October 25th CBA Deadline for 82 Game Season (CBA & Lockout Discussion) - Part XIV

[ThirtyFive]

I don't understand some of you guys calling for the cancellation of the season. Do you not realize how utterly catastrophic and embarrassing that would be? For the greatest sports trophy in history to not be awarded twice in some eight years?

 

[Iggy77]

Is it your contention that there is only one way to fix an unhealthy league, that being linkage based on averaging all 30 teams' revenues?

Linkage is leverage and protection for the owners if revenues drop. They'll never give it up even if it's the cause of some of the problems.

 

[Hire Sather]

I don't understand some of you guys calling for the cancellation of the season. Do you not realize how utterly catastrophic and embarrassing that would be? For the greatest sports trophy in history to not be awarded twice in some eight years?

Owners need to show the players just who is in control here.

 

[T-Funk]

I don't understand some of you guys calling for the cancellation of the season. Do you not realize how utterly catastrophic and embarrassing that would be? For the greatest sports trophy in history to not be awarded twice in some eight years?

I can't see how this situation can get much more embarrassing at this point.

 

[njdevil26]

I'm still on the side of the owners.
If it's true what Fehr was apparently saying to the players in the conference call, then I would be totally satisfied with Bettman waking up tomorrow and canceling the whole season.

Then he can send a fax to Fehr saying "Here's the new NHL offer. 5 year max on contracts, cap hit is actual money earned NOT AVERAGE, free agency 28, ELC 4 years, and the revenue split is 55-45 in favor of the owners. If you aren't prepared to take this offer AS IS, don't even bother replying."

 

[Deebo]

Could someone please explain the difference between the league's proposal of the make whole provision versus the players proposal?

The league's make-whole provision comes from players share in future years.

While the players offer said that 13 percent would come off the top of HRR to make the
players salaries whole and the remaining 85% would be split at 50/50.

At least that's how I understand it.

 

[NHLFanSince2020]

The 24% rollback really stung.

Ouch, well, considering they were making 74% of the revenue prior to the last CBA and teams were hemorrhage money, I'd say they did alright in that no teams folded, they all kept their jobs, and are making a much higher average salary now.

 

[General Fanager]

I don't understand some of you guys calling for the cancellation of the season. Do you not realize how utterly catastrophic and embarrassing that would be? For the greatest sports trophy in history to not be awarded twice in some eight years?

they dont seem to care so why should we? They are only doing it to themselves.

 

[Fugu]

I wouldn't say the longer the lockout went, the better the deal got, but it IS true that the players wound up with the better deal in 04-05, which flies in the face of what the players have been crying about.

On this point we can agree. One of the biggest wins for the players was the lowering of the UFA age. That turned out to be far more problematic to teams competing for the best players in the league than they realized.

I think there was a belief that the supply of players would be higher due to a cap, but the reality is that for every player departure from one team, there's an opening for another player there. Where they also miscalculated was not anticipating the lifelong contract crap, and that the floor would force teams to overpay mid- and lower level guys.

 

[patty59]

They actually think that they are going to get MORE money when part or all of a season is lost. How can any of them actually believe that?

The PA must have a threshold of how much of the season they are willing to lose. Same as the league, although I would bet the league is less worried about it dollar wise as the players.

The PA didn't even bat an eye when they cancelled the games this year knowing full well that they could get a full season in with a later start date.

So any guesses when that is? a 60 game season is 27% lost wages for one year + whatever they will give up in the deal.

What's the end point here?

 

[Huis Clos*]

Why is there another lockout if the league is healthy?

Really?

Is it your contention that there is only one way to fix an unhealthy league, that being linkage based on averaging all 30 teams' revenues?

Now you're just changing the argument. Could they tweak the way the cap is calculated to make the finances even better for smaller revenue teams? Sure. Could there be other ways of placing a salary cap that is more equitable? Maybe. But to argue that the league isn't better off with linkage now than it was in '04 is crazy. There isn't a metric that shows otherwise. So, absolutely yes linkage has been good for the whole of the league. Your original contention that linkage has not been beneficial is flat wrong.

 

[Scottkmlps]

Maybe some has mentioned this earlier and I missed it but hasn't Fehr been complaining how much the players lost in the last CBA . Now he says the further we go the better it gets. Maybe I'm missing something here but that sounds contradictory

I think delusional is a better word for it. Fehr is a clown. Plain & simple.

 

[Ollie Weeks]

Maybe some has mentioned this earlier and I missed it but hasn't Fehr been complaining how much the players lost in the last CBA . Now he says the further we go the better it gets. Maybe I'm missing something here but that sounds contradictory

One might even go so far as to think the players might have done ok as a result of the last CBA, after all.

But that's silly nonsense talk. Everything needs a winner and a loser.

 

[Fugu]

Linkage is leverage and protection for the owners if revenues drop. They'll never give it up even if it's the cause of some of the problems.

You're confusing what I'm saying as preferable to what I believe will happen. I agree that they won't give it up, but I'm saying that they should. They really should not treat revenues as globally as they do seeing how much of it is garnered locally, and seeing the massive disparity in not only current revenues but revenue potential for the different markets.

 

[Milhouse40]

If one side of a negotiation is trying to get the other to move towards them, there needs to be incentive offered.

So far, the ownership has not offered a single incentive to move the players down in percentage. The players understand that they have to come down and have said as much. You want to entice the players to come down to 50%? Offer to do it gradually, without short term loss of income on the player's part. That's an enticement. This immediate reduction stuff is total ******** and anyone blaming the players for not accepting it is a buyer of that ********. It's obstinate. The league is asking for concessions, it's their responsibility to soften the blow of them.

