Potential CBA negotiation issues (was: Is a lockout actually inevitable?)

[powerstuck]

Last time both the CBA and TV Deal expired in June of 2004.

This time, the CBA expires 1 year before the new TV Deal. Meaning the TV deal won't be affected what so ever. As the new TV deal will begin for the 2021-22 season, and the potential lockout year is the 2020-21 season. Unless for whatever reason the CBA extends into a second season, which is an extreme scenario.

Yes, I understand. But negotiations for both the CBA and TV contract won't begin at 5 to midnight (well for CBA most likely). What will happen is that you will lose a full season because of CBA negotiations...and during that same lost season you will be negotiating a new TV deal. TV networks won't jump in joy.

 

[Cor]

Yes, I understand. But negotiations for both the CBA and TV contract won't begin at 5 to midnight (well for CBA most likely). What will happen is that you will lose a full season because of CBA negotiations...and during that same lost season you will be negotiating a new TV deal. TV networks won't jump in joy.

But that loss of season has no affect on the new deal.

 

[mouser]

Yes, I understand. But negotiations for both the CBA and TV contract won't begin at 5 to midnight (well for CBA most likely). What will happen is that you will lose a full season because of CBA negotiations...and during that same lost season you will be negotiating a new TV deal. TV networks won't jump in joy.

I’m not seeing anything between the NHL and PA’s disagreements that suggest a completely lost season.

 

[powerstuck]

I’m not seeing anything between the NHL and PA’s disagreements that suggest a completely lost season.

I'm not seeing anything that would suggest a need for losing even a single game to CBA negotiations, but it's NHL and NHLPA, so who knows.

 

[BattleBorn]

I'm not seeing anything that would suggest a need for losing even a single game to CBA negotiations, but it's NHL and NHLPA, so who knows.

I've got a feeling the PA's going to make a play to move UFA up a fair amount. Paying guys younger will definitely have a ripple effect.

 

[jghockey]

I hope that there won't be another lockout after this season. What do y'all think?

 

[StreetHawk]

I've got a feeling the PA's going to make a play to move UFA up a fair amount. Paying guys younger will definitely have a ripple effect.

They would need to trade something big to get that concession. M

Who knows what either side wants.

Plenty of things like ufa age, arbitration rights for guys who don’t have it ( like nylander right now), escrow, contract term, signing bonuses, buyout rates, etc.

As long as they agree on what goes into HRR and the split, everything else is operational.

 

[chizzler]

PA has Donald Fehr. That’s all you need to know.

 

[ottawah]

I'm not seeing anything that would suggest a need for losing even a single game to CBA negotiations, but it's NHL and NHLPA, so who knows.

While I agree 100%, if thats the case then why would the players not extend the current deal to go to the Olympics, which at face value seemed extraordinarily important to them?

Something from the players side just does not pass the smell test. Not that it is all on them, its just that we have two logical statements that contradict each other. No reason to think the players need to make any changes, yet obviously they want to make large changes.

 

[mouser]

While I agree 100%, if thats the case then why would the players not extend the current deal to go to the Olympics, which at face value seemed extraordinarily important to them?

Something from the players side just does not pass the smell test. Not that it is all on them, its just that we have two logical statements that contradict each other. No reason to think the players need to make any changes, yet obviously they want to make large changes.

We know the players are very unhappy with escrow, and rightfully so. The question is what's the best way to go about solving that? I suspect the PA and Owners have very different ideas.

 

[Hoek]

How is it rightfully so? To me they just simply don't understand it. It's not actually screwing them out of anything they would've gotten. If we lose games to a bunch of guys not understanding that they can't go immediately spending money they don't have I'm going to be 100% pissed at the PA. Fix the formula to make it less escrow and be done with it, hopefully.

 

[ottawah]

We know the players are very unhappy with escrow, and rightfully so. The question is what's the best way to go about solving that? I suspect the PA and Owners have very different ideas.

Actually I think they are irrationally unhappy not rightfully so. Escrow is straight forward, and getting rid of it will not earn the players a penny more. They have agreed to a 50 50 split with the owners and escrow to manage that. So if they want to get rid of escrow, that will require an immediate 15% reduction in all contracts and likely a 20% lowering of the salary cap with less play between max and floor. Is it worth losing a half season just to make the same coin? Thats an absolutely illogical move based on emotion, not fact.

