1
Hellsempire
Registered User
 
Hellsempire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Rock Section 233
Country: United States
Posts: 2,483
vCash: 500
TSN's Burke proposes lockout solutions.

The two proposals that Burke has here may get the ball rolling and may save this season if the two sides(NHL & NHLPA) will listen to them. Things could be heating up now. We shall see and hope for the best .
Click the link for the whole proposals...

TSN's Burke proposes lockout solutions



Quote:
TSN's Burke proposes lockout solutions


by Brian Burke, special to TSN.ca Staff

1/12/2005

There obviously isn't a lot going on right now in terms of getting a new collective bargaining agreement, but there are a couple of things we can talk about that might kick-start negotiations.



Revenue Sharing Proposal
Year Reg. Season Playoffs Total
2005-2006 $50M $75M $125M
2006-2007 $75M $75M $150M
2007-2008 $100M $75M $175M
2008-2009 $150M $75M $200M
2009-2010 $200M $75M $225M


Have the regular season revenue sharing at $50 million, increasing $25 million per year to $150 million in 2009-10. With playoff revenue sharing, you could get a total of $225 million available when all is said and done.

That might move the players' view on linkage and it might not, but it would certainly behoove them to do it and move the players off the linkage issue.

Proposal No. 1: The players have said that their proposal would work with their salary rollback and changes made to the system. Well, I'm from Missouri, and the motto in my home state is 'show me.' If you say this will work, then I would be asking the league if they would be willing to try it for two years.

Come back and play right now with no changes to anything but the rollback the players have put on the table and we play the rest of the year. Then we start a 10-year agreement starting in June and we take the players' proposal with six notable exceptions.

If the proposal works after two years, and the wages and revenues line up in terms of what the reasonable percentages should be, we stay on that system.

If it doesn't work, the players are capped for the remaining eight years of that deal.



Proposal No. 2: I would say the players' proposal is guaranteed, under what I just said, to move under a cap because it's not meaningful enough of a system. That being said, I would change six things.

1. A meaningful luxury tax of .75 cents on the dollar and have it start at a payroll of $38 million. The union has proposed a 20 percent tax starting at $40 million and it won't have any deterring effect on spending.

2. Maximize entry-level system bonuses at $300,000. If a player comes in and tears it up as a rookie, he can make some meaningful money - but not the millions and millions that so many young players have made. Pay that to the veterans.

3. Amend the arbitration system. Change it so that a player or a team can file, and only once every three years. If a two-year deal is awarded, they can only do it every four years. Go to a high-low system that's fair, keep the walk-away/walk-back option, but amend the arbitration.

4. Reduce the regular season schedule to 72 games. The league and the players play too many games - a fact that has been lost in the shuffle. In my mind, this is a meaningful thing for our fans that have been suffering through this. We play too many games, and the product suffers as a result.

5. Move buyouts to .50 cents on the dollar. Right now, it's either .33 cents or .66 cents. Make it simple at .50 cents.

6. Make qualifying offers at 75 percent. The union's proposal to re-tool it is meaningless in my opinion.

If you make those changes, and you try the players' proposal, I think it might work.

Hellsempire is offline  
Old
01-13-2005, 09:03 AM
  #2
4check22
Registered User
 
4check22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Karl Spackler
Country: United States
Posts: 3,045
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to 4check22 Send a message via Yahoo to 4check22
"The players have said that their proposal would work with their salary rollback and changes made to the system. Well, I'm from Missouri, and the motto in my home state is 'show me.' If you say this will work, then I would be asking the league if they would be willing to try it for two years." That sounds like an intelligent response. Let's see, I tell you something. You believe it. Then I have time to prove it? Kinda like the weapons of mass destruction over in Iraq. Yeah, we believe you, President Bush. Now, show us. Oh. Two years later now -- tens of thousands are dead and still no weapons of mass destruction? Well, you tried.

That might be the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard. Show me? It's that kind of naivety which gets us in trouble on so many issues. Just because he's from Missour--AH does'nt make up for his stupidity. It does explain some things though.

