1) Posts that state simply "Bettman/Fehr/X-Player is an idiot" or other similar insults will be removed as spam. They add nothing to the discussion. Please refrain from making such posts.
2) Any information being posted from Twitter, TSN and other various sites regarding the CBA need to be posted with a link. We've been seeing a lot of copy and paste jobs without links.
If links are not included with a tweet or from information from another site such as TSN the post will be deleted and the possibly of the user being removed from the discussion.
The tweets must come from mainstream media sources, or known league affiliations.
Thanks for your cooperation!!
Note: To post links to the specific tweet, click on the time the tweet was sent. See picture below.
50/50
Make whole of $300M (about halfway between $182 and $390M)
8-Year Contracts with 25 percent variability
Pensions
8-Year CBA (With PA option at 6)
Cap Benefit Recapture -- Logical solution that penalizes teams if capdiving contract player retires too early
I really really don't see the NHL budging. If you are a player, you take a vote and get something started if you can't do it with Fehr'and Co. Then unite as players not superstars and drop the puck before it's too late.
Players are out to lunch. These guys clearly have no idea whats going on.
When you play for a niche sport where most hockey teams dont make any money at all, and when B and C tier NFL/NBA players are more well known than the star hockey players in the US; with that in mind, the current position of the NHLPA is completely and utterly ridiculous.
The NHL went all in, this was clearly the best possible deal...
It's clear that the hiring Donald Fehr will have set back the league by quite a bit. Too bad, it's the players that will lose the most money out of this in the end.
50/50
Make whole of $300M (about halfway between $182 and $390M)
8-Year Contracts with 25 percent variability
Pensions
8-Year CBA (With PA option at 6)
Cap Benefit Recapture -- Logical solution that penalizes teams if capdiving contract player retires too early
How can the NHL reject this?
The link doesn't work man. When was this offered by the way?
From the last thread but couldn't get it in before it locked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean
It won't be as good for the players because this time, term is capped. Term on deals was the major outlet for players to get higher monetary commitments than they otherwise would. That loophole would be closed to them this time around.
So why not try it out and re-negotiate if it's not fair? 90% of NHL contracts (mentioned earlier) never go longer than 5 years and most are 1-3 years anyway. If anything, I would think shorter contracts make players more money, because these are guaranteed contracts, and GMs are more willing to give big money for shorter term contracts than longer term contracts, which end up being more expensive (the whole insurance angle) and also less certainty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean
Next, it will be about 2nd contracts. If the player share "shrinks" to 50% from 57%, that means the total monies allocated to them will become 7% less of HRR. Which means that high profile, young players will have to negotiate that much harder to get a lucrative second contract, as an allocation of their piece of the pie. If they can't do it as well as they had before, then that's another indirect cost control the owners employ. The 5% variance is yet another.
OK, but do we know that for sure? Again, why not try it and see? If another Sidney Crosby comes into the league, GMs will find a way to get him money. Good players will still end up getting good money, even with this 7% rollback. Not sure what you mean by this 5% variance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bleach Clean
Basically, the loopholes that existed to provide the agents the necessary leverage to get their players top dollar will be closed. Closed for at least 7 years. Not good.
Hmm, so are we saying that we NEED loopholes to get the money to good players? Again, we don't know that players will stop getting top dollar until we try this CBA out. What we HAVE seen from past experience is the issue with cap circumvention with contract length - the intention of this is to stop that.
So hypothetical situations vs. situations that have actually happened and should be addressed.
One way Fehr's been able to save face is his insistence that the league's offers will keep getting better, and they have. One thing the NHL hasn't tried yet is to actually follow through on their "last, best offer". Not budge or even propose a slightly worse offer from now. Things could get worse or they could cause havoc within the PA.
Players need to ask themselves if they have any more friends across the table. When you have THE deal maker in Burkle scratching his head and getting a little heated, theres something a tad off with your approach in this thing.
One way Fehr's been able to save face is his insistence that the league's offers will keep getting better, and they have. One thing the NHL hasn't tried yet is to actually follow through on their "last, best offer". Not budge or even propose a slightly worse offer from now. Things could get worse or they could cause havoc within the PA.
Well, yes, the offers seem to get better, but ONLY if you are looking at a time vacuum or if this was Dec. 2011. But it's not - we're in Dec. 2012, we have already lost half the season and more games are being lost everyday. So time is the enemy of the players (as Hamrlik said).
