New CBA? Are Panthers Well Positioned? (ALL CBA TALK HERE)
Numerous news articles suggest that the Owner's initial proposal reflects an effort significantly to reduce the players share of revenues and thereby lower the salary cap, eliminate cap circumvention contracts, and extend the time to free agency and lower the costs of contracts to younger players. Not saying that the players are going to agree to the owners proposal, but it does seem likely that whatever compromise the players and owners ultimately work out will: (1) lower the cap while narrowing the range between the cap and the floor; (2) contain limitations on long-term front loaded contracts designed to circumvent the cap; and (3) contain limitations on money going to the younger players in order to maintain the compensation of the current NHLers who will vote to ratify the CBA.
On the surface, this looks to favor the Panthers in several ways. First, the Cats are way below the cap so will have money to spend even if it goes down by 10%. Second, the Cats have few long term contracts. Finally, with its pool of deep prospects, the Cats will likely have to pay them less money for the first seven years of their careers.
What do you think?
Last edited by angry_treefrog: 07-14-2012 at 10:48 AM.
Numerous news articles suggest that the Owner's initial proposal reflects an effort significantly to reduce the players share of revenues and thereby lower the salary cap, eliminate cap circumvention contracts, and extend the time to free agency and lower the costs of contracts to younger players. Not saying that the players are going to agree to the owners proposal, but it does seem likely that whatever compromise the players and owners ultimately work out will: (1) lower the cap while narrowing the range between the cap and the floor; (2) contain limitations on long-term front loaded contracts designed to circumvent the cap; and (3) contain limitations on money going to the younger players in order to maintain the compensation of the current NHLers who will vote to ratify the CBA.
On the surface, this looks to favor the Panthers in several ways. First, the Cats are way below the cap so will have money to spend even if it goes down by 10%. Second, the Cats have few long term contracts. Finally, with its pool of deep prospects, the Cats will likely have to pay them less money for the first seven years of their careers.
What do you think?
I think your post is very logical and well thought out.
Unfortunately the years have conditioned me to expect the worst (e.g. Crosby draft ping pong ball screw job).
(I think a thread to discuss the CBA negotiations outside of the News thread is appropriate. It's a far more significant topic than a signing. Lets make it this thread. All CBA talk here.)
__________________
FLORIDA PANTHERS 2011-12 SOUTHEAST DIVISION CHAMPIONS 2012-13 BASEMENT DWELLERS
Numerous news articles suggest that the Owner's initial proposal reflects an effort significantly to reduce the players share of revenues and thereby lower the salary cap, eliminate cap circumvention contracts, and extend the time to free agency and lower the costs of contracts to younger players. Not saying that the players are going to agree to the owners proposal, but it does seem likely that whatever compromise the players and owners ultimately work out will: (1) lower the cap while narrowing the range between the cap and the floor; (2) contain limitations on long-term front loaded contracts designed to circumvent the cap; and (3) contain limitations on money going to the younger players in order to maintain the compensation of the current NHLers who will vote to ratify the CBA.
On the surface, this looks to favor the Panthers in several ways. First, the Cats are way below the cap so will have money to spend even if it goes down by 10%. Second, the Cats have few long term contracts. Finally, with its pool of deep prospects, the Cats will likely have to pay them less money for the first seven years of their careers.
What do you think?
I think that we are far better positioned than most as far as long term future for the reasons you have mentioned. That said, the first offer out of the league is exactly that, laughably low-ball and with the obvious intention of movement upward.
Numerous news articles suggest that the Owner's initial proposal reflects an effort significantly to reduce the players share of revenues and thereby lower the salary cap, eliminate cap circumvention contracts, and extend the time to free agency and lower the costs of contracts to younger players. Not saying that the players are going to agree to the owners proposal, but it does seem likely that whatever compromise the players and owners ultimately work out will: (1) lower the cap while narrowing the range between the cap and the floor; (2) contain limitations on long-term front loaded contracts designed to circumvent the cap; and (3) contain limitations on money going to the younger players in order to maintain the compensation of the current NHLers who will vote to ratify the CBA.
On the surface, this looks to favor the Panthers in several ways. First, the Cats are way below the cap so will have money to spend even if it goes down by 10%. Second, the Cats have few long term contracts. Finally, with its pool of deep prospects, the Cats will likely have to pay them less money for the first seven years of their careers.
What do you think?
You make some good points. But i think the process and amount of issues makes all of the discussions too convoluted to say whether or not we are in a "good" or "bad" position.
As a fan, the only condition i have is that we get a full season this year. NOTHING is worse for the sport than a work stoppage. Similarly, NOTHING is worse for my hockey addiction than a work stoppage. So please please please figure this out before October. Please.
