Both sides to blame!

Discussion in 'The Business of Hockey' started by ladybugblue, Feb 20, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ladybugblue

    ladybugblue Registered User

    Joined:
    May 5, 2004
    Messages:
    2,427
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Graduate student
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB
    Now maybe this needs to be in the rant thread but I am really angry. I have been a firm believer that either sides frameworks were workable to a certain degree. I believe the leagues needs a more even playing field and a cap of some sort.

    The NHLPA still has points on their side that I disagree with:
    1. Clause 7. If you don't want linkage then you can't have it if it is not only to your benefit.


    The NHL:
    1. Revenue sharing. I know they don't agree with each other on how to do this but they need to have significant revenue sharing.
    2. Salary arbitration. If they get a stiff cap they need to have two way arbitration. The NHL needs to have the players get something significant for having the cap.
    3. Free agency. I think the NHL should give the players lower free agency for the hard cap system.

    Now it doesn't seem like either side at this point is very close on these issues as well as the hard cap number. This is how I would like to see it work out.
    1. Hard cap at $42.5 million per year for six years. (represents 61% of revenues of last years revenues will be a higher perecentage next year or two)
    2. Significant revenue sharing to maintain a minimum of $25 to 30 million per year for each team.
    3. Lower free agency starting at age 28.
    4. Two way salary arbitration.

    Now I think this system should be eventually put into the NFL system once revenue hit about what they were last year. In the NFL they give the players about 65% of the revenues. Now the NFL has no guaranteed contracts so they percentage should be lower (or a higher percentage of agreed revenues (i.e., just gate receipts, National tv contracts)). I am at a point where neither side is "right" or will "win" once this is all said and done. Both sides have played with the fans but we are all losing. The only positive out of the meetings yesterdsy is that it seems that having Gretzky Lemieux and Gartner helped understanding the positions better. Even Linden indicated that maybe this dynamic worked better. Not to say I agree with what the NHL or the NHLPA has done but I hope those involved yesterday work together again. There seemed to be less finger pointing and maybe those players/owners can bridge the gap to save the NHL for the future. If these sides don't agree soon for next year I see things getting worse and even the hard core fans will be gone.
     
  2. Chili

    Chili Registered User

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2004
    Messages:
    4,673
    Likes Received:
    186
    Trophy Points:
    111
    Location:
    Sugar Mountain
    I agree that there is plenty of responsibility to pass around. From the origins of the red ink financial statements to the final straw yesterday.

    The question is where do they go from here?

    I don't know if it will happen but I would like to see them back negotiating soon. The longer it takes to come to an agreement now, the more damage I believe will be done. Sadly, I don't think there will be an agreement until one side really feels the pinch.
     
  3. PhillyNucksFan

    PhillyNucksFan Registered User

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Messages:
    2,650
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Occupation:
    Finance
    Location:
    Philadelphia
    beaten to death.

    no one is suggesting the fault is fallen on either side, but rather, both sides.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"