24% rollback

[MS]

At the very least its a $316 million concession. If you believe the owners payroll figures of $1.5 billion, its a $360 million concession.

Keep in mind the rollback would be on existing contracts only - quite a few players are still unsigned and wouldn't be subject to it ... I'd guess (and this is a total guess) that this is probably a $200-250 million concession for this year and probably a $100-150 million concession in 05-06. Remember as well that this season will be a half-season if it happens so those numbers will be pro-rated.

But it's still a very, very significant concession ... coupled with a decent luxury tax IMO this is more than workable.

 

[TonySCV]

Bob: 24% rollback
Gary: linkage from salary to revenues
Bob: you can have your linkage, but no rollback
Gary: deal

The only guess is how many weeks it's going to take to get to this inevitable resolution.

 

[Benji Frank]

It will be of no interest to the owners unless there is much more thrown in with it. A rollback addresses next to none of the issues long term.

Combined with a solid luxury tax, it gives them their fix now and a few years to really market themselves to the point where maybe they could offer significant revenue sharing & a higher cap that the players would be content to be a part of....

 

[PecaFan]

*sigh*. Payroll is not 1.5 billion. It's far less than that, it's slightly over a billion. The 1.5 billion figure is *player costs*, not payroll. Per diems, travel, insurance....

No math majors here obviously. Sportsnet and vanlady comes up with $500 milllion is 24% of 1.5 billion. The real number is around $280 million.

Is it enough? It's a couple of years of breaking even, instead of losing. I'd say no.

But at least it does show the PA is finally starting to believe.

 

[Trottier]

Doesn't really make a difference. The owners won't be interested in this, simply because it's a 1 time roll back. Doesn't appeal at all to the owners. 24% is surely much higher than the reported 10% that was rumored, however, it still will not appeal to the NHL and the owners.

:lol

Sure, the owners won't be satisfied until the players agree to a 110% rollback.

"Pay us to play"!

I don't care how temporary a solution this might be, if the owners were as flip about this TREMENDOUS concession (as one part of an overall package) as your reply was, the NHLPA's response should be to shove it.

 

[Kid Canada]

A one time roll back does not appeal to the owners.

 

[Doc Hollywood]

A one time roll back does not appeal to the owners.

Yes it can appeal to owners. The ball is in their court now. They can prevent salaries from escalating. It is in the owners hands. If they want to increase salaries then it is their fault.

 

[MarkZackKarl]

holy crap.

God you're comments are ridiculous.

The rollback on salaries help set back the wage market for the players. Its only the owners who can **** this up... so why can they not be satisfied, with salaries going back under the level the owners want them at? As you have seen the last 2 years, the old CBA was FREAKING GREAT and the owners contained spending so much that the average salary rose less than 25K over that span.

The players have given enough. No more.

 

[Kid Canada]

Yes it can appeal to owners. The ball is in their court now. They can prevent salaries from escalating. It is in the owners hands. If they want to increase salaries then it is their fault.

Same as 1994, and we all know how that turned out.

 

[Kid Canada]

God you're comments are ridiculous.

The rollback on salaries help set back the wage market for the players. Its only the owners who can **** this up... so why can they not be satisfied, with salaries going back under the level the owners want them at? As you have seen the last 2 years, the old CBA was FREAKING GREAT and the owners contained spending so much that the average salary rose less than 25K over that span.

The players have given enough. No more.

They contained spending because the old CBA deal was expiring. That's why.

 

[Potatoe1]

I'm an "owners guy" but if the owners refuse to negotiate this proposal they have clearly lost their minds.

24% roll back, 75% Luxery Tax, and several other concessions.....

That is one hell of an offer.

Nice job players

 

[Doc Hollywood]

Same as 1994, and we all know how that turned out.

It is their fault then. If it happens again I have no sympathy. They can control what they do.

 

[PecaFan]

Yes it can appeal to owners. The ball is in their court now. They can prevent salaries from escalating. It is in the owners hands. If they want to increase salaries then it is their fault.

By rewinding the clock to 2001 or 2002? That's hardly enough. Owners and GM's have been trying to keep salaries from escalating for years, without success.

There needs to be fundamental systemic changes like blowing up arbitration before preventing salary escalation is possible.

