Brocklovich Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I can't say I understand 100% of these negotiations but from what I take from it is that the players were either keeping the same % or taking slightly less but the money they don't take doesn't go to the owners back pockets but instead goes to the lower revenue teams first. That seems fairly reasonable to me, but again I am not 100% on the numbers / what else was offered. On the issue of lower revenue teams, I understand that they don't really / truly want to contract any teams as that would cost jobs, however, I really don't see why the NHL seems so set against any sort of relocation for some franchises (I get that some have history and that would be a tough pill to swallow). I am sure if we checked over the numbers Winnipeg turned a profit whereas Atlanta was a shoe-in to lose money. Why not give the low revenue teams (CBJ, FLA, PHX etc) a year or 2 more and then start relocating them. Its unfortunate for fans of those particular markets but in the big scheme of things 5 - 10k fans in a 18 - 20k building compared to a sellout every night is just better business and in turn should jack up league revenue and have fewer markets that need support from the league. I am more onside with the players in that, they took the 24% hit last time and are being asked to do it again which I think is pretty unreasonable. On top of that, I find the owners are the ones who make ridiculous 10year 120 million dollar offers to UFA players. They wanted the cap, they got it, and the first thing they did was try to turn around and find ways around the cap and they did, but the players are the ones that have to accept a roll back? Either way as a fan (I am sure everyone says this) if there is a lockout, even if its a month or 2 my interest and spending money will be going elsewhere as they just take for granted that fans will keep coming back for more. I think it would be pretty damn awesome if the fans started to stick it to the league & players but really reducing how much they spend / go to games. On a side note when the lockout happened and the owners "won" I am curious if there was a 24% rollback on ticket prices and if there wasn't why not? If the cost of running a franchise has gone down, shouldn't the price of admission go down as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prngr44 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I'm no trade-unionist but it seems to me that the owners have mis-managed the business model and want the players (employees) to pay for their mistakes. You only have to look at the money they have put into Phoenix to see how badly they have run their business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc44 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 A very reasonable proposal??? You realy think Aquillini sees this as reasonable. It is very simple what the players have said: we know there are many teams in trouble but instead of us taking a pay cut to correct things, we think the owners of the teams that make money should do that. It is well-known that the 'rich' teams are dead set against more revenue sharing. The Fehr proposal is a direct attack on Bettman and now we have a war. As Bettman says it: 2 different views of the world. There will not be NHL hockey for a very long time. And this is NOT about Bettman. Fehr is as, if not more, responsible as his counteroffer is as offensive as the NHL original offer was. Of course Crosby says he likes it, the players gave up peanuts and told the owners how to run their business. Wow, what a declaration of war by Fehr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tru_Knyte Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 #1 I hope the new CBA is for a hell of a lot longer than the currently proposed 3 year deal, I don't want to have to watch this crap again in a few years #2 I don't like how Fehr is attempting to model the NHL's salary structure after the MLB, which I feel has led to the grossest over payments in all of sports. Good night sweet parity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prngr44 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Start bringing back more teams back to Canada and you will see the financial health of the NHL thrive Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MANGO Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 every negotiation is a game of push and pull untill a comprimise can be meet. Posturing is a part of the game. Every body loses if there is a lockout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coastal1 Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Same could be said with the NHLPA. Just split it 50/50. Why is it so complicated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 NHL Lockout Would Hurt Kings, Panthers Most: The NHL's collective bargaining agreement has exactly one month left before its no longer relevant. If the players were to be locked out by their owners on September 15, the defending Stanley Cup champion Los Angeles Kings and the Florida Panthers would be the two franchises most hurt, a report by Forbes Magazine said Wednesday. A lockout would push away the thousands of new fans who helped inject more than $3 billion into the league last season, and the NHL’s 30 teams would feel the financial repercussions for years to come. But it’s doubtful that any teams would be hit harder both on the ice and in the wallet than the Florida Panthers and Los Angeles Kings. According to Forbes' Chris Smith, both L.A. and Florida would be hurt mainly because they would lose a majority of the fans gained during the 2011-12 season. A loss of fans means a major loss of mainstream appeal and new revenue. The defending Stanley Cup champions ought to be one of the NHL’s top stories heading into next year, but the team may be forgotten in its own hometown if next season is cancelled or even delayed. Currently, talks between the owners and players have stalled, as the owners want a radical change in the way things work when it comes to revenue, length of contracts and unrestricted free-agent rules. Meanwhile, the players want an adjustment in overall economics, including less player salaries if more revenue sharing takes place in return. Regardless of what comes out of the situation, it is clear that the Kings and Panthers want a resolution, and soon. http://www.sbnation.com/nhl/2012/8/15/3245510/nhl-lockout-2012-kings-panthers-collective-bargainning-agreement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Columbo Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Given the proposals both sides have offered, it doesn't seem like either side has any intention of avoiding a lockout. What's the point of proposing terms you already know the other side won't accept, and then only meeting once a week to discuss these ridiculous proposals? F*ck these guys, let's boycott the NHL, see how much revenue they bring without the fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tanev's Smirk Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 I just hope the SEL season will be broadcast in Canada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Sikes Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 You talk like a mind reader. AS I recall, the managers do 100% of the negotiating with the players agents. I wasn't aware that Owners were doing the negotiating. What you say is news to me. Wether we like it or not, the Owners don't want to operate under this current cba. Sorry bro, but I am siding with the owners here. Not that I approve their first offfer, but still. