Breaking News-PA and NHL meeting this week
- Thread starter OilerFan4Life
- Start date
- Status
Optimistic posts in 10, 9, 8...
I'm very surprised there's a meeting this week. Nothing will come out of it, but hey, another few Sportscentre's with Healy and Burke yelling at the top of their lungs is always fun.
I'm very surprised there's a meeting this week. Nothing will come out of it, but hey, another few Sportscentre's with Healy and Burke yelling at the top of their lungs is always fun.
This is a huge meeting.
If both sides retrench we are in for some serious hardball.
If one or both offer the olive branch, then we may be in for some serious negotiations.
Unfortunately, I'm betting on hardball as neither side will want to show weakness.
If both sides retrench we are in for some serious hardball.
If one or both offer the olive branch, then we may be in for some serious negotiations.
Unfortunately, I'm betting on hardball as neither side will want to show weakness.
Bettman made it clear that the PA was required to come back to the table when called if for no other reason than to protect themselves in future legal wranglings.Schlep Rock said:
Thunderstruck said:
There's no olive branches at this point... the olive branches will be in May when the NHL extends one and if the PA rejects it then they might look at the impasse option and try and argue the draft is vital so implement the new CBA prior to the draft.
...and Bettman also made it clear that he wouldThunderstruck said:
be calling them sonner rather than later so this isn't really news.
Larionov
Registered User
Unless the 'PA is willing to sue for peace and accept something that looks like the NHL's last offer, I don't expect much here. The NHL's offer is clearly not going to get substantially better -- I think we can all agree on that. They may dress it up a little, and throw the 'PA a bone on a couple of non-cap issues, but the last offer is as good as it gets cap wise. If the 'PA wants to dig in, then we are heading for the ugly spectre of impasse, replacements, lawsuits, and all the attendant ugliness that goes with it.
My overwhelming sense is that this offer to meet is just part of the legal dance the NHL must do in order to declare impasse prior to the draft, and nothing more. I would love to be proven wrong, however...
My overwhelming sense is that this offer to meet is just part of the legal dance the NHL must do in order to declare impasse prior to the draft, and nothing more. I would love to be proven wrong, however...
Last edited:
Motown Beatdown
Need a slump buster
I really don't think the issue is the cap, the issue are the other non-cap issues (arbitration, qualifying offers, rookie contracts, revenue sharing, etc). The league has to give the players something in those issues if they want them to accept the $42.5M cap.
Schlep Rock said:
The NHL could offer an olive branch, tied up in their framework.
Bump linkage up to 57-58% and agree to a minimum cap for first two seasons to help alleviate concerns over post-lockout revenue depression.
chiavsfan
Registered User
There will not be a 42.5 million dollar cap anymore...that number was based on the last ACTUAL season's revenue. Since there was no revenue this season...there is no way the NHL can offer the same cap number...it wouldn't make any sense
Brewleaguer said:
It is up for the press to ask those questions to Bob Goodenow, Trevor Linden and Ted Saskin
1) Are you resuming talks because next year players that sign oversees no longer have out clauses in there contracts? or 2) Are you resuming talks for your legal obligation to bargain in good faith?
This meeting is to find out " if possible" what was discussed but not told to the press at the NHL owners meeting and the NHLPA meeting.
Sure both sides declaired solidarity after each meeting. BUT what was the actual truth?
What new pressure, if any, is being put upon both sides.
Since it is Betman that calls the meeting, I think it is the owners that want to know or get an up-to-date picture of union solidarity and possible concessions to come.
At the table, there will be nothing new but the back channels will be hard at work analyzing every hint dropped by anyone.
Sure both sides declaired solidarity after each meeting. BUT what was the actual truth?
What new pressure, if any, is being put upon both sides.
Since it is Betman that calls the meeting, I think it is the owners that want to know or get an up-to-date picture of union solidarity and possible concessions to come.
