NHL to have last proposal for NHLPA early this week

So the NHL is going to have a new proposal on the table sometime early this week.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?id=112256
He also insists the league is working hard at a deal.

Actually, I believe there's a better chance now," he said of reaching an agreement to end the dispute, "than there was before we had these meetings."

"We're trying to craft something that will work for both sides. And I can tell you that I think we're a lot closer than they're suggesting we are."


So what do you think this owners proposal will have in it, besides the obvoius salary cap? Whats the trigger points and what about all the other issues, can anyone tell me what they think the new propsoal will contain?

 

Here is a preview of the CBA for the new NHL, now renamed the BHL (Bettman Hockey League):

-Salary cap with a $31 million floor and $32 million upper limit - no exceptions.
-Entry level contract maximums set at $300,000 with allowable signing bonuses of $50,000 and performance bonuses over the three year term of the contract set at $100,000.
-Unsigned drafted players remain the permanent property of the drafting team
-No non-trade clauses.
-No guaranteed contracts.
-Players prohibited from holding out during contract disputes.
-All prior contracts declared void (no need for a rollback).
-All contracts to be negotiated by the BHL league office.
-Players prohibited from having any agent not approved and certified by the BHL.
-No salary arbitration.
-All revenue from personal appearances, endorsements and such things as hockey cards to be property of the player's respective team and the BHL to be split evenly.
-Players are required to make any personal appearance at any time as directed by the team or BHL except that the player is entitled to refuse to appear if such appearance is between the hours of Midnight and 6 am provided the player pays a penalty of $20,000 per refusal.
-Free agency at age 40 or 20 years service.
-No revenue sharing.
-Players to insure their own contracts and pay for their own medical expenses.
-Players to fund own disability plan.
-Players to reimburse ownership for all money spent on roadtrips for travel, lodging and food.
-Players to completely fund their own pension fund and repay the millions in misappropriated funds the owners were previously ordered to pay by the courts.
-Alan Eagleson to be re-appointed Executive Director of the BHLPA.
-Players prohibited from disclosing their contracts to anyone.

There that should about do it. Is that pro-management enough?????

 

Well given the history of their proposals, I would assume they will take all the givebacks the players have offered, skew them more to their liking and add their cap. They will also raise their cap offer by .5 percent and lower the free agency by a year to show they are really working at getting a deal. They'll say, give us a 40 percent rollback, no arbitration, no bonuses at all for players on a first contract, first contract capped at 750,000, 1st contract length four years, all others max 2 years. No meaningful revenue sharing, and maybe they will even go after the meal money, it is inflationary you know, because we have bigger players these days they have bigger appetites.

The NHLPA will turn it down and Bettman and all his cronies will say the NHLPA shut the season down. The funny thing is a large portion of the fans will be on the owners side and will actually believe the crap they spew.

 

The best off put forward yet by the GED set. You clowns are finally starting to get it. The players have been offered a very generous deal but are too stupid to realize it. Hey, maybe when they flush another $1.2 billion dollars down the tubes, that they will NEVER recover, they will finally start to realize how good they had it. Then again, they'll be too busy playing in Europe for a small fraction of what they were making in the NHL. That'll show the owners!!!

 

I hope they actually make a decent offer...

I'd be quite interested to see an offer with a lux tax/hard cap combination...

BIG luxury tax however, starting at 45 million as $1.50 on the dollar. Going to $2.00 on the dollar at $55 million, and a hard cap at $60 million.

Also a major part would be the players rollback offer (as offered by the players, no changes for certain players).

UFA age at 28, or after the first longterm contract (longterm being 5 years)

Franchise player contract void from Cap (FP must be named within a week after draft day, and cannot be acquired via Free Agency)

Bettman/Goodenow must step down (yes, I want that in the new CBA, negotiated by the two of them...)

Draft eligible age up one year (IE Crosby aint eligible til 2006)

I know that's not a CBA too many will like, but to put it simply, I'd like to see the NHL budge on this ridiculous hard cap, or no league thought process.

 

I don't mind some of your ideas, albeit the numbers being very high (the salary cap at $60M = 85% of league revenues). But in the spirit of the prime NHL desire, can you work those numbers into a linkage to revenues and post that?

 

luxury tax at 34 million .5 to 1
luxury tax at 38 million 1 to 1
luxury tax at 44 million 1.5 to 1
hard cap at 48 million
50% luxury tax money given to small market owners
50% luxury tax money put in a general advertising/growth of the game fund

free agency at 29
qualifying offers at 80% for players over 1 million dollars
qualifying offerse at 100% for players under 1 million
two way high/low salary arbitration
maximum 5 year contracts

 

not that either side would go for anything like this....its way too logical, Tim
yes...I agree
whoops Im talking to myself again

 

I agree the numbers are high, and in reality would expect more likely a $50,000,000 hard cap as the more reasonable number (obviously lux. tax would be brought to lower numbers, at same values) I just happen to, as everyone knows, support the players far more than the owners ;-)

Let me see what I can do as far as the linkage to revenues, can't promise I'll get it posted, but we'll see, math has never, ever, been a strong point for me. lol

 

I hate to break it down, but if there's a proposal, it will include a hard cap.