Incentive???
What incentive???

THE PLAYERS ALREADY GOT EVERYTHING.

They got the money, and most of it.
They can have 20 years contracts with frontloading BS

The owners pays everything for them from Hotel rooms, medicals treatment, masseuse to Sticks, gatorade and water.

What incentive can they give them?
Tell me ONLY ONE incentive they can give the players????

 

[Edgar Halliwax]

I'm not at all pleased with the league's approach. Simply saying "you have to work off our proposal or we refuse to talk at all" is not negotiating. And if you say "well the PA needs to come up with another proposal", why? The league won't care unless it is 90% their proposal, again not exactly fair negotiating.

It's no surprise the PA is waiting. They're not at all interested in rolling over and losing again.

The average salary went up over $1,000,000 per year since the beginning the the CBA that just expired. Now, please tell me - how exactly did the players "lose"?

 

[Deebo]

I can't see how this situation can get much more embarrassing at this point.

Cancelling the entire year would be infinitely worse.

If they were to reach a deal tomorrow and start an 82 game season on November 2nd, this labour dispute would be an after thought 15 seconds after the puck drops.

Maybe not to a bunch of posters here, but to the general public who hasn't been refreshing their twitter feeds every 5 seconds hoping for a new morsel of news.

I know I'd forget about all this pretty quickly if the lockout only delayed the start of the season by 3.5 weeks.

 

[Player big P]

Much of the problem stems from the fact that apparently everyone involved graduated from the Al Swearengen School of Negotiations.

"Here's my counter offer to your counter offer: GO **** YOURSELF."

 

[cheswick]

The average salary went up over $1,000,000 per year since the beginning the the CBA that just expired. Now, please tell me - how exactly did the players "lose"?

You might wanna check your math there bud. Per year? The average salary is now $2.5 million.

 

[NHLFanSince2020]

The league's make-whole provision comes from players share in future years.

While the players offer said that 13 percent would come off the top of HRR to make the players salaries whole and the remaining 85% would be split at 50/50.

At least that's how I understand it.

Thanks for the reply.

That doesn't really make it entirely clear to me.

For one thing...
100%-13%=87%
Where does the 85% come from?
Did you mean "15 percent"?

Please explain it again to me like you would to a 6th grader.
I thought I had an idea of what the their proposal were but now I'm not so sure.

 

[therealdeal]

I think delusional is a better word for it. Fehr is a clown. Plain & simple.

I would whole heartedly disagree. Though I am not his biggest fan, it would be foolish to think this. Don Fehr is extremely sophisticated, as is his bargaining team. Just because I (and you) don't understand his tactics doesn't mean they don't make sense or have a very specific end goal in mind.

The man has years of experience, he knows exactly what he's doing.

 

[Fugu]

Really?

Now you're just changing the argument. Could they tweak the way the cap is calculated to make the finances even better for smaller revenue teams? Sure. Could there be other ways of placing a salary cap that is more equitable? Maybe. But to argue that the league isn't better off with linkage now than it was in '04 is crazy. There isn't a metric that shows otherwise. So, absolutely yes linkage has been good for the whole of the league. Your original contention that linkage has not been beneficial is flat wrong.

I'm changing the argument? Let's review:

Because the league was so very healthy without it. Right? I don't know how anyone could argue that linkage hasn't been a positive mechanism for the whole of the NHL.

My response:

Why is there another lockout if the league is healthy?

Is it your contention that there is only one way to fix an unhealthy league, that being linkage based on averaging all 30 teams' revenues?

Why don't you answer my question?

I'm arguing for a better way to deal with the alleged problems. You're arguing that some gains were made under linkage. Sure, the teams, as a group, spent less but the weaker teams doubled their spending on player cost while their revenues only grew at a nominal rate, if at all in some cases.

 

[Deebo]

Thanks for the reply.

That doesn't really make it entirely clear to me.

For one thing...
100%-13%=87%
Where does the 85% come from?
Did you mean "15 percent"?

Please explain it again to me like you would to a 6th grader.
I thought I had an idea of what the their proposal were but now I'm not so sure.

It should have read "remaining 87%"

 

[stuffradio]

I would whole heartedly disagree. Though I am not his biggest fan, it would be foolish to think this. Don Fehr is extremely sophisticated, as is his bargaining team. Just because I (and you) don't understand his tactics doesn't mean they don't make sense or have a very specific end goal in mind.

The man has years of experience, he knows exactly what he's doing.

Helping the owners chase the most important revenue source away? Also imagine how the sponsors are feeling about sponsoring a league like this.

 

[Milhouse40]

I'm still on the side of the owners.
If it's true what Fehr was apparently saying to the players in the conference call, then I would be totally satisfied with Bettman waking up tomorrow and canceling the whole season.

Then he can send a fax to Fehr saying "Here's the new NHL offer. 5 year max on contracts, cap hit is actual money earned NOT AVERAGE, free agency 28, ELC 4 years, and the revenue split is 55-45 in favor of the owners. If you aren't prepared to take this offer AS IS, don't even bother replying."

As carzy as it sounds......it's the only move left to Bettman.

He can't put another firm deadline
He can't put out another "best offer" on the table

He did those things twice already.....one more time would not be serious.

So the NHLPA, wants to drag their feet, like they did SINCE JANUARY and cost EVERYONE'S GOOD MONEY......break them. That's the only option Bettman got and he should try it.

If i were Bettman,

I'd call Fehr and tell them: You guys have 48h to respond (counter proposal, a real one) to the last offer. If i don't hear from you in 48h, i will:

Take the offer off the table
Cancelled the whole season
Give you back the first offer.
Take it or leave it.

Trust me, players will **** in their pants!!