BIG UPDATE! as of 1/27 NHL will make ANOTHER NEW proposal to the PA

[Dr Love]

these rumours don't make any sense whatsoever. the NHL will make a new proposal despite not making much progress from yesterday??? i doubt the NHL makes a new proposal anytime soon since it wouldn't help the process at all. i do believe that little progress was made.

That makes sense. When something isn't working, you try something new. Certainly plausable and realistic.

 

[FLYLine27*]

whereas Eklund is never right :lol

deal in principle. another swing and a miss!

 

[Dr Love]

Actually he has been right on a few things, but that has never been the point. The point is that some people feel the need to force their ideas and beliefs on others when they should just let it go and not read what they dont like.

Yeah, those of us who want people to make objective, self thought evaluations with their heads rather than gut reactions, we're all jerks and should just shut the hell up so the world can run better.

 

[ceber]

that's the season, i guess. i thought the time was behind us for proposals, and the two sides were trying to draft something together?

This isn't good news.

This is good news.

There must be a formal proposal before they can agree to it. This could easily be the "deal in principle" that's been rumored. Just because one side is preparing it (makes sense it would be the league, IMO) doesn't mean that meat of it was not worked out as a joint effort.

 

[Bruwinz37]

You clearly were taking a shot at me that I was implying that Sportsnet and 590 are correct and blogs are incorrect. Keep playing your games if it suits you. Sportsnet and 590's sources say one thing. Some bloggers with sources say something very different. A number of posters here are more willing to believe one over the other. Maybe people should take a step back and breathe.

And you were clearly taking yet another shot at people who enjoy reading Eklunds blog. Get over it dude, who cares?

All I was saying is that these guys have been wrong way more than they have been right too. Until they are reporting an outcome it is all just different levels of guesswork.

I think you have to take a step back and look at the big picture. Both Eklund and the mainstream could be reporting on two very similar things when it looks very different. A deal in principle has a lot of grey area. We will see when the real story comes out, but until then you people that feel the need to bring up Eklund's name every time you hear a rumor should just chill out.

 

[bennysflyers16]

And you were clearly taking yet another shot at people who enjoy reading Eklunds blog. Get over it dude, who cares?

All I was saying is that these guys have been wrong way more than they have been right too. Until they are reporting an outcome it is all just different levels of guesswork.

I think you have to take a step back and look at the big picture. Both Eklund and the mainstream could be reporting on two very similar things when it looks very different. A deal in principle has a lot of grey area. We will see when the real story comes out, but until then you people that feel the need to bring up Eklund's name every time you hear a rumor should just chill out.

DITTO !

 

[Bruwinz37]

Yeah, those of us who want people to make objective, self thought evaluations with their heads rather than gut reactions, we're all jerks and should just shut the hell up so the world can run better.

No, you should just stop hijacking threads with your negativity when there are clearly people want to read it and discuss it. You have a pre-determined mindset whenever you read Eklund. Why not just skip it and let the people who want to *discuss* it do so without pissing on them?

 

[Benji Frank]

Settle down, There has to be some sort of proposal sooner or later. Do you think they will agree with nothing on paper. They have discussed, now the Nhl writes a proposal on what was negotiated, Players sign, and I am one happy dude. Keep your fingers crossed and the poitive attitudes, the end is near, good or bad.

My thoughts exactly. There's been alot of give and take over the last couple of weeks. Sooner or later it's gotta become formal. The owners formalized it and will meet in New York to ensure that's what the PA understood was agreed to ... hopefully they then cross the t's and dot the i's and open the doors.

That to me, sounds like they've worked out an agreement in principle.......

Of course, I may have missed the boat entirely on this one.....

 

[Owen Wilson]

an unnamed source said 24% rollbacks, 40 million soft cap, 50 million hard cap (1 for 1 luxury tax between 40-50 million).

 

[funkb15*]

As much as i would like to look at this as good news im still skeptical. Who knows maybe the PA will just turn it down like all the others. I mean all these players sayign they would never play under cap, maybe that isn't a PR. I say let players do what they want. Whoever wants to play under cap go play those that dont go F yourserlf!!!

 

[Dr Love]

And you were clearly taking yet another shot at people who enjoy reading Eklunds blog. Get over it dude, who cares?

No, I wasn't. I was making light of the sources that both sides, yes namely the bloggers, use. Your blinders prevent you from realizing that.

