HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > NHL Western Conference > Central Division > Colorado Avalanche
Notices

SI: NHLPA seeks cooperation in CBA talks

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
08-16-2012, 04:10 AM
  #1
Ivan13
Avs/Habs fan
 
Ivan13's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Zagreb
Country: Croatia
Posts: 13,485
vCash: 50
SI: NHLPA seeks cooperation in CBA talks

I tought that this whole mess about the new CBA deserves a thread on our boards.

SI article about the ongoing CBA negotiations:

Quote:
Monday’s surprising proposal by the NHLPA – which, among other things, agreed to temporary salary reductions and generally maintaining the hard salary cap — presents a formidable challenge to the owners, who have pledged to have at least some sort of preliminary response on Wednesday.

This “alternative view,” as Don Fehr called it, of how the players would solve the NHL’s revenue imbalance between the successful and struggling clubs also includes more comprehensive revenue sharing than the league currently employs, something the wealthiest NHL clubs have largely resisted. Ken Warren of The Ottawa Citizen framed ownership’s dilemma in these terms on Wednesday morning when he tweeted, “Do richest NHL teams care more about their own teams or the NHL as a whole? That’s the answer we’re all waiting for.”
http://nhl-red-light.si.com/2012/08/...sct=nhl_t11_a0






Ivan13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 04:52 AM
  #2
Hennessy
Blank Space
 
Hennessy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Östersund, Sweden
Country: United States
Posts: 6,781
vCash: 1100
After what the league proposed, I expected the PA to submit something equally as loony. I was pleasantly surprised to see them come out like the only grown-ups at the table with their counteroffer. Shows that they're serious about the health of the league and willing to work for it.

I've never been afraid of a lockout this go-around - too soon since last time and everyone is doing too good to mess with things - but after the league made their initial demands I started to get a little nervous. That disappeared when the PA responded.

Hennessy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 08:24 AM
  #3
SuperTheGreat
Swim Instructor
 
SuperTheGreat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Colorado
Country: United States
Posts: 581
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hennessy View Post
After what the league proposed, I expected the PA to submit something equally as loony. I was pleasantly surprised to see them come out like the only grown-ups at the table with their counteroffer. Shows that they're serious about the health of the league and willing to work for it.

I've never been afraid of a lockout this go-around - too soon since last time and everyone is doing too good to mess with things - but after the league made their initial demands I started to get a little nervous. That disappeared when the PA responded.
I haven't really been nervous so far either, and for the same reasons, but Bettman's comments yesterday are what got me a little closer to nervousness. Anyone else???

SuperTheGreat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 08:52 AM
  #4
Freudian
Patty likes beef
 
Freudian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Country: Sweden
Posts: 28,906
vCash: 50
The players have been better at communicating their stance compared to the owners. I don't think the players offer is as much of a compromise as they let on, but if the perception is that they are the good guys here it's it works in their favor.

They are also pretty smart about trying to pit small markets against big markets but I'm not sure it'll work. The owners realize that working together, even if you have to sacrifice some things, is the most profitable thing in the long run.

Freudian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 09:27 AM
  #5
CB Joe
Registered User
 
CB Joe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,485
vCash: 496
They should hire an independent arbitrator to handle the financials (HRR and revenue sharing). Meanwhile the owners and players can discuss realignment, olympic participation, contract lengths, free-agency eligibility and all other non revenue related concerns.

CB Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 01:06 PM
  #6
Foppa2118
Registered User
 
Foppa2118's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: 22 Acacia Avenue
Country: United States
Posts: 18,684
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperTheGreat View Post
I haven't really been nervous so far either, and for the same reasons, but Bettman's comments yesterday are what got me a little closer to nervousness. Anyone else???
Bettman's attitude and comments this whole time have made me nervous. Unless it's all a front, and he'll cave at the last second, he's gonna sink this whole thing again with his smugness and hardline stance for the players to make all the concessions.

Foppa2118 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-16-2012, 02:42 PM
  #7
Jaymond Flurrie
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Espoo, Finland
Country: Finland
Posts: 2,036
vCash: 500
I think I'm not totally on either side on this. I think players should get money for promoting the product (ask people from street name you 10 persons from NHL, I bet at least 9, if not 10 of those named are players). I also think that owners are right that they need to get the lengths of contracts i.e. guaranteed money lowered. I really appreciate that players agree on the hard cap.

Jaymond Flurrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 09:56 AM
  #8
Drury_Sakic
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,331
vCash: 500
I really just don't get what is so hard about finding somewhere in the middle on most of the issues.

55% of Revenue goes to players, dropping by .5% each of the next 6 seasons to bottom out at 52%. (meeting in the middle on revenue % while allowing teams to slowly adjust their cap situation) Players can recoup all the way to the original 57% revenue IF all teams financials are in the black and all teams can pay out the rated % without going into the red. (the final % and the finanicals of each club would have to be looked at by some independent auditor) So each players contract is signed in at they say 52% revenue %, if the owners all made enough to pay out 54% and stay in the profit, each player would recieve a share of that extra 2% based on their contract. If after whatever revenue sharing happens even 1 team is in the red, no bonus for the players.

Players choice of 3 or 4 year Entry Level Contract, if they chose the 4 year deal they become a UFA at the current age/games played rate, if they chose the 3 year deal they become a UFA 1 year later. (players choose an earlier UFA date versus an extra year of entry level salary)

6 year contract limit for all UFAs who sign with teams other than their original drafting/rookie year team, 8 year limit if you sign with your drafting/rookie year team. (rewards teams that draft well with the ability to offer longer deals and gives an incentive for players to stay with their drafting club)

Teams can trade up to 4 million in cap space for draft picks, 1st Rounder buys you 3 mill, 2nd 2 mill, 3rd 1 mill, 4th 500k. Teams cannot trade draft picks for cap relief for consecutive seasons. Half of the cap hit aquired can be use to meet the floor. (making this a system to boost contenders at deadlines and not something they can use to simply live above the cap year after year)

Union vote choice to participate in any olympics. NHL must allot time in given season for players to participate.

