July 1

[sundaystar]

If the CBA is not signed by July 1 what is IMG planning on doing? Are they planning on making a case for UFA status for players like Crosby, Thornton, etc. Any news or info would be well appreciated.

Click to read more...

 

[norrisnick]

I'm sure they'll try but it won't get beyond that if it gets worked out in the new CBA. A new CBA will trump anything that was part of the old one, including the July 1st deadline for qualifying offers to RFAs.

 

[DaBadGuy7]

http://www.tsn.ca/nba/news_story.asp?ID=127809

Apparently,If their no CBA after July 1 the NBA might shutdown so this might be a key date for the NHL also.

 

[NYR469]

july 1st has no impact on crosby, if they are going to fight over him the date to look at will be june 25th, which is when the draft should be held. once that date passes they could try to make some kind of arguement that they canceled his draft so he should be a ufa (not saying it is a valid arguement, but it would be made after the draft is canceled not july 1st)

i think you can definitely expect img or someone else go to court after july 1st to argue that all RFAs should be UFAs because QO deadlines were missed. QO are normally given to players still under contract but july 1st those contracts expire and those teams have no rights to those players and that expiration is written into the actual contracts. i'm not a lawyer but it could make for an interesting situation.

another potentially interesting situation is with regards to the expiration of contracts. lets assume the nhl and nhlpa agree to let 04-05 contracts expire, that would mean $1 bil worth of salaries gone. i can only assume that that also means that the agents will lose their commission on $1 bil worth of salaries. that is a LOT of $$. so it wouldn't surprise me at all if a group like IMG sued the league arguing that year of the contract must be honored saying it is the best interest of their clients (and themselves of course).

the agents are the big X factor here. the nhl and nhlpa can avoid court battles by working out all the details in negotiations but they have no control over the agents and the agents have no interest in anything besides $$.

 

[CREW99AW]

If the CBA is not signed by July 1 what is IMG planning on doing? Are they planning on making a case for UFA status for players like Crosby, Thornton, etc. Any news or info would be well appreciated.

With the new cba getting closer,I'd expect the nhl lawyers to drag out any legal fight that IMG brings,knowing a new cba will spell out the status of rfas,unsigned draft picks and the prospects waiting on the 2005 draft.

 

[SENSible1*]

IMG has now had 2 weeks to take action and follow up on the JUNE 1 deadline letter they sent out to all teams. The total lack of action on their part should tell you all you need to know about the July 1 deadline.

Much ado about nothing.

 

[ej_pens]

i think you can definitely expect img or someone else go to court after july 1st to argue that all RFAs should be UFAs because QO deadlines were missed.

There is no QO deadlinea t this point because the CBA that contained the QO "system" has expired

another potentially interesting situation is with regards to the expiration of contracts. lets assume the nhl and nhlpa agree to let 04-05 contracts expire, that would mean $1 bil worth of salaries gone. i can only assume that that also means that the agents will lose their commission on $1 bil worth of salaries. that is a LOT of $$. so it wouldn't surprise me at all if a group like IMG sued the league arguing that year of the contract must be honored saying it is the best interest of their clients (and themselves of course).

If the NHL and NHLPA agreed to something like this, it would be contained in the CBA, a CBA that the players would have to vote for. You can be sure that the courts aren't going to award money to the players for a clause that they've already agreed to abide by when they voted for the CBA.

 

[RangerBoy]

Canada Day conclusion?

Sources close to the negotiation tell Sportsnet the two sides are moving in the right direction towards ending the NHL lockout and confirm the possibility of a resolution by July 1.

Although the process seems to be progressing at a crawl, a source inside the meetings confirms the negotiation is being lawyered simultaneous to the negotiation. An effort that has been incredibly time consuming, but one that will expedite ratification once a new CBA is agreed to

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/article.jsp?content=20050614_164427_956

 

[NYR469]

There is no QO deadlinea t this point because the CBA that contained the QO "system" has expired




If the NHL and NHLPA agreed to something like this, it would be contained in the CBA, a CBA that the players would have to vote for. You can be sure that the courts aren't going to award money to the players for a clause that they've already agreed to abide by when they voted for the CBA.

but those old contracts were signed under the old cba and they are binding contracts, so therefore you can definitely make an arguement that the rules that were in place when it was signed should still apply and that one side can't 'change the rules' midway thru a deal. i'm not saying that the arguement would win but i think you can make that arguement and have a valid enough case to get a trial.