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Sikes Posted August 16, 2012 Share Posted August 16, 2012 Given the proposals both sides have offered, it doesn't seem like either side has any intention of avoiding a lockout. What's the point of proposing terms you already know the other side won't accept, and then only meeting once a week to discuss these ridiculous proposals? F*ck these guys, let's boycott the NHL, see how much revenue they bring without the fans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 @adamjahns Scott Gomez and Ryan Kesler are among a growing number of players walking into the NHLPA meetings. Bad Chicago weather has delayed flights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted August 16, 2012 Author Share Posted August 16, 2012 NHL shoots down players' contract proposal: The chances of an NHL lockout may have increased considerably Wednesday. A day after the NHL Players Association made a proposal on a new collective bargaining agreement, NHL commissioner Gary Bettman emerged from a negotiating session in Toronto to tell reporters, “There’s still a wide gap between us with not much time to go.” The current CBA will expire Sept. 15, and Bettman already has said the league is prepared to lock out the players if a new agreement is not in place. The league and its owners are seeking significant revenue concessions from the players and seem adamant about making changes involving contract lengths and in unrestricted free-agent status. The players’ union countered on Tuesday with a proposal that would reduce the players’ share of revenue over a three-year period. It would expand the league’s revenue-sharing plan, but keep the status quo on contracts and free agency. The NHLPA had a show of strength on Tuesday, as Sidney Crosby of the Pittsburgh Penguins and other stars flanked NHLPA executive director Donald Fehr as he addressed the media. There appeared to be an air of optimism, with Crosby saying the union had made a strong proposal and the players were “committed to getting a deal done.” Things appeared more glum after Wednesday’s session. “There are still a number of issues where we’re looking at the world differently,” Bettman said. “I’m not sure there has yet been a recognition of the economics in our world – and I mean in the greater world and the sports industry.” Bettman mentioned recent labor and CBA issues resolved in the NBA and NFL. Fehr later said Bettman conveniently left out Major League Baseball, which he noted has no salary cap and has a substantial revenue-sharing plan but has had no major labor issues the past decade. Bettman said he would not meet again with Fehr until next week. Fehr said he will be conducting player meetings, but noted bargaining sessions would continue and that he would stay in touch with Bettman. A key point of contention is a proposal by the league that the players’ annual share of hockey-related revenue be sliced from 57 percent to 46 percent (the union claims it would be 43 percent.) The union’s “alternative proposal,” as Fehr called it, would reduce the players’ revenue share by an estimated $465 million the next three years, but also provides $250 million a year in revenue-sharing to bolster teams hurting financially. Fehr said there were other proposals the union still were considering. Bettman, in turn, said not having the union’s full proposal on the table was “a little disappointing.” The NHL locked out the players in 2004 and the 2004-2005 season was canceled because of CBA issues. Asked about Bettman’s “wide gap” assessment, Fehr said there was a “pretty substantial monetary gulf” between the two proposals. He said the league wanted to roll players’ salaries back to where they were before the 2004-05 lockout, saying, “That creates the gulf.” Fehr said the players had been advised to prepare for a “worst-case” situation, which he said would be a lockout. http://www.newsobserver.com/2012/08/15/2272141/nhl-shoots-down-players-proposal.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 NHL, players' union dig in as hockey lockout looms; Detroit Red Wings cancel annual, eight-team September prospects tournament amid CBA 'uncertainty': TORONTO — The first tense moments of the NHL's collective bargaining negotiations have arrived. With Gary Bettman and Donald Fehr not scheduled to sit across from one another until the middle of next week and the sides unable to even agree on the core issues that need to be addressed, a sense of uneasiness has suddenly enveloped the talks. After Wednesday's session, in which the NHL dismissed the union's initial proposal, Fehr set off for pre-scheduled player meetings in Chicago. The union boss will also oversee a session with players in Kelowna before returning to Toronto and resuming CBA discussions on Aug. 22. At that point, the league and the NHL Players' Association will have just 24 days left to reach a new agreement and avoid a lockout. But where do they start? There is very little common ground between the proposals each side has put forth and neither seems particularly willing to move off its current position. "What the issues are and how they get solved and how deep the issues go are something that we're not yet on the same page," Bettman said Wednesday. Meanwhile, the hockey world remains on hold — and many are starting to brace for the worst. The Detroit Red Wings announced Thursday that they're cancelling their annual September prospects tournament in Traverse City, Mich., due to the "uncertainty" surrounding the CBA. Eight teams had been scheduled to participate. "We have determined that it is in everyone's best interest to cancel this year's tournament," Red Wings GM Ken Holland said in a statement. Sub-committees from