NHL Making *Formal* Offer Today? (Feb.1)

[officeglen]

http://www.sportsnet.ca/hockey/article.jsp;jsessionid=PFJIHFJAKBKH?content=20050201_165545_3304

The offer WILL be made tommorow.

Sadly if the NHL offer sees a shadow NHLPA offer, we are doomed to six weeks of more lockout and talks to be held at Punxsutawney, PA.

 

[davidwii]

The league will have a few changes to the ideas discussed at two meetings last week, but won't back away from its demand for a hard salary cap.

If the NHLPA hasn't said.."Ok, we'll accept this, this and that." Then it seems like such a waste of time to go back and make another formal proposal. And if the NHLPA has already accepted the foundation of the proposal and someone just has to officially document it for legal purposes....say that.

I understand all the ramifications of an impasse, showing willingness to negotiate. Even if the NHL knows the PA is gonna reject it, they still need to submit it. I'm pretty sure their gonna know if the PA is gonna accept/reject.

I doubt they get into these meetings and the listen to the PA say things like, "I spy, with my little eye...something big and green and wonderful. Ok NHL, no run off and create a proposal based upon the riddle I've just given you."

I mean this is not a guessing game. The NHL knows or doesn't know if their gonna accept/reject. Its not like their saying...ohhhh NHL, suprise me...I'd love to see something in Blue...can you go see if you can find me something....

Alright...I'm babbling...I must sign off....

 

[Greschner4]

The owners have to present a comprehensive proposal which can, if rejected, beimplemeted as a new CBA. These concepts just do not seem to fulfill that requirement.

Given the immigration problems and potential liabilites if they are wrong, I cannot see the owners trying to declare an impasse - it makes no sense, Hnag on wait a minute - these are the NHL owners so who knows

You haven't seen the proposal, so you have no way of knowing how comprehensive it is.

 

[Wetcoaster]

You haven't seen the proposal, so you have no way of knowing how comprehensive it is.

Nor do you.

I have seen enough concepts however from the NHL.

 

[Greschner4]

Nor do you.

I have seen enough concepts however from the NHL.

No I haven't, but I also haven't made the definitive legal judgment you have.

Reducing the proposal to a "comprehensive" legal document is a simple formality that would take two days if that.

 

[tritone]

here here

and there there

Tired of it all....I just want to hear one of two things from now on.....

1. "the season is officially canceled"
2. "we have an agreement and the season officially starts (fill in date)"

Aside from that I think the media and the NHLPA and the Owners should just say nothing , stop leaking silly little tidbits and getting everyone in a frenzy .

 

[Wetcoaster]

No I haven't, but I also haven't made the definitive legal judgment you have.

Reducing the proposal to a "comprehensive" legal document is a simple formality that would take two days if that.

What definitve legal judgment is that?

 

[Greschner4]

What definitve legal judgment is that?

What you wrote -- that the owners' concepts aren't "comprehensive" enough to be implemented as a CBA.

(If you've forgotten, you wrote the following: "The owners have to present a comprehensive proposal which can, if rejected, beimplemeted as a new CBA. These concepts just do not seem to fulfill that requirement.")

 

[Wetcoaster]

What you wrote -- that the owners' concepts aren't "comprehensive" enough to be implemented as a CBA.

(If you've forgotten, you wrote the following: "The owners have to present a comprehensive proposal which can, if rejected, beimplemeted as a new CBA. These concepts just do not seem to fulfill that requirement.")

And that is all that has been presented so far. Concepts, no comprehensive offer.

As of one hour ago:
TSN is reporting that there has been no new offer but one may be forthcoming on Wednesday.

There was no new proposal Tuesday but the two sides did finally make contact.

Sources indicated the league and union exchanged e-mails and set up Wednesday's meeting.