as far as the QO deadline being part of the old cba, the fact that contracts expire on july 1st i'm sure is part of the individual contracts. so you argue that since the contract expire the team has lost all rights, how can you extend the rights past the end of the contract?? (QO are supposed to be made before the contract expires). again not saying they would win, but its a valid arguement.

and i'm sure they will argue that it is a contradication that the league wants contracts to expire on july 1st because it benefits them but don't want QO deadlines to expire july 1st because it benefits them. i'd argue that you can't have it both ways, either contracts expire july 1st or they don't.

if the nhl and nhlpa agree to something, it becomes very unlikely that a court would overrule that agreement so odds are nothing happens unless the nhlpa fights it. but stranger things have happened and it remains a potentially sticky situation until everything is settled.

 

[NYR469]

http://www.tsn.ca/nba/news_story.asp?ID=127809

Apparently,If their no CBA after July 1 the NBA might shutdown so this might be a key date for the NHL also.

the possibility of the NBA shutting down imo is good news for the nhl...

first there are a number of owners/buildings that have both nhl and nba teams and you know that they don't want to have their arenas completely dark. so if the nba is gone there will be even more urgency to get the nhl back.

also in terms of recovery from the lockout, a lot of advertisers are probably ready to bail on the nhl (if they haven't already). well if the nba isn't there then maybe some of them will turn toward the nhl as a replacement.

 

[Mess]

I'm sure they'll try but it won't get beyond that if it gets worked out in the new CBA. A new CBA will trump anything that was part of the old one, including the July 1st deadline for qualifying offers to RFAs.

Only real card that the NHLPA has to play on that issue is to use the RFA without qualifiers as a negotiating chip should July 1st come without a new CBA.

They have the 2003 unsigned players and if the RFA happen as well and this would involve some real great young talent Thronton, Nash, Kovalchuk, Heatley, Iginla then the NHLPA will agree that the rights remain for the honouring of 2004-05 contracts and extending them a year .. Even teams like Atlanta, Columbus and Calagary would agree to that rather then risk losing the players ..

Because remember while what happens will be covered in the CBA .. The owners need the NHLPA to put those special clauses into the new CBA ..

That would be the best playing of that poker hand IMO ..

 

[Motown Beatdown]

IMG has now had 2 weeks to take action and follow up on the JUNE 1 deadline letter they sent out to all teams. The total lack of action on their part should tell you all you need to know about the July 1 deadline.

Much ado about nothing.

Totally agree, all IMG has done was create a little pub for themselves.

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

Only real card that the NHLPA has to play on that issue is to use the RFA without qualifiers as a negotiating chip should July 1st come without a new CBA.

They have the 2003 unsigned players and if the RFA happen as well and this would involve some real great young talent Thronton, Nash, Kovalchuk, Heatley, Iginla then the NHLPA will agree that the rights remain for the honouring of 2004-05 contracts and extending them a year .. Even teams like Atlanta, Columbus and Calagary would agree to that rather then risk losing the players ..

Because remember while what happens will be covered in the CBA .. The owners need the NHLPA to put those special clauses into the new CBA ..

That would be the best playing of that poker hand IMO ..

I thought this was going to be decided 17 months from now when EVERYONE will be UFA's? Or is this just going to go to court like you've been harping about? If I was the NHLPA I would be reading your posts and doing just the opposite of what ever you suggest. You have been wrong at every turn to date so it would be in their best interest to do the opposite of anything you suggest.

 

[Mess]

IMG has now had 2 weeks to take action and follow up on the JUNE 1 deadline letter they sent out to all teams. The total lack of action on their part should tell you all you need to know about the July 1 deadline.

Much ado about nothing.

1) How do you know they have not filed something ?? Courts move slow .. You don't get instant results ..

The NHL filed 3 NLRB complaints against the NHLPA and we still have no idea if any of those have been ruled on .. Court cases take time ..

2) Also IMG does not have any prominent 2003 unsigned players .. Thornton RFA is their big play and they would do both simultaneously IMO .. You don't need a separate case for each situation if you are about the challenge a CBA.

3) Why would they currently want to disrupt progress of the negotiations .. A settlement is far better then a court case.

