HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > General Hockey Discussion > The Business of Hockey
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
The Business of Hockey Discuss the financial and business aspects of the NHL. Topics may include the CBA, work stoppages, broadcast contracts, franchise sales, expansion and relocation, and NHL revenues.

tsn reports: cap on the table from both sides

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old
02-15-2005, 05:57 AM
  #26
shadoz19
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,769
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2
$46m hard cap
$1 for $1ish sliding scale starting around $36m
Loss of picks starting around $40m

I think it could work for just about everyone.

luxury tax money for weaker clubs
extra spending space for the richer/successful clubs

The pick penalty counter balances payroll advantage.

No linkage keeps the players happy.
I'd be shocked if either side put that one in there.

shadoz19 is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:01 AM
  #27
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnie
Exactly how does the NHLPA offer do anything? The $52 milion is far higher than any team's payroll would be without a cap affter the 24% payroll drop. In other words, it is a thinly disguised version of the the NHLPA's previous offer just like the trigger offer was a thinly disguised version of the NHL's original offer.

The NHLPA knows that revernues are going down, so they put up a salary cap that will never affect anyone. It's completely bogus.
One side comes in high and the other side comes in low.They meet somewhere in the middle.Would you prefer the NHL gets nuked over "philosophical differences"?

The big revenue teams in big markets will not see their revenue decrease.They will have to share some of their revenue with the lower revenue teams to help them reach the salary floor

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:10 AM
  #28
Bill_Meltzer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 472
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudcrutch79
The NHLPA didn't make their offer of cap until after the NHL offered to drop linkage. Obviously, there's a lot we don't know, but from everything in the public, you can't say that the NHLPA offered to talk cap first-all indications are the other way.
Even the NHLPA, in its press release, said the league dropped linkage first, offering a $40 M per team cap, and then the PA countered with its $52 M cap.

There are two different ways you could interpret the NHLPA's press release. Read between the lines one way (with its absence of the standard "no talks scheduled" statement and saying "major steps taken by both sides"), it would suggest they feel a deal is negotiable today.

Read the other way, it could be a way to address divisiveness in the rank-and-file and do a little PR spin, saying they made "an unprecedented move" in offering a cap, but it was rejected by the league (translation: we did what we could, the NHL decided it wasn't good enough).

I think the PA's $52 M no-linkage cap is too high and the league's $40 M no-linkage cap is too low. That ought to be a gap that be bridged but my feeling is that the talks ended last night because both sides moved very little, if at all, from their offers, so the NHL rejected the PA offer as-is.

I have no idea what the chances are of avoiding cancellation tomorrow but I think there's reason for optimism that there will be a 2005-2006 season that starts on time.

Bill_Meltzer is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:14 AM
  #29
me2
Seahawks 43
 
me2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Broncos 8
Country: Wallis & Futuna
Posts: 20,554
vCash: 1000
Quote:
Originally Posted by mudcrutch79
The NHLPA didn't make their offer of cap until after the NHL offered to drop linkage. Obviously, there's a lot we don't know, but from everything in the public, you can't say that the NHLPA offered to talk cap first-all indications are the other way.
If this linkage free cap was brought up by the players in September IMHO we'd have had close to a full season. Without the lockout damage the NHL clubs would have had a good idea of their income and and been happier to go along without linkage.

I believe a big part of the reason is the players have caved as far as they have is they believe it will take the league quite a few years to get back to the stage it was last season. Hence the lack of linkage, they don't want any part of the damage from the lockout.

Still the NHL will take the cap however they get it.

me2 is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:23 AM
  #30
McDonald19
Hampus
 
McDonald19's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: California
Country: United States
Posts: 17,404
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnie
Exactly how does the NHLPA offer do anything? The $52 milion is far higher than any team's payroll would be without a cap affter the 24% payroll drop. In other words, it is a thinly disguised version of the the NHLPA's previous offer just like the trigger offer was a thinly disguised version of the NHL's original offer.

The NHLPA knows that revernues are going down, so they put up a salary cap that will never affect anyone. It's completely bogus.
Don't be so cynical.

