You Never Give Me Your Money.. (CBA & Lockout Discussion) - Part XII

[Thucydides]

Ovie has been kind-of an idiot throughout this whole thing, and strikes me as completely arrogant.

 

[tmg]

That right there is likely one of the reasons the PA is playing hardball. They might compromise on the % of HRR but you mess with UFA and RFA status and you mess with everybody bread and butter.

But... it's a zero sum game. 50% of HRR will go to player salaries. All each player's individual contract does is decide what portion of it that player gets, in lieu of other players. So 2nd-year-contract monies come down? That's good for the majority of the PA - less money for the youngsters means more money for the oldsters, by rule. One player getting his bread means another player being deprived his butter.

From a collective-union perspective, the FA freedom (earlier UFA = being able to decide where they play) is more important than the early-FA money (because from a union perspective, the money is a constant, and the less that is dedicated to players currently on ELCs is more dedicated to everybody else).

 

[ps241]

If I was advising the PA on the core LONG TERM side issue to focus on it would be enhanced revenue sharing. Everyone has their opinion of why the owners locked out the players and my opinion is that the current system does not work well enough for teams 15 (ish) to 27 (ish). if Fehr and company negotiate the rev sharing formula so that these teams are being taken care of better then I think next time around the PA will be on much more level playing field. I left out the bottom three teams because in the case of more extreme losses whoever these teams are need assistance but making them whole would not be my goal (it would cost too much of the rev sharing pool), they would be assisted but probably to the tune of $15 million max. If the players drop to 50-50 there is allot more money to go around and they have a chance to get it right and take away the malcontent owner power base IMHO.

 

[Rooverick*]

Has anyone posted ideas regarding the "make whole" provision? The league certainly has dropped enough hints that they are willing to be creative in this area.

Would a 50/50 split for funding make it more palatable for the players?

How about a 50/50 split with the league having to match their amount as an add on to revenue sharing for the bottom 5 teams?

 

[Bob b smith]

Has anyone posted ideas regarding the "make whole" provision? The league certainly has dropped enough hints that they are willing to be creative in this area.

Would a 50/50 split for funding make it more palatable for the players?

How about a 50/50 split with the league having to match their amount as an add on to revenue sharing for the bottom 5 teams?

The ''make whole" provision is the closest attempt at humor in these CBA talks. I'm sure the PA sees it as a bad joke used by the league for puiblic PR and is not even considering it... Even the term "make whole" is a Luntz word re-engineering type term destined for public consumption.

 

[SuperUnknown]

Ovie has been kind-of an idiot throughout this whole thing, and strikes me as completely arrogant.

Yep, especially since he's playing in a league which had a rollback a couple years ago (20%+)...

But anyway, I'm rooting for the owners to cut his salary so he stays in Russia and we all can forget about him.

 

[LadyStanley]

Question. Does anyone have the info as to how much the players lost each season (% wise) that went back to the NHL in escrow?

I know there were 2 years where the players received more than 100% of contracts, and that last year the player received 99.something% of their contracts. What about the other 4 years?

They're getting back 7.98% from 11-12 (see thread -- may still be on first page). So, I think that was 7.02% they "donated" via escrow.

There have been threads every year, and a few posts where summary of all to date have been posted (even in the CBA mega threads, IIRC). Search function is your friend.

 

[Butch 19]

The ''make whole" provision is the closest attempt at humor in these CBA talks. I'm sure the PA sees it as a bad joke used by the league for puiblic PR and is not even considering it... Even the term "make whole" is a Luntz word re-engineering type term destined for public consumption.

How is the "make whole" provision for the players any different than "revenue sharing" for the owners?

Owners can help owners all day long, but the mere mention of players helping players is a non-starter?

 

[haseoke39]

Gary Bettman may be posturing a little when he says this was the best offer the league has to give, but I think it's true that it's the best offer the league will have to give for at least a couple months. The players might get better if the entire season is in jeopardy, but I think this is what the owners envisioned as an end goal. They're not going to get it, apparently, but I think that means the next move is firmly in the PA's court.

And when it comes to that next move, the PA can photocopy 500 delinked offers and paste them to the league office, but I mean from here on out, nothing moves until the union proposes linkage.

 

[AHockeyGameBrokeOut*]

Some of the contract issues have been discussed.

But Fehr seems to be pushing for some further concessions from owners in response to union taking less $$s.

He should present a proposal that asks for those concessions then - the problem is that, not unlike Richard Kimble finally catching the one-armed man... if his proposal succeeds, the negotiations are over. Fehr doesn't want it to end.

 

[Alesle]

They're getting back 7.98% from 11-12 (see thread -- may still be on first page). So, I think that was 7.02% they "donated" via escrow.

The players paid 8.5 % of their salaries in escrow, and got 7.98 % of their salaries back.

 

[Pyromaniac3]

NHL and NHLPA wasting time with scare tactics and PR stunts instead of settling CBA

Pretty good article summing up the discussion in my point of view.

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nhl--n...cs-and-pr-stunts-instead-of-settling-cba.html

Again, to be clear, the bulk of the blame belongs to the owners. They locked out the players for an entire season in 2004-05, and they got a salary cap and a 24-percent salary rollback. Now, despite seven years of record revenues, they're locking them out again and asking for more, more, more. They want them to go from 57 percent of HRR to 50, right now, when that represents $231 million a year, if revenues are flat. They want to tighten contracting rules, when loosening them was their concession last time. Their opening offer was too harsh, and now they're being only less harsh, and they're still being stubborn.

