If any Players Union should complain...

[Jag68Sid87]

Non-guaranteed contracts actually work well for a football player, because it means they're getting money up front in the form of a signing bonus. With a football player's career span a lot shorter than most other sports, they like getting that money up front.

It just gives teams far greater flexibility in a cap system.

 

[Wetcoaster]

The NFL union is actually pretty strong. They realize by helping to grow the game, they can make more money. The only thing they do not have is gaurenteed contracts, which you shouldn't if you suck.

Only if you are an NFL owner. The NFLPA has long been criticized as being weak. They have allowed non-guaranteed contracts which fail to protect their players.

 

[PecaFan]

Only if you failed to comprehend what I wrote.

Seems to me that you're the one that can't comprehend what you wrote:

FACT 1 - The ownership structures are nearly identical in the NBA and NHL.
FACT 2 - NBA players and owners came to an agreement on what was related revenue and what was not.
FACT 3 - The owners concealed revenue, and the players found out about it, and will adjust the definitions in the next CBA.

Which simply blows away every single argument about linkage. You know, those "League structures are different", "No trust, because revenue can be hidden", "They couldn't possibly agree what was revenue" etc.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Seems to me that you're the one that can't comprehend what you wrote:

FACT 1 - The ownership structures are nearly identical in the NBA and NHL.
FACT 2 - NBA players and owners came to an agreement on what was related revenue and what was not.
FACT 3 - The owners concealed revenue, and the players found out about it, and will adjust the definitions in the next CBA.

Which simply blows away every single argument about linkage. You know, those "League structures are different", "No trust, because revenue can be hidden", "They couldn't possibly agree what was revenue" etc.

Comprehension does seem to be an issue for you.

The pre-condition to begin an audit of the books is that you actually have to allow access to them and the NHL has refused this for years.

Secondly it took the NBAPA over two years to get a handle on the books in order that they could begin to negotiate a defintion.

Like the owners you want to skip these steps.

 

[lazaer]

The NHLPA has indicated that they would talk salary cap if the NHL agreed to share at a NFL level.[/QUOTE]

Wetcoaster i have been all pro-owner thur this, but if the players think like this then i think i would change sides. Do you have any proof that the PA has offered this?

 

[Steve L*]

The cap is increased yearly.

The CBA expires after the 2007 season. The NFL and NFLPA have already begun preliminary discussions, if anything the NHL and NHLPA should have taken a page from them.

Except the fact that the NHL asked the union to negotiate years ago and they flat out refused.

 

[Ar-too]

Only if you are an NFL owner. The NFLPA has long been criticized as being weak. They have allowed non-guaranteed contracts which fail to protect their players.

Yes, but players know they can make most of their money in guarranteed signing bonuses.

I've never heard any current or ex-NFL players bash the CBA.

 

[ladybugblue]

Comprehension does seem to be an issue for you.

The pre-condition to begin an audit of the books is that you actually have to allow access to them and the NHL has refused this for years.

Secondly it took the NBAPA over two years to get a handle on the books in order that they could begin to negotiate a defintion.

Like the owners you want to skip these steps.

Actually the NHL has indicated that an audit of the books would be open to the Union but they have refused to do so. Arthur Griffith on MOJO talked about this and he thought the reason being is that the Union would not longer have any arguements about why they would not accept a salary cap and I happen to agree with him. Now the audit of the books does not need to be public but the NHLPA did go over all of th books before they offered their Dec 9 proposal...remember all of the days of discussion they were going over the books. Now maybe the NHLPA should have taken the NHL's offere of getting an audit done when the NHL hired Levitt and they would have had a say in who was hired and how to conduct the audit. I think the NHLPA does not want to address reality and by saying they haven't opened the books they can continue the charade that the league doesn't need cost certainty.

 

[CarlRacki]

Only if you are an NFL owner. The NFLPA has long been criticized as being weak. They have allowed non-guaranteed contracts which fail to protect their players.

Who's doing this criticism of the NFLPA that you speak of? Whoever it is, they're none too bright.
NFL salaries have risen more than 115 percent in the last decade (cap from $37.1 million in '95 to $80.5 million in '04), in no small part due to 18 years of labor peace. And, unlike the NHL, that salary growth has been accomplished without mutliple work stoppages (which tend to cost players money) and without putting teams into backruptcy and other financial straits.

The non-guaranteed contract deal is a red herring because they're never existed in the NFL and never will because of its special circumstances regarding injuries. However, more guaranteed money is being given out today than ever before in the form of signing bonuses, the value which has grown more than 1,000-fold since 1992. In 2000, more than half of all contract money was guaranteed.

http://www.nflpa.org/PDFs/Shared/Guaranteed_Contracts.pdf

 

[CarlRacki]

The NHLPA has indicated that they would talk salary cap if the NHL agreed to share at a NFL level.

Bull. They've never said anything like that and you know it. Provide a link. If I'm wrong, I'll apologize. Otherwise stop making things up.

p.s. the notion of the NHL being able to share at an NFL level is about as disingenuous as it gets.