NHL Willing to Negotiate with NO Linkage

On The Score's ticker it is reporting that Bill Daly has told Steve Kouleas(sp), that the NHL is willing to negotiate a salary cap with no linkage. Both Daly and Saskins will have 1-on-1 interviews at 6ET on The Score. At least this may be some compromise on the NHL's part, but let's see how high they are willing to go with the cap.

 

dont tell me the NHL is caving... well i hope there is still a cap... now if the players can get the owners to agree to revenue sharing lets drop the puck!@

 

I dont have it in me anymore to be optimistic.

 

If true, the NHLPA better take them up on their offer or they will lose what little support they have now.

 

The owners are caving....

 

I'm pretty sure I've heard Daly say this before, not too long ago.

Would the players listen? I doubt it at this point.

 

Na I don't think they're caving. Didn't somebody already say they'd try to force something the PA would want no parts of and then offer a much more palatable option?

 

Owners are Caving???

Doesnt matter though..if NHLPA doesnt put up another proposal the season is done(even though it pretty much is)

 

If it's a cap with no linkage, it better be lower than the 45 million we heard tossed around. 38 million ideal, 42 million TOPS.

 

Nope. Just means, if true,that they were willing to give up linkage to get a cap.

As they've always said, if the players take a cap everything's negotiable. Some haven't paid much attention to those repeated statements, but they're a mater of public record.

 

Daly was also on MOJO radio today saying the league would have accepted the leagues 24% rollback for two years before those four triggers would be in place. The NHL is hitting the NHLPA leadership hard for their percieved lack of negotiations.

Word is that the NHLPA will deliver a proposal in the next 24-48 hours and that it will be their original proposal (Dec. 9) for four years and then after that if the players salaries exceed 58% of revenue the leagues Jan. 3 proposal kicks in for the last four years.

I hope its true.

 

Yeah, so...caving then, eh?

So much for "cost certainty."

 

It's nothing new. Daly said that a LONG time ago. He even said the NHL would be willing to negotiate a luxury tax at a high threshold but the union had no interest in it.

 

Far be it from me to tell the players what to do, but no linkage is a bad deal for the players. It might take a few years, but eventually league revenues will grow and when it does they'll be missing out on their share of the money.

 

i will believe it when i see it officially signed
dr

 

sorry for being dense, but i've never gotten the linkage thing. does this have anything to do with hard/soft cap? is it a move toward the player's deember proposal?

 

I think it means a salary cap that would move.

so if league revenues went down, the cap's ceiling would drop as well(Sub 30 million perhaps) on the flip side if the league revenues increase because of parity, then the cap would also increase(dunno for sure).

then again that's what I've pieced it together to mean, correct me if I'm wrong.
this would be a static cap, set at say 38 million and whether the NHL makes 1 cent in revenue or 1 trillion dollars, the cap would be at 38 million.

 

Linkage just means the Cap would move from year to year based on revenue. Otherwise the cap is set at a number and stays there for the duration of the CBA.

 

so is linkage in place good for the owners or players? I suspect the owners based on what I am seeing but if revenues increase nicely wouldnt that be good for the players?

 

The players don't care. By the time this happens, their careers will be over and it will be the younger generation that will suffer. By the current union doesn't care about them.

Anyways, I remember that some players (JR I know for sure) have said they would accept a cap not liked to revenues.

Give it to them. A cap with revenue sharing will fix the league.

 

HF Proposal?

 

Not from Eklund I hope...

 

I'm thinking that's exactly where it came from.

 

Just skimmed it, but I believe this is roughly the "rumor" of the blogger formerly welcome here, so I hope you have another source.

 

not from his site, anyway - ive been there. he says something about an 8 year deal, first 4 years would be the players offer - if it goes over 58% then they owe the teams the money back after four years, it would be in escrow. i think the cap with no linkage sounds more reasonable to me.