@TSNBobMcKenzie: PA doesn't like 5 yr term limits on contracts or 10 yr term of CBA or fact that Make Whole bump to $300M is tied to accepting 10 yr CBA.
What's the problem with 5yr term limit? What is the % of players with 6y+ deals? This only benefits the stars. The majority of the players surely don't care.
As for the 10yr term of the CBA, it's the players that should be pushing for this as they are 'losing' assets in each new CBA. Strange that they are against this...
The owners seem to want to close the deal. It's now up to the players to decide how much more they want to lose over the 550M they already lost...
TSN Radio mentioning that Pension has now become a big issue. WTF? This isn't the 50's where guys are getting screwed over. If you're making over $1M/year and you can't max out your RRSP's on your own ... you probably deserve to retire in poverty.
The pa decided to send their hardliners and this is the mess we get
Can't wait until the owners get to the point of saying "See you guys in June...Have a nice holiday season"... Atleast we know now the players don't give a **** about the fans either...
If it wasn't brought up we likely wouldn't be anywhere near a solution right now. That's speculative I know, but players seemed to only accept a 50/50 split when that number came about. As for contract restrictions, I can't see the NHL coming off max length, and again, no doubt 5 years was chosen because that's how long a contract can be insured for. It was a major loophole in the CBA that needed to be plugged.
1) You're right. That's speculative. Just like I could speculate that they would have talked if something OTHER revision was proposed to the PA that seemed (somewhat) attractive (if tweaked.)
2) That's not a loophole, dude. It's a vice grip of a restriction... The league may get the split it wants. But it's not going to get all the contract BS too. They would be best off to just take the revenue split.
Well the man has over a quarter century of bad will built up with fans and players. Players throughout the entire league now don't trust him or care for him. Is it really all that shocking he's having a hard time getting the benefit of the doubt with some folks?
When you walk and talk like a duck for that long, it's hard to believe you're not a duck.
I read the same thing about the last one but guys like Chara and Savard tripped over each other to sign here within hours... I don't buy it.
TSN Radio mentioning that Pension has now become a big issue. WTF? This isn't the 50's where guys are getting screwed over. If you're making over $1M/year and you can't max out your RRSP's on your own ... you probably deserve to retire in poverty.
Exactly...if you make enough to live ten lifetimes and have nothing to show for it when you are 50, tough *******.
What's the problem with 5yr term limit? What is the % of players with 6y+ deals? This only benefits the stars. The majority of the players surely don't care.
You're both cutting down their share of HRR... AND you limit the versatility of contracts.
They don't like the ten years, because this CBA will be a huge win for the owners. The PA doesn't want its concessions to last a decade.
1) You're right. That's speculative. Just like I could speculate that they would have talked if something OTHER revision was proposed to the PA that seemed (somewhat) attractive (if tweaked.)
2) That's not a loophole, dude. It's a vice grip of a restriction... The league may get the split it wants. But it's not going to get all the contract BS too. They would be best off to just take the revenue split.
1) Honest question, you really believe the players would have ever gotten to a 50/50 split without make whole? They made it very clear from the start they wanted the owners to honor their current contracts right from the start. They're still balking aat 300 million make whole. Offering no make whole and demanding a 50/50 split right off the hop would have resulted in a lost season. It's speculative, but based largely on common sense.
2) They aren't getting all the contract BS they want. They've conceded on two major contracting points, UFA and Salary Arbitration
Can't wait until the owners get to the point of saying "See you guys in June...Have a nice holiday season"... Atleast we know now the players don't give a **** about the fans either...
1) Honest question, you really believe the players would have ever gotten to a 50/50 split without make whole? They made it very clear from the start they wanted the owners to honor their current contracts right from the start. They're still balking aat 300 million make whole. Offering no make whole and demanding a 50/50 split right off the hop would have resulted in a lost season. It's speculative, but based largely on common sense.
2) They aren't getting all the contract BS they want. They've conceded on two major contracting points, UFA and Salary Arbitration
1) I think so. I think you have to do something ELSE. But I think there's other ways to do it.
2) Status quo is NOT a concession. Just like status quo isn't the "players wanting more money." The more you can keep of what works, the better.
What needs to be changed is what DOESN'T work. Primarily? That's the revenue split.
Owners want a 10-year CBA and the players want a 5-year CBA. So, why don't they make it a 6-year deal with triggers that bump it up to 10-years.
Players think the limit on contract length will hurt fringe NHLers. So, why don't they accept that, in exchange for a modest bump in the league's minimum salary?
Owners want a 10-year CBA and the players want a 5-year CBA. So, why don't they make it a 6-year deal with triggers that bump it up to 10-years.
Players think the limit on contract length will hurt fringe NHLers. So, why don't they accept that, in exchange for a modest bump in the league's minimum salary?
1. from what someone posted eariler the owners offered 8 years with 2 option years so I agree with you this one seems like it should be easy to come to an agreement on.
2. I don't see how the players can argue this one. If they can't get insurance for a contract over 5 years then that should be the limit.
Owners want a 10-year CBA and the players want a 5-year CBA. So, why don't they make it a 6-year deal with triggers that bump it up to 10-years.
Players think the limit on contract length will hurt fringe NHLers. So, why don't they accept that, in exchange for a modest bump in the league's minimum salary?