 

You think??????????

 

i dont think the owners are hung up on hard cap. they wont budge from linkage.

dr

 

Soft cap at $35 million. Luxury tax applicable to payrolls exceeding $35 million.

The first contract that will put a team above $40 million is subject to review by a panel composed of one league official, one PA official and 3 independent arbitrators.

If the contract is considered acceptable, the team will be allowed to keep it but will not be allowed to pursue other free agent contracts, including forfeiting to right to tender qualifying offers or re-sign RFA's. If the contract is not considered acceptable, the team will be allowed to re-tender another contract to the same player or a different one for review.

Or, alternatively, a hard cap where once a team exceeds $40 million in payroll they are not allowed to pursue other contracts. Scratch the 'panel.'

 

I think the NHL is gonna offer a NBA style offer, but with stiffer rules and the luxury tax to kick in much easier then how the NBA has it. UFA will be dropped to about 28, and contracts will be gaurnteed like Bettman has said 500t times but that idiot Trevor Linden cannot get it through his thick skull.

Players are fools for not accepting the significant conesccions the owners have made to them.

 

How's this:

Each team gives 56% of all hockey related revenue to the players. Thus each team's salary cap is different: depending on how well they do, how well the fans like them etc, etc. The onus is on the players: play well, make it to the playoffs and make a good showing and revenues go up.

 

I'm just hoping its something the PA can respond to and make a counter offer. Not just making an offer that they know will be rejected so they can say in the media they were trying.

 

That would make it even worse off then it is now. Everyone should be on a even playing field and they are not, with this it would keep more of the same and the NHL does not need that.

There has to be a strict cap, I prefer the hard cap, but can live with a soft cap as long as it prohibts spending like the NBA.

 

The title of this thread is misleading. Nowhere in that link does it say an NHL offer is coming early next week.

 

56% of what???? We do not know what the revenue is because the owners refuse to open the books.

 

That's a great idea

 

Although players say they don't want a hard cap, if the owners came up with a 70M hard cap, they would probably accept it. I'd think it's all in the numbers. So maybe a much higher hard cap than what the NHL as presented up to now (in the 50-55M) and a luxury tax starting at around 40M would work better indeed.

At least, if Bettman came up with this kind of offer, which is a compromise from his +/-35M hard cap, I'm sure you'd see the union starting to split and ultimately, see many players willing to accept that as a basis for negotiations (you get the barebone structure, now get to the table and talk about everything else surrounding that structure).

Of course, no matter what happens from there, IMO the season is lost regardless, so take the time to make it right please.

 

You forgot the "indentured servitude" "yes, massa" clauses.

Nice threadcrap.

 

I don't know, guys and gals, it doesn't look good, according to this article:



http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=112242&hubName=nhl

 

i have the feeling the league won't present a uniformly hard cap in its next proposal. instead, i think it will offer up linkage based upon certain percentage of total league revenues. how each team spends will depend on their gross revenues what percentage of those revenues would be allowed (as has been suggested in a previous post in this thread) to use for player salaries. so, as a result, the wealthier teams could afford to spend more. this would partly address the players' concern that the richest teams wouldn't spend as much money as they could if a 30-40 mill cap was imposed. it would also limit a great deal of player movement should a dispersal draft take place.

i also think that the percent linkage could possibly be negotiable on a year by year basis between the league and the PA.

however, for the NHLPA to even contemplate such a proposal, they would have to be assured of an appropriate super-audit of the league's total income. i don't see that happening.

further, such cost certainty would really screw the small market teams over. there wouldn't be as significant enough drag on salaries to allow these clubs to make a decent profit as they would if a 30 mill cap was in place. the large markets would still have a big monetary advantage. as well, how would these teams be assured to retaining their star players given that many of them would desire to go to the clubs with the cash to pay them. even more grim for these small market clubs is the fact the rich clubs don't want to share their money. also, if a dispersal draft were to occur, i would believe the small market clubs would probably just end with the most overpaid mediocre players that the rich clubs don't want to have anything to do with (LeClair, Turgeon etc...) in the end, i do forsee the league winning this lockout. but i seriously question whether the small market teams will benefit much in the long run. no matter what happens, i think they're gonna get shafted because there won't be any real revenue sharing.

this is pure speculation...probably all unnecessary right now as the union will not currently accept any form of cost certainty. say hello to the entire year of 2005 without hockey.

 

For the umpteenth time....dont buy into ANYTHING you read/see or hear from the PA or the league.....