Inverting the cap ...

Discussion in 'Fugu's Business of Hockey Forum' started by southwing, Jan 24, 2005.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
View Users: View Users
  1. southwing

    southwing Registered User

    Mar 5, 2003
    Likes Received:
    Trophy Points:
    Shopping cart salesman.
    Moose's Armpit, Sk
    Home Page:
    In the conversations of last week, there was a lot of talk about going 3 or 4 years without a luxury tax and then, if it didn't work out, having it morph into a hard cap. If that were inverted to 3-4 years with a cap and then if it didn't work out (as determined by an agreed upon formula by both sides) then it would morph into a luxury tax system for the next 3-4 years. This would be a reasonable means to satisfy both sides or at least save face for both sides.

    All the other stuff (free agency, revenue sharing, etc) could fall into place pretty quick if they couled get over this basci road block in the negotiation.

    And this thought: where did all the talk go from the NHL's perspective of what they called 'forming a partnership' with the NHLPA? It doesn't sound like much of a partnership when players are told they are the equivalent of auto workers.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "358c248ada348a047a4b9bb27a146148"