All I was saying is that these guys have been wrong way more than they have been right too. Until they are reporting an outcome it is all just different levels of guesswork.

I completely agree. And because it's guesswork, I won't believe any of it.

I think you have to take a step back and look at the big picture. Both Eklund and the mainstream could be reporting on two very similar things when it looks very different. A deal in principle has a lot of grey area. We will see when the real story comes out, but until then you people that feel the need to bring up Eklund's name every time you hear a rumor should just chill out.

I have never brought up his name in this thread. You have.

A deal in principle does have a lot of grey area. The grey area of a deal in principle never includes one side bringing a new proposal to the other. It's pretty basic, bringing a new proposal to the table means that the key points were not agreed on, and one side is altering their stance on key points and offering that to the other side. A deal in principle already has keys point agreed upon, there is no need for one side to bring a new proposal to the table.

So, circling back to what I said, clearly Sportsnet/590 and bloggers have different sources. Choose to believe what you will, but keep in mind that two (well, three) different avenues of information are hearing opposite things.

 

[Dr Love]

No, you should just stop hijacking threads with your negativity when there are clearly people want to read it and discuss it. You have a pre-determined mindset whenever you read Eklund. Why not just skip it and let the people who want to *discuss* it do so without pissing on them?

I made one comment, you jumped down my throat on it and have been on me since. If I'm hijacking this thread, you are too, and more so.

 

[bennysflyers16]

A deal in principle does have a lot of grey area. The grey area of a deal in principle never includes one side bringing a new proposal to the other. It's pretty basic, bringing a new proposal to the table means that the key points were not agreed on, and one side is altering their stance on key points and offering that to the other side. A deal in principle already has keys point agreed upon, there is no need for one side to bring a new proposal to the table.


I tend to disagree a bit. Let's say most things were agreed upon, I think the league would still call it a proposal, because if they called it a contract, we would all be peeing our pants with excitement, when the chance of it being rejected is still possible.

 

[Dr Love]

I tend to disagree a bit. Let's say most things were agreed upon, I think the league would still call it a proposal, because if they called it a contract, we would all be peeing our pants with excitement, when the chance of it being rejected is still possible.

Yes, but saying they are bringing a new proposal is just as strong as saying that they are bringing a contract, it's in the negative though. A new proposal means something different--not working on what they were yesterday. Let's assume for a minute that they did agree in principle on a bunch of things yesterday. Cleaning up the grey area from that isn't bringing a new proposal, it's working on what they worked on yesterday. If that's what they are doing, but it's being reported as 'a new proposal,' then that's god awful reporting. But given that when in the past the two sides resumed talks on the same proposals that they had seen the meeting before were reported as 'continuing/resuming talks,' it's completely inconsistent--alarmingly so--with the way things have been reported up to today. Which leads me to believe that this report--as unreliable as it may be--is something totally different that what we were hearing yesterday, as unreliable as that may also be.

 

[Egil]

The NHLPA screwed the NHL last time with an "agreement in principle", so I suspect the NHL is going to get a legalesed "proposal" on the table to be voted on by the players. THAT is the differense between an "agreement in principle" and a proposal.

Remember, the final agreement WILL be a contract (which means you need a proposal), and not a 1 page agreement in principle.

IF they have an agreement on

A) Salary Cap level
B) Luxury Tax levels
C) Rollback amount (if any)

then, one side needs to send the other a full blown proposal of everything else, which then gets talked and modified over a day, gets rejigged that night, and is then voted on by both sides.

We will see, but I certainly see the end of either the lockout or the season in the next 7 days.

 

[ceber]

A deal in principle already has keys point agreed upon, there is no need for one side to bring a new proposal to the table.

What do they sign if there is no formal proposal? I think maybe the word "new" is tripping some people up. It's new because it's different from the last formal proposal. Doesn't mean it's different from what was discussed in the most recent meetings.

