TSN reports proposal was made today (2.9.05) by the NHL and PA rejected .

[Bruwinz37]

Boy I am not sure how the NHLPA can justify turning this down. This is their own proposal. They either knew this wasnt going to work or it was a smokescreen offer that they knew the owners would never accept. Either way they lose a lot of credibility for even making the offer in the first place...IMO.

Very, very interesting development. This clearly puts the league in control if it goes to the courts. They can now say they were willing to try their proposal. The players are going to end up screwed in the long run if they continue this hardline policy.

That being said perhaps Goodenow is waiting for the deadline date and a few more concessions and he will accept the final offer.

 

[Charge_Seven]

where are all the pro-NHLPA people

the NHL just proved the NHLPA's offer would not control anything by asking them to guarantee it.....and it it doesn't work then they would switch to the Feb. 2 proposal

haha...the players are going to be pissed about this....

Please see my previous post.

You'd have to be an idiot to believe that this was an offer made with the intentions of ever allowing the players system to work. All this offer was made to do was to force the 24% rollback, and then as soon as the owners went to sign the free agents they'd simply have to sign them as they did the past few years, and *bang* in comes their cap, just like they wanted.

 

[417]

where are all the pro-NHLPA people

the NHL just proved the NHLPA's offer would not control anything by asking them to guarantee it.....and it it doesn't work then they would switch to the Feb. 2 proposal

haha...the players are going to be pissed about this....

The players themselves guaranteed that offer, in fact I remember a quote by a player, don't remember who, saying that they should try the players offer cause they guarantee it, and if it dosen't work, they'd agree to switch to the owners offer...

PA is a joke...just goes to show that that offer was not a serious offer by them, they knew the owners would reject it, but they also knew pro-pa followers would eat it up

 

[Bruwinz37]

Bettman's probably having the press conference to point out that the league was willing to play under the Dec 9 offer.

And to give the drop dead date of next week I assume.

The players need to realize that this deal isnt so bad if they come out without a cap....at least initially.

 

[GKJ]

Boy I am not sure how the NHLPA can justify turning this down. This is their own proposal. They either knew this wasnt going to work or it was a smokescreen offer that they knew the owners would never accept. Either way they lose a lot of credibility for even making the offer in the first place...IMO.

Very, very interesting development. This clearly puts the league in control if it goes to the courts. They can now say they were willing to try their proposal. The players are going to end up screwed in the long run if they continue this hardline policy.

That being said perhaps Goodenow is waiting for the deadline date and a few more concessions and he will accept the final offer.

From the looks of it, it seems as if the NHLPA wasn't going to have any say over whether or not their proposal was actually working.

 

[RandV]

You could take it that way, however everyone knows that the owners would have the power to make or not make the players proposal work, and therefore what is to stop them from making it not work?

Under a CBA the owners aren't a collective group, but 30 individuals competing against each other. So whats to stop a small number of owners ruining things for the rest again if that offer was accepted?

 

[Charge_Seven]

That's a tough question to answer since we're not privy to the details about what kind of mechanism would exist to make the changeover.

Regardless, the players have said repeatedly they believe their Dec. 9 proposal would solve the league's financial issues. If they truly believed that, it would seem they would jump at this opportunity to prove it. Also, if the proposal works as the PA insists, why would the owners want to sabotage a system that works?

It would solve their financial issues. There's no question about it. However the league does not want their financial issues solved, it wants their financial issues to never have the ability to exhist, irregardless of poor management (which is the root cause of all of these financial issues). The players proposal requires intelligent management.

 

[Charge_Seven]

Under a CBA the owners aren't a collective group, but 30 individuals competing against each other. So whats to stop a small number of owners ruining things for the rest again if that offer was accepted?

Are you agreeing with me, or challenging what I'm saying...? lol

EDIT: I think I see what you're saying now...that things would simply revert to the way they are now after the rollback, correct?

I'm sure teams would come out and spend money as they did before, however as we all know by now this lockout is about making it possible for owners to make money again (not about equal playing fields). If the players gave the owners the 24% rollback, they would be able to keep their payrolls under wraps if they chose to. If they choose to spend money and go back into debt that is their fault. The players cleaned off the slate for them with the rollback offer, if the owners decide to screw it up again that's their own perogative, however there is no reason to reward them for doing so again by giving them a cap for ruining yet another workable system.

