Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Again, crux of dispute is memo from last night that was leaked. NHL believes Fehr "hid" details of "make-whole." One player says it was...
Elliotte Friedman @FriedgeHNIC
Deliberately kept out of that memo because they knew it would get out and they didn't want to reveal specific details.
Yep, deliberately hide the details of the proposal in the memo to the players outside of Don's inner circle. Can't have them thinking for themselves. If I was Fehr, I wouldn't want the guys not making the big bucks to know the details either.
If we can get confirmation on the league offering straight 50/50 and making salaries whole spread over two years and willing to negotiate on all contract terms except back-diving deals (which I agree with), then I'm officially on the owners' side at this point. Fehr's interview tonight is on TSN and it's not impressive.
Although he did say that many players are present during each of the proposals and so there is no way for him to "leave stuff out" (that's the implication -- that it wouldn't' fly because players who were there would say something if there was a big discrepancy). If a player comes out who was in the meetings and says the memo was wrong then Fehr can drop dead.
And asking for 82 games of salary for this year is ********. I don't know how he can turn away from a straight pro-rated amount of money for each player at the original value. What else would a reasonable person expect? It's stupid.
If we can get confirmation on the league offering straight 50/50 and making salaries whole spread over two years and willing to negotiate on all contract terms except back-diving deals (which I agree with), then I'm officially on the owners' side at this point. Fehr's interview tonight is on TSN and it's not impressive.
Although he did say that many players are present during each of the proposals and so there is no way for him to "leave stuff out" (that's the implication -- that it wouldn't' fly because players who were there would say something if there was a big discrepancy). If a player comes out who was in the meetings and says the memo was wrong then Fehr can drop dead.
And asking for 82 games of salary for this year is ********. I don't know how he can turn away from a straight pro-rated amount of money for each player at the original value. What else would a reasonable person expect? It's stupid.
I don't think there's much question as to what the actual NHL offer was now (apart from some minor details on contract rights). Straight drop to 50-50, with deferral of parts of salaries to be paid in year 1 ($150 million) and year 2 ($61 mlilion) +2% interest. The NHl would pay this and it would be gauranteed and would not come out of the players share. By year 3, the NHL estimates that the players will be made whole based on revenue growth of 5%.
Now, what have the players said? They've had the gall to ask 'but what if revenue doesn't grow?' Then they aren't made totally whole after year 3! Yes, the players, who are proposing a delinked salary cap with gauranteed raises every year and calling it 50-50 based on projected revenue growth of 5 - 7.1% is now who ing about the NHL using growth estimates. Yes folks, I think that is what we call hypocrisy at its finest. When used in the NHLPA proposals, the growth assumptions are totally reasonable, but in the NHL proposal? NhLpA is suddenly worried 'omg, what happens if the revenues don't grow'.
Well PA, I'll tell you what happens if the revenues don't grow as projected.
Under the players proposal: if revenue growth underperforms, it can threaten the financial viability of multiple teams. If growth is slower than the NhLpa gauranteed raises, or declines even, NHL could see itself paying out more than 57% or even 60% in players salaries. If this happens, not only is Phoenix in trouble, so is 3 or more other teams by the end of the CBA
Under the Owners proposal: if the revenue growth underperforms, the majority of players are still made whole. Players like Sidney Crosby, Kovulchuk, Ovechkin though would face the horror of maybe missing out on a few million of their gauranteed $100 million + contracts.
Gee, golly, hard to decide who to support and who's being reasonable here.
Starting to look that way. The owners have finally come around / shed their douchery and the most ridiculous elements of their original proposals (and they were ridiculous / not a legitimate basis for negotiating), but the union is still douching it up seems like.
Although I agree completely that the timing and delay between meetings is inexcusable and most likely the decision / fault of the owners. Part of their tactics. That's was Sid was driving at in his recent radio comments I think. Why the delays. There's no excuse for that other than skipping a couple days here or there to regroup.
Last edited by Chancellor Vitale: 11-10-2012 at 08:24 AM.
I wonder if the PA is still holding out for something better than 50/50 and the 82 game salary from <82 games is them holding out for something better to increase the HRR%. If the star tribune article is true, it is pretty hard to be sympathetic with the players when the proposal has the PA conceding 50/50, the league would be willing to concede to making whole and other secondary issues.