Fehr helpfully reminds us of the 2004-05 background every time he holds a news conference. But again, the players are not blameless victims. They prospered under the last CBA and are better off than ever before. They did so well under the last CBA that they wanted to keep playing under the deal. How are they going to win here? What is their end game? They should not cave just because the owners want them to. They should not take a bad deal just because they are under pressure. But they have to acknowledge that the owners have the hammer – like it or not, as bitter as they are at Bettman, as much as they distrust the owners – and their goal must be to get the best deal they can. They are going to lose in the end; they have to mitigate their loss. Is this the best way to do that?

We haven't been able to run the numbers yet," Fehr said.

Really? What the heck has the union been doing since Sept. 12, the last time it made a proposal? The leaders haven't run the numbers yet on their best-sounding offer so far? What do the rank and file think about that? Did the rank and file press the leadership to make that proposal during that last-minute conference call Thursday? Is that why the negotiating session was delayed?

Enough. Enough of the games. Enough of the too-smart solutions and strategies. Enough of the history lectures and economics lessons. Enough of the grudges and the greed.

Owners, get back to the table and find more in the players' proposals you can adopt. Players, get off your high horses and find a way to give the owners more of what they want without compromising your principles.

Ask yourselves how much is enough, because the rest of us, we already know.

 

[SuperUnknown]

The players paid 8.5 % of their salaries in escrow, and got 7.98 % of their salaries back.

Blasphemy! They didn't get face value! Oh wait, that was under the CBA which they wanted to maintain...

 

[Rooverick*]

Blasphemy! They didn't get face value! Oh wait, that was under the CBA which they wanted to maintain...

Quite hilarious to see the hypocrisy.

Just like the massive signing bonuses are ignored, in spite of the fact that their agents got them as protection against a reduction in player's share.

 

[pigpen65]

The season is toast and that's all there is to it. That's what media types like this guy have to come to terms with. What the owners want they are only going to get by starving the players out, and that's not going to happen with enough time left to still salvage the season. The owners have always known that to be true. I think it's safe to say the players have been prepared by Fehr for this reality since he was brought in. So they are stocked up to last a while as well. Eventually the two sides will lose enough money that they will be forced into making concessions neither of them want to make today. But 2012-13 is gone.

 

[Rooverick*]

The real negotiations will take place in the next few days.

 

[Mike Jones]

The real negotiations will take place in the next few days.

Probably not. They don't seem interested enough in this deal to work through the weekend or set up meetings for tomorrow.

This is not a priority for them. I was reading an article here in the Calgary Herald about a player enjoying the extra time with his family and business interests. Why should he care about the game? This is a sabatical for the players.

They simply don't care about fans, workers, markets, or anything.

Self-absorbed twits.

 

[Freudian]

The players won as much as the owners under the last CBA. The players only feel like their lost because they were the ones caving. So it's more emotional than rational.

A league that has 73% of revenue going to player salary wouldn't have survived. So the players won by actually having a league to play in.

 

[robla]

The players won as much as the owners under the last CBA. The players only feel like their lost because they were the ones caving. So it's more emotional than rational.

A league that has 73% of revenue going to player salary wouldn't have survived. So the players won by actually having a league to play in.

well said.. and players should have an interest in a healthy league.. where on earth can US and Canadian born players receive multiple millions/year for playing hockey except for the NHL

 

[Iggy77]

The PA doesn't like the NHL's offer of "make whole" which is basically players paying players down the road.

That's true but isn't the PA's 3rd proposal essentially the same thing ? Future players signing contracts would get bent over backwards to pay for the existing contracts which will be expiring over the next few years. Isn't that "players paying players" too ?

 

[haseoke39]

The PA doesn't like the NHL's offer of "make whole" which is basically players paying players down the road.

That's true but isn't the PA's 3rd proposal essentially the same thing ? Future players signing contracts would get bent over backwards to pay for the existing contracts which will be expiring over the next few years. Isn't that "players paying players" too ?

Just don't tell the players. Something tells me they have no idea what's going on.

 

[Uncle Lou]

Has anyone heard when there meeting next?

 

[Crows*]

The season is toast and that's all there is to it. That's what media types like this guy have to come to terms with. What the owners want they are only going to get by starving the players out, and that's not going to happen with enough time left to still salvage the season. The owners have always known that to be true. I think it's safe to say the players have been prepared by Fehr for this reality since he was brought in. So they are stocked up to last a while as well. Eventually the two sides will lose enough money that they will be forced into making concessions neither of them want to make today. But 2012-13 is gone.

There is a lot more to it than " the season is toast"

 

[mouser]

How so? Other than the 3rd one which devalues the contracts (13% guaranteed, and 87% subject to escrow at 50/50), the other two are fixed figures over the first 2-5 years. The 3rd proposal might not honor the contracts (although with growth, it realistically will), but the first two certainly do. Fixed dollar amounts with fixed raises. How does that not honor the contracts?

Because neither of the first two proposals stop escrow from still taking place and players with existing contracts losing a portion of them via escrow. The proposals just have a higher % of HRR than the NHL's do. There's nothing stopping the owners from spending to a level that will continue to trigger escrow as happened the last 4 seasons (6% average) and 5 of the 7 years of the CBA.

 

[mouser]

question. Does anyone have the info as to how much the players lost each season (% wise) that went back to the nhl in escrow?

I know there were 2 years where the players received more than 100% of contracts, and that last year the player received 99.something% of their contracts. What about the other 4 years?

2005-2006: +0.40%
2006-2007: -2.76%
2007-2008: +0.48%
2008-2009: -12.90%
2009-2010: -9.4%
2010-2011: -2.3%
2011-2012: ~ -0.6%