4check22 is offline  
Old
01-13-2005, 06:40 PM
  #3
DevilFisch
Registered User
 
DevilFisch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Edison, NJ
Country: United States
Posts: 8,311
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to DevilFisch Send a message via AIM to DevilFisch
How the hell is it ridiculous? I'm sick and tired of the NHLPA and their apologetics basically sitting on their butts just saying that their way is better. Burke is only asking for some kind of proof that it's a viable proposal, and I agree with him. Does salary rollback and similar system changes work in other hockey leagues? In other sports? In any other organizations? Yeah, you won't know for sure unless it's actually implemented; but that can be said for ANY proposal in, well, anything. Just because it has a possibility it could work doesn't mean it is automatically viable, the NHLPA's proposal would be a lot better if they could point to similar proposals have yielded desired results. But since they haven't stepped up with anything, I agree with burke: Show me.

(Oh, as an aside, the US Army captured Saddam Hussein. But I guess the torturer, oppresser, and mass murderer of Iraq for decades isn't the same as a missle. My bad.)

DevilFisch is offline  
Old
01-14-2005, 09:42 AM
  #4
4check22
Registered User
 
4check22's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Karl Spackler
Country: United States
Posts: 3,045
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to 4check22 Send a message via Yahoo to 4check22
Quote:
Originally Posted by DevilFisch
How the hell is it ridiculous? I'm sick and tired of the NHLPA and their apologetics basically sitting on their butts just saying that their way is better. Burke is only asking for some kind of proof that it's a viable proposal, and I agree with him. Does salary rollback and similar system changes work in other hockey leagues? In other sports? In any other organizations? Yeah, you won't know for sure unless it's actually implemented; but that can be said for ANY proposal in, well, anything. Just because it has a possibility it could work doesn't mean it is automatically viable, the NHLPA's proposal would be a lot better if they could point to similar proposals have yielded desired results. But since they haven't stepped up with anything, I agree with burke: Show me.

(Oh, as an aside, the US Army captured Saddam Hussein. But I guess the torturer, oppresser, and mass murderer of Iraq for decades isn't the same as a missle. My bad.)
First, I was blasting the "show me" comment. Of course I'll back something if it makes sense, but Burke said we should simply give it a chance since the NHLPA says it will work. They also are the ones who say the NHL's reported $224 million in losses are closer to $90 million. So I'm just supposed to swallow that and further accept their proposal which the NHL says will result in further losses because Burke says, "show me?" I don't think so. I'll take a lockout. I'll take NO HOCKEY FOR 2 YEARS IF I HAVE TO, because in the end, stability WILL be the result . . . instead of MIGHT BE THE RESULT.

Secondly, Bush didn't go in to remove Saddam Hussein (not publically anyway). If that would have been his reasoning, he would have never had the backing of the United States. The fact that "Weapons of Mass Destruction" was just a B.S. reason to remove Hussein further adds to my argument against "showing me." He lied to us to get what he wanted done. Reminds me of a money-hungry organization made up of overpaid hockey players.

4check22 is offline  
Old
01-14-2005, 09:54 AM
  #5
Hellsempire
Registered User
 
Hellsempire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: The Rock Section 233
Country: United States
Posts: 2,483
vCash: 500
Commissioner Gary Bettman speaks live on the NY/NJ radio station today about the current lockout and the CBA. Bettman was live on the Mike and the Mad Dog show today on Sports Radio 66 WFAN AM radio. Amazing that no one can speak with the NHLPA and especially Goodenow. Bettman is right what he says in this interview. All the more the NHL and the owners are doing the right thing here and the NHLPA and the players are just plain stupid. This could take a while but they will get it done right.

Now Playing: Jan 13-Mike & Dog get the state of the NHL from Commissioner Gary Bettman - Requires Real Player

http://wfan.com/chrismikeaudio/local...013183742.html

Hellsempire is offline  
Closed Thread

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:24 PM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.