Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

-Vintage Canuck-

*Official* CBA Negotiations and Lockout Thread

Recommended Posts

I certainley believe the players make too much money and an adjustment is required, but done over time. Its the owners to bid up the contracts, think they can rewrite legal contracts, just because they are now not making money. Its absurd and the owners have dug themselves a hole and now want a ladder to get out. Players were willing to go 50/50 this cpa , over a few years, owners want it all now ! wheres the negotiations in that. Bettmans a little crap, and is responsible for the mess of the present NHL. I'm happy to watch junior hockey, the NHL can fold !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said about 15 seconds ago, the desertification vote will be the biggest measure of the loyalty players have towards Fehr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he dismantled the MLB by striking come playoff time. the NHL was smarter than that and just locked the players out to prevent this tactic. Fehr only has one card left disclaimer of intent/decertify and i dont think his membership wants that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if i was a player i would not touch desertification with a 10 foot pole at this point, the miniscule differences in the proposals is not worth the massive losses of rights they could incur if they decertify.

You just know the NHL would love a chance to get non-guaranteed contracts into the mix NFL style if they ever got the chance. As a player do i want to take that risk over a shorter contract length and not being able to make more money up-front? i highly doubt it.

(i dont know the intricacies of desertification but i heard that was a possibility from doug maclean im not sure how that would happen but he said it was a possibility)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Smarter? Bettman said they're losing about $20M a day during this lockout. IF you believe the PA would have gone on strike just before the playoffs without a single bit of proof that's true, the owners could have had their entire regular season revenue and only the owners who had teams in the playoffs would have lost any. So to review: even if the supposed PA playoff strike plan were true, it would have cost the league a few BILLION less than the owners' lockout.

This is lockout day 82. If each lockout day costs the owners $20M, owners have lost $1.64B so far. That's significantly more than their $1.38B share of last season's HRR and rising each day. That doesn't sound anything like "smart" to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both sides just need to take a step back and cool down, we are making things seem way worse that they are because of frustration. the main

Here's my idea.

- Have max contracts for own players/RFA's at 7 like proposed, then have UFA at 6.

- In exchange for that make the CBA a 9 year agreement with an opt out clause for the players in the 8th year, and the players get the economic deal they "agreed too" back.

Sounds good? It's really not that difficult, we are so close, if either side can park there egos/personal feelings aside for this last little stretch we can actually get a deal done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the season ended due to desertification I can guarantee you the PA would want to get rid of the cap

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everything has gone according to Bettman's playbook up until today. He always planned on giving nothing to the players until Dec 1 and counted on them compromising right up until then. That way he begins negotiating on Dec 1 against a player position that is far closer to their own, allowing them to give less in the end.

They knew when the players started missing paycheques, this would cause them to compromise. They also know that in many markets the NHL doesn't make very much money in October and November as compared to the later months and certainly the playoffs. In short, they lose less than the players by forgoing the first 2 months. The players miss a third of their salary, but the owners only miss a fifth or sixth of their revenue.

They figured once Dec 1 rolled around, the players would be ripe for compromise and would be anxious to deal.

What happened here is that Fehr slowed down the process, knowing that we are entering waters that the owners do not care to be in (missing games deep into December and January). He now has the NHL in a more precarious position, much like the players were in for the last 3 months.

It is now Fehr's turn to grind the NHL and see what HE can get from THEM. This was not a part of Bettman's playbook and now he is extremely unhappy.

IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Garrison still would get 5. Security is security. Teams will still want to sign their core players to maximum years. And that means most guys in any team's top 4 with as much talent as Garrison will get 4-5 years.

There will hardly be any trickle down effect - it's just ridiculously long contracts like Weber, Luongo, Crosby, Hossa, Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, etc will be cut down to 5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Dasein

Those contracts won't stand, contracts that are already signed will remain. it will just be for future contracts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know, that's what I'm saying. If Weber hadn't signed this year and had to sign a 5 year deal next year, and if Garrison had to sign a deal next year, there won't be a trickle down effect where since Weber is signed for 5 years, teams won't sign guys like Garrison at the same length, but 3-4 years. He'll still get 5 because he's worth it, and it'll just eliminate ridiculously long contracts from getting signed. There's almost no trickle down at all.

Basically, Botchford is being an idiot as usual is what I was getting at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Mr Fehr has royally screwed up.

He knew damn well that even the moderate owners were royally pissed off and when he comes out and leads all the fans to believe he thinks the owners are likely going to accept the PA's counter proposal he was outright bullchitting and playing on the fans emotions.

I think Fehr has now galvanized the moderates to the hawk owners side and the owners are now daring the PA to take decertification to their members.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Garrison still would get 5. Security is security. Teams will still want to sign their core players to maximum years. And that means most guys in any team's top 4 with as much talent as Garrison will get 4-5 years.

There will hardly be any trickle down effect - it's just ridiculously long contracts like Weber, Luongo, Crosby, Hossa, Ovechkin, Kovalchuk, etc will be cut down to 5.

EDIT: By getting cut down to 5, I mean that any future UFAS who have the potential to have signed a 10+ year deal like Crosby, Ovechkin, Weber, etc (ie, Seguin, Hall, Pietrangelo, etc) will be forced to cut down to 5 instead. I'm not saying that the current existing contracts will be violated and reduced to five years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.