TSN reports proposal was made today (2.9.05) by the NHL and PA rejected .

[Charge_Seven]

I'm intrigued to see the developments from the supposed tonight/tommorow meetings...should be some interesting stuff coming out.

If Bettman will allow tweaking to his triggers, there is still a chance...if not...then he's a bad, bad man...

 

[futurcorerock]

We are several days from the cancellation of a season... a little late for a PR stunt, I would think

You'd honestly be surprised how late a PR stunt could go down. If it's going to garner news, they'll do it.

"Bob Goodenow named in Jackson Sex Abuse Probe, issued Federal Warrant for his arrest"

 

[bleedgreen]

Detroit's committed payroll for 2004-2005 is $57 million. After the 24% rollback, its $43 million.

have they signed everyone? most teams havent.

 

[Morbo]

Isn't that what the players said it would do?

Obviously not, since they have rejected the deal on the basis of the triggers.

I don't recall them saying that the highest 3 and lowest 3 teams should be less than 33% apart, or proposing the average payroll be 36.5 million, no.

 

[Motown Beatdown]

have they signed everyone? most teams havent.

They have Datsyuk and maybe Chelios.

 

[The Legend]

These triggers are effectively caps by themselves. Three teams can only go over 42 million? That's a cap on salaries. 55 percent of the revenues have to go to the players, that's linkage.


Just a differently worded document.

 

[bleedgreen]

They have Datsyuk and maybe Chelios.

those two could easily out them over. that would be one team.

 

[FrenchKheldar]

Well but Bettman made it clear earlier that teams were warned that they would probably be a cap in place when NHL resumes and that it was their business to get under. So too bad if Philly has to buy out contracts, if the Wings can't resign Schneider and Chelios or if the Leafs are stuck with their 40 years old players that nobody else want. They had a huge payroll in order to win the Cup last year, they have to assume their choices now !

 

[Motown Beatdown]

those two could easily out them over. that would be one team.

In another thread Brouder posted 6 teams are already over the mark.

 

[Egil]

The NHL is BEGGING the PA to make a counter proposal, just BEGGING them. I am pretty sure one will be coming tonight, as the FRAMEWORK for this agreement can be reached. This was GUARANTEED going to be rejected by the players, and the NHL new it. However, it was still a VERY fruitful offer, and to me tells me their WILL be a season. 3 things will be modified by the PA in a counter offer, IMHO.

#1 The triggers will be negotiated upwards (to say 58-60% of league revenue, 5 teams could be above 45 million (given as a % of league revenue), disparity between the top 5 teams and bottom 5 teams of no more than 40% (possibly done by throwing out the highest and lowest teams). In general, a loosening of the triggers.

#2 The NHLPA will toughen their Dec. offer, as it would not have worked (and they know it). Expect the PA to tighten the rookie cap and bonus structure, and to either reduce the QO amount, OR implement the Arbitration structure from the owners last offer. The PA, with the triggers, would now have a much greater interest in ensuring their deal works, and as such, they would make it so.

#3 The NHLPA will change the terms of the last NHL offer. MAYBE the cap would go up 1%, but expect things like QO to be raised under the cap. They will ensure, that if a cap is triggered, that the NHLPA membership has greater mobility at a younger age than in the last NHL proposal.

Finally, I would be SHOCKED if the PA doesn't come back with a very reasonable counter to this offer from the NHL. The framework, I believe, is now in palce, so its all about haggling over money now, which means the end is in sight.

 

[creative giant*]

The players said their proposal would provide cost certainty to the NHL and the league called them on it. And the players blinked, they realized back on Dec 9 that their proposal was ****e and they finally had to admit it in public today.

 

[Gary]

or 37 million after rollback...

 

[kerrly]

Obviously not, since they have rejected the deal on the basis of the triggers.

I don't recall them saying that the highest 3 and lowest 3 teams should be less than 33% apart, or proposing the average payroll be 36.5 million, no.

They claimed that their proposal would work for the league, and these are the numbers the league feels will work.