Quote:
The league also feels "we're there" on revenue sharing, with a source saying that the league is basically willing to go with the NHLPA’s proposal other than a couple issues that need to be talked about.
The sources also say it’s untrue that the NHLPA must agree to all the league contract demands. That is negotiable, with the one area the league feels must be stopped are the back-diving contracts
I wonder if that means NHL then would be willing to scrap the new adjustments to UFA age and associated 2nd contract details.
Also, the arriving really late for negotiations seems like a very petty thing to do yet it is pretty consistent on the player's side as if they don't really care about negotiations.
I really think at some point the union is going to crack. You can't have a leader who is intentionally misleading the majority of its constituents just so he and a few others get their way. Hopefully some of these players get their head out of the sand and take a real look at the owner's proposal. It's really pretty reasonable.
Starting to look that way. The owners have finally come around / shed their douchery and the most ridiculous elements of their original proposals (and they were ridiculous / not a legitimate basis for negotiating), but the union is still douching it up seems like.
Although I agree completely that the timing and delay between meetings is inexcusable and most likely the decision / fault of the owners. Part of their tactics. That's was Sid was driving at in his recent radio comments I think. Why the delays. There's no excuse for that other than skipping a couple days here or there to regroup.
I wouldn't say the owners are being less douchy...
It isn't a coincidence that the first time Jacobs steps in the room this week, things blow up and suddenly there is propaganda being leaked from the NHL, with the intent to divide the NHLPA.
For all of the anti-christ venom spewed at Fehr, Jacobs is worse. He is so utterly disgusting, that he makes Bettman look like a reasonable fellow.
Hopefully cooler heads prevail, but that seems to be a fool's dream. I've totally thrown my hope for common sense out of the window, weeks ago.
I'm embarrassed to call myself an NHL fan right now (but I'll never be embarrassed for how much I love this sport).
Last edited by Mr Jiggyfly: 11-10-2012 at 09:54 AM.
Reason: Ifone is made for small fingers
I wouldn't say the owners are being less douchy...
It isn't a coincidence that the first time Jacobs steps in the room this week, things blow up and suddenly there is propaganda being leaked from the NHL, with the intent to divide the NHLPA.
For all of the anti-christ venom spewed at Fehr, Jacobs is worse. He is so utterly disgusting, that he makes Bettman look like a reasonable fellow.
Hopefully cooler heads prevail, but that seems to be a fool's dream. I've totally thrown my hope for common sense out of the window, weeks ago.
I'm embarrassed to call myself an NHL fan right now (but I'll never be embarrassed for how much I love this sport).
I dunno man. The owners seem to be the only party at this point willing to strike a deal. The PA's most recent proposal is ridiculous.
I dunno man. The owners seem to be the only party at this point willing to strike a deal. The PA's most recent proposal is ridiculous.
Could be, but the same could be said for the league. An argument could be made either way.
We don't have to listen to Fehr's words... Adams came right out and said the owners new "make whole" offer is being grossly misrepresented. He called it the "make partial" provision.
I don't classify a Harvard guy like Adams as a dumb player, so I am giving some merit to what he says.
No matter what I think, there was absolutely no need for yesterday's propaganda **** show from the league. They think this type of stupidity will divide the PA, but I get the sense it will steady their resolve further...
Just another poor miscalculation by the league and that decision could now derail these talks.
Could be, but the same could be said for the league. An argument could be made either way.
We don't have to listen to Fehr's words... Adams came right out and said the owners new "make whole" offer is being grossly misrepresented. He called it the "make partial" provision.
I don't classify a Harvard guy like Adams as a dumb player, so I am giving some merit to what he says.
The most accurate description seems to be that it's 'Make Whole' if revenue growth averages 5 % or more a year, and 'Make Partial' if the average growth is less.
If there was a full season this season, with revenues increasing by 5 % from last seasons, the difference between the players pay last season and a 50 % share would be about $150 M, while the next season would see about a $60 M difference, and the following season a 50 % share would've surpassed the players share from last season. The NHL offered to guarantee those $210 M in difference, which would make the contracts 'whole' if the league experienced an average growth of 5 % or more.