the league and union gathered Thursday to discuss non-core economic issues such as travel, ice conditions and training camp. Both sides seemed encouraged about the status of those talks, but as deputy commissioner Bill Daly pointed out: "I don't think that's where this CBA is going to get cut or not." In simple terms, the owners want to pay players less — much less. Despite the fact the NHL's revenues grew from $2.2 billion before the 2004-05 lockout to $3.3 billion last season, a number of teams are still struggling. The financial success of the wealthiest franchises over the last seven years ended up hurting the poorer ones. That's because the salary cap was tied to overall hockey-related revenues and rose dramatically from $39 million in 2005-06 to $64.3 million last season, bringing the salary floor (the minimum teams must spend) up along with it. If next season was played under the current system, the cap would have been set at $70.2 million and the floor would have been $54.2 million. However, a new deal needs to be put in place before the NHL resumes operations. Under the proposal put forward by the owners in July, the players' share in revenue would be cut from 57 per cent to 43 per cent and would include a change to the way the salary cap is calculated. Instead of being set at $8 million above the midpoint (total league revenues divided by 30 teams), the upper limit would be reduced to $4 million above. As a result, the salary cap would drop to $50.8 million next season, which is below where the floor currently rests. The league also called for the elimination of salary arbitration, contract limits of five years (with equal money paid each year, essentially eliminating signing bonuses) and 10 years of service before unrestricted free agency kicks in. All of those proposed changes are designed to slow the increase in salaries. The NHLPA estimated the league's proposal would cost players approximately $450 million per season. Rather than making a direct counter-offer, Fehr elected to design his own system. He attempted to appease owners by keeping the hard salary cap in place and putting a drag on salaries by delinking them from overall revenues, but called for an expanded revenue-sharing plan that would see the wealthy teams distribute more than $250 million per season to the poor. Under the union's plan, the salary cap would fall at roughly $69 million next season. It would increase to $71 million in 2013-14 and $75 million in 2014-15. In other words, the owners would only realize significantly more profit in the deal if the league continued to grow at a level beyond the seven per cent it averaged since the lockout. There's no guarantee of that, especially since the strength of the Canadian dollar has helped fuel the growth. The offer is based on the premise that the players would give up revenue for three years — the system would revert back to the current rules in the fourth — so that the NHL could work on getting its struggling teams on stable footing. "If there are issues remaining, they are club-specific issues," said Fehr. "And that if the clubs that don't need assistance are willing to partner with the players to help get at the issues of the clubs that may need it we're prepared to do that. But it's not a circumstance in which the players are just going to say 'OK, take everything from us."' History is also at play here. The players are still smarting after being locked out for an entire season in 2004-05 before eventually accepting a 24 per cent rollback on salaries and a salary cap. At the time, Bettman repeatedly talked about the need for "cost certainty" to keep the league healthy — something the union eventually capitulated to. Now in the next round of negotiations, the sides appear to be back where they started and the threat of yet another lockout seems very real. The league is contending the players need to give up a significant amount of salary to stabilize the industry while the union maintains that goal would be best accomplished with the wealthy teams doing more to help their struggling counterparts. Against that backdrop, the first signs of animosity are beginning to surface. After talks wrapped up Wednesday, Fehr hinted the NHL was working from a "playbook" that involves using the lockout as a negotiating tactic and called for the owners to present an offer that moved in the players' direction. Bettman, meanwhile, seemed to suggest that this wasn't a good time for Fehr to step away from talks and hold regional player meetings. "Where we go from here is I come back next Wednesday to resume negotiations when the union's ready," said Bettman. Fehr contends that he doesn't need to be present for talks to continue. "As we go forward ... what we have to do is sit and negotiate until we get the deal done," he said. "It doesn't mean that every single person has to be in the room on every single meeting, but the parties have to be going at it regularly." • • • Here's a look at how the salary cap and salary floor would be impacted by the current CBA along with proposals from the NHL and NHL Players' Association for the 2012-13 season: • CURRENT SYSTEM: Salary cap: $70.2 million Salary floor: $54.2 million • NHL’S PROPOSAL: Salary cap: $50.8 million Salary floor: $38.8 million • NHL PLAYERS’ ASSOCIATION proposal (assuming a fixed $16-million gap is kept in place): Salary cap: $69 million Salary floor: $53 million http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/players+union+hockey+lockout+looms/7101656/story.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossi Vaananen Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 So many respected people assassinated long before their time. Why can't someone step up and put a bullet through Bettman's head? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kanucks1 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 I HATE GARY BETTMAN I just want there to be a max on years of a salary like e.g. 1million for 8 years maxxxxxxxx!~ But please NO Lockout!!!! Thx Pcuzz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuck_trevor16 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 woah 20 million cap reduce......that would suck for a lot of teams except for those crappy team with ELC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-Vintage Canuck- Posted August 17, 2012 Author Share Posted August 17, 2012 Aaron Ward on that’s hockey talking about CBA. http://watch.tsn.ca/nhl/clip740796#clip740796 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccc44 Posted August 17, 2012 Share Posted August 17, 2012 At least until the Canadian dollar tanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.