A report in the New York Daily News said the NHL would table a new offer to the NHLPA on Tuesday, but that did not happen. Still, many expect the league to finally deliver its final official proposal this week, perhaps as early as Wednesday.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=113455&hubName=nhl

Canadian Press is saying the same thing:

A report in the New York Daily News said the NHL would table a new offer to the NHLPA on Tuesday, but that did not happen. Still, many expect the league to finally deliver its final official proposal this week, perhaps as early as Wednesday.

http://www.canada.com/sports/hockey/story.html?id=f056806c-e41f-4703-aead-7f979a2c1fb3

When a proposal is actually tabled then we can see. Thus far no comprehensive proposal.

 

[Greschner4]

And that is all that has been presented so far. Concepts, no comprehensive offer.

As of one hour ago:
TSN is reporting that there has been no new offer but one may be forthcoming on Wednesday.

http://www.tsn.ca/nhl/news_story.asp?ID=113455&hubName=nhl

Canadian Press is saying the same thing:

http://www.canada.com/sports/hockey/story.html?id=f056806c-e41f-4703-aead-7f979a2c1fb3

When a proposal is actually tabled then we can see. Thus far no comprehensive proposal.

No there isn't, but as I said it will take two days for NHL lawyers to put the concepts we've heard about into a formal legal document to present to Goodenow in the form of a full CBA that is the "final offer."

I'm surprised that you're so hung up on this obvious point.

 

[me2]

No there isn't, but as I said it will take two days for NHL lawyers to put the concepts we've heard about into a formal legal document to present to Goodenow in the form of a full CBA that is the "final offer."

I'm surprised that you're so hung up on this obvious point.

They've probably got 95% (the standard stuff) typed up already and ready to go. Add on the rest when a deal is struck

 

[Wetcoaster]

They've probably got 95% (the standard stuff) typed up already and ready to go. Add on the rest when a deal is struck

It is that last 5% that could be the deal breaker.

 

[Wetcoaster]

No there isn't, but as I said it will take two days for NHL lawyers to put the concepts we've heard about into a formal legal document to present to Goodenow in the form of a full CBA that is the "final offer."

I'm surprised that you're so hung up on this obvious point.

Thus far every time we hear comprehensive proposal from the NHL we have seen concepts. I will wait and see what comes down the pipe.

And if you have ever negotiated detailed contracts and/or been involved in complex negotiations, the final language can be critical. The last time in 1994-95 it took the lawyers over two weeks to sign off. You can kill a lot of trees before the agreement is in final form acceptable to both sides.

I'm surprised that you missed this obvious point.

 

[Greschner4]

Thus far every time we hear comprehensive proposal from the NHL we have seen concepts. I will wait and see what comes down the pipe.

And if you have ever negotiated detailed contracts and/or been involved in complex negotiations, the final language can be critical. The last time in 1994-95 it took the lawyers over two weeks to sign off. You can kill a lot of trees before the agreement is in final form acceptable to both sides.

I'm surprised that you missed this obvious point.

I've negotiated a bunch, which is why I understand that parties don't exchange offers in what you call "comprehensive" form.

Final language may turn out to be a thorny issue, but it's not even remotely the issue the parties are faced with now which is agreeing on the important components of a deal.

I also understand that it's a mere formality for the NHL to turn its offer into CBA form ... which was your original point.

 

[Wetcoaster]

I've negotiated a bunch, which is why I understand that parties don't exchange offers in what you call "comprehensive" form.

Final language may turn out to be a thorny issue, but it's not even remotely the issue the parties are faced with now which is agreeing on the important components of a deal.

I also understand that it's a mere formality for the NHL to turn its offer into CBA form ... which was your original point.

I have had different experiences when negotiating contracts in the NHL in the past. YMMV.

 

[Sammy*]

I have had different experiences when negotiating contracts in the NHL in the past. YMMV.