One way or another the players are not getting that escrow money back unless they change the 50 50 rule, and I just cannot see that happening.

And opening this up leads to the owners hitting hard in other areas such as signing bonuses. The last two lockouts have seen the players eventually take a worse deal than the one offered to them from the start. This one looks likely the same ....

 

[Tawnos]

I don’t think the players are looking to get rid of escrow so much as changing the way the escrow payments are structured.

 

[powerstuck]

Actually I think they are irrationally unhappy not rightfully so. Escrow is straight forward, and getting rid of it will not earn the players a penny more. They have agreed to a 50 50 split with the owners and escrow to manage that. So if they want to get rid of escrow, that will require an immediate 15% reduction in all contracts and likely a 20% lowering of the salary cap with less play between max and floor. Is it worth losing a half season just to make the same coin? Thats an absolutely illogical move based on emotion, not fact.

One way or another the players are not getting that escrow money back unless they change the 50 50 rule, and I just cannot see that happening.

And opening this up leads to the owners hitting hard in other areas such as signing bonuses. The last two lockouts have seen the players eventually take a worse deal than the one offered to them from the start. This one looks likely the same ....

I don't know if the impact would be the reduction in salaries as you say it, but I do know that having less margin between the cap and the floor would increase the competitiveness between teams. Look, you have Coyotes and Senators struggling to reach the floor because they are budget teams, and as long as they keep doing it they will never be competitive vs teams that spend almost 21 millions more.

 

[LadyStanley]

The big issues facing NHL, NHLPA in upcoming CBA talks

The Athletic (paywall) Katie Strang looks at the issues in the upcoming CBA negotiations.

“Obviously, everyone knows the re-opener date is coming roughly 13 months from now and we will be having lots of discussions with players over the course of the ensuing season, starting in the fall, about what that means and how we approach it and what’s on players’ minds and so on,” Fehr told The Athletic. “And players are cognizant of the fact that in the last negotiations they made a series of significant concessions. And we’ll sort of leave it at that.”

Negotiations could start this fall.

Issues include: HRR (definition, clarification), but % probably won't change; escrow ("The problem with escrow is, it’s an easy issue to complain about, but harder to fix."); max length contracts; Olympics; and the Wild Card - Seattle expansion.

 

[ottawah]

I don't know if the impact would be the reduction in salaries as you say it,

Right now the players salaries get ~60% of the revenue. They lose ~16% in escrow to bring the number down to 50%. To lose escrow and keep the 50%, only one thing can happen. Salries have to be reduced, and there is already a precedence for it.

 

[ottawah]

The big issues facing NHL, NHLPA in upcoming CBA talks

The Athletic (paywall) Katie Strang looks at the issues in the upcoming CBA negotiations.



Negotiations could start this fall.

Issues include: HRR (definition, clarification), but % probably won't change; escrow ("The problem with escrow is, it’s an easy issue to complain about, but harder to fix."); max length contracts; Olympics; and the Wild Card - Seattle expansion.

Thats not how i read it. They say the talk among themselves begins this fall and goes through season. That would indicate that they will not be talking to the owners anytime soon. And Fehr has said in the past he sees no reason to negotiate until the very last minute. I do not agree with the approach, but he is probably right, its a waste of time as little progress can be made. Butt he also has to take into account that losing games at the start of the year hurts his side significantly more than the other side, while losing games at the end of the year (i.e. playoffs) hurts the other side more.

 

[powerstuck]

Right now the players salaries get ~60% of the revenue. They lose ~16% in escrow to bring the number down to 50%. To lose escrow and keep the 50%, only one thing can happen. Salries have to be reduced, and there is already a precedence for it.

Yes, but in the end it doesn't make sense.

When I get my paycheck, it's written I earned 3000$ but only receive 49% of it because the government takes 51%. I don't consider I earn 3000$ but 1470$. It doesn't matter if players ''get 60%'' if they automatically lose the difference between what ever they receive and 50% of the total pot.

 

[Section337]

Thats not how i read it. They say the talk among themselves begins this fall and goes through season. That would indicate that they will not be talking to the owners anytime soon. And Fehr has said in the past he sees no reason to negotiate until the very last minute. I do not agree with the approach, but he is probably right, its a waste of time as little progress can be made. Butt he also has to take into account that losing games at the start of the year hurts his side significantly more than the other side, while losing games at the end of the year (i.e. playoffs) hurts the other side more.