The question then becomes if you believe a 5 % average growth to be too optimistic (in which case I'm not sure what to call the NHLPA's initial proposal of a 7.2 % average growth rate).
The most accurate description seems to be that it's 'Make Whole' if revenue growth averages 5 % or more a year, and 'Make Partial' if the average growth is less.
If there was a full season this season, with revenues increasing by 5 % from last seasons, the difference between the players pay last season and a 50 % share would be about $150 M, while the next season would see about a $60 M difference, and the following season a 50 % share would've surpassed the players share from last season. The NHL offered to guarantee those $210 M in difference, which would make the contracts 'whole' if the league experienced an average growth of 5 % or more.
The question then becomes if you believe a 5 % average growth to be too optimistic (in which case I'm not sure what to call the NHLPA's initial proposal of a 7.2 % average growth rate).
Exactly. It pisses me off that now the players are crying about the growth rate issue when they are the ones that projected 7% growth earlier on. It is absolutely make whole if the league's revenues grow at 5%. The notion that the players believe their pay should be made whole this season is ludicrous since it will be a shortened season. You don't get paid a full paycheck for partial work. The players are being unreasonable. Adams' isn't stupid but he is toeing the party line with his comments and he's "technically correct" but it's an asinine thing to say.
Could be, but the same could be said for the league. An argument could be made either way.
We don't have to listen to Fehr's words... Adams came right out and said the owners new "make whole" offer is being grossly misrepresented. He called it the "make partial" provision.
I don't classify a Harvard guy like Adams as a dumb player, so I am giving some merit to what he says.
No matter what I think, there was absolutely no need for yesterday's propaganda **** show from the league. They think this type of stupidity will divide the PA, but I get the sense it will steady their resolve further...
Just another poor miscalculation by the league and that decision could now derail these talks.
No matter what it will be that way with the fluctuation of the increased revenue share percentage, it could go up, down or stay the same. They are 100% counting on a 5% to 7% increase, and if it doesn't guess what, they lose money.
The players want it 100% guaranteed which intern makes it 5% or no deal. For the last CBA they were guaranteed those numbers. Maybe in 2004 the NHLPA, players agents and the players themselves should understand what they're agreeing too.
A deal is a deal, yes they signed those contracts, but they also signed off on the last CBA. If anything the one backing out on the deal are the players. The owners are gonna fallow the new CBA.
The most accurate description seems to be that it's 'Make Whole' if revenue growth averages 5 % or more a year, and 'Make Partial' if the average growth is less.
If there was a full season this season, with revenues increasing by 5 % from last seasons, the difference between the players pay last season and a 50 % share would be about $150 M, while the next season would see about a $60 M difference, and the following season a 50 % share would've surpassed the players share from last season. The NHL offered to guarantee those $210 M in difference, which would make the contracts 'whole' if the league experienced an average growth of 5 % or more.
The question then becomes if you believe a 5 % average growth to be too optimistic (in which case I'm not sure what to call the NHLPA's initial proposal of a 7.2 % average growth rate).
To me it seems reasonable, as growth has consistently been above 5% through the prior CBA.
This is probably why Fehr said they aren't as far apart as the league is claiming.
So why would the league get stupid and pull that **** last night?
To me it seems reasonable, as growth has consistently been above 5% through the prior CBA.
This is probably why Fehr said they aren't as far apart as the league is claiming.
So why would the league get stupid and pull that **** last night?
I think they're just sick of Fehr. I don't blame them to be honest. If the players aren't willing to concede the league growing at that rate is perfectly reasonable, then the season is lost. If the players truly want to play, they sure as hell better be close to a deal with the parameters given in the league's most recent proposal.
To me it seems reasonable, as growth has consistently been above 5% through the prior CBA.
This is probably why Fehr said they aren't as far apart as the league is claiming.
So why would the league get stupid and pull that **** last night?
I think they misinterpreted the leaked memo (in addition to being annoyed by Fehr showing up late to a scheduled meeting for the second time, him stubbornly offering delinked proposals with fixed salary increase in first year and raising the required revenue sharing to 260 M from their original request of 240 M after the owners offered an increase in revenue sharing).