It's not going to be that hard to bridge the gap between the 52 million cap offer and the 40 million cap offer.

Be optimistic that they are going to sit down and get it done today.

McDonald19 is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:27 AM
  #31
RangerBoy
#freejtmiller
 
RangerBoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Country: United States
Posts: 32,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by me2
If this linkage free cap was brought up by the players in September IMHO we'd have had close to a full season. Without the lockout damage the NHL clubs would have had a good idea of their income and and been happier to go along without linkage.

I believe a big part of the reason is the players have caved as far as they have is they believe it will take the league quite a few years to get back to the stage it was last season. Hence the lack of linkage, they don't want any part of the damage from the lockout.

Still the NHL will take the cap however they get it.
Still the big market teams will not be adversely affected by the lockout.The big market fans will come back.The $50-70 million payrolls will be gone.Bettman achieves his cost certainty right there since the big market teams drive up the prices

RangerBoy is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:29 AM
  #32
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnie
Exactly how does the NHLPA offer do anything? The $52 milion is far higher than any team's payroll would be without a cap affter the 24% payroll drop. In other words, it is a thinly disguised version of the the NHLPA's previous offer just like the trigger offer was a thinly disguised version of the NHL's original offer.

The NHLPA knows that revernues are going down, so they put up a salary cap that will never affect anyone. It's completely bogus.
I don´t know all the details, but its a hardcap at 52m and a 24% rollback on salarys. That will stop teams like the Rangers for ever to go on a "crusade" and drive up the salaries. It is supposed to have aggressive tax thresholds and tax rates on team payrolls. I don´t know where the taxes kick in, but lets say there are a dollar for a dollar at 42-46m$. That would mean that if a team where in the low 40´s siging a player to a 3 million contract it would cost them 6 million. This is dramaticly gooing to keep the salarys down.

The only time this is gooing to be a "disguised" version of the previous offers are next year when the teams still will suffer from the lockout. However in 4-5 years this is gooing to be workable for all org. If there is a team that survived under the old system there is no way that team couldn´t be success full with this offer. No way. And remember these negotiations isn´t about the 3-4 lowest revenue teams...

Its just IMO not proportional to loose 1.5-2 years of hockey and the harm that will do for the game compared with what Bettman have to gain on not taking this offer and cancelling the season. This guy(bettman) has shown tremendous account of bad judgement before and what he is dooing right now just seems insane to me...


Last edited by Ola: 02-15-2005 at 06:35 AM.
Ola is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:30 AM
  #33
Brewleaguer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Scotland
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason MacIsaac
Bettman shouldn't be shot. I wouldn't accept 46 million if I were him. 42 or nothing.
INCREDIBLE, it just goes to show you the pro Bettman clan only wants 40 mil cap or nothing.
The PA offers a cap, something they said they would never do, but to get back to playing they offer it and it's turned down.
So now Pro Buttman loves, still think the players are greedy?

Brewleaguer is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:33 AM
  #34
Pepper
Registered User
 
Pepper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 14,483
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnie
That's ridiculous. The average team payroll last year was less than $46 million. A cap that high, by itself, accomplishes nothing.
<sigh>

Of course it accomplishes, it cuts Detroit's & Rangers' budget nearly in half. It totally destroys Leafs', Rangers', Detroit's, Stars', Avs', Philly's etc. ability to poach all the talent in the league from the small teams. It greatly lowers average salary which means instant advantages to all teams.

Saying it doesn't accomplish anything is simply ignorant.

Pepper is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:34 AM
  #35
Ola
Registered User
 
Ola's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sweden
Country: Sweden
Posts: 18,364
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brewleaguer
INCREDIBLE, it just goes to show you the pro Bettman clan only wants 40 mil cap or nothing.
The PA offers a cap, something they said they would never do, but to get back to playing they offer it and it's turned down.
So now Pro Buttman loves, still think the players are greedy?
There is just no credibility left for all the Bettman lovers, not one ounce if they keep supporting him after this.

Ola is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:42 AM
  #36
SuperNintendoChalmrs
Registered User
 
SuperNintendoChalmrs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,560
vCash: 500
Who out there knows any actual details of a possible deal?

