Sergei Shirokov Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Most of the media seem to think the lockout will end by Nov. 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-52 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Most of the media seem to think the lockout will end by Nov. 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldnews Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I find it interesting that there is an assumption that 50/50 is a "fair" split. 30 owners sharing 50% 690 player sharing 50% 30 owners sharing 43% 690 players sharing 57% If you keep in mind that there are 23 times more players than owners, the 50/50 split becomes a mere abstraction of "fairness". What is assumed is that their collective interests are equal. In my opinion, contracts entered into freely by GMs and players - that have been negotiated as determined by market demand - is as fair as what is in the end an arbitrary/abstract "50/50" division of revenue. That imo amounts to a collective reneg. It is truly interesting the particular NHL economy. Who else in the market system, other than NHL owners, get to lock out to retroactively attempt to reallocate 'revenue sharing'? What a special economy the NHL has. If owners want a greater cut of revenue, perhaps they should exercise more discretion in negotiating contracts - let the market determine value - that is commonly called things like the free market and competition - the espoused virtue of capitalism. It is truly interesting the unique take on economics that is the NHL. I understand the reasoning behind imposing limits in CBA negotiations - it's simply fascinating to try to track the "logic" in conventional terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeNiro Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Most of the media seem to think the lockout will end by Nov. 2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmo2337 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 If the players took a "make whole, IOU" from the first few years and got paid back over the last few, there could be balance. If you balance out the owner savings over the course and still honour player contracts, I think everyone wins. The owners would be making a promise upfront to pay existing contracts, and then pay it back after 2-4 years depending on growth rate. Players make it easier to swallow at 49% split. For the players, its not about the percentage split, its about a second pay cut when revenue is growing, and not honouring deals. I don't blame them for that part at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmo2337 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 And unless the NHL was just bluffing with their quick dismissal of the NHLPA's proposal, I don't see it happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 A Make Whole clause would only work if the owners remain on the hook for that salary and that there's a guarantee for players who may leave the league (retirement or injury) for unpaid salary. Even then, though, I don't know if the players will go for it. It's basically a loan as the owners get to keep owed money longer and players then won't get the interest they could have earned on it. Definitely a better option than a rollback though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmo2337 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Even then, though, I don't know if the players will go for it. It's basically a loan as the owners get to keep owed money longer and players then won't get the interest they could have earned on it. Definitely a better option than a rollback though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poetica Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Tiered "make whole" might work. Definitely something they should consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 If the players took a "make whole, IOU" from the first few years and got paid back over the last few, there could be balance. If you balance out the owner savings over the course and still honour player contracts, I think everyone wins. The owners would be making a promise upfront to pay existing contracts, and then pay it back after 2-4 years depending on growth rate. Players make it easier to swallow at 49% split. For the players, its not about the percentage split, its about a second pay cut when revenue is growing, and not honouring deals. I don't blame them for that part at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashian Kassian Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I would like to relay out my proposal, this time in greater detail: Please Read ============================================================================= CBA Length: 7 years (2012-13 to 2021-2022 I think if my math is right on that) #1: Hockey Related Revenue - HRR starts right away at 52/48 for the players in year 1. (2012-13) - Then it lowers to 50/50 for the 2nd season (2013-14) - It stay's at 50/50 for the duration of the CBA - At the end of the 2014-15 Season, that Mechanism, is used to pay player's back the Salary they lost in the initial Rollback. And this is done years later so that the team's can get the ball rolling at 50/50, start saving money, and hopefully with the help of the Revenue sharing system, they would be making money or atleast staying afloat, and at the end of that time the bottom line will have grown, and there will be money there to pay back the players, then we start from a clean state at 50/50 and now one owe's anyone anything Here's the layout: 2012/13: 52/48% (for the players). 2013/14: 50/50 Split 2014/15: 50/50 Split (at the end of the year the players are payed back the 7% they lost in the rollback) 2015/16: 50/50 Split from here on out, and no one owns anybody anything. 2016/17 - 2021/2022: 50/50 split all the way through. #2 Revenue Sharing System The big market clubs (New York, Vancouver, Montreal, Toronto) The teams that are succeeding and making alot of money each year, pay out a % of there collected revenue for the season to the system then it is dispersed to the teams that need it. (im not sure what that % is yet, I have to look at what is being discussed) - Hopefully this will offer support to those teams, so they can stay afloat till there teams become successful and make money, (although some of the teams shouldn't be in the places they are in) #3 Player Contracting Rights/Arbitration and so-on - The UFA Status is changed to 28 or 8 years of service - Arbitration remains - Contracts are put at a maximum length of at 6 years - the cap hit remains the same throughout - No front loaded contracts, the Salary (not including bonus's) must remain the same throughout the duration of the deal Entry Level contracts (I made this it's own mini-topic cause I have a new idea for this that owners may like) - There are 2 Entry Level type contracts. - The initial entry level contract is two