This encapsulates the reason why I don't understand fans supporting either side in these negotiations. Neither of the ever want to make a deal, they just want to win a deal.

 

[BLONG7]

Neither side wins if there is another lockout................negotiate and tweak the current deal, which both owners and players are making out like bandits...

 

[Fourier]

I've got a feeling the PA's going to make a play to move UFA up a fair amount. Paying guys younger will definitely have a ripple effect.

Aside from even more money going to the few top stars and as such less for everyone else what would their motivation be?

 

[Tomas W]

Cant they just pretend there is a lockout now, and sort this out before the end of the current CBA?

 

[S E P H]

Perhaps I am dumb, but if I was Fehr I would actually extend the CBA until the season after the NHL signs a brand new television deal which should obviously increase from the current one they have due to the game's growth and inflation. After that, he could make some more demands such as increasing the salary cap which would increase the average player's salary. It should also dramatically increase player's escrow as well.

However, in the middle of writing this post I came up with the notion that the television company like NBC/ESPN/Fox/ Others or a combination of two to three would not sign a deal until the CBA is done.

 

[AmericanDream]

I am truly curious to know this - and hopefully I can explain it correctly..

What is the overall total per year in NHL contracts vs total revenue brought in??

this is just pure bare bones and I know numbers are higher -I am curious that if the NHL brings in lets just say $500 mil in revenue, and the overall salaries are $400 mil, then the league would be technically making a profit correct?

Now, how much of that revenue is from the tv deals vs the gate??

I also want to know how close salaries are to revenue for the NFL and NBA?? meaning, NBA brings in $1bil in revenue and their salaries are $700 mil - obviously these numbers are not right, just examples.

What I am trying to get at is that hockey is still a gate driven sport 100%, whereas the NFL and NBA are not nearly as reliant on this as they have monstrous tv deals that sustain the sport...so if the NHL brings in the least amount of revenue of the 4 sports, but has a % of salary to the revenue that is close to that of the NBA or NFL, then that is something that cannot be sustained until a better tv deal comes along...players need to understand this sport is still gate driven, that will hurt them until this changes.

hopefully someone can understand what I am getting at -

Kirk Cousins makes $20 mil
Pat Kane makes $10 mil

are these contracts actually closer in terms of % of league revenue despite the size difference in yearly value??

 

[ottawah]

I am truly curious to know this - and hopefully I can explain it correctly..

What is the overall total per year in NHL contracts vs total revenue brought in??

this is just pure bare bones and I know numbers are higher -I am curious that if the NHL brings in lets just say $500 mil in revenue, and the overall salaries are $400 mil, then the league would be technically making a profit correct?

Now, how much of that revenue is from the tv deals vs the gate??

I also want to know how close salaries are to revenue for the NFL and NBA?? meaning, NBA brings in $1bil in revenue and their salaries are $700 mil - obviously these numbers are not right, just examples.

What I am trying to get at is that hockey is still a gate driven sport 100%, whereas the NFL and NBA are not nearly as reliant on this as they have monstrous tv deals that sustain the sport...so if the NHL brings in the least amount of revenue of the 4 sports, but has a % of salary to the revenue that is close to that of the NBA or NFL, then that is something that cannot be sustained until a better tv deal comes along...players need to understand this sport is still gate driven, that will hurt them until this changes.

hopefully someone can understand what I am getting at -

Kirk Cousins makes $20 mil
Pat Kane makes $10 mil

are these contracts actually closer in terms of % of league revenue despite the size difference in yearly value??

Well, its simple to determine. Average team salary is about 74M * 31 = 2300M. Escrow eats off 10% or so, lets guess at 2B (probably +- 10%). Players get half of, so revenue would have to be about 4B, players get 2B.

But its not 2B in profit. There are many other expenses off a hockey team, travels, GM, coaches, scouts, minor leagues, rinks, etc etc etc.

NBA brings in far more than that, and the players make far less of revenue (they get a 50/50 split too). Average NBA team seems to have about 120M in salary, so that likely 7.5B revenue, 3.75B salary.

But you are right, the costs to run a basketball team are definitely less than a hockey team, and the players get the same percentage. Same with football and baseball. Hockey pays out the most in terms of % revenue (tied with the NBA roughly).


You cannot compare NBA salaries and NHL salaries though as there are far less NBA players, and the truth is only the top ones make decent coin. A ball game can be dominated by one player as they play 80% of the game, less players on the court.