While we await the NHL and NHL Players’ Association to resume talks -- no scheduled sessions at this point -- here’s a little nugget I found interesting from the summer’s negotiating sessions: The league has proposed to the NHLPA to have free agency start July 10 instead of the long-standing July 1 opening day, two sources told ESPN.com.
Quote:
The league, though, in its current proposal, opted to push back the start of free agency to July 10; my guess being that clubs would feel things would be too compressed otherwise given that the entry draft is usually the third week of June.
My suspicion is that the NHLPA would likely not look kindly to moving the start of free agency 10 days into July. Shortening the window for any of its free-agent members to find work isn’t that appealing to the union. At least it hasn’t been in the past when the league has brought up the notion.
The NHL is claiming they lost $240M in the last 2 years.
Only way to solve that, really, is to increase revenue sharing (which the NHLPA is proposing) or to cut ties with about 4 teams (which will never happen).
Not sure how releasing that the NHL lost money is a great way to make their case here. Sure, a bigger split of the HRR will help the league, but so would increasing revenue sharing.
Either that, or I'm way off in my understanding of what's really going on in these debates.
$3.3B in revenue. Now the NHL is losing money. NHL is trying to win the PR battle. Or at least even it out. Bettman is getting blasted in every column and article written about the CBA. Now the NHL is losing money again.
If the NHL is losing so much money maybe they should fire Bettman for negotiating such a terrible CBA last time
Exactly. I wonder what the bettman apologists have to say about that. He spent the last 6 years patting himself on the back, spent the first year after the lockout high fiving himself. Maybe he should have figured out a fix that isn't based on taking money from the players.
They are going to lock out and settle on a deal that they could have signed today if bettman had any business sense and a manageable ego. I get the impression that fewer owners are on board with him this time. Hopefully they check him before he botches this deal.
The NHL is claiming they lost $240M in the last 2 years.
The nhl had creative accounting last lockout. The union has speculated that the nhl fudges the revenue numbers, but no pa head besides Fehr has requested proof. They found "independent" auditors to confirm the numbers before, no matter how ridiculous it was (the isles not reporting tv money, chicago omitting luxury boxes, msg leaving out concessions).
If the nhl is losing money, its because they are keeping multiple franchises afloat. The sale of Phoenix will be after the new cba, so that profit isn't going to be reflected in any accounting.
For all we know, the $240m loss is the war chest the league built up! over the last two years. Clearly they've planned for rollbacks with these outrageous contracts from traditionally frugal teams. They can save close to $24m each on those wild contracts with their targeted rollback.
Professional leagues use accounting tricks all the time to show "losses". Teams are able to write off depreciation of players, interest on loans, non-revenue generating costs (safety systems, security, etc.).
Professional leagues use accounting tricks all the time to show "losses". Teams are able to write off depreciation of players, interest on loans, non-revenue generating costs (safety systems, security, etc.).
“We actually don’t think that meeting on the other issues while the main economic issues remain uncertain would be particularly constructive or productive in terms of resolving those issues,” deputy commissioner Bill Daly wrote in an email to The Post. “A lot has already been done and most of those issues are teed up for resolution if the main issues can be addressed.”
The Post has learned the NHL proposals feature a “management rights” clause under which the league would assume unilateral power over issues including realignment, scheduling and playoff format.
The union refused to give its assent last year to the league’s proposed realignment plan for 2012-13 that would have created a four-conference (division) format, with attendant changes in scheduling and playoff structure.
Interesting comment by Daly. I am sure both sides know where each sides stands on certain issues and where they can find a middle ground. The main issue is the "core economics".
Brooks is back from vacation and is crying again about the NHL CBA.
The NHL owners are the bosses. Its their league.
Quote:
"I learned a big lesson: It's not a partnership. It's their league, and you are going to play when they want," he said.
Today, Guerin has hindsight and his experience serves as a giant caution to any player who thinks losing a game, much less an entire season, to this lockout is a good idea. His message is simple: Get what you can; start playing; you are not going to win what you think.
"It is not worth it to any of them to burn games or to burn an entire year. Burning a year was ridiculous," Guerin said. "It wasn't worth me giving up $9 million a year, or 82 games plus the playoffs, then having a crappy year and being bought out.... Guys in the NBA making $15 million or however much better think long and hard about this."
Quote:
"We could have waited two years and they would have waited us out -- I would have given an extra 2 percent back to play that year," Guerin said. "When you are in the heat of battle, and you are fired up, you don't think what they are doing is right. But it's not about what is right or wrong -- it's their league. It's theirs. I feel, personally, I didn't like guys giving up a year of their career, for what? A few less bucks? Guys are making more money now than they ever have."
The "partnership" exists between the owners. Its their job to help each other. Dolan,Snider,Jacobs,Molson,whoever owns the Leafs today,Wirtz. Those guys.
Quote:
The Players’ propose that they partner with the high-income teams to provide targeted funding for the distressed teams and owners. But the players won’t and shouldn’t have to do this alone. The higher income teams need to share far more with the lower revenue teams. The Players will do their part; will the owners?
I'm also a big fan of the league getting their "management rights" back.
__________________
"Trust me I'm an expert, I watched 13 rangers games on NHL center Ice this year through streaming." -Starburst
"I don't even understand what the point of all this arguing is. Are you guys hoping that the other side is going to have an epiphany and go 'Oh, OH! You're right, we ARE going to lose this series!'" -Crease
Yes, professional sports franchises can claim that as players age their value decreases. Baseball has been doing it for a long time. Other leagues have taken this principle on as well. For baseball, I believe the write down begins when a player is in their 30s.
Ha, I have to admit I got a good chuckle out of that one. I do budgeting for a living, so Im fairly familiar with accounting principles - and I'd love to know how human beings depreciate.
Ha, I have to admit I got a good chuckle out of that one. I do budgeting for a living, so Im fairly familiar with accounting principles - and I'd love to know how human beings depreciate.
I'm also a big fan of the league getting their "management rights" back.
I do not get this. The owners canceled a season, then got basically everything that they wanted. And now, comes the poverty cry? Owners gettign "management rights" back? Sports, unlike the corporate world, has a CBA. The management rights are limited to what is within the CBA. Bettman got a CBA that they owners demanded last time, when the players caved.
And now, we are right back at square one? Help us we are poor. But let's ignore the Wild of all teams spending $192 in two days or Nashville matching Webber's $120m deal. Management rights do not include signing contracts and then complaining about them. Nor, in a league with contracts and a CBA, does it include waiting 10 years to become a free agent.
And now, we are right back at square one? Help us we are poor. But let's ignore the Wild of all teams spending $192 in two days or Nashville matching Webber's $120m deal.
Their problem is that they have to sign deals like that if they want to be competitive.
