Everything I've read sounds like the players don't want to move a bit. This is all Fehr. He lost a baseball season and is in the process of losing a hockey season. It's his MO.
The owners seem to have moved much more to the middle than the players even seem to be considering.
That's not entirely true about the players, both sides have essentially agreed on 50:50, the issue now is honouring the existing player contracts and how much each side is willing to give there.
I'm pro player in this whole debate but I agree with you about Fehr, he's really starting to piss me off. I wish the NHLPA would start making proposals that gets them to 50:50 without the assumption of revenue growth. Because the longer this goes, the less revenue is going to grow which widens the gap between what the players and owners are offering.
That's not entirely true about the players, both sides have essentially agreed on 50:50, the issue now is honouring the existing player contracts and how much each side is willing to give there.
I'm pro player in this whole debate but I agree with you about Fehr, he's really starting to piss me off. I wish the NHLPA would start making proposals that gets them to 50:50 without the assumption of revenue growth. Because the longer this goes, the less revenue is going to grow which widens the gap between what the players and owners are offering.
The NHLPA has agreed to nothing of the sort. They have agreed to a fixed dollar amount with fixed raises every year. IF revenues grow at 5-7% their offer will approximate 50-50, but they have essentially just demanded a guaranteed raise and tried to explain it away playing math games. As pretty much everyone is assuming revenues are going down due to the lockout, that fixed number is going to be 60+.
If Fehr would submit a single linked proposal that allowed for 50:50 prior to the 7th year the owners would likely drop some or all of the contractual issues aside from the 5% variance/5 year contract (pick one) and we would have hockey.
EDIT - And on a selfish note extending the UFA age one year wouldn't be so bad for the Ducks, would it.......
The NHLPA has agreed to nothing of the sort. They have agreed to a fixed dollar amount with fixed raises every year. IF revenues grow at 5-7% their offer will approximate 50-50, but they have essentially just demanded a guaranteed raise and tried to explain it away playing math games. As pretty much everyone is assuming revenues are going down due to the lockout, that fixed number is going to be 60+.
If Fehr would submit a single linked proposal that allowed for 50:50 prior to the 7th year the owners would likely drop some or all of the contractual issues aside from the 5% variance/5 year contract (pick one) and we would have hockey.
EDIT - And on a selfish note extending the UFA age one year wouldn't be so bad for the Ducks, would it.......
They kind of did in their 3rd offer they made on the 18th of October. A 50:50 split but existing contracts had to be paid at face value. So it doesn't rely on revenue growth to get there, just contract expirations.
And yep, raising the UFA age one year helps us out a lot. Unfortunately I don't think that will be a part of the final agreement but I can hope.
They kind of did in their 3rd offer they made on the 18th of October. A 50:50 split but existing contracts had to be paid at face value. So it doesn't rely on revenue growth to get there, just contract expirations.
And yep, raising the UFA age one year helps us out a lot. Unfortunately I don't think that will be a part of the final agreement but I can hope.
The NHL ran the numbers on that proposal though and it came out to lose to 56% for the players. Hopefully they listen to Recchi.
But... but... but... They met all last week! Do you want them to collapse from exhaustion? They need at least two weeks off now.
I was 100% joking when I said this. Had no idea that Bettman actually wants to take two weeks off. I can't believe it's not a joke. It's like they are trying to parody their own BS.
Talk about strikes, Hostess company is shutting down and letting go of 18,500 workers because one of the two unions wouldn't agree to a new contract. Yup. One of the Unions agreed with Hostess, but the other didn't and all it did was shut down Hostess and 18,500 workers are now out of work just before the holidays. The unions were warned if they company didn't get back to work by Thursdays, then Hostess would have to shut down all their operations. Guess the union lost the bluff and all it did was cost 18,500 people their jobs. I thought making money was better than making no money?
Hmmmm... NHL vs PA union strike. The PA knows many teams are losing money year by year, but the PA won't budge on what they want. Fortunately, the strike should only last a year, at most. But if the Hostess example doesn't wring through the PA, then we're all stuck with low-res feed that sometimes comes in just to watch the Ads.
I used to love going to the old Long Beach Ice Dogs games. Maybe the NHL can just get the F out and we can get a dependable minor league team to support. I'm really tired of this **** every time there is a new CBA.
I was 100% joking when I said this. Had no idea that Bettman actually wants to take two weeks off. I can't believe it's not a joke. It's like they are trying to parody their own BS.
Haha I was just about to post how you predicted it hahaha, maybe this is some tactic used by Bettman, I don't know, but hopefully it brings a deal faster somehow :/
I used to love going to the old Long Beach Ice Dogs games. Maybe the NHL can just get the F out and we can get a dependable minor league team to support. I'm really tired of this **** every time there is a new CBA.
I still wear my blue and grey Ice Dogs jersey in roller hockey when we are darks!