Why are you arguing this obvious point. Why in gods name would they put together a comprehensive proposal when the principal & concepts that have been put forward to date have been rejected. You first of all come to an agreement as to the framework of a deal, that is basically worked off of concepts that have been agreed to, then you go from there.
Its really not that difficult a "concept" to understand

 

[Wetcoaster]

Why are you arguing this obvious point. Why in gods name would they put together a comprehensive proposal when the principal & concepts that have been put forward to date have been rejected. You first of all come to an agreement as to the framework of a deal, that is basically worked off of concepts that have been agreed to, then you go from there.
Its really not that difficult a "concept" to understand

The issue revolved around what would be needed to get in position to declare an impasse. You need a comprehensive proposal that if rejected can be implemented as the new CBA.

See post No. 74 where I was following up on a point made regarding impasse.

Do try to follow along. Its really not that difficult a "concept" to understand.

 

[X0ssbar]

This from the Columbus Dispatch this morning (subscription site only) regarding a possible proposal from the league today:

"Two sources who spoke on condition of anonymity indicated to The Dispatch last night that the offer will include a salary cap but might include a luxury tax and a new profit-sharing component.

Under such a plan, two limits would be set for player payroll. The highest figure would be a hard cap that a team could not exceed. Anything greater than the lower figure, likely $5 million to $10 million less than the hard cap, would be subjected to a tax.

The luxury tax would be split 50-50 between owners and players, with some of the money being spread among small-market teams. Sources said the players’ offer for an immediate 24 percent rollback in salary, made in December, is part of the proposal."

 

[Greschner4]

The issue revolved around what would be needed to get in position to declare an impasse. You need a comprehensive proposal that if rejected can be implemented as the new CBA.

See post No. 74 where I was following up on a point made regarding impasse.

Do try to follow along. Its really not that difficult a "concept" to understand.

Actually, the issue revolved around you saying that what you've seen in the media wouldn't be "comprehensive" enough to consitute a new CBA.

You were then called on the flaws in what you wrote, specifically (1) you hadn't seen the proposal, so you were in no position to make such a broad-based and definitive judgment; and (2) that if impasse is the strategy, it would take little time for the concepts we've seen reported to be reduced by the NHL lawyers to a comprehensive legal document that could be faxed to Goodenow and when not accepted by Goodenow, serve as the new CBA.

To which you responded alternatively that you had some sort of relevant "experience" -- which doesn't seem to be reflected in what you write; and by sarcasm, changing the subject, and not addressing the point of what's written.

 

[Wetcoaster]

Actually, the issue revolved around you saying that what you've seen in the media wouldn't be "comprehensive" enough to consitute a new CBA.

You were then called on the flaws in what you wrote, specifically (1) you hadn't seen the proposal, so you were in no position to make such a broad-based and definitive judgment; and (2) that if impasse is the strategy, it would take little time for the concepts we've seen reported to be reduced by the NHL lawyers to a comprehensive legal document that could be faxed to Goodenow and when not accepted by Goodenow, serve as the new CBA.

To which you responded alternatively that you had some sort of relevant "experience" -- which doesn't seem to be reflected in what you write; and by sarcasm, changing the subject, and not addressing the point of what's written.

It appears I called it perfectly - another set of concepts - short on details yet again.

 

[Wetcoaster]

You haven't seen the proposal, so you have no way of knowing how comprehensive it is.

It appears my prediction was spot on.

 

[PecaFan]

It appears my prediction was spot on.

Oooh, congratulations, you "won" an argument no one was disputing. Everyone in this thread said that concepts only would be exchanged.

Nobody else felt the need for the self-congratulatory pat on the back.

 

[Rahan]

By the way guys...

I hope you know that there's no hope for tomorrow. I can already tell you what's going to happen: The NHLPA will make a proposal, reflecting the one they did in December, just to have their vengeance, because every hit they get, they must give back, and they still haven't got over the NHL's rejection of their offer in December. They just wanna insult them tomorrow with another dumb proposal, and then the NHL won't want to come back with another proposal, and everything will be lost.

Too bad they're all trying to be hardasses.