futurcorerock said:Message to PA: We could've had a better deal for you in February, but noooooooooo
Leaf Lander said:i feel sorry for the players giving back 24% claw back when the new cba agreement came into affect. This must had been a tough pill to swallow but another 10% payback off there 05=06 pay cheques is harsh.
Same old story teams are overspending and players have to bite the bullet
imo it should be the 4 to 8 mil dollar a yr players that bite the bullet more then the 450 000 to 1 mil a yr players
rwilson99 said:The $450,000 a year players who got a payraise from $180,000 last year.
That's right they raised the minimum.
alot more player make 450 nowrwilson99 said:The $450,000 a year players who got a payraise from $180,000 last year.
That's right they raised the minimum.
MojoJojo said:Thats actually not true. Higher cap number, yes, but the rest of the CBA offered in February would have been a terrible deal for the players.Originally Posted by futurcorerock
Message to PA: We could've had a better deal for you in February, but noooooooooo
MHA said:The players can't blame anybody but themselves because of their poor negotating skills
Well I am sure if your boss came to you at the end of the week and said that 10% of your check was being set aside because the company had gone over their budget you would not be too happy.Bucky Katt said:I don't see what the big deal is. It is common in business when there is a partnership to set aside funds so that the proper percentages can be worked out at the end. The players get up to 54% - this is just a mechanism to ensure that.
Spongebob said:Well I am sure if your boss came to you at the end of the week and said that 10% of your check was being set aside because the company had gone over their budget you would not be too happy.
The problem with that statement is that YOU did not receive 60% of the revenues. Somebody else did. But YOU are going to have to give up some of your paycheck as a result of it.Bucky Katt said:I may not be happy about but if I had collectively bargained to receive 54% of revenues and I received 60% I would expect to give 6% back. It is called a business partnership. In case you haven't noticed, the NHL/NHLPA relationship is quite different than that of a normal employer/employee relationship.
Spongebob said:The problem with that statement is that YOU did not receive 60% of the revenues. Somebody else did. But YOU are going to have to give up some of your paycheck as a result of it.
Spongebob said:The problem with that statement is that YOU did not receive 60% of the revenues. Somebody else did. But YOU are going to have to give up some of your paycheck as a result of it.
Not sure what deal you've been readingMojoJojo said:Thats actually not true. Higher cap number, yes, but the rest of the CBA offered in February would have been a terrible deal for the players.