The NHLPA says 52 million.....is there going to be a luxury tax of some sort prior to that amount?

How many of the 30 NHL teams had a 50 million dollar salary structure on their teams last year?

SuperNintendoChalmrs is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:42 AM
  #37
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,565
vCash: 500
from tsn..

Quote:
The union counter-offered with the $52-million team-by-team salary cap. The players' proposal also featured more aggressive payroll tax thresholds and tax rates on team payrolls.
Quote:
The union's offer also included the 24 per cent salary rollback on all existing contracts.


I think the PA has moved a ton. Not only are they willing to accept a cap, but a luxury tax on top of that. Plus they still have their roll back in effect.

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:44 AM
  #38
Brewleaguer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Scotland
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen
i see the major sticking point now being that the pa wants a team by team cap, i assume somehow oriented around the big market teams being allowed to spend more. im sure the league wants to minimize that as much as possible. hate to see this all hinge on that. i bet thats why they are still in disagreement when so close.
Like I have said a few times on these boards that it's a three way battle. Bettmans 8 man front, the PA and the top NHL team owners.
COME on Buttman you have your cap, lets get busy and play!!!!!!!

Brewleaguer is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:44 AM
  #39
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperNintendoChalmrs
Who out there knows any actual details of a possible deal?

The NHLPA says 52 million.....is there going to be a luxury tax of some sort prior to that amount?

How many of the 30 NHL teams had a 50 million dollar salary structure on their teams last year?

8 teams had a payroll over 52 million dollars last year. And yes there is gonna be a luxury tax on top of that 52 million dollar cap.

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:45 AM
  #40
Pet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Töölö
Country: Finland
Posts: 7
vCash: 500
about caps amount, is it ment to be same several years or will it be rechecked every season ? haven't seen any info on that. Pepper has good point about
new ( after cap ) average team salary, it cuts more from top teams than brings to below average teams.


Last edited by Pet: 02-15-2005 at 06:51 AM.
Pet is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:47 AM
  #41
SuperNintendoChalmrs
Registered User
 
SuperNintendoChalmrs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,560
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by JWI19
8 teams had a payroll over 52 million dollars last year. And yes there is gonna be a luxury tax on top of that 52 million dollar cap.
Then the cap is probably too high. If somebody has a payroll list of last season.....where do the 15 lowest salaried teams and the 15 highest teams.....what is the middle salary level.....Somewhere in the low 40s I would think.

SuperNintendoChalmrs is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:49 AM
  #42
Vic Rattlehead*
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: St-Hubert, Quebec
Country: Canada
Posts: 40,790
vCash: 500
52 million is too high. The NHL has the NHLPA where they want them. The PA has already conceded playing under a cap. The NHL will get their way by the end of the day.

Vic Rattlehead* is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:50 AM
  #43
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
 
Motown Beatdown's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Country: United States
Posts: 8,565
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperNintendoChalmrs
Then the cap is probably too high. If somebody has a payroll list of last season.....where do the 15 lowest salaried teams and the 15 highest teams.....what is the middle salary level.....Somewhere in the low 40s I would think.

They are so close now, one wants 52 one wants 40. SPLIT THE DIFFERENCE AND GET IT DONE. 46 million dollar cap, with a tax starting over 40 million.

Motown Beatdown is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:50 AM
  #44
Jocus
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 78
vCash: 500
This is too little too late, but it'll be a great starting point in September when they start over.

You have something like 250 points in an average CBA. Probably half of them are already agreed upon, but you'd still have a hundred or so different points to negotiate. This can not be done in a day, it would require a week at a minimum to come to an agreement.

After that, there's travel for all the players overseas, and half the players are free agents, you'd have to give teams a week to sign players and get organised. After that, a week of training camp and a week of exhibition games. Thats 4 weeks. I'd rather see the season cancelled then start in mid March, it's a waste of time and it'll be a joke.