Some sort of revenue sharing, not exactly at the level of the MLB, but something above where the NHL is at now. Also work out some sort of deal to lower/reduce the salary floor OR tie revenue sharing to the floor somehow so that the floor accounts in some way for the bottom end financial teams. (without knowing more details about each clubs actual financial state, hard to go into details)


Last edited by Drury_Sakic: 08-17-2012 at 10:04 AM.
Drury_Sakic is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 09:57 PM
  #9
Mant*
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 3,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drury_Sakic View Post
I really just don't get what is so hard about finding somewhere in the middle on most of the issues.
Easy... they're all really ****ing greedy.

Mant* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 10:08 PM
  #10
S E P H
@Krzysztof_WHL
 
S E P H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Avs Country!
Country: Poland
Posts: 4,323
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mant View Post
Easy... they're all really ****ing greedy.
You can say that with any human.

S E P H is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-17-2012, 11:48 PM
  #11
chet1926
Registered User
 
chet1926's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Denver
Country: United States
Posts: 3,920
vCash: 500
I think we are totally *******. I think the earliest we see any hockey is January due to the TV deal with NBC and the winter classic.

The owners are pompous ***** and have millions and sometimes even billions of dollars what do they care if they lose some "meaningless" games in the early part of the year. They won't want to miss out on the large chunk of money after Jan 1 but until then there is little to no incentive for the owners to work with the players.

On the other hand the reason you saw a decent proposal (not perfect, but at least credible offer) from the players is because the players have no power and really have a ton to lose if they miss out on half the seasons pay. They want to get a deal done so they can make money from October to January. But that being said Fehr has already said the players won't cave like last time. So if they aren't going to cave and the owners don't have a reason to cave either what do you have? A Stalemate... which could drag on until the owners near that Jan 1 deadline where they might have to give in a bit as to not lose all the money from the TV deal and winter classic.

I think its naive for any of us to think we see any hockey prior to Jan 1. Which really sucks because 1. I love hockey 2. its a big middle finger to the fans again 3. it will damage hockey to the point where only diehards will come back. You can keep having lockouts every 10 years and expect anyone except diehards to keep coming back.


Last edited by Frenchy: 08-18-2012 at 09:20 AM. Reason: dont go arround the works filter like you did .
chet1926 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 10:14 AM
  #12
ABasin
Viva "Our Structure"
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,672
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Foppa2118 View Post
Bettman's attitude and comments this whole time have made me nervous. Unless it's all a front, and he'll cave at the last second, he's gonna sink this whole thing again with his smugness and hardline stance for the players to make all the concessions.
In truth, I really don't have a problem with the owners wanting a 50/50 revenue split with the players. That "43% to the players" or whatever their first volley was, was stupid. But 50/50 sounds pretty reasonable to me. That's pretty much what the NFL and NBA recently did, no?

-AB

ABasin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 11:39 AM
  #13
AvsFanRCN
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Victoria, BC, Canada
Country: Canada
Posts: 946
vCash: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABasin View Post
In truth, I really don't have a problem with the owners wanting a 50/50 revenue split with the players. That "43% to the players" or whatever their first volley was, was stupid. But 50/50 sounds pretty reasonable to me. That's pretty much what the NFL and NBA recently did, no?

-AB
Yeah, I agree, 50/50 split is reasonable, and its eventually going to come down to that anyways considering the NFL and NBA are both like that. Though they can't just say 50/50 and call it a day, they have to make proposal after proposal beating each other down to it, its pointless bartering that is going to cost us part of the season.

AvsFanRCN is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 01:26 PM
  #14
freeboy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,185
vCash: 500
I agree with the comments about the fans gettingthe short end of this if the season does not start on time...
ITs sad and shows how out of touch these organizations are with the source of their funding...
My suggestion would be the reorganization of the league as per the plan last spring, with a shorter pre season and some creative way for everyone to make more money... shared advertaizing of everything media related etc....
No way will the fans in markets like Colorado tollerate shortened season imo(in my opinion) and will feel further disenfranchised resulting in fewer season tickets and poorer attendance..
OR
They can collectively wake up, compromise and seek win win alternatives and have the best season ever.. all comes down to maturity and leadership in both the players and owners respective camps...

freeboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 05:55 PM
  #15
Drizzt1
Registered User
 
Drizzt1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 359
vCash: 500
In my opinion, the NHL should almost go with the NHLPA's agreement in totally. I know that sounds strange, but it's a win, win.

If their plan DOESN'T work out, or is getting smashed apart during the process, Bettman can squarely point the finger at them, and draw the reigns, taking control at that point in time, and well into the future.

IF it works properly, and the owners get a fair shake of the coin, Bettman looks as though he is supportive, and a man who wants to make things work.

Simple and naive yeah, I know.

Drizzt1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
08-18-2012, 07:56 PM
  #16
NHL33*
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New York
Country: Antarctica
Posts: 7,873
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drizzt1 View Post
In my opinion, the NHL should almost go with the NHLPA's agreement in totally. I know that sounds strange, but it's a win, win.
No, it's not. The NHLPA's proposal conceded very little. Avoiding peripheral stuff like contractual length, what it boils down to is that the players will still earn the same amount of real dollars. In the next few years the players will forego some of the league growth to an extent, though still grow by 2% annually, but they are also leaving open an option to return to the current salary structure by the last year of the CBA. Not happening.

The NHL's proposal is a joke. The NHLPA's proposal is little better.

NHL33* is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:44 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.