 

[Chileiceman]

This is by far the best deal yet. I don't know why Godenow won't accept his own deal.
I love and hate these triggers at the same. Love them because it's what is going to keep this fair. The PA said that this was gonna work on Dec. 9 and the triggers are there to make sure they do. If one of them goes off, it shows that league was rightPa was right and we have a salary cap which was what I was hoping for. I also like because it makes the PA look like a bunch of hypocrites for even proposing a deal in the first that they doubt will work

I hate the triggers cause the league should know by now that Goodenow is a moron and he would never accept anything that's not tottaly crazy.
The only thing I don't understand is why didn't the league think of the triggers back on Dec. 9

 

[handtrick]

Officially from the NHL website the triggers are:

Any one of four economic and competitive conditions would "trigger" conversion to the terms outlined in the NHL's February 2, 2005 proposal:


League-wide Player Compensation exceeds 55 percent of League-wide hockey revenues; or


The average of Club Payroll for highest three Payroll Clubs in the League is more than 33 percent higher than the average of Club Payroll for the lowest three Payroll Clubs in the League; or


Any three Clubs each have Club Player Compensation in excess of $42 million; or


League-wide average Player Compensation per Club exceeds $36.5 million

 

[bleedgreen]

i dont feel anything has really changed with this offer. its basically everything they have demanded already, just using the pa to get it. those are all numbers that the pa has refused oto live with the whole time. they want a free market and wont accept anything else, the league knew they wouldnt accept. players need to cave to the point of accepting a cap, then get the owners to cave on the cap being connected to revenue. i think thats the only hope - and i dont think these combatants are up to the challenge. unless this is all smoke, and the deals being discussed are different, its over.

 

[CarlRacki]

Obviously not, since they have rejected the deal on the basis of the triggers.

I don't recall them saying that the highest 3 and lowest 3 teams should be less than 33% apart, or proposing the average payroll be 36.5 million, no.

If the PA's Dec. 9 offer contained revenue sharing to the extent the players claim, that 33 percent figure shouldn't be a problem.

As for the $36.5 million average ... last year's average was $41.6 million, according to The Sporting News, and $44.5 million according to USA Today. I can't explain the discrepancy. But let's take the higher number. Subtract 24 percent from that. Now you're at $33.8 million. Ta-da!

 

[handtrick]

The NHL is BEGGING the PA to make a counter proposal, just BEGGING them. I am pretty sure one will be coming tonight, as the FRAMEWORK for this agreement can be reached. This was GUARANTEED going to be rejected by the players, and the NHL new it. However, it was still a VERY fruitful offer, and to me tells me their WILL be a season. 3 things will be modified by the PA in a counter offer, IMHO.

#1 The triggers will be negotiated upwards (to say 58-60% of league revenue, 5 teams could be above 45 million (given as a % of league revenue), disparity between the top 5 teams and bottom 5 teams of no more than 40% (possibly done by throwing out the highest and lowest teams). In general, a loosening of the triggers.

#2 The NHLPA will toughen their Dec. offer, as it would not have worked (and they know it). Expect the PA to tighten the rookie cap and bonus structure, and to either reduce the QO amount, OR implement the Arbitration structure from the owners last offer. The PA, with the triggers, would now have a much greater interest in ensuring their deal works, and as such, they would make it so.

#3 The NHLPA will change the terms of the last NHL offer. MAYBE the cap would go up 1%, but expect things like QO to be raised under the cap. They will ensure, that if a cap is triggered, that the NHLPA membership has greater mobility at a younger age than in the last NHL proposal.

Finally, I would be SHOCKED if the PA doesn't come back with a very reasonable counter to this offer from the NHL. The framework, I believe, is now in palce, so its all about haggling over money now, which means the end is in sight.

Damn good post....I hope you are right.
I agree that the creative framework is in place....the NHLPA rejected outright, but asked them to stay in Toronto for further talks. It appears obvious they wanted to run some numbers....and I think your right, Egil, to tweak it....God I hope you are right

 

[Flukeshot]

Those are some pretty bogus clauses for implementation of the owner's system. There is a lot of room to negotiate this into a decent deal though. There are so many things that can be changed to even it out.

