What am I missing, wasn't the players latest offer (54 to 52) a pretty significant move from their previous stance? No, it isn't the 25 percent windfall the owners are demanding, but it seems the first offer from either side that had a significant concession.
Am I misreading it somehow?
EDIT: Apparently, it was based on certain (optimistic) revenue projections, etc. Oh well.
I don't blame Fehr--he's there to do a job, and the players' knew what they were buying--but he's the worst possible person to have in the position to get a deal. Between his ego and Bettman's ego, I doubt there's much room at the table for anyone else anyway...
Well it is only for 5 year! This is why people are so pissed off.... The owners are being hypocrites, arguing for max 5 year deals, and now Carlson just signed for 6. Also Leonis(spelling) is one of the main negotiators for the NHL. It all seems very strange(******** more like it)
Oh I believe that's a little much for Lehtonen, but probably have to pay a little extra to keep him in Dallas.
NHLPA should get 49% the NHL owners should get 51%
I understand and the owners should understand you cant expect the NHLPA to cut its shares by 7% or more immediately but I do believe the players do not deserve a majority of the HRR.
Their should be a hard cap to promote an even level playing field for all teams (big markets or small). It could increase or decrease but nothing to major. No reason why 1 year the cap space should go up nearly 7 million. Also no reason why the new CBA should promote a 10 million drop when half the league is over. A hard cap should be fair to promote good management and a spread of talent for more competitive games for fans to watch and players to be part of.
Their should be restrictions on length of contracts. Teams are not starting to sign players for long long long terms to decrease the cap hit. So in reality its just a big loop hole in the cap space.
40+ no longer than 2 years
39-35 no longer than 4 years
35-31 no longer than 5 years
27-31 no longer than 7 years
24-27 no longer than 8 years
21-24 no longer than 11 years
19-21 no longer than 5 years
under 19 MAX 3 years, after 2 you can renegotiate
^^^ was done in 5 minutes... years and age are open to discussion but understand my point that years should be restricted due to loop holes in cap space. It should force youngsters to learn maturity and work for a good contract, allow insurance for young players with good length and pay and allow prime players to get great contracts but also limit teams from signing long contracts for players out of their prime. Nothing to restricted but something... Drafted Rookies are allowed more money than rookie FA signings and depending on where your drafted allows you more room to gain more money in a contract.
This is what I believe should be fair and right for the players and the league.
dont worry when there is a lockout next season there will be a even bigger increase in ticket prices to cover the costs of lost money.
I do remember tho when Fehr was in charge of the MLBPA they once went to zlmost zero hour before a strike/lockout. It was after 1994 I think. But I do remember it because there was a nationally telivised game when the news broke that there was an agreement.