4) Logically IMG would need to know what the new CBA says in the regards to both and how financially they are effected before the court could award damages. Or the wording of the clause itself .. If the CBA say the rights remain forever they might challenge that .. but if the clause says every team has 2 weeks (or a short period of time) exclusive rights to sign them or they become UFA or go back in the draft then IMG or any agent could simply tell his client not to sign with the team in the period and he gains his freedom anyway without a court battle ..

5) How do we know if the NHL has not agreed already in the talks and the clause reads that anyone drafted in the 1st and 2nd round of 2003 can be signed under the old CBA terms to avoid any problem .. Its only really going to effect a dozen players that would receive the top base, bonus structure and that avoids the whole issue. This difuses any leverage the NHLPA might have of using it, in bargaining or court ..

6) The NHLPA is using the 2003 unsigned players as a bargain chip and the 24% rollback in hopes of getting contracts honoured IMO .. or another concession .. If that is happening already then IMG as agents would have been told to hold off on any official filling and the BLUFF alone at this point is sufficient for bargaining purposes.

Lots of possibilities exist at present ..

 

[SENSible1*]

1) How do you know they have not filed something ?? Courts move slow .. You don't get instant results ..

The NHL filed 3 NLRB complaints against the NHLPA and we still have no idea if any of those have been ruled on .. Court cases take time ..

Umm...IMG made sure the press was well informed when they sent out "THE LETTER". I'm assuming they'd pull a similar PR ploy if they actually filed anything....the silence speaks volumes.

You should also note that all filings with the NLRB by the NHL and with the labour boards in BC and Quebec have made the news. Where is the news report on the IMG filing?????

3) Why would they currently want to disrupt progress of the negotiations .. A settlement is far better then a court case.

This from the poster that has worn out three keyboards proclaiming that decertification and lawsuits on a myriad of subjects was the PA's best alternative.

4) Logically IMG would need to know what the new CBA says in the regards to both and how financially they are effected before the court could award damages. Or the wording of the clause itself .. If the CBA say the rights remain forever they might challenge that .. but if the clause says every team has 2 weeks (or a short period of time) exclusive rights to sign them or they become UFA or go back in the draft then IMG or any agent could simply tell his client not to sign with the team in the period and he gains his freedom anyway without a court battle ..

Since when does logic play any part in your fanatasy schemes? You've been maintaining for months that IMG would get a ruling PRIOR to the sigining of the CBA that could not be undone by the CBA. The spin never ends with you.

5) How do we know if the NHL has not agreed already in the talks and the clause reads that anyone drafted in the 1st and 2nd round of 2003 can be signed under the old CBA terms to avoid any problem .. Its only really going to effect a dozen players that would receive the top base, bonus structure and that avoids the whole issue. This difuses any leverage the NHLPA might have of using it, in bargaining or court ..

So now your adopting the arguments used against your fantasy to support it? Too funny.

6) The NHLPA is using the 2003 unsigned players as a bargain chip and the 24% rollback in hopes of getting contracts honoured IMO .. or another concession .. If that is happening already then IMG as agents would have been told to hold off on any official filling and the BLUFF alone at this point is sufficient for bargaining purposes.

It was a PR ploy by IMG to raise their profile and perhaps a desperate attempt by the NHLPA to create leverage where none existed.

Keep the laughs coming Massager...free entertainment at its finest.

Lots of possibilities exist at present ..

 

[ej_pens]

but those old contracts were signed under the old cba and they are binding contracts, so therefore you can definitely make an arguement that the rules that were in place when it was signed should still apply and that one side can't 'change the rules' midway thru a deal.

Sure they can. It happens every time a new CBA is ratified. The standard player contract doesn't specify witch CBA that contract falls under, just that the contract falls under the rules set forth by the agreements negotiated between the 2 parties (the NHL and NHLPA). Just because the contract was signed under a old set of "rules" doesn't mean that the new rules don't apply.

Also, one side isn't "changing the rules". Those rules have to be accepted by both parties. In other words, the players, though the NHLPA, are accepting the changes to those rules.

i'm not saying that the arguement would win but i think you can make that arguement and have a valid enough case to get a trial.

Except that disputes regarding the validity of the NHL contract would have to be settled by an arbitrator, not the courts.

as far as the QO deadline being part of the old cba, the fact that contracts expire on july 1st i'm sure is part of the individual contracts. so you argue that since the contract expire the team has lost all rights, how can you extend the rights past the end of the contract?? (QO are supposed to be made before the contract expires). again not saying they would win, but its a valid arguement.