 

[Kid Canada]

It is their fault then. If it happens again I have no sympathy. They can control what they do.

I have absolutely no sympathy right now for the owners. So I completely agree with you on that. However, they have displayed that they can't control what they do. That's what Bettman wants fixed, in the form of a cap.

I'm in the middle. I don't agree with either side.

 

[two out of three*]

I'm an "owners guy" but if the owners refuse to negotiate this proposal they have clearly lost their minds.

24% roll back, 75% Luxery Tax, and several other concessions.....

That is one hell of an offer.

Nice job players

If that is indeed the proposal the NHLPA made... Im with you.

 

[MS]

Same as 1994, and we all know how that turned out.

If the luxury tax is as reported, there's no way in hell salaries would continue to rise past their current point. So it isn't the same is 1994. Salaries will go down, it's just a matter of how much.

 

[vanlady]

*sigh*. Payroll is not 1.5 billion. It's far less than that, it's slightly over a billion. The 1.5 billion figure is *player costs*, not payroll. Per diems, travel, insurance....

No math majors here obviously. Sportsnet and vanlady comes up with $500 milllion is 24% of 1.5 billion. The real number is around $280 million.

Is it enough? It's a couple of years of breaking even, instead of losing. I'd say no.

But at least it does show the PA is finally starting to believe.

My guess is the 24% rollback is only one of the concessions but the largest. My guess is when we see the proposal the owners are going to get more than the rollback. In labor terms this kind of give back is huge.

 

[Malakhov]

Latest news according to TQS here (french station in Montreal):

Rollback of 24%
Luxury tax for teams over 45 millions
Salary cap for new players, not for the players already established in the league so in a few years when all the big players are retired, the salary cap will be in place

If the owners don't agree to this, screw them. They're supposed to talk again tonight.

 

[Kid Canada]

Latest news according to TQS here (french station in Montreal):

Rollback of 24%
Luxury tax for teams over 45 millions
New salary cap for new players, not for the players already established in the league so in a few years when all the big players are retired, the salary cap will be in place

If the owners don't agree to this, screw them. They're supposed to talk again tonight.

If that's true, there will be a season. Source?

 

[PecaFan]

Oh my god. Now Sportsnet has adjusted their article to say $600 million.

They are truly idiots. $600 million is 24% of 2.5 billion dollars.
I know salaries are going up quickly, but not that quickly.

 

[Malakhov]

Like I said it was on TQS about 2 minutes ago, that's why I just got here, been a while since I posted because I had lost hope.

They said they're gonna talk again tonight and TQS will have a special about this tonight.

I have hope once again!

 

[Lanny MacDonald*]

I'm an "owners guy" but if the owners refuse to negotiate this proposal they have clearly lost their minds.

24% roll back, 75% Luxery Tax, and several other concessions.....

That is one hell of an offer.

Nice job players

Lets wait and see what the whole package is before we say what a great offer it is. There has to be some control mechanisms in there and we need to know what those are.

 

[Kid Canada]

Like I said it was on TQS about 2 minutes ago, that's why I just got here, been a while since I posted because I had lost hope.

They said they're gonna talk again tonight and TQS will have a special about this tonight.

I have hope once again!

TQS is?

 

[Goldthorpe]

Yes it can appeal to owners. The ball is in their court now. They can prevent salaries from escalating. It is in the owners hands. If they want to increase salaries then it is their fault.

The owners will never control themselves. No, let me say it another way: the owners cannot be expected to control themselves. It's not a question of will; the dices are crooked against them to begin with. The owners must compete between themselves, because they are different corporations in a capitalist market. They must compete by definition[/b]. They actually can't chose to fix the salary of a specific player in a mutual aggreement; that would be against the law.

Any CBA will have to set some rules that temper the natural tendancy of salary rise. Linking salaries and revenues was one solution. Luxury taxes may be another, although I don't know if 45M is low enough (specially post-roleback). Maybe the owners will come back with a 40M luxury tax and we will see some hockey next February

 

[Hockey_Nut99]

Luxury tax is a COMPLETE JOKE!!! Fix that and then there is a pretty good proposal..I would rather have a lower rollback and have a higher tax

Rich teams can't wait for the NHl to accept this deal it won't do anything to them