The memo mentions the 'Make Whole' offer being similar to what was discussed between Daly and Fehr on Saturday, alluding to the offer already being known to the players. I think the league interpreted it as Fehr saying the revised 'Make Whole' was similar to the original 'Make Whole' proposition.
I think they're just sick of Fehr. I don't blame them to be honest. If the players aren't willing to concede the league growing at that rate is perfectly reasonable, then the season is lost. If the players truly want to play, they sure as hell better be close to a deal with the parameters given in the league's most recent proposal.
Their fear of Fehr is showing... They can't pull stunts like last night that gives Fehr more ammo and unifies the PA more.
Just negotiate through this low point and leave the ****ing media out of it.
Their fear of Fehr is showing... They can't pull stunts like last night that gives Fehr more ammo and unifies the PA more.
Just negotiate through this low point and leave the ****ing media out of it.
They're not afraid of Fehr, they just seem to want a deal to get done and they're being stonewalled by someone who seems to be more about antagonizing and cementing his legacy than negotiating.
I'm surprised by how people are confusing the ability to annoy with the ability to strike fear. Suddenly wanting players to be paid for games they'll never get back is no different than a stinkbomb in the school bathroom.
Their fear of Fehr is showing... They can't pull stunts like last night that gives Fehr more ammo and unifies the PA more.
Just negotiate through this low point and leave the ****ing media out of it.
They had this entire week to negotiate based on what Fehr and Daley discussed last Saturday. The league grew tired of the talks going nowhere. The PA wanting paid based on an 82 game schedule is just dumb. If I was an owner, I'd assume Fehr has no intentions of making a deal soon.
They're not afraid of Fehr, they just seem to want a deal to get done and they're being stonewalled by someone who seems to be more about antagonizing and cementing his legacy than negotiating.
I'm surprised by how people are confusing the ability to annoy with the ability to strike fear. Suddenly wanting players to be paid for games they'll never get back is no different than a stinkbomb in the school bathroom.
None of us, including the owners, have an inkling of what Fehr's end game is. He doesn't care about the game and I have little doubt he cares if the league cancels another season.
He is walking away after this CBA is done, so I also doubt he cares about long lasting ramifications.
The man is a wizard at keeping his union strong and unwavering. This means things very well could go nuclear... Removal of the cap, etc.
The owners would be quite foolish not to be afraid of what he will do.
None of us, including the owners, have an inkling of what Fehr's end game is. He doesn't care about the game and I have little doubt he cares if the league cancels another season.
He is walking away after this CBA is done, so I also doubt he cares about long lasting ramifications.
The man is a wizard at keeping his union strong and unwavering. This means things very well could go nuclear... Removal of the cap, etc.
The owners would be quite foolish not to be afraid of what he will do.
It's the players who should be more afraid, and just my opinion, probably are.
It's an old argument, but the owners will just go back to running their other ventures, and the players can go find work in Switzerland.
The cap removal won't ever happen. If Fehr would even bring it up in a serious manner, the NHL would just cancel the season and wait until the majority of North American NHLPA members realize there's no other market for them to make the type of money they're turning down. There's no second-division team in Sweden willing to pay the Joe Vitale's of the NHL nearly a million per season plus perks. They would then end up with a worse deal than whatever the current proposal is.
I really don't see how missing the season helps the NHLPA at all in any circumstance.
It's the players who should be more afraid, and just my opinion, probably are.
It's an old argument, but the owners will just go back to running their other ventures, and the players can go find work in Switzerland.
I get the sense many of the players are pissed off by the league's actions and when you are pissed, you don't always think clearly. This is twice now that the league tried to undermine Fehr, only to have it blow up in their face. These actions are unifying the PA even more... Jesus, is the league that stupid that they don't get it? You want a deal? Then start by stopping with the propaganda that is leading to all of this hatred and mistrust.
I believe Fehr is doing what's best for the players, but I am not gullible enough to think I am 100% right. That uncertainty is what worries me and it has to be worrying the owners. The Rags, Leafs, Habs, Flyers, etc stand to lose a ******** of money if there is no season.