 

[417]

Please see my previous post.

You'd have to be an idiot to believe that this was an offer made with the intentions of ever allowing the players system to work. All this offer was made to do was to force the 24% rollback, and then as soon as the owners went to sign the free agents they'd simply have to sign them as they did the past few years, and *bang* in comes their cap, just like they wanted.

If that's the case, then what's the point of the PA making any proposal, if the owners are just going to turn around and make just like they want, what's the point of the PA offering anything, which in that case bring the question, what the hell does the PA exist for?

 

[Greschner4]

The players themselves guaranteed that offer, in fact I remember a quote by a player, don't remember who, saying that they should try the players offer cause they guarantee it, and if it dosen't work, they'd agree to switch to the owners offer...

PA is a joke...just goes to show that that offer was not a serious offer by them, they knew the owners would reject it, but they also knew pro-pa followers would eat it up

I didn't think it was possible for the PA to become an even bigger joke than it already is ... guess I underestimated them.

I nominate today's rejection and the idea that owners would spend all the rollback right away just to get a cap for the "Dumbest Things Said During The Lockout" thread and move that they be declared the runaway winners.

(All subject to the details being close to what's being reported, of course).

 

[Motown Beatdown]

Who knows if tsn is right saying the players turned it down. How many media outlets reported they were meeting face to face today? Not one, i'll wait and pass judgement when Bettman has his press conference tonight.

BTW, from nhl.com

The NHL today made a compromise offer to the Players' Association with the hope of furthering the CBA negotiations. NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman will hold a press conference in Toronto tonight at 6:30 p.m. ET to discuss the situation. You can listen to the call live on NHL.com.

http://nhl.com/

they aren't saying the PA rejected it. And before when the Pa rejected their proposal they had it on the front page.

 

[hockeytown9321]

Its funny that a few weeks ago a lot here said the NHL can't compromise by implementing the cap after 3 years if the PA's proposal didn't work. Just going by the language TSN used, they said a cap would be implemented if it was clear the tax wasn't working. Clear to who?

I think this proposal can also be seen as the first sign the owners are cracking a little and are getting desperate to play. I'm sure Goodenow recognizes it too.

 

[likea]

Please see my previous post.

You'd have to be an idiot to believe that this was an offer made with the intentions of ever allowing the players system to work. All this offer was made to do was to force the 24% rollback, and then as soon as the owners went to sign the free agents they'd simply have to sign them as they did the past few years, and *bang* in comes their cap, just like they wanted.

the NHLPA stated that their proposal would curb spending....that they put enough in their to stop owners from spending money

today, they just admitted the opposite...

the NHL just put a butt whoopin on Goodenow

 

[GKJ]

Are you agreeing with me, or challenging what I'm saying...? lol

I think he's trying to say that if this bizzare proposal was to happen, that there would be some kind of scheme where some of the owners will just continue to spend just in order to prove that it wasn't working.


Then we get into lawsuits and collusion. It would only get ugly.


And if that's not what he was trying to say, I wouldn't doubt that that would be the motive.

 

[Leaf Army]

Bettman is offering the players deals he KNOWS they can't accept. How would that have been a good deal for the players?

Yeah, for the remaining 25 games of this year you play at salary reduced by 24%. Then a year from now, we implement our deal.

Of course they can't accept that. That's ridiculous.

 

[417]

It would solve their financial issues. There's no question about it. However the league does not want their financial issues solved, it wants their financial issues to never have the ability to exhist, irregardless of poor management (which is the root cause of all of these financial issues). The players proposal requires intelligent management.

Poor management has as much to do with players as it does owners

 

[Lexicon Devil]

If true, isn't that essentially an admission by the PA that their proposal wouldn't work?

Of course not.

Suppose they implemented a trial system which rolled over into a cap if it didn't work. What incentive would the owners have to make the trial system work? The owners would clearly ensure the failure of the system to get their hard cap.

