Some fans refuse to face reality.

[Resolute]

The cap isn't set at the 54% mark. They use 54% to find the mid point and the the ceiling will is $5-7 million above, and the floow will be $5-7 million below.

Err, no. The cap is 54%. If payroll comes in over 54%, the escrow will reduce the players salaries until they are back down to 54%. This is independant of whether revenues are below expectations or not.

 

[GSC2k2*]

Err, no. The cap is 54%. If payroll comes in over 54%, the escrow will reduce the players salaries until they are back down to 54%. This is independant of whether revenues are below expectations or not.

I am pretty sure you guys are saying the same thing but not quite in the same way. There are team caps (which FlyersFan is posting on) and the league cap (which Resolute is posting on). Both are valid.

 

[ClosetOilersFan]

LMAO, who cares if the players lose some money? Perhaps this was already considered by the NHLPA when they designed the Escrow section of the CBA... One would think that if your average fan could spot this, several highly educated and well compensated businessmen and lawyers would have? Maybe I'm expecting too much though.

If the NHLPA was concerned about this, there would be a lower cap. Then again, in my mind, this means the same thing... less money for the players? Perhaps the 39million cap was agreed to because both sides were already satisfied with this mark as the maximum ???

Any fan who thought the CBA was going to shrink the salary of the top players was dillusional... supply and demand my friend... those in demand will always make the dollars. It's the players who are not in high demand that will take the big hits... which in my world makes perfect sense.

However.. yes. The teams who are spending 2/3 or 3/4 of their cap on a couple players, and then a token to fill the rest of the spots will suck; just as when teams spent 2/3 or 3/4 of the budget before the CBA. It's just poor management.

Surely you didn't expect all the crappy GM's and owners to suddenly become smart after the CBA? It appears to me that all the good GM's are still good... Also, as some with sense has pointed out several times, it will take a couple years for the effect of the cap to kick in... ONCE all the teams have a finalized roster and are near their spending limit/cap. Once this happens, it will be much more difficult to absorb large salaries and to find money to sign new players.

Once again, anyone who expected the CBA to change things the day after it was signed is crazy. Give it time.. give it time.

 

[ResidentAlien*]

Not to speak for Ike, but I do note that his post specifies that it was the teams' PAYROLLS "that sent the financial situation into, etc." I read that as "the players", since they are the payroll recipients. You misquoted him in a slight but relevant way.

True, but,with any payroll recipient there is a check writer.SOmeone has to write the check before someone can cash it.

Regardless arguing the success of this CBA is kind of silly at this point don't ya think?
It will take at least a year to see what happens...more like two IMO.
HIstory will judge this new deal, not IKE, you or me.

 

[RLC]

If the NHL goes over the 54% then they get the escrow money, but who's is it?

The players ? which players?
the top 50 players again get the big money and some making back lots of the 24%. It's those contracts the would put the league over the 54%. The regular players take a 15%hit but they are not the ones that put the league over the limit. It's the little guy that gets screwed again.

 

[Resolute]

Well, assuming the escrow hit actually does come out to the full 15%, tell me, who loses more money: Jarome Iginla or Steve Montador?