50/50
Make whole of $300M (about halfway between $182 and $390M) 8-Year Contracts with 25 percent variability
Pensions
8-Year CBA (With PA option at 6)
Cap Benefit Recapture -- Logical solution that penalizes teams if capdiving contract player retires too early
How can the NHL reject this?
8 years is to much, I bet the 6/8 would be fine though
25% is to much, I bet 15% would be better
PA option at 6 years is the stupidest thing ever, no owner will pass that
One way Fehr's been able to save face is his insistence that the league's offers will keep getting better, and they have. One thing the NHL hasn't tried yet is to actually follow through on their "last, best offer". Not budge or even propose a slightly worse offer from now. Things could get worse or they could cause havoc within the PA.
Hmm why not offer them a deal from before with worse conditions. Then offer the last one again. Would show the PA that this is the best.
From the last thread but couldn't get it in before it locked.
So why not try it out and re-negotiate if it's not fair? 90% of NHL contracts (mentioned earlier) never go longer than 5 years and most are 1-3 years anyway. If anything, I would think shorter contracts make players more money, because these are guaranteed contracts, and GMs are more willing to give big money for shorter term contracts than longer term contracts, which end up being more expensive (the whole insurance angle) and also less certainty.
Long-term BDC contracts break the system. They allow rich teams to essentially create an uneven playing field that results in the budget teams having to overspend to compete, or be pushed aside.
You don't try something out with a 7 year commitment. You only do that if you are committed to the deal.
Quote:
OK, but do we know that for sure? Again, why not try it and see? If another Sidney Crosby comes into the league, GMs will find a way to get him money. Good players will still end up getting good money, even with this 7% rollback. Not sure what you mean by this 5% variance.
Good players will get their money, but not as much, and with not as much certainty. Guaranteed contracts + no term limit is pure gold.
With the great players setting the bar, it pulls everyone else up. That's why it behooves the NHLPA to make sure their great players get paid as much as they can.
Quote:
Hmm, so are we saying that we NEED loopholes to get the money to good players? Again, we don't know that players will stop getting top dollar until we try this CBA out. What we HAVE seen from past experience is the issue with cap circumvention with contract length - the intention of this is to stop that.
So hypothetical situations vs. situations that have actually happened and should be addressed.
I think you would need loopholes to get players the type of money they are making now, yes. There is a cap, so that covers the top end. If you push farther and start adding contract limits like max 7 years with a 5% variance, it really limits how an agent can squeeze the extra dollars out of your GM. It basically idiot proofs the system.
The loopholes in the old CBA allowed what appeared to be a clear win for the NHL end up a huge mistake. The players "won" that deal hands down because of the breaks in the system. Now the NHL is trying to plug up the damn. They know what loopholes to target and how to close them. So closing the top end with a cap, and the individual contracts with their own limits, leaves little in the way of the players to leverage their situation in order to maximize returns.
So... you sign a 23 year old to an 8 year contract.
Starts at $5M and grows to $6.25M over the course of time... What's wrong with 25 percent?
That's outrageous somehow?
That's what we're killing the season for?
Are you bloody kidding me?
I love how you act as if it's so one sided, ask the same question the other way.
So a 5 year max contract is soo bad the players can't sign the deal, especially considering 90% of them will never get see more then a 2-3 year contract anyhow?
I hate to say it, but I think I would like nothing more than for Bettman to straight up cancel the season tommorrow. Fehr shot this down cause he's holding out for more.
What a glorious pie in the face it'd be if the league said "Sorry, see you next September."
Now ya, go tell all the players why you shot down a fair proposal and now are focing them to miss an *ENTIRE SEASON* Donald. I'm sure it'll go over great
I love how you act as if it's so one sided, ask the same question the other way.
So a 5 year max contract is soo bad the players can't sign the deal, especially considering 90% of them will never get see more then a 2-3 year contract anyhow?
Dude, we were in a system where there were NO limits.
So now the PA is offering to drop from INFINITY to 8.
You want to cancel the season for that?
Last edited by slocal: 12-07-2012 at 04:57 AM.
Reason: chill out
I hate to say it, but I think I would like nothing more than for Bettman to straight up cancel the season tommorrow. Fehr shot this down cause he's holding out for more.
What a glorious pie in the face it'd be if the league said "Sorry, see you next September."
Now ya, go tell all the players why you shot down a fair proposal and now are focing them to miss an *ENTIRE SEASON* Donald. I'm sure it'll go over great
Why would you want Bettman to cancel the season over the difference of 5 year and 8 year contracts?
