Alberta_OReilly_Fan
Bruin fan since 1975
My lastest idea to get the cap done...
give the owners their 5 year limit on contracts by saying only the first 5 years of a contract are guaranteed in full... contracts that extend beyond 5 years can be bought out for like 1/10th value. Players still get some protection if they want it but it hurts teams way less then current system. As an incentive to get players to sign longer term deals... say that full NTC are only eligible on contracts that exceed 5 years. Modified NTC are still eligible for shorter term deals but the whole NTC thing sucks so for the good of the game it should be altered anyhow.
replace the owners variance thing they wanted by saying that any player that retires from their contract early forfeits the highest paid year of salary back to the team. Such a harsh penalty would elliminate the worries of wink-wink-nudge-nudge that is going on now. Players would insist on sticking around to honor the deals they sign even if it takes them to 45 years old. If an owner tries to bury one of these special contacts in the minors then they owe a sum equal to the largest year of the contract to the players union. So basically it will cost big time money if any player signed to one of these whacky deals doesnt honor it in full. Then who cares if contracts are front loaded or not?
Make the CBA 10 years but play this year under the terms of the old CBA at a 57% split. The league needs to get going immediately and doesnt have time to negotiate all the fine print needed for a new contact. AND play next season at a 54% split for the players. I say this to replace the make whole money that is too complicated and is screwing everything up anyhow. Players just want to get what they feel was fairly bargained for them. It will take a couple seasons for teams to get under the new cap anyhow. Going to 50-50 immediately isnt very realistic.
so Players get their current contracts honored as they are asking for... owners get the 10 year deal they want... the transition becomes realistic.
I think my suggestions repersent fair give and take on all three of the big issues the owners want and still look after the players for the most part. If the buyout for long term deals needs to be a bit higher... then sure why not? Buyouts wont count against the cap under my plan. This is just an incentive to players.. mostly superstars that want to sign long term with a team in order to get full NTC and some insurance against injury. Most players arent good enough to get more then 5 year deals anyhow.
this whole lawsuit thing guarantees a lost season if it happens... doesnt matter who ultimately wins... it wont be good for hockey or us fans. Negotiate these 3 vital points for the owners... bend enough to address the owners concerns... and still try to give the players something for seeing reason. Make it happen
give the owners their 5 year limit on contracts by saying only the first 5 years of a contract are guaranteed in full... contracts that extend beyond 5 years can be bought out for like 1/10th value. Players still get some protection if they want it but it hurts teams way less then current system. As an incentive to get players to sign longer term deals... say that full NTC are only eligible on contracts that exceed 5 years. Modified NTC are still eligible for shorter term deals but the whole NTC thing sucks so for the good of the game it should be altered anyhow.
replace the owners variance thing they wanted by saying that any player that retires from their contract early forfeits the highest paid year of salary back to the team. Such a harsh penalty would elliminate the worries of wink-wink-nudge-nudge that is going on now. Players would insist on sticking around to honor the deals they sign even if it takes them to 45 years old. If an owner tries to bury one of these special contacts in the minors then they owe a sum equal to the largest year of the contract to the players union. So basically it will cost big time money if any player signed to one of these whacky deals doesnt honor it in full. Then who cares if contracts are front loaded or not?
Make the CBA 10 years but play this year under the terms of the old CBA at a 57% split. The league needs to get going immediately and doesnt have time to negotiate all the fine print needed for a new contact. AND play next season at a 54% split for the players. I say this to replace the make whole money that is too complicated and is screwing everything up anyhow. Players just want to get what they feel was fairly bargained for them. It will take a couple seasons for teams to get under the new cap anyhow. Going to 50-50 immediately isnt very realistic.
so Players get their current contracts honored as they are asking for... owners get the 10 year deal they want... the transition becomes realistic.
I think my suggestions repersent fair give and take on all three of the big issues the owners want and still look after the players for the most part. If the buyout for long term deals needs to be a bit higher... then sure why not? Buyouts wont count against the cap under my plan. This is just an incentive to players.. mostly superstars that want to sign long term with a team in order to get full NTC and some insurance against injury. Most players arent good enough to get more then 5 year deals anyhow.
this whole lawsuit thing guarantees a lost season if it happens... doesnt matter who ultimately wins... it wont be good for hockey or us fans. Negotiate these 3 vital points for the owners... bend enough to address the owners concerns... and still try to give the players something for seeing reason. Make it happen