The first things to change as mentioned by quite a few posters are the numbers in the triggers. The 2nd more important thing is the system that would be implemented if those triggers are met. Each little issue could be tweaked to balance things out enough so that the only major implementation would be a Hard Cap vs a luxury tax. Another important thing would be for PA to demand that at least 2 or 3 (whatever number) of seasons are played under their system to give it time to take hold and work, in turn they'd guarantee that 2 capped seasons be played if it does not. Both sides make money there.

What the PA has to look at is what numbers would guarantee a "healthy NHL". What is the cost of all non-player expenditures and the cost of player expenses after a 24% rollback. If the PA made an offer that could guarantee "loss-certainty" rather than cost-certainty they may turn a lot of heads. Is there a system that the PA could guarantee that the league will not lose money and that if they do the PA pays the league some sort of % of the loses. (from half to all??? The # could be bargained).

Then if at that time player costs put the league at a loss the next season a league revenue based cap would go in. This process could even keep switching back and forth. On a year where the NHL loses money or 0% profit a cap goes in. It stays until the league is making xx% profit and then goes back to a luxury tax system.

 

[Chileiceman]

If the PA's Dec. 9 offer contained revenue sharing to the extent the players claim, that 33 percent figure shouldn't be a problem.

As for the $36.5 million average ... last year's average was $41.6 million, according to The Sporting News, and $44.5 million according to USA Today. I can't explain the discrepancy. But let's take the higher number. Subtract 24 percent from that. Now you're at $33.8 million. Ta-da!

You are a smart young man

 

[LazRNN]

I've been an optimist from the start of this. I thought, despite everyone saying there would be one, they would avoid a lockout. I figured the doomsday talk was all posturing. When I was proven wrong, I was sure that they'd come up with a deal to save about half the season. I just assumed that at some point, better judgement would get to the best of both sides and they'd realize that the league couldn't afford to deal with the long term ramifications of cancelling a whole season. But now is time for me to admit it: I was wrong. I was naive. The owners want an impasse so they can break the union, and they've been plotting it that way the whole time. The PA leaders are too damn stubborn to admit they were wrong for having such an adamant anti-cap stance, and are therefore playing right into the owners plans. I give up on these fools. I still want to see the NHL back for a small season and a full Stanley Cup playoff tournament, but if the only purpose of these negotiations from the NHL's POV is to get themselves in position to declare an impasse, just get the damn announcement over with. Quit screwing around with us.

 

[Hockeyfan02]

Season is over. NHLPA looks bad today for not accepting their own proposal. I can see how their POV on why they would reject it. Revenues are going to plummit after this and the trigger would already be spending over the revenues that they are going to be generating after this lockout. Some teams even with a rollback would be over the 42 limit as I saw one post on another thread that was more accurate than the one that was posted a few pages ago. Theyd be walking right in to the proposal they rejected. Their proposed CBA proposed Dec. 9 would be gone after this season and the February 2nd(?) proposal would be in for 05-06. Smart move by Bettman and the PA isnt looking too good right now. Its going to take a hard cap without linkage to get this done, but I doubt it will. The PA hasnt shown the willingness to eve counter offer and I'm sure the NHL is tired of negotiating with it self. Hope both sides have a damn good reason this weekend as why we arent playing hockey. Its gonna take a miracle to get these sides to come to an agreement and I'm not a big believer in this miracle. Hope they all enjoy the smaller "pie" they come back to if they ever come to an agreement.

 

[misterjaggers]

Why doesn't the league simply accept the NHLPA's December 9th proposal and agree to play under it the balance of this season and next season, but then reserve the right to opt out of it with a year's notice? At least this would get us back to playing hockey.

 

[Morbo]

Why doesn't the league simply accept the NHLPA's December 9th proposal and agree to play under it the balance of this season and next season, but then reserve the right to opt out of it with a year's notice?

Because they only really want the framework Bettman has proposed.

Hence, the ca--, er, I mean, triggers.

 

[kerrly]

Because they only really want the framework Bettman has proposed.

Hence, the ca--, er, I mean, triggers.

And of course, then we would essentially back to square one again. We would have another lockout, and personally, I think if the league is willing to go all the way to get cost-certainty, they might as well do it now, since its come this far.