Because they aren't really doing that. They aren't extending the contract. The players are bound by the terms of the CBA (not the expired one), regardless of their contract status.

and i'm sure they will argue that it is a contradication that the league wants contracts to expire on july 1st because it benefits them but don't want QO deadlines to expire july 1st because it benefits them. i'd argue that you can't have it both ways, either contracts expire july 1st or they don't.

Once again, there is no QO "system" right now because there is no active CBA. There is nothing in the Standard Player Contract that mentions anything about a qualifying offer system.

Sure, the contracts could expire. The players would then be free to sign with any team outside of the NHL. But that doesn't mean the players are automatically free agents in the NHL since they will be bound by the rules that are set into place by the new CBA, regardless of when it is ratified.

 

[kdb209]

How do you know they have not filed something ?? Courts move slow .. You don't get instant results ..

The NHL filed 3 NLRB complaints against the NHLPA and we still have no idea if any of those have been ruled on .. Court cases take time ..

But Court filings do not, and are public records. So it's pretty safe to say that IMG has not filed anything yet - if they had, you can bet they'd be trumpeting the fact for publicity (as well as for leverage in the CBA negotiations with the RFA QO date coming up also).

4) Logically IMG would need to know what the new CBA says in the regards to both and how financially they are effected before the court could award damages. Or the wording of the clause itself .. If the CBA say the rights remain forever they might challenge that .. but if the clause says every team has 2 weeks (or a short period of time) exclusive rights to sign them or they become UFA or go back in the draft then IMG or any agent could simply tell his client not to sign with the team in the period and he gains his freedom anyway without a court battle ..

Because filing and somehow magically winning a case before there is a new CBA is the only way for IMG to win a favorable ruling. A judge is much more likely to make a ruling in the absence of a CBA than override a negotiated CBA. Of course, even if they won then, any decision would be moot when a new CBA is signed.

I know you hate the words Messenger, but: non-statutory labor exemption.

And your idea of waiting those two weeks and going back in the draft or becoming a UFA (I assume you are only talking about overage unsigned draftees here) has a major flaw in it if you use history as an example. The '95 CBA had a similar window - unsigned draftees who signed before the '95 draft were not subject to the ELS, those who signed afterwards (and all '95 and later draftees) were. So there very well might be a window where unsigned draftees may still be able to sign under the older (less restrictive) ELS system. And even if an unsigned draftee does wait and try to go back into the draft or become a UFA, it's not likely he would get any better a deal - due to the new harsher ELS.

 

[London Knights]

Seeing as Crosby still has draft eligibility after this year I don't see how he would have a case anyway. It would be as if he wasn't good enough to be drafted and if he "improve" himself the next year he "might" get into the draft...like a Danny Syvret who went from undrafted to CHL Defenseman of the Year and most likely will get drafted this year despite being an overager.

 

[Gary]

http://www.tsn.ca/nba/news_story.asp?ID=127809

Apparently,If their no CBA after July 1 the NBA might shutdown so this might be a key date for the NHL also.

Awesome timing...The Bruins should offer Shaq a contract. I'd like to see him on the Bruins defense...

 

[me2]

Awesome timing...The Bruins should offer Shaq a contract. I'd like to see him on the Bruins defense...

Pad him up like Giguere and put him in net.

 

[London Knights]

Pad him up like Giguere and put him in net.

Wouldn't it make more sense to get one of those male gymnasts. You know, the ones that look like football players but are as flexible as Gumby.

As an unrelated, yet in some ways related question, what is everyone's opinion on how the offseason will be handled. Will FA be opened before the draft, or after. Seeing as most teams will probably be waiting to see who they get in the draft, how much movement would we see prior to any draft?

 

[HockeyCritter]

Wouldn't it make more sense to get one of those male gymnasts. You know, the ones that look like football players but are as flexible as Gumby.

As an unrelated, yet in some ways related question, what is everyone's opinion on how the offseason will be handled. Will FA be opened before the draft, or after. Seeing as most teams will probably be waiting to see who they get in the draft, how much movement would we see prior to any draft?

I don't think that will make a difference seeing as how only two or three kids from the draft will be NHL ready . . . . most won't see time with their team for three to five years.

 

[London Knights]

Clearly, but then you have to factor in draft day deals and such. I would imagine in a year like this you might see a little more draft picks for players type moves.