they know bettman is backed into a corner. he wouldn't have made a new offer if he wasn't. i wouldn't be surprised if fehr waits until bettman is kissing his feet
Bettman says this offer is OFF the table if a deal isn't made before Nov 2nd...
they know bettman is backed into a corner. he wouldn't have made a new offer if he wasn't. i wouldn't be surprised if fehr waits until bettman is kissing his feet
Aaaaaaand this is why it took a month to get a new proposal. Whoever makes it would be perceived to be backed into a corner.
The leverage Bettman exerts the other way is that if they push for much beyond tweaking, games will start to be cancelled - not to be made up this time - and the players will lose those dollars irretrievably. Is an extra 2% in year one worth losing 20% of the season? Basic math says no.
EDIT: basic math also says that if I'm a player I'm telling Fehr not to get too aggressive in trying to tweak. I'm pretty happy with this as-is - don't **** it up by shooting for the moon.
Aaaaaaand this is why it took a month to get a new proposal. Whoever makes it would be perceived to be backed into a corner.
The leverage Bettman exerts the other way is that if they push for much beyond tweaking, games will start to be cancelled - not to be made up this time - and the players will lose those dollars irretrievably. Is an extra 2% in year one worth losing 20% of the season? Basic math says no.
EDIT: basic math also says that if I'm a player I'm telling Fehr not to get too aggressive in trying to tweak. I'm pretty happy with this as-is - don't **** it up, by shooting for the moon.
I agree wholeheartedly with everything you said. Hopefully cooler heads prevail all around. This is a good "starting point" for final negotiations.
__________________
"Here we can see the agression of american people. They love fighting and guns. when they wont win they try to kill us all." -HalfOfFame
I like everything about the contracts except 5 yrs wont work for max contracts, push that to 10. Also no way should guys like redden in the AHL count against the cap, if a team wants to eat a guys contract in the nhl they should be able to. And thirdly I DO NOT want an 8 game road trip to end the season. Forget squeezing 82 games...lets make it 75 games and thats it.
I like everything about the contracts except 5 yrs wont work for max contracts, push that to 10. Also no way should guys like redden in the AHL count against the cap, if a team wants to eat a guys contract in the nhl they should be able to. And thirdly I DO NOT want an 8 game road trip to end the season. Forget squeezing 82 games...lets make it 75 games and thats it.
10 years max contracts? Too much, 8 should be the tops, but I can deal with 5.
Redden will be an amnesty buy out. Won't worry about that.
The 8 games won't be added at the end, they would most likely be added one every 5 weeks during the season.
I saw that one of the items in the deal offered by the NHL is closing the "Redden Loophole". If the deal were signed as-is today, how would this impact the NYR salary cap for this year? What's left on Redden's contract, and do you think they'll have a buyout provision so we can get Redden off the books and not kill our cap in the first year of the new CBA?
I saw that one of the items in the deal offered by the NHL is closing the "Redden Loophole". If the deal were signed as-is today, how would this impact the NYR salary cap for this year? What's left on Redden's contract, and do you think they'll have a buyout provision so we can get Redden off the books and not kill our cap in the first year of the new CBA?
We have no idea yet. Redden has two years left. Most people are speculating that there will be one-time amnesty buyouts like in 2005.
I like everything about the contracts except 5 yrs wont work for max contracts, push that to 10. Also no way should guys like redden in the AHL count against the cap, if a team wants to eat a guys contract in the nhl they should be able to. And thirdly I DO NOT want an 8 game road trip to end the season. Forget squeezing 82 games...lets make it 75 games and thats it.
I would be fine with a 10 year max...although there's still too much room there for circumvention. If you lower it to 8 or even 6 you make it a lot harder for that kind of monkey business to take place.
And please have an 82 game season if at all possible.
they know bettman is backed into a corner. he wouldn't have made a new offer if he wasn't. i wouldn't be surprised if fehr waits until bettman is kissing his feet
That would be as much of a blunder as Bettman's fist offer. I'm as pro player as anyone here, and I recognize that this is the owners' league and a generous starting point. It cuts through a lot of BS so they can arrive at a deal quicker. If Fehr (and I don't believe for a second it will be his M.O.) turns this into an ego trip, it will invigorate the league and lengthen the stalemate... and cut into the players' share.