Also, the players might have given in on the salary cap, but they are asking for more somewhere else. Negotiations is a game of give and take. They gave the cap, they will want something in return. So they are probably not much closer todau then they were last week,

Jocus is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:51 AM
  #45
Seachd
Registered User
 
Seachd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: The Fail
Posts: 13,938
vCash: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brewleaguer
INCREDIBLE, it just goes to show you the pro Bettman clan only wants 40 mil cap or nothing.
The PA offers a cap, something they said they would never do, but to get back to playing they offer it and it's turned down.
So now Pro Buttman loves, still think the players are greedy?
Huh? The owners take linkage off the table, something they said they'd never do, and the players still can't make a good enough offer.

Anything you can say about one side can be said about the other.

Seachd is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:54 AM
  #46
Brewleaguer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Scotland
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ola
There is just no credibility left for all the Bettman lovers, not one ounce if they keep supporting him after this.
Yeah and if this thing doesn't happen the "greedy" ball will now be in Bettmans court.

Brewleaguer is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:54 AM
  #47
tantalum
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Missouri
Posts: 10,880
vCash: 500
The difference between a $40 mil cap and a $52 mil cap is NOT simply $12 mil, it's over a third of a billion dollars....$360,000,000. It's 17% of reported leaguewide revenues. That is a HUGE difference yet. Especially with there being unknown business damage caused by the lockout. THe greedy puck is not in the owners end of the ice yet....it's still with the players.

That said it is MAJOR progress. If the season is saved than I can see the owners dropping linkage...why? Because the revenues could very well bounce back before the end of the 05-06 season. After that the revenues increase while the cap stays the same...in that case for the last years of the deal the owners laugh their way to the bank. I believe that no linkage is truly only a win for the players after the season gets cancelled and major harm is done to the business. With a shortened season and a lengthy CBA deal the players are going to wish they had linkage by that final year IMO.

What is interesting is the report that the tax thresholds and tax rate were also made significantly tougher...seems to me that the NHLPA brought forth that soft cap-tax-hard cap system. It's probably workable depending on the numbers: bring the cap down to $50 mil and dollar for dollar tax between 40 and 50 mil that counts towrad the cap (i.e. essentially a $45 mil cap).

The PA has bent significantly...they need to bend a bit more on the cap issue while reaping some free agency awards.

My guess is that the PA is talking to the executive trying to determine if they can split the difference while the league does the same with the governors. They then get back together this afternoon and see if it can be hammered out. 90% of the CBA will not change from the last one making it easy to put to paper quite quickly.

There is still a huge gulf between the sides money wise but atleast now it is simply money and not system issues. Kudos to the players for atleast getting over the cap is evil BS.

tantalum is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:54 AM
  #48
Icey
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: United States
Posts: 591
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleedgreen
i see the major sticking point now being that the pa wants a team by team cap, i assume somehow oriented around the big market teams being allowed to spend more. im sure the league wants to minimize that as much as possible. hate to see this all hinge on that. i bet thats why they are still in disagreement when so close.
The latest NHL proposal was a team by team cap. If they have a team by team cap what incentive does a team like Toronto or Philadelphia have to increase their revenues or even continue at the rate it has when a team like Phoenix can produce no revenue but yet still have the same cap. You have to throw the big market teams a bone, after all 6 teams produce 85% of the revenue for the league.

Icey is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 06:59 AM
  #49
SuperNintendoChalmrs
Registered User
 
SuperNintendoChalmrs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Country: United States
Posts: 3,560
vCash: 500
From USA Today


The 15th highest salaried team last year was Ottawa at 39.59 million....The 16th was Phoenix at 39.249 million.

16 teams were under 40 million dollars in payroll last year.

SuperNintendoChalmrs is offline  
Old
02-15-2005, 07:00 AM
  #50
Brewleaguer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Country: Scotland
Posts: 260
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seachd
Huh? The owners take linkage off the table, something they said they'd never do, and the players still can't make a good enough offer.

Anything you can say about one side can be said about the other.
And the players counter with taking "No cap talk" off the table and Bettmans clan turns it down, The greed ball is back in Bettmans court.
Thats one hell of a good offer. The PA is also looking out for the top team owners who know that Bettmans 40-42 cap would distroy their team.

Brewleaguer is offline  
Closed Thread

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 04:20 AM.

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

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2015 All Rights Reserved.