Just out of curiosity, wouldn't a salary rollback on already existing contracts result in a breach of contract on the owners part, seeing as they signed a legally binding contract that states they will pay each player X amount of money? If this is the case, the contracts (every contract in the league that contains a specific salary, which is all of them) would become voided, wouldn't they? This would drop the entire league into FA if the players wanted to go that route.
No. All contracts are contingent on a CBA. If they players vote for a CBA that includes a roll back, they can't void their contracts.
I don't know why people still think that a professional league contract is the same as you or I entering into a contract. There are very different rules surrounding them.
On another note, can Fehr and Bettman meet in Cape May for today. Maybe then we could have a new CBA.
A lot of soundbytes, posturing and veiled accusations have been reported in the past month but these words from Suter sum up best the frustration I feel as a fan and why I'm more on the side of the NHLPA than the league and owners:
Sure, the players are the ones asking for and pushing for the incredible salary offers but the market is only set by the owners willing to hand them those contract sums - and the hypocrisy that Suter references would be infuriating to anyone. Forgetting the disparity of dollars between the salary of the average NHL player (or pro athlete) and the everyday working man, being hired based on one salary, only to have the employer come back and cry poverty by wanting to cut that same salary down immediately after getting the employee committed to the original amount, is not only two-faced in nature but borderline fraudulent IMO.
The fact that Leipold in particular is one of the owners backing Bettman and supporting the conditions the league is after also reeks - especially in that, with St. Paul, MN being the 25th largest population out of 30 NHL cities, the Wild are technically a "small-market" team. For Leipold to blow a wad this summer like a big spending, major market owner while embracing all of the benefits for small-market teams is pure hypocrisy.
Sorry, but if Suter was so worried about that, then he could have waited until the new CBA was signed to sign a contract.
The team AND the player enter into a contract. And every player that signed this summer knew that the owners could very well ask for a rollback during the CBA talks.
So, to act like the owners asking for rollbacks are some sort of hypocrisy doesn't sit well with me.
Everyone knew the reality of the situation moving forward and everyone is trying to make decisions that are in their best interests.
The name of the game is get what you can get while you can get it.
And that goes for the owners as well as the players.
Both sides are greedy SOBs that are trying to get the most that they can. For me, neither side has the moral high ground here. As long as they are fighting over money, there is no moral high ground to be won.