I hope you're right about this... and I suspect that you are.
Many teams would be in serious trouble if there aren't buyouts. Almost half of the league is over $62 mill in cap hit right now, which I believe would be above the cap proposed in this deal (maybe now, I haven't seen a firm number on what it would be yet)
Whos side the fans are on isn't a deciding factor in the lockout, don't fool yourself.
The NHL invested money in focus groups, and the players have been pandering to the fan base over social media outlets well before the lockout even began. Are the fans the deciding factor? Of course not, but to pretend like they don't play a key part in negotiations is foolish.
There are already plenty of fans on this board saying this is a "Where do I sign!?" scenario for the NHLPA. If they don't reach an agreement and the lockout is prolonged, who gets to waive the "Hey, we tried to compromise!" flag to the media? The league, that's who. Coming to the table first was a calculated risk.
We're not lawyers (for the most part) and we haven't read the proposal. The devil is in the details. IMO the lower ufa age is an element that helped spiral contracts out of control and started the circumvention deals. Bettman gladly gave up 27 or 7.
The AHL contracts... that could be abused. Teams pay AHL and NHL salaries regardless. What's to stop the Isles from burying a big contract there to 1) reach the floor and 2) weaken their team for a lottery pick. It eats into the players' share. Its a sloppy example, but it illustrates that an amount of forecasting is required.
I'm not sure where the players give back to increase contract length, remove AHL contracts, phase the cap... it was a shrewd maneuver by the league.
The NHL invested money in focus groups, and the players have been pandering to the fan base over social media outlets well before the lockout even began. Are the fans the deciding factor? Of course not, but to pretend like they don't play a key part in negotiations is foolish.
There are already plenty of fans on this board saying this is a "Where do I sign!?" scenario for the NHLPA. If they don't reach an agreement and the lockout is prolonged, who gets to waive the "Hey, we tried to compromise!" flag to the media? The league, that's who. Coming to the table first was a calculated risk.
Agree wholeheartedly. I think this is a master stroke by Bettman and company from the PR perspective.
We're at the point where the season should've started already and most fans want something to happen without really caring what it is exactly.
The fact of the matter is the NHL is still proposing across the board cuts to the players' interests, although not as draconian as before.
But hey, its something, right? So "where do I sign?"
Its entirely possible the focus group mess forced this proposal. The fan opinion matters... why the side they take is important I do not know. It stands to reason that pissed off fans, regardless of their leaning, don't devote money to the league. Less money hurts everyone.
Its entirely possible the focus group mess forced this proposal. The fan opinion matters... why the side they take is important I do not know. It stands to reason that pissed off fans, regardless of their leaning, don't devote money to the league. Less money hurts everyone.
If it took a focus group for the NHL to realize the fans were against them, they must have been hiding under a rock.
__________________ "Matteau! Matteau! Matteau!"~H. Rose
Its entirely possible the focus group mess forced this proposal. The fan opinion matters... why the side they take is important I do not know. It stands to reason that pissed off fans, regardless of their leaning, don't devote money to the league. Less money hurts everyone.
If anything, I think what they gained from the focus group was that most fans have no idea whats really going on and just want to see some movement on the negotiations and some hockey.
“@drosennhl: NHLPA rep says there will be no further update today or tonight from the Union regarding the NHL's proposal. We could hear more tomorrow.”
Its entirely possible the focus group mess forced this proposal. The fan opinion matters... why the side they take is important I do not know. It stands to reason that pissed off fans, regardless of their leaning, don't devote money to the league. Less money hurts everyone.
I don't think it forced it, but going into the first "serious" negotiations with the fans in your corner? That's a huge win. Now, instead of the public perception being primarily sympathetic towards the players, many of those people are now wondering, "Why haven't they signed it yet!? I want my hockey back!"
I said it before the lockout started, but it still rings true for me: The most interesting part of this whole charade isn't the terms of the CBA, but how the two sides are going to use new media tools to sway the fans in their favor. 8 years ago, this wouldn't have been news to 70% of the fans until tomorrow mornings paper; hours after the NHLPA had a chance to review it. Now, it's touched millions of people in a matter of minutes thanks to Twitter, thus putting even more pressure on the players.