You make some good points. But i think the process and amount of issues makes all of the discussions too convoluted to say whether or not we are in a "good" or "bad" position.
As a fan, the only condition i have is that we get a full season this year. NOTHING is worse for the sport than a work stoppage. Similarly, NOTHING is worse for my hockey addiction than a work stoppage. So please please please figure this out before October. Please.
lol, if a lockout happened both sides are completely dumb. Just now getting established again and ratings/revenues going up. Another lockout? can you imagine what that would do? It shouldn't even be an option.
lol, if a lockout happened both sides are completely dumb. Just now getting established again and ratings/revenues going up. Another lockout? can you imagine what that would do? It shouldn't even be an option.
I'm sure that NHLPA is ready to start season without contract (continue with existing one) and then if NHL and NHLPA cannot make a deal, start strike when playoffs start (and that's the reason season will not start without contract).
I'm sure that NHLPA is ready to start season without contract (continue with existing one) and then if NHL and NHLPA cannot make a deal, start strike when playoffs start (and that's the reason season will not start without contract).
JOL
Baseball still has difficulty after pulling that ill-advised stunt (and yes, Fehr was the head of the MLBPA for that). They have the public leverage at the moment and striking at the playoffs would quickly kill that.
I'm sure that NHLPA is ready to start season without contract (continue with existing one) and then if NHL and NHLPA cannot make a deal, start strike when playoffs start (and that's the reason season will not start without contract).
JOL
Why would you be sure of that?
Financially it makes sense (would hurt owners $, not players), but it would be a public relations disaster for the NHLPA.
lol, if a lockout happened both sides are completely dumb. Just now getting established again and ratings/revenues going up. Another lockout? can you imagine what that would do? It shouldn't even be an option.
this. taking 2 steps forward after 04-05 and 5 steps back with this blunder waiting to happen is not what either side should want right now.
I can't understand why our CBA is so short. Extend the ****ing thing so we fans aren't the ones screwed every 6 seasons.
Now that we have the opportunity to see the Owners full proposal, it is safe to state that the players are unlikely to agree to a 24% reduction in compensation, extending the time to free agency, eliminating contracts longer than 6 years etc.
Now that we have the opportunity to see the Owners full proposal, it is safe to state that the players are unlikely to agree to a 24% reduction in compensation, extending the time to free agency, eliminating contracts longer than 6 years etc.
IMO, a lockout/ strike is likely coming.
Because the players don't like the first proposal? I'm fairly certain there will be some negotiations. It's more likely that they'll continue with the current CBA than risk another lockout/strike. Unless it's your guts telling you that a lockout is imminent... do you feel it in your bones? Is it a hunch? because I'm totally on board with your thoughts if it's a hunch.
NHL reduces financial demands from first proposal to an eventual 50/50 split in revenue sharing. The cap will drop to 58m this season under the new proposal and then rise to pre-set points in the seasons after.
Light at the end of the tunnel! Please Bettman/Fehr, let us have hockey!
I imagine the 58MM will get negotiated upwards. The good news here is that the NHL's counter is largely based in reality compared to the dream they started out with. They're at least speaking different dialects of the same language now.
Yeah I see them settling on something a little higher because over half the league is over that $58M. They will have to do something in the way of a buyout period to get everyone under anyway.
We're around $53M now without having signed Kulikov or adding in Huberdeau (I think thats why its taken so long to sign Kuli...they were waiting on the CBA). So that puts us right against that cap it seems to my calculations. I guess that would at least kill any rumor of us being interested in Luongo finally
Yeah I see them settling on something a little higher because over half the league is over that $58M. They will have to do something in the way of a buyout period to get everyone under anyway.
We're around $53M now without having signed Kulikov or adding in Huberdeau (I think thats why its taken so long to sign Kuli...they were waiting on the CBA). So that puts us right against that cap it seems to my calculations. I guess that would at least kill any rumor of us being interested in Luongo finally
I am not sure if this is allowed to happen but I read somewhere that the players salary will be cut like the salary cap (same percentage) I dont think that is very likely...
But I still dont get why the owners are complaining about the cap hit..They are the people who are throwing out the money. But I like it more with a lower cap because of the lower market teams, like we are one.
Assuming that the lockout is relatively short, the Panthers look to be net winners for a variety of reasons.
First, it appears that the cap, at the end of the day, likely will be reduced and stablized for a couple of years, which is good news for teams like the Panthers which are way below the cap.
Second, it is likely that the time to UFA will be extended, which is great news for teams like the Panthers with great young prospects.
Third, it is likely that poor teams like the Panthers will receive increased revenue sharing, which will make the Cats more competitive.