 

[tantalum]

We'll see but all media outlets have reported similar things in the past (no proposal or a proposal) and nothing has come of those. Anyways, I think the NHL could be tabling a new proposal around this sort of hybrid system that seems to be as big a compromise the players may get in terms of framework. So are they close? Who knows. i would presume that the NHL will table an offer that takes into account the NHLPA concerns in everything except the system. I think the NHLPA has invited Hotchkiss to the table and got the same lines as Bettman gave them and now I believe NJ Lou has probably just repeated the same concerns. Make no mistake, while NJ Lou is very well respected everything I've ever read from him or heard from him is that he is very much a Hawk when it comes to cost certainty. Two guys well respected by the NHLPA in Hotchkiss and NJ Lou with the same story as Bettman. No dissent at all through the whole thing from any of the owners...small market or big. They are serious. Has the PA grasped this? I seriously doubt it. I think talks will break down by tomorrow afternoon...if they were at all close I don't see short meetings but extended round the clock ones.

 

[Munchausen]

IMO, this means the talks they had Wed. had some meaning to it. NHL went back to NY, conference call to owners, reviewed what when on in mtg, formulated a new proposal. This can't be anyting but progress....

Don't want to get overly cynical, but it could still be PR. If they indeed made very little progress, which might also not be true, then I'll say it's probably in big part just that. The owners can't flinch at this point, it would be ridiculous, they hold all the cards. Unless the players have suddenly agreed to a cap, I can't see a conlcusion here.

 

[Dr Love]

What do they sign if there is no formal proposal? I think maybe the word "new" is tripping some people up.

You can verbally agree to something.

 

[bennysflyers16]

Yes, but saying they are bringing a new proposal is just as strong as saying that they are bringing a contract, it's in the negative though. A new proposal means something different--not working on what they were yesterday. Let's assume for a minute that they did agree in principle on a bunch of things yesterday. Cleaning up the grey area from that isn't bringing a new proposal, it's working on what they worked on yesterday. If that's what they are doing, but it's being reported as 'a new proposal,' then that's god awful reporting. But given that when in the past the two sides resumed talks on the same proposals that they had seen the meeting before were reported as 'continuing/resuming talks,' it's completely inconsistent--alarmingly so--with the way things have been reported up to today. Which leads me to believe that this report--as unreliable as it may be--is something totally different that what we were hearing yesterday, as unreliable as that may also be.

You could be bang on, I could be, Eklund could be , TSN, could be, that is the thing, anyone here could guess what is going to happen, that is why we need this to end, I have year end work here to complete, but that is on the backburner until we get this CBA figured out.

 

[NJD Jester]

While I keep my fingers crossed...

Here's the deal on Eklund -- he's most likely someone who is getting information from a source. Now, who that source it, who knows? But perhaps being that this is a blogger and not, say, Kevin Paul Dupont, his crap detector isn't quite as effective in figuring out the B.S. from the truth. Plus, he seems to print every shred of information sent his way (if he's not making it all up, which I don't buy that he is).

I think the people who have a beef with this guy have one because they expect what he writes to have some facual basis, when in fact he's the Matt Drudge of the NHL. (And Eks, if you're reading this and steal that last line as your slogan, I want some -- ahem -- "cost certainty" headed back my way.)

 

[Son of Steinbrenner]

A new proposal can be good news not bad news. Although i tend to think its going to be rejected outright.

 

[ceber]

You can verbally agree to something.

Ok, then after you verbally agree, someone needs to draft up a complete proposal that can be signed. Keep in mind, the only "source" I've seen that talked at all about new "agreements" has been Eklund. Haven't all the media outlets just reported meetings? Forget about Eklund for a bit. If you ignore his stuff this sounds like very good news to me.

 

[Egil]

You can verbally agree to something.

You can indeed, which is what occured in 1994. However, the players behaviour in 94 has screwed the pooch on this occuring this time. In 1994, the lockout was lifted, the players returned, and still, their was no signed CBA. So the players managed to get a bunch of "fine print" into the deal, and the owners (having already called the players back), felt compelled to accept it, or risk re-shutting down the league (imagine that, the lockout ends for a week, then resumes), which would have been a PR nightmare.

So, don't expect ANYTHING to happen until a fully legalezed CBA is in place (they would probably lift the lockout pending a vote by the membership, but it will be a formal document being voted upon). They arn't going to lift the lockout if their is only a verbal agreement on cap amounts, luxury tax amounts and the like.

BTW, I suspct the PA and NHL have 95% of the CBA agreed to, in legal format. This "new proposal" is quite possibly the cap, tax, rollback (along with other related matters such as arbitration and UFA age) tacked on to the rest of that agreed upon CBA.

 

[i am dave]

You can verbally agree to something.

You can't formally agree to something without something formally written. The proposal is a formality.