years, and the highest possible Salary and Cap Hit is 1 Million. - The second is for 3 years, it more like a bridge contract, and the max Salary and Cap Hit is 2.5 Million - Bonus's are at the most 750k and 50% of what the bonus is, is added onto the cap hit. Reasoning for this: I think I heard something that owner's didn't like to have to commit the money for 3 years to certain players that they aren't 100% sure about, yet they also want it to be a 4 years in some cases so they don't have to pay a fortune to these young star's right away. This gives them the best of both worlds, they sign player to the 2 year one right away, then if they want them to remain apart of the team they sign them to the next "bridge" contract. and the players do get a decent raise, in between. if they sign there 1st ELC at 18 after being drafted, they will qualify for the 2nd one at 20, and by the time they are 23 they will be able to qualify for regular RFA and will get paid accordingly. For Free Agent Signings, that are 21 or under it is the same thing, if you are 22 or older you immediately qualify for the 2nd ELC, the "Bridge contract" as I call it. Trading Cap Circumventing Contracts Someone earlier (Provost) talked about when you trade say Luongo (for example), we would still have to pay half Luongo's Cap hit, when we trade him, and I think it is a good idea. It makes team pay a little bit without going overboard. when you make a deal, with say Florida we would trade Luongo and we would half to hold onto half of his cap hit since the deal circumvented the cap, and if they traded us Upshall in return, they would part part of his Cap Hit because I think his did too. - The idea that these long front loaded deal's should remain on the cap after they retire shouldn't happen because it was within the rules of the previous CBA to do that, the owner's signed it and ultimately it's there fault, GM's (and owner's) do whatever it takes and that's part of it. There might have been some stuff I missed out, so leave feedback on it, let me know what you think about these ideas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 Still no talks scheduled ahead of Thursday's deadline to save an 82-game season: If the NHL is going to have a full 82-game season something major is going to have to happen over the next couple of days. And it doesn't appear to be on the horizon. As of Tuesday morning there are no additional talks scheduled between the two sides as they continue to stare each other down after last weeks series of meetings resulted in an exchange of proposals, but no agreement. The talks ended on Thursday when the league rejected a series of NHLPA offers within a matter of minutes. For a full season to be salvaged (it would in theory start on Nov. 2 after a one week training camp, according to the NHL's latest proposal) a deal has to be completed by Thursday, Oct. 25. The league has already said that any delay beyond that could result in the cancellation of signature events on the regular season schedule. "I'm not sure there is any reason to meet if there is nothing new to say," said NHL deputy commissioner Bill Daly in an email to the Canadian Press on Monday. "Our position was communicated to the union pretty clearly last Tuesday and then again on Thursday. If they have a desire to meet with regard to the proposal we have on the table, they know how to reach us." According to Sportsnet's Michael Grange, the NHL has yet to hear from the NHLPA. The NHL left Thursday's meetings after the players presented them with a series of offers in response to the league's latest proposal (detailed here) on Tuesday. The offers from both sides involved 50-50 revenue splits, but the NHL wants that split to start immediately while the players offers would have seen the split gradually drop down to 50-50 over the course of the agreement. The players are also insisting that all current contracts be honored. The NHLPA is also upset that the league gave general managers an opportunity to speak with players about its latest offer without informing the NHLPA about it. Here's what NHLPA special counsel Steve Fehr had to say on that matter, via Renaud Lavoie of RDS:"Most owners are not allowed to attend bargaining meetings. No owners are allowed to speak to the media about the bargaining. It is interesting that they are secretly unleashed to talk to the players about the meetings the players can attend, but the owners cannot." At this point a full season seems like it's nothing more than a pipe dream. The league has already cancelled the regular season schedule through Nov. 1 which has taken away 135 games. If a new deal is reached by Thursday those games would be rescheduled. http://www.cbssports.com/nhl/blog/eye-on-hockey/20654818/nhl-lockout-still-no-talks-scheduled-before-thursday-deadline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmo2337 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Here's the layout: 2012/13: 52/48% (for the players). 2013/14: 50/50 Split 2014/15: 50/50 Split (at the end of the year the players are payed back the 7% they lost in the rollback) 2015/16: 50/50 Split from here on out, and no one owns anybody anything. 2016/17 - 2021/2022: 50/50 split all the way through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizmo2337 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 And good proposal by the way, I liked your revene sharing Idea but I don't know if you ment it is determined by the salary cap of how much money the teams make, because if it's the salary cap then the way you had setup is kinda wrong because.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Karlsson Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Lol why are you guys spending time making proposals, not like they're going to read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanj Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Lol why are you guys spending time making proposals, not like they're going to read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canucksnihilist Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Lol why are you guys spending time making proposals, not like they're going to read them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zombieksa Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Question is, where does the money come from that pays the players back? From the owners pocket? imo, it probably needs to come from the future growth pool somehow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Colt 45s Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I feel for the players. The owners are not bargaining in good faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted October 23, 2012 Author Share Posted October 23, 2012 @News1130Sports: In 14 games with the ZSC Lions in the Swiss league, Brule had no goals and 6 assists before Marc Crawford cut him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.