At the table, there will be nothing new but the back channels will be hard at work analyzing every hint dropped by anyone.
rekrul
Registered User
oh boy just don't end this with, "no more meetings planned but we remain open to diologe" spare up the broken record, just say "we are still bitter and angry because the other side is a bunch of greedy people that doesn't see the universe in our way!"
like the NHLPA, just schooled isn't bitter enough to drag this out another year. Folks the presure is all on Bettman & Co. They HAVE to get a deal done for sponsorships, season ticket revenue, oh yea the DRAFT..
plus a little thing like ESPN will probaly opt out of their $60 mil deal late spring if no deal is done. NHL will lose the $$ but more importantly a total loss of exposure on cable'b biggest outlet.
what does the NHLPA have presure on, other than for the "goodness of the game" nonsence? satisfy the legal challenges, owners plan B is replacements, NHLPA plan B is WHA, other minors and Europe.
wonder if they have considered where they are going to find the "replacement fans".
like the NHLPA, just schooled isn't bitter enough to drag this out another year. Folks the presure is all on Bettman & Co. They HAVE to get a deal done for sponsorships, season ticket revenue, oh yea the DRAFT..
plus a little thing like ESPN will probaly opt out of their $60 mil deal late spring if no deal is done. NHL will lose the $$ but more importantly a total loss of exposure on cable'b biggest outlet.
what does the NHLPA have presure on, other than for the "goodness of the game" nonsence? satisfy the legal challenges, owners plan B is replacements, NHLPA plan B is WHA, other minors and Europe.
wonder if they have considered where they are going to find the "replacement fans".
KingsFan7824
Registered User
They have to come to a deal at some point. Neither side can live without the other, in terms of hockey. Small numbers of people watch the NHL. Fewer people would watch the NHL with replacement players. Even fewer would watch a players league.
I don't know what the date would be, but both sides have to get this done in time to have a draft, some type of free agency period, and then training camps come September.
I'm not getting excited though. I'm not going to read the article. I'm not going to read any articles about meetings. When a headline reads, "They Have a Deal Done...no, seriously this time...honestly, we're not kidding...come on, really...it's true...you can check", then I'll read it.
I don't know what the date would be, but both sides have to get this done in time to have a draft, some type of free agency period, and then training camps come September.
I'm not getting excited though. I'm not going to read the article. I'm not going to read any articles about meetings. When a headline reads, "They Have a Deal Done...no, seriously this time...honestly, we're not kidding...come on, really...it's true...you can check", then I'll read it.
Icey said:
Are you kidding me about revenue sharing?
Arbs, QO's, and ELS (entry level) contracts are secondary to the cap & revenue sharing.
The NHL doesn't seem willing to offer revenue sharing at all so maybe they need to budge on that!
chiavsfan said:
Oh please... the President of the Tampa Bay Lightning said they are anticipating revenues for next season to be $800 million.
There is no way the NHL can offer a cap based on ANY linkage to revenue at least for the first few years of the CBA. 60% of revenue equals a $16 million cap. :lol
rekrul said:
WHA - HA... If there is a WHA, they wont make close to what they could make w/ a 42.5 million cap in the NHL. Again, the NHLPA has alternatives, but nothing that is as good as the NHL even w/ a cap.
The owner could try replacement players, but that would depend on who will cross the line and the skill of the replacements.
I don't care at this point. Wait till a deal gets done and then I will start caring again.
Bettman offer to Goodenow. We can now only offer you 32 million hard with luxury taxes that will go directly into revenue sharing starting at any payroll over 25 million plus we need a linkage protection clause at 55% max of gross agreed upon revenues.
Goodenow repsonse. Linkage is a non starter.
Bettman. OK, I'll be lifting the lockout to any player currently under 1 million in salary effective June 1st. See you at the draft.
Goodenow repsonse. Linkage is a non starter.
Bettman. OK, I'll be lifting the lockout to any player currently under 1 million in salary effective June 1st. See you at the draft.
Slats432
Registered User
Ah, the pressure point argument. Hello Mr. PA supporter. Just remember where the money comes from to pay those big salaries.rekrul said:
I think it nonsensical when the argrument comes up and the PA guys think that well, we can still get our $49.00 salary cap deal when league revenues have gone to pot.
Great...wait two years, get a no salary cap deal and the average salary goes to $600K.....OR, accept the $42.5 cap with the $1.3 Million average salary. Nah...it is a principle thing, we want the smaller pie as long as there is no cap.
- Status
