Pepper
Registered User
- Aug 30, 2004
- 14,693
- 269
Sorry there has been so many meetings & discussions that I forgot whats the latest PA is offering, still the 24% rollback with ridiculously low luxury tax?
RangerBoy said:The NHLPA offer of a 24% rollback for all player under EXISTING contracts
$850,000 maximum annual salary plus signing bonus
$212,500 maximum annual signing bonus
$850,000 limit on total "A" bonuses per year, with $212,500 limit on each "A" bonus
Unlimited "B" and "C" bonuses
Very limited ability of a Club to take a Group II player to arbitration
Payroll Tax:
20% tax for dollars over $45 million payroll
50% tax for dollars over $50 million payroll
60% tax for dollars over $60 million payroll
5% increases in tax rates for repeat offenders
Negotiated increase in payroll threshold in subsequent years
110% for players earning $660,000 or less
105% for players earning between $660,000 and $1 million
100% for players earning more than $1 million
RangerBoy said:The NHLPA thinks that offer was the answer to ending the lockout.All of the players reacted in such anger when the offer was rejected by the NHL on December 14
Listening to the NHLPA,their offer could bring the world peace and harmony
Pepper said:So if that's the best PA can offer, they have absolutely no moral ground whatsoever to appear "angry" or "shocked" or whatever by NHL's offers. I mean that offer is so far from reality that it's not even funny.
NHLPA better make a new, REAL offer or the labor board will have a slamdunk case in finding out that PA has done nothing to reach a deal.
chiavsfan said:I think the PA gets a lot stupider (yes I said stupider, which is not a real word) everyday.
Levitate said:the NHL proposals have pretty much been the same things repackaged over and over...not really "new" proposals
i think the players anger over their proposal being rejected wasn't so much that the owners didn't just sign it right then and there, but that the owners dismissed everything about it and walked away without bothering to negotiate
shakes said:Sorry to interrupt this player bashing thread, but why is it that a crap proposal by the owners is "something to work with" but a crap proposal by the NHLPA is not?
Levitate said:they increased the "cap" but then hobbled it with an attempt to make ownership "idiot proof" with the whole tie to revenues. especially with the wide variety in ways in which NHL teams collect revenues, it makes for an ugly deal.
if it was just a straight $32-42 mill cap, at this point i'd say the players could take it and be getting a decent deal out of the cap area...i'm more in favor of something in the $45 mill range, but if it let the players get a more fair deal in other parts of the CBA, then fine. I've always been of the opinion that if the owners will go high enough on a cap, the players should take it.
and you know what, i think the NHLPA should have been making some more offers in here, but i think the reason they never bothered with making offers involving a revision of their luxery tax concepts is because of the way the owners scorned the deal in the first place...honestly i think what should have happened is the two sides started this "talking" a lot sooner after that, not even offering deals, but just figuring out what they could...there's no reason to have waited this long and both sides deserve to by lynched for taht
Egil said:PROFIT SHARING Levitate. That is a HUGE concession from the owners.
At least the owners waited five days before rejecting that offer . . . . the same can't be said of the PA (and why weren't they working on a counter-proposal).RangerBoy said:The NHLPA thinks that offer was the answer to ending the lockout.All of the players reacted in such anger when the offer was rejected by the NHL on December 14
Listening to the NHLPA,their offer could bring the world peace and harmony