We all know Larry Brooks umbilical cord is attached to the NHLPA. Turns out he knows the NHLPA's plan B: Read the entire ridiculous column here. More brilliance from the man: Ummm.... fair is fair. Sure the NHL agreeing on an unacceptable NHLPA offer (in Bettman's view) only takes 8 veto votes (the small market teams) out of 30 to reject it. Well, the NHLPA agreeing on an unacceptable NHL proposal (in Goodenow's view) only needs 7 veto votes (the executive council) out of 750 to reject it. Here is the ultimate compromise, the NHLPA's last proposal ($49 million cap with indexing provisions that would establish a cap range of $70M max, 36M min under 2003-2004 economic conditions if there is a 30% revenue drop next year) be put to a vote by all NHL clubs. A simple majority passes the NHLPA proposal. Likewise, the most recent NHL proposal ($42.5M cap, no minimum) be put to a vote of the entire NHLPA membership. Again, a simple majority requiring acceptance. I would bet all of my current wealth and future earnings that the NHL proposal would be a lot closer to passing than the NHLPA. Quite likely that neither would pass, but personally I think the NHLPA proposal would be a much tougher sell because it establishes a system that is significantly worse than what has caused the current lockout. No-brainer.