Wake up. This proposal, whether or not it existed, is nothing but a PR stunt.

 

[Taranis_24]

Please see my previous post.

You'd have to be an idiot to believe that this was an offer made with the intentions of ever allowing the players system to work. All this offer was made to do was to force the 24% rollback, and then as soon as the owners went to sign the free agents they'd simply have to sign them as they did the past few years, and *bang* in comes their cap, just like they wanted.

Isn't this what Goodenow was couting on. Knowing that a lot of the owners would put that 24 % back into player salaries. He got his bluff called and folded!

 

[Charge_Seven]

If that's the case, then what's the point of the PA making any proposal, if the owners are just going to turn around and make just like they want, what's the point of the PA offering anything, which in that case bring the question, what the hell does the PA exist for?

There is no point to any offer that gives the power to switch to a new CBA to the owners when it is there own stupidity that would get them the cap.

The point of players making offers is so that alternative approaches can be made, not so that regardless of what they agree upon the owners can screw it up and still get a cap.

 

[GKJ]

Poor management has as much to do with players as it does owners

I didn't know the players pay themselves.

 

[davidwii]

Boy I am not sure how the NHLPA can justify turning this down. This is their own proposal. They either knew this wasnt going to work or it was a smokescreen offer that they knew the owners would never accept. Either way they lose a lot of credibility for even making the offer in the first place...IMO.

Very, very interesting development. This clearly puts the league in control if it goes to the courts. They can now say they were willing to try their proposal. The players are going to end up screwed in the long run if they continue this hardline policy.

That being said perhaps Goodenow is waiting for the deadline date and a few more concessions and he will accept the final offer.

I agree. By rejecting this, I think they are in effect saying we have no faith in our own proposal.

As for people saying that the owners would not allow it to work is MORONIC. If the details of the proposal were strong and detailed enough..its not about the owners not allowing it. They would have to follow it. If it works...its works.....if not...it doesn't. If the players were smart enough to structure it so there are little to no loopholes...then it should work.

I wonder what the league offered as the determining details for deciding if its working or not....that would be of interest if I was a ProPA person.

But c'mon....this is getting idiotic for the players....

 

[Greschner4]

Bettman is offering the players deals he KNOWS they can't accept. How would that have been a good deal for the players?

Yeah, for the remaining 25 games of this year you play at salary reduced by 24%. Then a year from now, we implement our deal.

Of course they can't accept that. That's ridiculous.

Your comment is preposterous, nothing personal.

This year's numbers are already what they are, save for the free agents on the market now. How could the PA deal possibly be shown to "not work" until you go through at least one true free agent signing season with the rollback. Unless you believe that the owners would try to say that this year's two week signing period shows enough, you'd have AT A BARE MINIMUM this year and next under the December 9 proposal.

The PA has descended from utter stupidity to abject insanity.

 

[hockeytown9321]

Isn't this what Goodenow was couting on. Knowing that a lot of the owners would put that 24 % back into player salaries. He got his bluff called and folded!

Except that the owners would now have incentive to let costs get out of control.

 

[Charge_Seven]

Isn't this what Goodenow was couting on. Knowing that a lot of the owners would put that 24 % back into player salaries. He got his bluff called and folded!

What Goodenow wanted was for the NHL to accept that, and not have a clause that could change the system to a cap system. Goodenow's offer on the 9th gave the owners exactly what they needed, a chance to redeem themselves from previous mistakes, however they don't want the opportuintiy to fix previous mistakes, they want to make it oner hundred percent impossible for themselves to make them again, and it is not the players role in hockey to make sure the owners make good business decisions.

 

[Bruwinz37]

Bettman is offering the players deals he KNOWS they can't accept. How would that have been a good deal for the players?

Yeah, for the remaining 25 games of this year you play at salary reduced by 24%. Then a year from now, we implement our deal.

Of course they can't accept that. That's ridiculous.

I sincerely doubt the NHL would use 1/4 of a season to deem the CBA not to work. My guess is that 3 seasons would be the earmark.

This is either a good faith offer to bridge the gap or just a ploy to make them smell like roses in front of an impasse court situation, and it will probably work. The players are screwed unless another deal is reached soon.